Global Research

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.

*** 

Once again, Kiev makes clear its intention to continue carrying out terrorist attacks on the undisputed territory of the Russian Federation. In a recent interview, the head of Ukrainian intelligence stated that the conflict should be “extended” to “Russian territory”, thus showing that neo-Nazi forces plan to continue with incursions into Russia’s demilitarized zone, unnecessarily endangering the lives of innocent civilians.

The words were spoken by Kirill Budanov, head of the Ukrainian Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR). During an interview with Ukrainian TV anchor Natalya Moseichuk, he stated that hostilities need to be extended to deep inside Russian territory, in addition to countries and regions where Russia “has influence”.

“The war must be extended to other territory – which for us is clearly Russia – and other areas where they have influence (…) The wider the operations are, the better”, he said.

For Budanov, the deepening of territorial incursions against Russia is an efficient strategy from the military point of view, since it would supposedly allow “paralyzing” Moscow’s forces, giving Kiev’s troops an advantage. In other words, in the face of heavy losses, Ukraine wants to gain time to reorganize itself and think about new combat tactics – and plans to do this by keeping the Russians busy trying to neutralize deep attacks.

It is also curious that Budanov mentions the possibility of attacks against areas where Russia “has influence”. In practice, he is admitting that Kiev plans to attack Russia’s allies, internationalizing the conflict. In this regard, it is necessary to remember that until now several sabotage operations have already been carried out by the Ukrainians against the territory of Belarus. Considering Budanov’s words, it is expected that new maneuvers of this type will happen in the near future.

A few days before Budanov’s interview, another Ukrainian intelligence officer had already made similar statements. In an interview to the New York Times on August 25, Andrey Yusov, a spokesman for Ukraine’s military intelligence service, stated that

“Russian elites and ordinary Russians now understand that war is not somewhere far away on the territory of Ukraine, which they hate” , adding that the “war is also in Moscow, it’s already on their territory.”

Commenting on Yusov’s words at the time, New York Times journalists stated that Kiev’s drone attacks against Russia have been working as a “morale booster”. They also said that, despite previous American disapproval of this type of maneuver, now “US officials conceded that attempted Ukrainian strikes had so far been calibrated, and they had not provoked any drastic escalation by Moscow.”

In fact, both Budanov’s and Yusov’s words directly contradict the statement by Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky himself, who on August 27th showed a lack of interest in carrying out in-depth attacks, stating that such operations risk Kiev being “left alone”. Zelensky apparently thinks the attacks create an uncomfortable situation for the West, which, despite maintaining a proxy war, tries to avoid a direct conflict with Moscow.

So, once again Ukrainian internal disagreements become clear. Officials claim different things and expose strategies for the conflict that contradict each other. In practice, there are only two possibilities in this scenario: either Zelensky is acting propagandistically, and privately he authorizes attacks in depth, while publicly denying them. Or, on the other hand, the regime’s officials are acting in a totally decentralized way, with military and intelligence agents carrying out attacks without prior authorization from Zelensky.

Both scenarios seem plausible, but to analyze the case properly it is necessary to consider what the West says on the topic, as the Ukrainian state is not sovereign and acts only as a proxy for NATO. There have been several US pronouncements so far disallowing attacks on undisputed Russian territory, but according to the New York Times, the current trend among US officials is to recognize drone incursions as “calibrated” and with low risk of escalation.

So, it is possible that US officials coordinating Ukrainian military operations on the battlefield are authorizing these drone strikes, as well as other forms of territorial invasion of Russia, without any communication to Zelensky. With so much evidence that the Ukrainian president is now isolated, without Western support and on the verge of being replaced, his exclusion from the military decision-making process seems likely.

However, these attacks will not bring any military advantage to Kiev. Escalation possibilities exist and Moscow will certainly react incisively if it perceives enemy incursions as a significant threat. This has not happened so far because the Russian forces have been efficient in neutralizing or reducing the damage of most attacks, but, having military control of the conflict, the Russians could assume a more escalatory attitude at any time. If it is necessary to increase the frequency and intensity of attacks on Ukraine to prevent the conflict zone from expanding into its undisputed territory, Moscow will certainly do so.

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

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.

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 this global Corona War our minds and bodies have been relentlessly assaulted, and the most sickening perversions of thought have been imposed upon us …”

***

For many years I have enjoyed delving into the history of science, and have been fascinated by the work of physicists. My own mathematical talents reached an apex in rudimentary calculus and although I mustered enough mental energies to pass my statistics course in medical school, I can’t say I had much affection for that discipline.

Nonetheless I have followed the various advances in physics and cosmology from the layman’s armchair for decades: Newton’s laws, Maxwell’s equations, Einstein’s special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, the Standard Model, string theory, dark energy and dark matter, the Big Bang, the multiverse, the ever-expanding universe, and on and on.

But let’s be frank, if I have a grasp of any of these great achievements, it is a tenuous and metaphorical one at best. I understand that the preeminent discoveries of mathematics and physics have enabled our modern world of locomotion and instantaneous communication, of engineering and space-based geo-location, and nuclear energy and nuclear warheads —- in short, of the conveniences we take for granted which confer ease and power over nature.

The Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland has been smashing subatomic particles and providing skeins of data and has confirmed the existence of the boson predicted by physicist Peter Higgs in 1964. Gravity waves have been detected, quantum entanglement appears to be a fact of life, and although a single unifying theory that marries relativity to the quantum world has yet to be achieved, a tremendous lot has been comprehended.

In our era of Big Science, funded almost exclusively by States whose coffers taxpayers fill, an extravagant amount of money has been devoted to the education of the mathematical elite and their research projects encompassing astronomy, atomic forces and particle physics. The Webb telescope is exploring the depths of interstellar space and thousands of satellites swarm around our Earth and have become a foundational necessity for modern warfare — and finding the directions to the nearest pizza joint.

The quest to learn and seek to know more and more goes on. It is virtually an imperative that we probe the origins of our universe and develop ever more finely honed instruments of detection, instruments that far transcend the puny capabilities of the human sensorium. Strive we must, it seems, for comprehensive knowledge, for solving the mysteries of the forces that govern the physical universe and even the origin of life. In short, we just can’t get enough until we get the theory that explains everything.

So strong is the drive to know, to encompass, to grasp and to explore, that this very pursuit goes unquestioned. The quest is esteemed, accepted, bathed in impregnable virtue, and seen as the crowning glory of human activity.

Meanwhile our mundane world is an absolute mess. To earn a living wage that allows a modicum of leisure and freedom from want is now fast becoming an impossibility in the ‘civilized’ Western sector of the planet. And for the many less fortunate billions, poverty, political thuggery, corruption, and war are ever-present ravages.

Somehow the mysteries of human cooperation and peace elude the ostensibly vast intellectual forces of our best and brightest. Somehow we prefer the alluring excitement of manipulating the human genome to the rather prosaic accomplishments of organizing societies that can preserve individual autonomy and establish equitable avenues of opportunity for all.

Why?

One would think that the creation of a peaceful and harmonious world that allows for maximal human good, that pays obeisance to our nurturing planet and establishes a sound foundation for future generations would be our greatest priority. And perhaps in some quarters it may be, though far greater emphases appear to be on the quest for control and ‘convenience’ that underlies the hallowed pursuit of technical knowledge.

In service to the God-rivaling ambition of knowing and therefore manipulating everything, humankind has launched itself into a cul-de-sac. Is our modern world — a world that is fast becoming exponentially more controlled — a better one than the world a a few centuries or even a millennium ago?

Are we better able to love, to cherish our place on the earth, to create works of beauty untinged by servitude to power? Was Homeric or Renaissance art less worthy than the art of our day? Did societies exist within which the rapacious and destructive drives of men were kept to an absolute minimum?

There is a reason why the Old Testament is filled with stories of prophets who have despaired to witness the corruption and wickedness of men and women, over and over: it is because within the fabric of the human soul the impulse to deceive, destroy, command and to commit harm merely for the sake of pleasure exists. It vies with its opposite, the impulse towards tenderness, peace and benevolence. And somehow out of the complex tissue of desires and drives and energies within the human breast springs the ever-inquisitive mission to know.

So, now we know how to split the atom and manufacture weapons of unimaginable destructive power. Now we know how to infest the human genome with injectable concoctions, and the human mind with seductive falsehoods. We know too how to manipulate weather, and in the secret echelons of military agencies no doubt fancier tools and weapons have already been devised. Soon the LHC will be hurling subatomic particles at even higher energies while somewhere somebody will cheer. But to what end? How much more do we need to know? What, in fact, do we want to know?

I like running water and driving cars and having a home that can withstand a storm; I like being able to take a ferry across Wellington Harbour; I even like being able to speak to somebody thousands of miles away.

Do I wish to be able to fly to Europe in two hours instead of twenty-four? I’m not so sure.

I can’t shake the notion that the greater the technology, the greater the ability to kill, pure and simple, though it is not the technology itself that does the killing, but those who exploit it. Here again we are face to face with this quintessentially human factor, present from the dawn of the species in an age of rudimentary tools, and present now, in our age of vastly calamitous and sophisticated weaponry.

In this global Corona War our minds and bodies have been relentlessly assaulted, and the most sickening perversions of thought have been imposed upon us as well.

The ways of deception have been unimaginably many.

I used to think that the notion of an ‘internet of things’ was far-fetched, given that it aspires to the labeling and tracking of, essentially, everything — including us. Now, I’m not so sure, having recently learned that nano-technological graphene signatures may be applied invisibly to materials, and suspecting that nano-technological agents have already been injected into billions of us, courtesy of the covid jab.

We are, each of us, born into a world that is for all intents and purposes experienced as magical, and believing that some Great Benevolent Societal Entity is the magician that has made our comforts possible — our roads, our screens, our vehicles, our wireless communications over vast distances, our access to virtually every human fantasy. A very few of us understand how anything really works: we accept it, we cherish the conveniences, we assume the magic world’s immortality and omnipotence.

Who’s running this show? And, ultimately, to what purpose? That’s what I’d really like to know.

*

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/

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.

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.

*** 

August 23^rd was a big news day all over the world. The western media’s focus on the events of that day was solidly on the unproven claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin was behind the sabotage or shooting down of an executive jet that killed his former associate Yevgeny Prigozhin.

In reality, however, there was a far more important story that was coming out of South Africa. In fact, Putin had a far more important job to do on that day due to his desire to make progress in stripping the United States of its dollar hegemony.

Putin was engaged by videolink in the discussions taking place in Johannesburg regarding expanding the so-called BRICS monetary union, in part to include measures that would diminish the dominance of the dollar in the world economy.

That objective would have been damaged severely if Putin had been implicated in the spectacular public assassination of a rival on the same day as the BRICS meeting that would have been not only an embarrassment but also very damaging vis-a-vis his credibility as a statesman.

If Putin had really wanted to kill Prigozhin, there were less politically damaging ways to do so and as of this writing the cause of the airplane crash remains unknow. By one theory, the death of Prigozhin was carried out by an airplane bomb planted by US or British intelligence working with Ukrainian agents inside Russia to discredit the Russian leader, knowing that even if he were innocent he would be blamed for the killing, which is precisely how the story has been developing in the US and Europe.

The name BRICS comes from an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill reportedly coined the term BRIC (without South Africa) in 2001 and the group was set up a few years later using the acronym.

Recently, the drive to expand BRICS has gained momentum as a result of the completely avoidable Ukraine war. The venerable status quo for international finance was developed in the wake of the Second World War at Bretton-Woods, where the instruments of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were created, to include endorsing the dollar as the de facto world reserve currency for many transactions. The entire structure is, by design, managed by a transatlantic capitalist cabal based in Washington.

There is currently only limited competition to the IMF and World Bank in the global marketplace for credit, loans, issuance of money and capital, the power to grow and develop economies, project finance, and to stay competitive with the influx of much needed capital to house, clothe, educate, or feed the people of the world. And the United States knows that and uses its control over the financial system to keep countries in line politically.

The BRICS banking model, based as it is on a multipolar world with multiple currencies and lending arrangements, has offered an alternative to this out-of-control monster of a global banking monopoly maintained by the IMF.

This is why 132 nations, which had been calling on the UN for a new financial model, immediately saw hope in the BRICS alternative banking and financing initiatives which began to take shape in 2015. Within the first year, 57 countries formally joined the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB),[entirely dollarized] constituting the first total break from the Western Bretton Woods institutions, with initial capitalization of the BRICS New Development Bank stated to be $100 billion.

So BRICS has been around in its current form for about eight years, but interest in it exploded with events surrounding the start of the Ukraine War.

A little over a year and a half ago, the US responded to the Russian intervention in Ukraine by using its control over the international banking system to slap sanctions on Moscow’s financial assets around the world, including freezing billions of dollars in banks in New York.

By one estimate, $1 trillion in Russian assets were frozen and Russian banks were also denied access to the SWIFT global messaging service that connects financial institutions and facilitates rapid and secure payments.

Washington subsequently announced that the frozen money would not be returned and would be instead used for Ukraine’s reconstruction.

That set off warning lights all around the world, though there had already been similar behavior on the part of the US in relation to Iranian and Venezuelan assets. Many were asking the question “If they can do it to a great power like Russia they can also do it to me to punish me? What should I do?” Of course the simple answer is to get out of dollars as a reserve currency, though that was something difficult to do as most energy sales and purchases continue to be, by arrangement, denominated in dollars. Hence the transition to BRICS away from dollars, permitting financial transactions in a range of currencies.

The annual meeting of BRICS Partner Countries Business Forum, as they refer to themselves, took place in Johannesburg South Africa over August 21st-24th. Meeting host South African President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates will formally join the BRICS group of nations as their candidacies had been approved by leaders of the current member states. The six newcomers will become full-fledged BRICS club members starting in January 2024. The club, which is the inner circle of the banking system, currently consists of the founders Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa though there are many other non-members who enjoy limited banking privileges, including Britain, France, Germany, Italy, New Zealand and Australia. The desirability of BRICS expansion topped the agenda of the summit in Johannesburg all week. Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose nation will take up the rotating BRICS presidency next year, spoke to the attendees via videolink and thanked the host of the summit for his hospitality and contribution to the successful outcome.

Chinese President Xi Jinping actually attended the summit meeting, as did the heads of state of Brazil, China and India to discuss a broad range of geopolitical, economic and trade issues. President Xi declared to the group that in the context of BRICS’s growth

“China stands firmly on the right side of history, and believes that a just cause should be pursued for the common good.”

He also denounced the United States indirectly, saying that

“some country, obsessed with maintaining its hegemony, has gone out of its way to cripple the EMDCs (emerging markets and developing countries).”

He argued that

attempts to punish and contain developing countries would be “futile,” and that “the collective rise of EMDCs represented by BRICS is fundamentally changing the global landscape…[as] EMDCs have contributed up to 80% of global growth in the past 20 years.”

He added that

“I am glad to note that over 20 countries are knocking on the door of BRICS. China hopes to see more joining the BRICS cooperation mechanism.”

BRICS multipolar banking model embracing multiple currencies and the resources made available through its New Development Bank are clearly concepts whose time has arrived and its membership will likely surge over the next several years as the US continues to seek to rule the world through sanctions that destroy economies and impoverish whole nations, such as it currently does in Syria and Venezuela. In its closing document from the summit, the attendees indirectly attacked US use of sanctions, stating that there should be “concern about the use of unilateral coercive measures.” There is particular resentment throughout much of the developing world of US attempts to use primary and secondary sanctions to coerce countries that are disinclined to do so into supporting the NATO war effort in Ukraine.

BRICS enjoys certain advantages as it grows including the leadership of China, which might already be the world’s largest economy, as well as the commitment of developed fast growing large economies Russia, Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran. The expanded BRICS includes 36% of the entire world’s GDP (larger than the G7) and 47% of the world’s population. BRICS member countries will soon control nearly half the world’s energy resources and if Venezuela, Algeria and Kazakhstan are included as new members as early as in 2024, it may control as much as 90% of all oil and gas traded globally. It is reported that as many as forty new countries have applied to join alliance. Even the Vatican has sought membership as an observer.

The rise of BRICS means that the US dollar will, at a minimum, lose its relative monopoly on oil and gas trades and sales.

The dominance of dollar economics will thereby inevitably fade and the dollar will surely decline as the world’s top reserve currency, though it will undoubtedly continue to survive in that capacity in parts of the world where the US continues to have considerable political and economic leverage, like Latin America. What will the outcome for the United State economy and for American citizens be?

It is hard to calculate, and some are predictably dismissive of possible negative outcomes, but the dollar will inevitably shrink in value, hurting consumers, and Americans will undoubtedly find many potential markets closed to US development and investment.

That is in part why there is such a panic about China on Capitol Hill. China does not pose a military threat but it out competes the United States globally and, operating through BRICS and other mechanisms it is already the lead nation in a highly competitive and attractive economic alliance that decisively rejects the American and Western European model.

Of course, the US could respond by lightening up on the coercive economic policies that it has for so long employed, but there is little to suggest that either Joe Biden or Donald Trump would choose to go down that path. It is the American consumer and tax payer who will suffer and have to pay the price for whatever missteps they make. And the ultimate possible horror scenario is “Will the US be ‘forced’ to go nuclear against BRICS to save the dollar?” Don’t put anything past the power-mad neocons and globalists dominating Washington. Stay tuned!

*

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 Unz Review.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from TUR

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.

*** 

As the four indictments against former President Donald Trump continue to unfold, the American people have begun to recognize the painful truth that the country’s justice and judicial system, especially the DC District Court in Washington DC,  reveal itself as a microcosm of evil monsters as Congress refuted its Constitutional responsibility.

In May, 2021, there was momentum to establish an ‘independent’ Congressional inquiry into the facts surrounding the January 6 event when thousands of Stop the Steal Americans left Trump at the Ellipse to “peacefully and patriotically’ walk to the Capitol.   At the time, the House was meeting to count Electoral College votes and certify the 2020 election which millions of Americans felt was rampant with voter irregularities and digital manipulation.

At that point, the mockingbird media had complete control of the narrative espousing that the outpouring of concerned Americans was causing a ’riot,’ even an ‘insurrection’ to overthrow the government which was, of course, utter nonsense. That outpouring of citizenry was concerned that an accurate, bona vide process be conducted that would guarantee that only legitimate votes had been counted and result in the declaration of a fair election. 

In early January 2021, Ray Epps flew from Arizona to DC to attend the January 6^th rally at the Ellipse. He met with his son Jim although neither ever attended the Ellipse rally while the senior Epps actively participated in the Capitol event. As the event exploded, Epps stood out as an oddly central figure busily ushering the public through locked gates, encouraging the public to breach the Capitol building during House consideration and repeatedly urging an insurrection with “We need to Go Inside the Capitol, Go inside.”

While Defendant Ryan Samsel’s video shows Epps whispering into Samsel’s ear just before the take down of a fence escalated into violence, Samsel with a turbulent history suffered a ‘viciously and savagely’ attack by a corrections officer.  

IMPORTANT: this is exact moment the siege of the Capitol building began as the two men in front ripped down a preliminary barrier & rushed officers who were behind a 2nd barrier

They then encouraged others to follow their lead. Officers appeared to be taken completely off guard pic.twitter.com/LE0a01PXBi

— E (@ElijahSchaffer) January 6, 2021

Upon Epps return to Arizona on January 8, he was informed that his photo was on the FBI website seeking information about J 6 suspects. Epps  met with the FBI in March which later met with his son Jim. Epps hired an attorney and by July, 2021 his photo was removed from the FBI site – not so lucky for hundreds of other J6 attendees.  

In May, 2023, Epps was informed that the FBI would be criminally charging him. By July 2023, Epps hired an attorney and filed a defamation suit against Fox News citing Tucker Carlson’s comments identifying Ebbs as an undercover agent.

To date, Epps has still not been charged or arrested for repeated obstructions. He has retained an attorney with HRC and DNC ties for unknown purposes since the DOJ and FBI have shown no interest whatsoever in arresting Epps as a potential defendant. Yet if Epps was prosecuted as some of the Proud Boys, Epps might be looking at fifteen to twenty years.

In May, 2021, the House voted 222-190 with thirty five Republicans voting in support of an “independent’ national commission (HR 3233) to investigate January 6^th ‘attack’  on the Capitol. Republican leadership opposed creation of the Commission presumably because the Democrats controlled Congress which is indicative of the reality that Republicans are not comfortable when they need to assert their legislative prowess and defend the Constitutional Republic.

Once the ‘Select’ Committee was established, Pelosi refused to allow Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy two of his five choices to participate as Republican members of the Commission. A review of the “Composition of Commission” within the Act does not indicate that Speaker Pelosi had any authority to deny those two Republican members. While Pelosi offered to replace Reps. Jordan and Banks with two other appointments, McCarthy refused and said the Republicans would hold their own investigation – which never happened. 

Were Jordan and Banks the only two possible candidates for the Commission with no other House Republicans competent to participate on the Committee?

Were Rep. Gaetz or Rep. Boebert or two other equally engaged Members not acceptable? Did McCarthy not have the inner grit to stand up to Pelosi and push back or was it easier to cave and allow the Commission to go forward with the loathsome Liz Cheney and the odious Adam Kinzinger representing Republicans on the Commission?

Even with the knowledge that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and DC Mayor Muriel Bowser refused to allow national guard troops to monitor the January 6^th gathering, their refusal should have been immediate cause for alarm. 

Inexplicably, no one in those early days apparently considered the real probability that the FBI, the CIA, the DHS or Capitol Hill police had infiltrated the crowd of Trump supporters, especially focused on Oath keepers and  the Proud Boys – which should have been the first matter of dispute for the Commission to ascertain.

The bottom line is that the Commission ‘investigation’ was a disaster and allowed the Democrats to dominate the narrative that J 6 was a Republican-inspired Trump ‘insurrection’ and the mockingbird media complied.

The end result of the failed commission has been more than a thousand defendants continue to be  mercilessly prosecuted and persecuted, some resulting in horrendous sentences of 10, 12, 15, 17, 18 and 20 years for misdemeanors or speculative ‘seditious conspiracy.’ It remains unclear why Republicans would oppose creation of an ‘independent’ investigation other than they just don’t have the inner personal strength to have stood up to Cheney et al or the necessary perseverance to save the Constitutional Republic? 

On the Senate side, the vote was 54- 35 with eleven predominately Republicans Not Voting.

In retrospect, there is no end to the abuse and cruelty as twenty two year Jorde Meacham committed suicide in late August two weeks after being charged with four misdemeanor counts of walking inside the Capitol.

Meacham’s arrest warrant cited ‘knowingly entering or remaining in a restricted building without lawful authority, disorderly or disruptive conduct within a restricted building,  disorderly conduct in a Capitol building and parading, demonstrating or picketing within in the Capitol.   

At about the same time, in late August, a seventy five year old veteran was arrested in SW Colorado for the exact same four misdemeanor charges citing his 25 minute visit inside the Capitol.

It was a busy time for the FBI as they were also arresting Philip Anderson who had a complicated experience on J6. Having been unconscious and dragged out by Jake Lang from under a pile of other bodies including Roseann Boylan who was beaten by a police officer, she died with Anderson holding her hand. Anderson reports that the DC police continued to shoot noxious gas into the crowd. Lang was later arrested and has been imprisoned for 1000 days without a trial.  

While Speaker McCarthy has failed to fulfill an earlier promise that he would release the remaining hours of J6 video, the vindictive persecution of J6 defendants has cast several especially malicious judges into the limelight with a steady stream of seditious conspiracy sentences, lacking basic traits of humanity while Congressional leadership and its minions remain in absentia, paralyzed by inaction, lacking the necessary qualities to provide leadership and  guidance to save the country out of this stinkin’ mess.

As long as Members of Congress continue to collect their pensions and health care, there is no inclination to examine the presence of clandestine participation or their role in fomenting the “insurrection,” it remains to be seen if red state America First voters who have seen RINO lethargy may show no inclination to reelect those who continue to dismiss J6 as little more than a nuisance.   

Question:  IF, in fact, there had been positive Republican participation within the J6 Committee, IF the narrative of a Republican-led insurrection had been challenged, shifting public awareness into a discussion of truth, exposing law enforcement participation, would President Trump have been indicted by the most gross totalitarian District Court in the country for a fictitious role in creating the J6 insurrection?

*

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.

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

Featured image: Outside during the US Capitol during the January 6, 2021 attack on the building (Licensed under CC)

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.

*** 

In another shocking development, electric vehicles burst into flames in Florida after coming in contact with saltwater swirled up by Hurricane Idalia. The firefighters in Palm Harbor, Florida, citing the incidents that involved Teslas took to social media and warned hybrid car owners that their vehicles could combust if exposed to saltwater.

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.

*** 

Lost in a chaotic hall of mirrors of its own creation, the CIA has generally failed in its one and only legitimate task, to provide U.S. policymakers with accurate intelligence about the world beyond the Washington echo-chamber to inform U.S. decision-making.  

If, unlike many of his predecessors, President Biden actually wanted to be guided by accurate intelligence, which is by no means certain, his nomination of former Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns as CIA Director was an encouraging, although puzzling, appointment. It removed Burns from the State Department’s policymaking chain of command, but puts him in a position where his decades of diplomatic experience and insight might help to guide Biden’s decisions, especially over the crisis in U.S. relations with Russia. Burns, fluent in Russian, lived and worked at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow for many years, first as a political officer and later as U.S. Ambassador.

It is hard to find Burns’s finger-prints on Biden’s Russia policy or on the conduct of NATO’s war in Ukraine, where U.S. policy has run headlong into precisely the dangers Burns warned his government about, in cables from Moscow spanning more than a decade. We cannot know what Burns tells the president behind closed doors. But he has not publicly called for peace talks, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley has done, although to do so would be highly unusual for a CIA director.          

In the current environment of rigid pro-war, anti-Russian orthodoxy, if Bill Burns publicly voiced some of the concerns he expressed earlier in his career, he might be ostracized, or even fired, as a Putin apologist. But his dire warnings about the consequences of inviting Ukraine to join NATO have been quietly tucked in his back pocket, as he condemns Russia as the sole author of the catastrophic war in Ukraine, without mentioning the vital context that he has so vividly explained over the past 30 years. 

In his memoir The Back Channel, published in 2019, Burns confirmed that, in 1990, Secretary of State James Baker had indeed assured Mikhail Gorbachev that there would be no expansion of the NATO alliance or forces “one inch to the east” of the borders of a reunified Germany. Burns wrote that, even though the pledge was never formalized and was made before the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Russians took Baker at his word and felt betrayed by NATO enlargement in the years that followed. 

When he was political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in 1995, Burns reported that

“hostility to early NATO expansion is almost universally felt across the domestic political spectrum here.”

When in the late 1990s President Bill Clinton’s administration moved to bring Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic into NATO, Burns called the decision premature at best, and needlessly provocative at worst.

“As Russians stewed in their grievance and sense of disadvantage, a gathering storm of ‘stab in the back’ theories slowly swirled, leaving a mark on Russia’s relations with the West that would linger for decades,” he wrote. 

After serving various posts in the Middle East, including ambassador to Jordan, in 2005 Burns finally got the job he had been eyeing for years: U.S. ambassador to Russia. From thorny trade issues to the conflict in Kosovo and missile defense disputes, he had his hands full. But the issue of NATO expansion was a source of constant friction. 

It came to a head in 2008, when officials in the Bush administration were pushing to extend a NATO invitation to Ukraine and Georgia at the Bucharest NATO Summit. Burns tried to head it off. Two months before the summit, he penned a no-holds-barred email to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, parts of which he quoted in his book.

“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests,” Burns wrote. “At this stage, a MAP [Membership Action Plan] offer would be seen not as a technical step along a long road toward membership, but as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. Russia will respond. Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze…. It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.”

In addition to this personal email, he wrote a meticulous 12-point official cable to Secretary Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, which only came to light thanks to a WikiLeaks diplomatic cable dump in 2010. 

Dated February 1, 2008, the memo’s subject line, all caps, could not have been more clear: NYET MEANS NYET: RUSSIA’S NATO ENLARGEMENT REDLINES. 

In no uncertain terms, Burns conveyed the intense opposition from Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and other senior officials, stressing that Russia would view further NATO eastward expansion as a potential military threat. He said that NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, was “an emotional and neuralgic” issue but also a strategic policy issue. 

“Not only does Russia perceive encirclement and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene—a decision Russia does not want to have to face.” 

Six years later, the U.S.-supported Maidan uprising provided the final trigger for the civil war that Russian experts had predicted. 

Burns quoted Lavrov as saying that, while countries were free to make their own decisions about their security and which political-military structures to join, they needed to keep in mind the impact on their neighbors, and that Russia and Ukraine were bound by bilateral obligations set forth in the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership, in which both parties undertook to “refrain from participation in or support of any actions capable of prejudicing the security of the other side.” 

Burns said a Ukrainian move toward the Western sphere would hurt defense industry cooperation between Russia and Ukraine, including a number of factories where Russian weapons were made, and would have a negative impact on the thousands of Ukrainians living and working in Russia and vice versa. Burns quoted Aleksandr Konovalov, Director of the Institute for Strategic Assessment, predicting that this would become “a boiling cauldron of anger and resentment among the local population.” 

Russian officials told Burns that NATO expansion would have repercussions throughout the region and into Central and Western Europe, and could even cause Russia to revisit its arms control agreements with the West. 

In a rare personal meeting Burns had with Putin just before leaving his post as ambassador in 2008, Putin warned him that “no Russian leader could stand idly by in the face of steps toward NATO membership for Ukraine. That would be a hostile act toward Russia. We would do all in our power to prevent it.” 

Despite all these warnings, the Bush administration plowed ahead at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest. Given objections from several key European countries, no date for membership was set, but NATO issued a provocative statement, saying “we agreed today that Ukraine and Georgia will become members of NATO.” 

Burns was not happy.

“In many ways, Bucharest left us with the worst of both worlds—indulging the Ukrainians and Georgians in hopes of NATO membership on which we were unlikely to deliver, while reinforcing Putin’s sense that we were determined to pursue a course he saw as an existential threat,” he wrote.

While Ukraine still has hopes to formally enter NATO, Ukraine’s former defense minister Oleksii Reznikov says that Ukraine has already become a de facto member of the NATO alliance that receives NATO weapons, NATO training and all-round military and intelligence cooperation. The intelligence sharing is directed by the CIA chief himself, who has been shuttling back and forth to meet with his counterpart in Ukraine. 

A much better use of Burns’s expertise would be to shuttle back and forth to Moscow to help negotiate an end to this brutal and unwinnable war. Would that make him a Putin apologist, or a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize? What do you think?

*

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.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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.

*** 

“It puts the mask on its skin or else it gets locked down again.”

I was led to believe this little goblin had retired. Yet here he pops up again, like a recurring herpes infection.

Taking a page out of the Karamel-uh Harris book, COVID Warlord Fauci appeared on CNN to push more endless masking amid the latest wave of COVID terror.

Try to make any sort of sense out of this:

“I would hope that if in fact we get to the point where the volume of cases is such and organizations like the CDC recommend — the CDC doesn’t mandate anything, I mean, recommends that people wear masks — I would hope that they abide by the recommendation and take into account the risk to themselves and to their families. And again, we’re not talking there’s forcing anybody to do anything…

I mean, when you’re talking about at the population level, that the data are less strong than knowing that if you look on a situation as an individual, protecting themselves or protecting them from spreading it, there’s no doubt that masks work.”

For the record, masks do not work in the real world. There is objective evidence to this effect from reputable medical journals, as well as evidence of their many harms. But Warlord Fauci isn’t one to let science get in the way of The Science™.

This degenerate creature – who, in a decent society, would have been prosecuted for crimes against humanity and duly disposed of years ago by this point – has often employed this “we didn’t force anybody to do anything” defense.

Here’s how the sham works: the CDC does not directly, in legal fact, force masking, which enables liars like Warlord Fauci to make public pronouncements to that effect that are technically, literally, true.

What happens in practice is that the CDC makes “recommendations,” which are then taken up by local authorities all across the country – particularly in blue jurisdictions – that do enforce masking, not to mention all of the private companies and institutions that force-mask their workers and customers.

Fauci knows this, I know this, and you probably know this. But lobotomized CNN viewers don’t know this or, really, anything.

*

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 Armageddon Prose.

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Ghion Journal

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.

*** 

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”—H.L. Mencken

First came 9/11, which the government used to transform itself into a police state.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit, which the police state used to test out its lockdown powers.

In light of the government’s tendency to exploit crises (legitimate or manufactured) and capitalize on the nation’s heightened emotions, confusion and fear as a means of extending the reach of the police state, one has to wonder what so-called crisis it will declare next.

It’s a simple enough formula: first, you create fear, then you capitalize on it by seizing power.

Frankly, it doesn’t even matter what the nature of the next national emergency might be (terrorism, civil unrest, economic collapse, a health scare, or the environment) as long as it allows the government to lockdown the nation and justify all manner of tyranny in the so-called name of national security.

Cue the Emergency State.

Terrorist attacks, mass shootings, “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”: the government has been anticipating and preparing for such crises for years now.

As David C. Unger writes for the New York Times: “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have given way to permanent crisis management: to policing the planet and fighting preventative wars of ideological containment, usually on terrain chosen by, and favorable to, our enemies. Limited government and constitutional accountability have been shouldered aside by the kind of imperial presidency our constitutional system was explicitly designed to prevent.”

Here’s what we know: given the rate at which the government keeps devising new ways to establish itself as the “solution” to all of our worldly problems at taxpayer expense, each subsequent crisis ushers in ever larger expansions of government power and less individual liberty.

This is the slippery slope to outright tyranny.

You see, once the government acquires (and uses) authoritarian powers—to spy on its citizens, to carry out surveillance, to transform its police forces into extensions of the military, to seize taxpayer funds, to wage endless wars, to censor and silence dissidents, to identify potential troublemakers, to detain citizens without due process—it does not voluntarily relinquish them.

The lesson for the ages is this: once any government is allowed to overreach and expand its powers, it’s almost impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. As Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe recognizes, “The dictatorial hunger for power is insatiable.”

Indeed, the history of the United States is a testament to the old adage that liberty decreases as government (and government bureaucracy) grows. To put it another way, as government expands, liberty contracts.

In this way, every crisis since the nation’s early beginnings has become a make-work opportunity for the government.

Each crisis has also been a test to see how far “we the people” would allow the government to sidestep the Constitution in the so-called name of national security; a test to see how well we have assimilated the government’s lessons in compliance, fear and police state tactics; a test to see how quickly we’ll march in lockstep with the government’s dictates, no questions asked; and a test to see how little resistance we offer up to the government’s power grabs when made in the name of national security.

Most critically of all, it has been a test to see whether the Constitution—and our commitment to the principles enshrined in the Bill of Rights—could survive a national crisis and true state of emergency.

Unfortunately, we’ve been failing this particular test for a long time now.

Indeed, the powers-that-be have been pushing our buttons and herding us along like so much cattle since World War II, at least, starting with the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor, which not only propelled the U.S. into World War II but also unified the American people in their opposition to a common enemy.

That fear of attack by foreign threats, conveniently torqued by the growing military industrial complex, in turn gave rise to the Cold War era’s “Red Scare.” Promulgated through government propaganda, paranoia and manipulation, anti-Communist sentiments boiled over into a mass hysteria that viewed anyone and everyone as suspect: your friends, the next-door neighbor, even your family members could be a Communist subversive.

This hysteria, which culminated in hearings before the House Un-American Activities Committee, where hundreds of Americans were called before Congress to testify about their so-called Communist affiliations and intimidated into making false confessions, also paved the way for the rise of an all-knowing, all-seeing governmental surveillance state.

By the time 9/11 rolled around, all George W. Bush had to do was claim the country was being invaded by terrorists, and the government used the USA Patriot Act to claim greater powers to spy, search, detain and arrest American citizens in order to keep America safe.

By way of the National Defense Authorization Act, Barack Obama continued Bush’s trend of undermining the Constitution, going so far as to give the military the power to strip Americans of their constitutional rights, label them extremists, and detain them indefinitely without trial, all in the name of keeping America safe.

Despite the fact that the breadth of the military’s power to detain American citizens violates not only U.S. law and the Constitution but also international laws, the government has refused to relinquish its detention powers made possible by the NDAA.

Then Donald Trump took office, claiming the country was being invaded by dangerous immigrants and insisting that the only way to keep America safe was to expand the reach of the border police, empower the military to “assist” with border control, and essentially turn the country into a Constitution-free zone.

That so-called immigration crisis then morphed into multiple crises (domestic extremism, the COVID-19 pandemic, race wars, civil unrest, etc.) that the government has been eager to use in order to expand its powers.

Joe Biden, in turn, has made every effort to expand the reach of the militarized police state, pledging to hire 87,000 more IRS agents and 100,000 police officers, and allowing the FBI to operate as standing army.

What the next crisis will be is anyone’s guess, but you can be sure that there will be a next crisis.

So, what should you expect if the government decides to declare another state of emergency and institutes a nationwide lockdown?

You should expect more of the same, only worse.

More compliance, less resistance.

More fear-mongering, mind-control tactics and less tolerance for those who question the government’s propaganda-driven narratives.

Most of all, you should expect more tyranny and less freedom.

Given the government’s past track record and its long-anticipated plans for using armed forces to solve domestic political and social problems in response to a future crisis, there’s every reason to worry about what comes next.

Mark my words: as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, if and when another crisis arises—if and when a nationwide lockdown finally hits—if and when martial law is enacted with little real outcry or resistance from the public— then we will truly understand the extent to which the powers-that-be have fully succeeded in acclimating us to a state of affairs in which the government has all the power and “we the people” have none. 

In the meantime, if all we do to reclaim our freedoms and regain control over our runaway government is vote for yet another puppet of the Deep State, by the time the next crisis arises, it may well be too late.

*

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.

Featured image is from Pixabay

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.

*** 

 

 

Annnd… Here we go. If you have not read the background (Go Deep), you will not have the appropriate context to absorb the latest revelation about how the Dept of Defense will now conduct online monitoring operations, using enhanced AI to protect the U.S. internet from “disinformation” under the auspices of national security.

Gee, who would have predicted that U.S. internet operations would suddenly have a totally new set of enhanced AI guardians at the gateways?

Read Carefully – Eyes Wide Open:

The US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) has contracted New York-based Accrete AI to deploy software that detects “real time” disinformation threats on social media.

The company’s Argus anomaly detection AI software analyzes social media data, accurately capturing “emerging narratives” and generating intelligence reports for military forces to speedily neutralize disinformation threats.

“Synthetic media, including AI-generated viral narratives, deep fakes, and other harmful social media-based applications of AI, pose a serious threat to US national security and civil society,” Accrete founder and CEO Prashant Bhuyan said.

“Social media is widely recognized as an unregulated environment where adversaries routinely exploit reasoning vulnerabilities and manipulate behavior through the intentional spread of disinformation.

“USSOCOM is at the tip of the spear in recognizing the critical need to identify and analytically predict social media narratives at an embryonic stage before those narratives evolve and gain traction. Accrete is proud to support USSOCOM’s mission.”

But wait… It gets worse!

[PRIVATE SECTOR VERSION] – The company also revealed that it will launch an enterprise version of Argus Social for disinformation detection later this year.

The AI software will provide protection for “urgent customer pain points” against AI-generated synthetic media, such as viral disinformation and deep fakes.

Providing this protection requires AI that can automatically “learn” what is most important to an enterprise and predict the likely social media narratives that will emerge before they influence behavior. (read more)

Now, take a deep breath…. Let me explain.

The goal is the “PRIVATE SECTOR VERSION.”  USSOCOM is the mechanical funding mechanism for deployment, because the system itself is too costly for a private sector launch.   The Defense Dept budget is used to contract an Artificial Intelligence system, the Argus anomaly detection AI, to monitor social media under the auspices of national security.

Once the DoD funded system is created, the “Argus detection protocol” – the name given to the AI monitoring and control system, will then be made available to the public sector.  “Enterprise Argus” is then the commercial product, created by the DoD, which allows the U.S. based tech sectors to deploy.

The DoD cannot independently contract for the launch of an operation against a U.S. internet network, because of constitutional limits via The Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States.  However, the DoD can fund the creation of the system under the auspices of national defense, and then allow the private sector to launch for the same intents and purposes. See how that works? 

*

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 TLR

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.

*** 

As the Pinochet regime rounded up and murdered its political opponents after the 1973 coup, a UK Foreign Office propaganda unit passed material to Chile’s military intelligence and MI6 connived with a key orchestrator of the coup, newly declassified files show.

The UK government assisted Chile’s military intelligence in the aftermath of the brutal 1973 coup against elected president Salvador Allende, newly declassified files show.

The assistance was authorised by the Information Research Department (IRD), a secret Foreign Office propaganda unit which worked closely with Britain’s secret intelligence service, MI6.

The IRD had long seen Allende as a political threat. As Declassified previously revealed, throughout the 1960s, the unit had sought to prevent Allende from ever becoming president through election interference and covert propaganda operations.

After Allende was elected in 1970, the IRD’s distribution of propaganda material became “strictly limited”, with the British embassy having fewer reliable contacts in the Chilean government. 

This all changed after the coup.

In January 1974, the IRD began to “extend the distribution” of its material, which was now passed “to the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government information organisations” and, crucially, the dictatorship’s “military intelligence” services.

At this time, Chile’s security forces – including the country’s intelligence apparatus – were responsible for massive human rights violations, including the widespread use of torture as a political weapon.

The UK government was under no illusions about this. As Foreign Office official Christopher Crabbie noted three months after the coup in December 1973, “I do not think that anyone seriously doubts that torture is going on in Chile”. 

Reliable figures indicate that, between 1973 and 1988, Chilean state agents were responsible for over 3,000 deaths or disappearances and tens of thousands of cases of torture and political arrests. This was in a country which, in 1973, had a population of only 10 million people.

‘Hearts and Minds’

The nature of the information passed to Chile’s military intelligence remains unclear, though the files suggest it may have included material for use in propaganda, research reports on left-wing activity, and even manuals on domestic security operations.

For instance, newly declassified files show how the UK government secretly helped the Chilean authorities to develop a counter-insurgency strategy, using techniques refined during Britain’s colonial interventions in Southeast Asia.

The idea for such assistance was first raised during the visit of British navy chief Sir Michael Pollock to Chile in late November 1973, two months after the coup. 

The timing of Pollock’s visit was “politically tricky”, noted the British ambassador in Santiago, Reginald Secondé, since there was “much critical attention” being given “to the Chilean Government’s treatment of their political opponents”.

However, there were “two frigates and two submarines for the Chilean Navy under construction in British yards” – an arms deal worth around £50m – and “this was not a moment to prejudice the historic tradition of Anglo-Chilean naval friendship”. 

In Santiago, Pollock and Secondé met with a number of regime officials, including navy chief José Toribio Merino Castro, defence minister Patricio Carvajal Prado, and foreign minister Ismael Huerta.

With Huerta, the British officials spoke about the UK government’s “hearts and minds” campaign in Northern Ireland, a counter-insurgency strategy inspired by Britain’s war in Malaya (1948-60).

Huerta “seemed impressed with the concept”, and Secondé “later twice heard him muttering to himself ‘hearts and minds’”.

Subsequent meetings were held between Secondé, British information officer Tony Walters, and Captain Carlos Ashton, the director of overseas information in Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Like Huerta, Ashton was “very receptive to the idea that this kind of approach to Chilean security problems might be the right answer”, and requested “details of what practical measures a ‘hearts and minds’ exercise would involve”.

Counter-insurgency Advice

Ashton’s request for assistance was forwarded to Rosemary Allott, the head of the IRD’s Latin American desk.

In a letter dated 15 February 1974 and marked ‘secret’, Allott agreed to provide the Chilean regime with counter-insurgency advice, but limited this to material on Britain’s past colonial interventions.

“In view of the delicate political considerations involved”, Allott wrote, “it would be best to confine, at this stage at least, the material we send you of insurgencies of the past, rather than those currently preoccupying HMG” such as Northern Ireland.

The Pinochet regime was soon issued with three books on British counter-insurgency strategy, alongside a “Manual of Counter Insurgency Studies”. 

Allott also tracked down “various official reports on Malaya” including “The Fight Against Communist Terrorism in Malaya”, the “Review of the Emergency in Malaya (1948-57)”, and “two booklets on the Philippines insurrection”. 

Britain’s military campaign in Malaya involved the “resettlement” of over 500,000 civilians, aerial bombardment, and an intensive propaganda operation. 

Embassy officials suggested that they were teaching Chilean officers “tactics of tolerance and magnanimity”. However, brutal repression often lay behind the UK government’s rhetoric about “winning hearts and minds”, and the Chilean authorities were only sharpening their repressive techniques.

None of the material given to the Pinochet regime was “for attribution to HMG”. This meant that the Chilean authorities could use the information but not source it to the UK government. 

The extent to which Britain’s advice was acted upon remains unclear; the Pinochet regime was certainly not lacking in support from the CIA. 

Nonetheless, it is clear that Britain agreed to share its colonial policing methods with the Chilean junta, with the goal of stabilising Pinochet’s regime against domestic opposition.

MI6 in Chile

Evidence of British assistance to Chile’s intelligence services raises further questions about what Britain’s own secret intelligence service, MI6, was doing in Chile. 

In 1972, MI6 officer David Spedding was attached to the British embassy in Santiago – his only foreign posting outside of the Middle East throughout his career. 

This was not Spedding’s first visit to Chile. As a postgraduate student at Oxford University during the mid-1960s, Spedding had spent his gap year in Santiago and found work as an assistant in the British embassy’s press office. 

Spedding’s first role in the diplomatic service was thus in the same British embassy that had been directing covert propaganda operations against Allende throughout the 1960s. The job gave him “an entrée into SIS [MI6]”, historian Nigel West noted.

Spedding remained in Chile until September 1974. He was subsequently made responsible for MI6 operations across the Middle East, and would go on to become MI6 chief between 1994 and 1999.

‘Our Relationship with Admiral Merino’

Spedding’s name rarely appears in declassified Foreign Office files on Chile.

Yet in one file, dated 4 December 1973, Spedding informed the Foreign Office that 2,800 civilians and 700 armed forces personnel had been killed during and after the coup. 

“In order to protect our relationship with Admiral Merino”, Spedding noted, “we would not like these figures to be quoted, at least for the time being”. 

Admiral Merino was one of the key orchestrators of the 1973 coup. He was head of the Chilean navy in September 1973, and remained in post until the fall of the dictatorship in 1990. Merino claimed responsibility for convincing Pinochet to join the coup.

One of Spedding’s roles, then, was to ensure close collaboration with the Chilean junta by covering up its responsibility for massive political repression and human rights violations. 

The MI6 station in Santiago was only closed down in 1974 amid the UK Labour Party’s return to government.

It would not be surprising if MI6 played a supporting role to the CIA’s covert operations against Allende during the early 1970s. It was recently revealedthat the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) had “opened a base in Santiago to assist in the US Central Intelligence Agency’s destabilisation of the Chilean government” in 1971.

Britain’s secret assistance to the Pinochet regime was consistent with the UK government’s position on the coup. 

The Conservative government under Edward Heath had welcomed the coup and rushed to give diplomatic recognition and arms to the Chilean junta, with the Foreign Office noting that it had “infinitely more to offer British interests than the one which preceded it”.

The coup against Allende inaugurated a 17-year dictatorship under General Augusto Pinochet, who only left office in 1990.

*

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.

John McEvoy is co-directing a forthcoming documentary investigating Britain’s hidden role in the death of Chile’s democracy and rise of the Pinochet dictatorship. You can support the film’s production here.

Featured image is from The Libertarian Institute

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.

*** 

Judicial Watch released 58 pages of records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showing that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its COVID vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it. The FDA indicated that this production of records “represents our complete response to your request; no additional productions are anticipated.” 

The records were obtained in response to a March 2022 lawsuit filed after the Department of Health and Human Services failed to respond to an August 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records “submitted by Pfizer and BioNTech to the FDA, including BARDA, relating to ‘booster’ vaccinations for the SARS-CoV-2 virus” (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00730)).

Click here to read the full report.

Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, BARDA, has been heavily involved with the development of the COVID-19 vaccine. According to its website:

The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) provides an integrated, systematic approach to the development of the necessary vaccines, drugs, therapies, and diagnostic tools for public health medical emergencies such as chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) accidents, incidents and attacks; pandemic influenza (PI), and emerging infectious diseases (EID).

BioNTech is a German pharmaceutical company that partnered with Pfizer in developing the original vaccine. 

The records include a July study titled “Phase 1 Booster Safety and Immunogenicity Data up to 1 Month Post-Dose 3 of BNT162b2 30 µg [micrograms] in Study C4591001” provided “preliminary safety and immunogenicity data” for a group that had received two vaccine shots and, seven to nine months later, a third (booster) shot:

This submission includes preliminary findings from a subset of younger (18 to 55 years of age) and older (65 to 85 years of age) participants in the Phase 1 part of Study C4591001 who completed the initial two-dose series of BNT162b2 30 µg, given approximately 3 weeks apart, and then received a third dose (booster) of BNT162b2 30 µg approximately 7 to 9 months after the second dose. Data were collected through the cutoff date of 13 May 2021.

The participants were evaluated for symptoms up to one month after the booster shot. The booster’s immunogenicity, or how well a vaccine works over time, was evaluated seven days and one month after the booster: 

SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralization titers were assessed in sera drawn before BNT162b2 Dose 1 (on Day 1); 7 days and 1 month after BNT162b2 Dose 2; before Dose 3; and 7 days and 1 month after Dose 3.

The participants included 11 people aged 18 to 55 and 12 people aged 65 to 85. Of the younger group, there were nine females and two males; eight of whom were white, one was black and two were Asian. Of the older group six were female, six were males, and all were white.   

The study reports that a booster dose increases the breadth of neutralizing response against SARS-CoV-2 variants and that the data suggests that a third dose could prolong protection and further increase the breadth of protection:

[T]he durability of protection from vaccination and the required frequency of booster doses are unknown at this time. To date, results from the global Phase 1/2/3 study of BNT162b2 indicate robust protection lasting at least 6 months, despite modest waning of immunity over time. Booster doses have the potential to keep protection high if immunity continues to decline over time.

This Pfizer study was sent to Marion Gruber, PhD, director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review.

An August 13, 2021, FDA-CBER (Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) report is titled “Phase 1 Booster (Dose 3) Immunogenicity at 1 Month Post-Dose 3 in Study C4591001: SARS-CoV-2 Wild-Type and Delta Variant Neutralization Data.”

On August 24, 2021, the White House stated it was moving “aggressively” to roll out booster shots despite not yet receiving clearance from the FDA to give everyone third doses. 

Shortly thereafter, it was reported that Gruber and her deputy, Phil Krause, were leaving the agency because they were frustrated with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Biden White House interference in vaccine decisions. Gruber and Krause were among a group of resigning doctors who agreed that “Available evidence doesn’t yet indicate a need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots among the general population …”

On September 21, 2021, just over a month after Pfizer’s second submission, the FDA approved a single booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for those over 65, for those 18 to 64 at a high risk of severe Covid-19, and for those whose frequent institutional or occupational exposure puts them at high risk of serious complications of COVID-19.

The FDA said it based its decision on the documents presented by Pfizer, as well as input from the CDC, the Israeli Ministry of Health and the University of Bristol in the UK.

Three weeks after approval, about 8.9 million boosters had been administered.

“With the planned push for new boosters by the Biden administration, the public would do well to examine these troubling documents about the shotgun approval of prior COVID boosters,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  

Through FOIA Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information regarding COVID-19 issues:

• In July 2023, Judicial Watch sued DHS for records and communications between DHS component offices and the U.S. Biological Defense Program regarding a $2 million grant awarded by the DHS’s Ground Truth Network to EcoHealth Alliance, which is implicated in using tax dollars for “gain-of-function” coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute for Virology and elsewhere in China.
• HHS records included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
• HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19.
• Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the COVID shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
• HHS produced records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
• In October 2020, Judicial Watch received FDA records that detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
• NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
• HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
• NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
• HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
• HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
• HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
• University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
• HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
• Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
• HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
• HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
• Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.

*

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.

---

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.

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.

*** 

Kiev was offered a peace deal long ago, but chose war instead, egged on by its Western backers. Now its fate is sealed.

September 2 marked the 78th anniversary of the World War Two surrender ceremony onboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay.

This moment formalized Japan’s unconditional capitulation to the United States, and its allies, and marked the end of the conflict. From the Japanese perspective, it had been ongoing since the Marco Polo bridge incident of July 7, 1937, which started the Sino-Japanese War.

There was no negotiation, only a simple surrender ceremony in which Japanese officials signed documents, without conditions.

Because that is what defeat looks like.

History is meant to be studied in a manner that seeks to draw out lessons from the past that might have relevance in the present. As George Santayana, the American philosopher, noted, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The Ukrainian government in Kiev would do well to reflect on both the historical precedent set by Japan’s unconditional surrender, and Santayana’s advice, when considering its current conflict with Russia.

First and foremost, Ukraine must reflect honestly about the causes of this conflict, and which side bears the burden of responsibility for the fighting. ‘Denazification’ is a term that the Russian government has used in describing one of its stated goals and objectives. President Vladimir Putin has made numerous references to the odious legacy of Stepan Bandera, the notorious mass murderer and associate of Nazi Germany who is feted by modern-day Ukrainian nationalists as a hero and all but a founding father of their nation.

That present-day Ukraine would see fit to elevate a man such as Bandera to such a level speaks volumes about the rotten foundation of Kiev’s cause, and the dearth of moral fiber in the nation today.

The role played by the modern-day adherents of the Nazi collaborator’s hateful nationalist ideology in promulgating the key events that led to the initiation of the military operation by Russia can neither be ignored nor minimized. It was the Banderists, with their long relationship with the CIA and other foreign intelligence services hostile to Moscow, who used violence to oust the former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich, from office in February 2014.

From the act of illicit politicized violence came the mainstreaming of the forces of ethnic and cultural genocide, manifested in the form of the present-day Banderists, who initiated acts of violence and oppression in eastern Ukraine. This, in turn, triggered the Russian response in Crimea and the actions of the citizens of Donbass, who organized to resist the rampage of the Bandera-affiliated Ukrainian nationalists. The Minsk Accords, and the subsequent betrayal by Kiev and its Western partners of the potential path for peace that these represented, followed.

Ukraine cannot disassociate itself from the role played by the modern-day Banderists in shaping the present reality. In this, Kiev mirrors the militarists of Imperial Japan, whose blind allegiance to the precepts of Bushido, the traditional ‘way of the warrior’ dating back to the Samurai of 17th century Japan, helped push the country into global conflict. Part of Japan’s obligations upon surrender was to purge its society of the influence of the militarists, and to enact a constitution that deplatformed them by making wars of aggression – and the military forces needed to wage them – unconstitutional.

Banderism, in all its manifestations, must be eradicated from Ukrainian society in the same manner that Bushido-inspired militarism was removed from Japan, to include the creation of a new constitution that enshrines this purge as law. Any failure to do so only allows the cancer of Banderism to survive, festering inside the defeated body of post-conflict Ukraine until some future time when it can metastasize once again to bring harm.

This is precisely the message that was being sent by Putin when, during the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum this past July, he showed a video where the crimes of the Banderists during the Second World War were put on public display.

“How can you not fight it?” Putin said. “And if this is not neo-Nazism in its current manifestation, then what is it?” he asked. “We have every right,” the Russian president declared, “to believe that the task of the denazification of Ukraine set by us is one of the key ones.”

As the Western establishment media begins to come to grips with the scope and scale of Ukraine’s eventual military defeat (and, by extension, the reality of a decisive Russian military victory), their political overseers in the US, NATO, and the European Union struggle to define what the endgame will be.

Having articulated the Russian-Ukrainian conflict as an existential struggle where the very survival of NATO is on the line, these Western politicians now have the task of shaping public perception in a manner that mitigates any meaningful, sustained political blowback from constituents who have been deceived into tolerating the transfer of billions of dollars from their respective national treasuries, and billions more dollars’ worth of weapons from their respective arsenals, into a lost and disgraced cause.

A key aspect of this perception management is the notion of a negotiated settlement, a process which implies that Ukraine has a voice as to the timing and nature of conflict termination. The fact is, however, that Kiev lost this voice when it walked away from a peace deal brokered between its negotiators and their Russian counterparts last spring, at the behest of its NATO masters as communicated through then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The decision to prolong the conflict was predicated on the provision to Kiev of tens of billions of dollars in military equipment and assistance. The authorities duly staged a mass mobilization, meaning that Ukrainian troops vastly outnumbered their Russian counterparts.

Kiev’s new NATO-trained and equipped force achieved impressive territorial gains during a fall offensive. The Russian reaction was to stabilize the front and carry out a partial mobilization of its reserves to accumulate enough manpower to accomplish the mission assigned from the outset of the operation – denazification and demilitarization. Denazification is a political problem. Demilitarization is not. In the case of Ukraine, it means to effectively destroy Ukraine’s ability to wage armed conflict on a meaningful scale against Russia. This objective also presumably entails the need to remove all NATO military infrastructure, inclusive of equipment and material, from Ukraine.

Russia has been undertaking the successful demilitarization of Ukraine’s armed forces since the initiation of partial mobilization. The equipment Ukraine is provided by the West is similarly being destroyed by Russia at a rate that makes replacement unsustainable. Meanwhile, Russia’s own defense industry has kicked into full gear, supplying a range of modern weapons and ammunition that is more than sufficient.

The harsh reality is that neither Ukraine nor its Western allies can sustain the operational losses in manpower and equipment that the conflict with Russia is inflicting. Russia, on the other hand, is not only able to absorb its losses, but increase its strength over time, given the large number of volunteers that are being recruited into the military and the high rate of armament production. At some point in the not-so-distant future, the balance of power between Russia and Ukraine in the theater of operations will reach a point in which Kiev is unable to maintain adequate coverage along the line of contact, allowing gaps to open up in the defensive line which Russia, able to employ fresh reserves, will exploit. This will lead to the collapse of cohesion among Ukrainian troops, more than likely resulting in a precipitous withdrawal to more defensive positions that could be established west of the Dnieper River.

Ukraine, through its actions in 2014, lost Crimea. Ukraine, and through its choices in 2022, lost the Donbass, Zaporozhye, and Kherson. And if Kiev persists in extending this conflict until it is physically unable to defend itself, it runs the risk of losing even more territory, including Odessa and Kharkov.

Russia did not enter the conflict with the intent of seizing Ukrainian territory. But in March 2022, Kiev rejected a draft peace agreement (which it had preliminarily approved at first), and this decision to eschew peace in favor of war led to Russia absorbing Donbass, Zaporozhye, and Kherson.

As one of its conditions to even begin negotiating for peace with Moscow, Kiev demanded the return of all former Ukrainian territories currently under Russian control – including Crimea. To achieve such an outcome, however, Ukraine would have to be able to compel compliance by defeating Russia militarily and/or politically. As things stand, this is an impossibility.

What Ukraine and its Western partners do not yet seem to have come to grips with is the fact that Russia’s leadership is in no mood for negotiations for negotiations’ sake. Putin has listed its goals and objectives when it comes to the conflict – denazification, demilitarization, and no NATO membership for Ukraine.

This is the reality of the present situation. Russia is working to achieve its stated goals and objectives. As things stand, there is little Ukraine or its partners in the US, NATO, and the EU (the so-called ‘collective West’) can do to prevent it from accomplishing these aims. The timeline is not calendar-driven, but rather determined by results. The longer Kiev – and its Western partners – drag out this conflict, the greater the harm that will accrue for Ukraine.

It is time for Ukraine and its Western partners to move to the path of peace and reconstruction. But this can only happen when Ukraine surrenders and accepts reality.

*

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.

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika: Arms Control and the End of the Soviet Union.’ He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, served in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991 to 1998 served as a chief weapons inspector with the UN in Iraq. Mr Ritter currently writes on issues pertaining to international security, military affairs, Russia, and the Middle East, as well as arms control and nonproliferation. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter and on Telegram @ScottRitter

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.

*** 

Preface

A peaceful dissolution of the USSR according to the agreement between Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan in 1988 in Reykjavik brought a new dimension of global geopolitics in which up to 2008 Russia, as a legal successor state of the USSR, was playing an inferior role in global politics when an American Neocon concept of Pax Americana became the fundamental framework in international relations. Therefore, for instance, Boris Yeltsin’s Russia capitulated in 1995 to the American design regarding a final outcome of the USA/EU policy of the destruction of ex-Yugoslavia in November 1995 (the Dayton Agreement) followed by even worse political capitulation in the case of Washington’s Kosovo policy that became ultimately implemented in June 1999 (the Kumanovo Agreement). Russia was in the 1990s geopolitically humiliated by the USA and its West European clients (Collective West) to such an extent that we can call the period of Boris Yeltsin’s servile policy toward the West a Dark Time of the history of Russian international relations when the main losers became the Serbs who were and still are extremely demonized by the Western corporative mass-media and academic institutions.[i]

Russia Between the West and Herself

Yeltsin on 22 August 1991 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

An ideological-political background of Boris Yeltsin’s foreign policy of Russia was Atlanticism – an orientation in foreign policy that stresses the fundamental need to cooperate (at any price) with the West, especially in the area of the politics and economy. In other words, the integration with the West and its economic-political standards became for Boris Yeltsin’s Russia, governed by the Russian liberals, an order of the day. This trend in Russia’s foreign policy in the 1990s had roots in the 19th-century geopolitical and cultural orientation of the Russian society by the so-called Russian “Westerners“ who became the opponents to the Russian “Slavenophiles“ for whom the ultimate aim of the Russian foreign policy was to create a Pan-Slavonic Commonwealth with the leadership of Russia.

The actual outcome of the Russian liberals:

“in the years following Yeltsin’s election were catastrophic as, for instance, Russia’s industrial production dropped by nearly 40%, over 80% of Russians experienced a reduction in their living standards, health care disintegrated, life expectancy fell along with the birth rate, and morale overall collapsed“.[ii]

However, the political influence of the Russian liberals became drastically weakened by Vladimir Putin’s taking power in Russia from 2000 onward and especially from 2004. A new global course of Russia’s foreign policy after 2004 became directed toward the creation of a multipolar world but not unipolar Pax Americana one as the American Neocons wanted and fought for using all means. Therefore, the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Syria became directly exposed to the Russian-American geopolitical struggle while Kosovo is up to now still left to the exclusive US sphere of geostrategic interest and economic exploitation. Nevertheless, it was expected in the nearest future that post-Yeltsin’s Russia would take decisive geopolitical steps with regard to Kosovo as from the year 2000 the Russian exterior policy is constantly becoming more and more imbued with the neo-Slavophile geopolitical orientation advocated by Aleksandar Solzhenitsyn (1918−2008) as a part of a more global Eurasian geopolitical course of the post-Yeltsin’s Russian Federation supported by many Russian Slavophile intellectuals like a philosopher Aleksandar Dugin.

Ivan L. Solonevich, probably, gave one of the best explanations of Russia’s geopolitical situation and peculiarity in comparison to those of the USA and the UK focusing his research on the comparative analysis of geography, climate, and levels of individual freedoms between these countries:

“The American liberties, as well as American wealth are determined by American geography. Our [Russia’s] freedom and our wealth are determined by Russian geography. Thus, we’ll never have the same freedoms as the British and Americans have, because their security is guaranteed by the seas and oceans, but ours could only be guaranteed by military conscription“.[iii]

Samuel P. Huntington was quite clear and correct in his opinion that the foundation of every civilization is based on religion.[iv] Huntington’s warnings about the future development of global politics that can take the form of a direct clash of different cultures (in fact, separate and antagonistic civilizations) are unfortunately already on the agenda of international relations. Here, we came to the crux of the matter in regard to Western relations with Russia from both historical and contemporary perspectives: Western civilization, as based on the Western type of Christianity (Roman Catholicism and all Protestant denominations) has traditional animosity and hostility toward all nations and states of the East Christian (Orthodox) confession.

As Russia was and is the biggest and most powerful Christian Orthodox country, the Eurasian geopolitical conflicts between the West and Russia started from the time when the Roman Catholic common state of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania launched its confessional-civilizational imperialistic wars against the Grand Duchy of Moscow at the very end of the 14th century; i.e., when (in 1385) Poland and Lithuania became united as a personal union of two sovereign states.

The present-day territories of Ukraine (which at that time did not exist under this name) and Belarus (White Russia) became the first victims of Vatican policy to proselytize the Eastern Slavs.

Therefore, the biggest part of present-day Ukraine was occupied and annexed by Lithuania till 1569[v] and after the Lublin Union in 1569 by Poland. In the period from 1522 to 1569, there were 63% of the East Slavs on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania out of her total population.[vi] However, from the Russian perspective, an aggressive Vatican policy of re-conversion of the Christian Orthodox population and their denationalization could be prevented only by military counter-attacks to liberate the occupied territories. Nonetheless, when it happened from the mid-17th century till the end of the 18th century a huge number of the former Christian Orthodox population already become Roman Catholics, and the Uniates with lost their original national identity (today, they are the most fervent Russophobes).

A conversion to Roman Catholicism and making the Union with the Vatican on the territories occupied by the Polish-Lithuanian common state (Commonwealth of Two Nations) till the end of the 18th century divided the Russian national body into two parts: the Christian Orthodox, who remained to be the Russians and the pro-Western oriented converts who, basically, lost their initial ethnonational identity. This is especially true in Ukraine – a country with the biggest number of Uniates in the world due to the forcible Brest Union in 1596 with the Vatican under the umbrella of the Polish-Lithuanian common state (union).

The Uniate Church in (the West) Ukraine openly collaborated with the Nazi regime during WWII and for that reason, it was banned from 1945 till 1989. Nevertheless, it was exactly the Uniate Church in Ukraine that propagated an ideology that the “Ukrainians“ were not (Little) Russians but were a separate nation that had no ethnolinguistic and confessional connection with the Russians. Therefore, it opened the way to the successful Ukrainization of the Little Russians, Ruthenians, and Carpatho-Russians during the Soviet (anti-Russian) rule. After the dissolution (in fact, peaceful dismemberment) of the USSR, the Ukrainians became an instrument of the realization of the Western anti-Russian geopolitical interests in East Europe.[vii]

The unscrupulous Jesuits became the fundamental West European anti-Russian and anti-Christian Orthodox hawks to propagate the idea that a Christian Orthodox Russia is not belonging to a real (Western) Europe. Due to such Vatican propaganda activity, the West gradually became antagonistic to Russia, and her culture was seen as inferior, i.e. barbaric as a continuation of the Byzantine Christian Orthodox (anti)civilization.

Unfortunately, such a negative attitude toward Russia and East Christianity is accepted by a contemporary US-led Collective West for whom Russophobia became an ideological foundation for its geopolitical projects and ambitions[viii] (today, especially within the borders of the Soviet Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States, or Moldova). Therefore, all real or potential Russian supporters became geopolitical enemies of a Pax Americana like the Serbs, Armenians, Greeks, Byelorussians, etc.

A new moment in the West-Russia geopolitical struggles started when Protestant Sweden became directly involved in the Western confessional-imperialistic wars against Russia in 1700 (the Great Northern War of 1700−1721) which Sweden lost after the Battle of Poltava in 1709 when Russia finally became a member of the concert of the Great European Powers.[ix] A century later, that was Napoleonic France took a role in the historical process of “Eurocivilizing“ of “schismatic“ Russia in 1812 also finished by the West European fiasco[x], similar to Pan-Germanic warmongers during both world wars. However, after 1945 up to the present, the “civilizational“ role of the Westernization of Russia is assumed by NATO and the EU. Collective West immediately after the dismemberment of the USSR, by imposing its client satellite Boris Yeltsin as a President of Russia, achieved an enormous geopolitical achievement around Russia, especially on the territories of the ex-Soviet Union and the Balkans.

Nevertheless, the West started to experience a Russian geopolitical blowback from 2001 onward when B. Yeltsin’s time of pro-Western political clients were gradually removed from the decision-making positions in Russia’s governmental structures. What a new Russian political establishment correctly understood is that a Westernization policy of Russia is nothing else but an ideological mask for the economic-political transformation of the country into a colony of the Western imperialistic planners led by the US Neocon administration[xi] alongside with the task of the US/EU to externalize their own values and norms permanently. This „externalization policy“ is grounded on the thesis of The End of History by Francis Fukuyama:[xii]

“that the philosophy of economic and political liberalism has triumphed throughout the world, ending the contest between market democracies and centrally planned governance“.[xiii]

The Theories of “Hegemonic” and “Multipolar” Stability  

Therefore, after the formal ending of the Cold War (1.0) in 1989, the fundamental Western global geopolitical project is The West and The Rest, according to which the rest of the world is obliged to accept all fundamental Western values and norms according to the Hegemonic Stability Theory of a unipolar system of the world security.[xiv] Nevertheless, behind such doctrinal unilateralism as a project of the US hegemony in global governance in the new century clearly stands the unipolar hegemonic concept of a Pax Americana, but with Russia and China as the crucial opponents to it in the practice including the BRICS and future the BRICS+ countries as well. In fact, BRICS+ will become the focal counter-pole to the US hegemonic project of a Pax Americana (the first enlargement of the BRICS with the six countries is already scheduled for January 1st, 2024). Therefore, from 2024, the BRICS+ countries (or the BRICS 11) will control around 1/3 of the global GDP and subsequently one-third of the world economy. Just for the beginning as there are more applicant countries to the BRICS membership waiting on the list.

According to the Hegemonic Stability Theory, global peace can occur only when one hegemonic center of power (state) acquires enough power to deter all other expansionist and imperialistic ambitions and intentions. The theory is based on the presumption that the concentration of (hyper) power will reduce the chances of a classical world war (but not local confrontations) as it allows a single hyperpower to maintain peace and manage the system of international relations between the states.[xv] 

Examples of ex-Pax Romana and ex-Pax-Britanica clearly offered support by the American hegemons for the imperialistic idea that (the US-led) unipolarity would bring global peace and, henceforth, inspired the viewpoint that the world in a post-Cold War era under a Pax Americana will be stable and prosperous as long as the US global dominance prevails. Therefore, a hegemony, according to this viewpoint, is a necessary precondition for economic order and free trade in the global dimension suggesting that the existence of a predominant hyperpower state willing and able to use its economic and military power to promote global stability is both divine and rational orders of the day. As a tool to achieve this goal the hegemon has to use coercive diplomacy based on the ultimatum demand that puts a time limit for the target to comply and a threat of punishment for resistance, for example, it was a case in January 1999 during the “negotiations“ on Kosovo status between the US diplomacy and Yugoslavia’s Government in Rambouillet (France).

However, in contrast to both the Hegemonic Stability Theory and the Bipolar Stability Theory, a post-Yeltsin Russian political establishment advocates that a multipolar system of international relations is the least war-prone in comparison with all other proposed systems (it was clearly stressed by Moscow during the BRICS meeting in South Africa in August 2023). This Multipolar Stability Theory is based on the concept that polarized global politics does not concentrate power, as it is supported by the unipolar system, and does not divide the globe into two antagonistic superpower blocs, as in a bipolar system, which promotes a constant struggle for global dominance (for example, during the Cold War). The multipolarity theory perceives polarized international relations as a stable system because it encompasses a larger number of autonomous and sovereign actors in global politics that is as well as giving rise to more political alliances. This theory is in essence presenting a peace-through model of pacifying international relations as it is fundamentally based on counter-balancing relations between the states in the global arena. In such a system, an aggressive policy is quite harder to happen in reality as it is prevented by multiple power centers.[xvi]

A New Policy of Russia and US Public Debt

A new policy of international relations (IR) adopted by Moscow after 2000 is based on the principle of a globe without hegemonic leadership – a policy that started to be implemented at the time when the global power of the US as a post-Cold War hegemon declined because it makes costly global commitments in excess of ability to fulfill them followed by the immense US trade deficit. The US share of global gross production has been in the process of constantly falling ever since the end of WWII. Another serious symptom of the US erosion in international politics is that the US share of global financial reserves drastically declined especially in comparison to the Russian and Chinese share.

The US is today the largest world debtor and even the biggest debtor ever existed in history (32 $ trillion or around 123 percent of the GDP) mainly, but not exclusively, due to huge military spending, alongside tax cuts that reduced the US federal revenue.

The deficit in current account balance with the rest of the world (in 2004, for instance, it was $650 billion) the US administration is covering by borrowing from private investors (most from abroad) and foreign central banks (most important are of China and Japan). Therefore, such US financial dependence on foreigners to provide the funds needed to pay the interest on the American public debt leaves the USA extremely vulnerable, especially if China and/or Japan decide to stop buying US bonds or sell them. Subsequently, the world’s strongest military power at the same time and the greatest global debtor with China and Japan being direct financial collaborators of the US hegemonic leadership’s policy of a Pax Americana after 1989 (up to 2014).

It is without any doubt that the US foreign policy after 1989 is still unrealistically following the French concept of raison d’état that indicates the realist justification for policies pursued by state authority, but in the American eyes, the first and foremost of these justifications or criteria is the US global hegemony as the best guarantee for the national security, followed by all other interests and associated goals.

Therefore, the US foreign policy is based on a realpolitik concept which is a German term referring to the state foreign policy ordered or motivated by power politics: the strong do what they will and the weak do what they must. However, the US is becoming weaker and weaker and Russia and China are more and more becoming stronger and stronger.

*

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. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

[i] As a very example of such moral, cultural and civilizational demonization of the Serbs by the Western academic writings is [John Hagan, Justice in the Balkans: Prosecuting War Crimes in The Hague Tribunal, Chicago−London: The University of Chicago Press, 2003].

[ii] John Baylis, Steve Smith (eds.), The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, Second edition, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001, 124.

[iii] Irina Isakova, Russian Governance in the Twenty-First Century: Geo-strategy, Geopolitics and Governance, London−New York: Frank Cass, 2005, 12.

[iv] Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order, London: The Free Press, 2002.

[v] On the Lithuanian occupation period of the present-day Ukraine, see: [Alfredas Bumblauskas, Genutė Kirkienė, Feliksas Šabuldo (sudarytojai), Ukraina: Lietuvos epocha, 1320−1569, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2010].

[vi] Ignas Kapleris, Antanas Meištas, Istorijos egzamino gidas. Nauja programa nuo A iki Ž, Vilnius: Leidykla “Briedas”, 2013, 123.

[vii] About this issue, see more in [Зоран Милошевић, Од Малоруса до Украјинаца, Источно Сарајево: Завод за уџбенике и наставна средства, 2008].

[viii] Срђан Перишић, Нова геополитика Русије, Београд: Медија центар „Одбрана“, 2015, 42−46.

[ix] David Kirbz, Šiaurės Europa ankstyvaisiais naujaisiais amžiais: Baltijos šalys 1492−1772 metais, Vilnius: Atviros Lietuvos knyga, 2000, 333−363; Peter Englund, The Battle that Shook Europe: Poltava and the Birth of the Russian Empire, London: I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd, 2003.

[x] On Napoleon’s military campaign on Russia in 1812 and its fiasco, see [Paul Britten Austin, The Great Retreat Told by the Survivors, London−Mechanicsburg, PA: Greenhill Books, 1996; Adam Zamoyski, 1812: Napoleon’s Fatal March on Moscow, New York: Harper Press, 2005].

[xi] The US-led NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 is only one example of a gangster’s policy of a violation of the international law and the law on war when the civilian objects became legitimate military targets. Therefore, the attack on Serbia’s television station in downtown of Belgrade on April 23rd, 1999 attracted criticism by many human rights activists as it was apparently selected for bombing as „media responsible for broadcasting propaganda“ [The Independent, April 1st, 2003]. By the same gansters the same bombing policy was repeated in 2003 in Iraq when the main television station in Baghdad was hit by cruise missiles in March 2003 followed next day by destruction of the state radio and television station in Basra [A. P. V. Rogers, Law on the Battlefield, Second edition, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004, 82−83]. According to the international law expert Richard Falk, the 2003 Iraq War was a „crime against Peace of the sort punished at the Nuremberg trials“ [Richard Falk, Frontline, India, No. 8, April 12−25th, 2003].

[xii] Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1992.

[xiii] Charles W. Kegley, Jr., Eugene R. Wittkopf, World Politics: Trend and Transformation, Tenth edition, USA: Thomson−Wadsworth, 2006, 588; Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, Ramesh Thakur (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, New York: Oxford University Press, 2015, 54−55.

[xiv] David P. Forsythe, Patrice C. McMahon, Andrew Wedeman (eds.), American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World, New York−London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006, 31−50.

[xv] William C. Wohlforth, „The Stability of a Unipolar World“, International Security, No. 24, 1999, 5−41.

[xvi] Charles W. Kegley, Jr., Eugene R. Wittkopf, World Politics: Trend and Transformation, Tenth edition, USA: Thomson−Wadsworth, 2006, 524.

Featured image is from the author

Commemorating The Tragic Events of 9/11. 22 Years Ago

We bring to the attention of our readers Michel Chossudovsky’s article published in 2002 pertaining to the role of Sen Bob Graham and Rep Porter Goss, chairmen of the Joint inquiry on 9/11 of the Senate and House of Representatives.

A mysterious September 11 breakfast meeting hosted by Sen Bob Graham and Rep Porter Goss was held with the head of  Pakistani intelligence on the morning of 9/11.

Author’s Note

While the Joint inquiry (under the helm of Bob Graham and Porter Goss)  had collected mountains of intelligence material, through careful omission, the numerous press and intelligence reports in the public domain (mainstream media, alternative media, etc), which confirm that key members of the Bush Administration were involved in acts of political camouflage, were carefully removed from the Joint inquiry’s hearings.

In retrospect, the mission of Porter Goss and Bob Graham to Pakistan in late August 2001 (which was documented in my earlier writings) was part of the preparation of the propaganda campaign, with a view to sustaining the official narrative, i.e  “Al Qaeda was  behind the conspiracy to bring down the WTC towers, Muslims did it”, etc., which essentially sustains the official 9/11 narrative.  

The following text published by Global Research in 2002, provides details on the breakfast meeting hosted by Sen Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss on the morning of September 11.

Michel Chossudovsky, September  5, 2023

*        *       *

Mysterious September 11 2001 Breakfast Meeting on Capitol Hill

by Michel Chossudovsky

Was it an ‘intelligence failure’ to give red carpet treatment to the [alleged] ‘money man’ behind the 9-11 terrorists, or was it simply ‘routine’?

On the morning of September 11, Pakistan’s Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at  a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees:

“When the news [of the attacks on the World Trade Center] came, the two Florida lawmakers who lead the House and Senate intelligence committees were having breakfast with the head of the Pakistani intelligence service. Rep. Porter Goss, R-Sanibel, Sen. Bob Graham and other members of the House Intelligence Committee were talking about terrorism issues with the Pakistani official when a member of Goss’ staff handed a note to Goss, who handed it to Graham. “We were talking about terrorism, specifically terrorism generated from Afghanistan,” Graham said.

(…)

Mahmoud Ahmad, director general of Pakistan’s intelligence service, was “very empathetic, sympathetic to the people of the United States,” Graham said.

***

In late August 2001, barely a couple of weeks before 9/11, Senator Bob Graham, Representative Porter Goss and Senator Jon Kyl were in Islamabad for consultations. Meetings were held with President Musharraf and with Pakistan’s military and intelligence brass including the head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmad. (image right) An AFP report confirms that the US Congressional delegation also met the Afghan ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef. At this meeting, which was barely mentioned by the US media, 

“Zaeef assured the US delegation [on behalf of the Afghan government] that the Taliban would never allow bin Laden to use Afghanistan to launch attacks on the US or any other country.” 1

Note the sequencing of these meetings. Bob Graham and Porter Goss were in Islamabad in late August 2001.

• The meetings with President Musharraf and the Afghan Ambassador were on the 27th of August 2001,
• The mission was still in Islamabad on the 30th of August,
• General Mahmoud Ahmad arrived in Washington on an official visit of consultations barely a few days later (September 4th).
• During his visit to Washington, General Mahmoud met his counterpart CIA director George Tenet and high ranking officials of the Bush administration.2
• 9/11 “Follow-up Meeting” on Capitol Hill

On the morning of September 11, the three lawmakers Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl (who were part of the Congressional delegation to Pakistan) were having breakfast on Capitol Hill with General Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” behind the 9-11 hijackers. Also present at this meeting were Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S. Maleeha Lodhi and several members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees were also present.

This meeting was described by one press report as a “follow-up meeting” to that held in Pakistan in late August. “On 8/30, Senate Intelligence Committee chair Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) “‘was on a mission to learn more about terrorism.’ (…) On 9/11, Graham was back in DC ‘in a follow-up meeting with’ Pakistan intelligence agency chief Mahmud Ahmed and House Intelligence Committee chair Porter Goss (R-FL)” 3 (The Hotline, 1 October 2002):

“When the news [of the attacks on the World Trade Center] came, the two Florida lawmakers who lead the House and Senate intelligence committees were having breakfast with the head of the Pakistani intelligence service. Rep. Porter Goss, R-Sanibel, Sen. Bob Graham and other members of the House Intelligence Committee were talking about terrorism issues with the Pakistani official when a member of Goss’ staff handed a note to Goss, who handed it to Graham. “We were talking about terrorism, specifically terrorism generated from Afghanistan,” Graham said.

(…)

Mahmood Ahmed, director general of Pakistan’s intelligence service, was “very empathetic, sympathetic to the people of the United States,” Graham said.

Goss could not be reached Tuesday [September 11]. He was whisked away with much of the House leadership to an undisclosed “secure location.” Graham, meanwhile, participated in late-afternoon briefings with top officials from the CIA and FBI.” 4

While trivializing the importance of the 9/11 breakfast meeting, The Miami Herald (16 September 2001) confirms that General Ahmad also met Secretary of State Colin Powell in the wake of the 9/11 attacks:

“Graham said the Pakistani intelligence official with whom he met, a top general in the government, was forced to stay all week in Washington because of the shutdown of air traffic ‘He was marooned here, and I think that gave Secretary of State Powell and others in the administration a chance to really talk with him’. Graham said.”5

Again the political significance of the personal relationship between General Mahmoud (the alleged “money man” behind 9/11) and Secretary of State Colin Powell is casually dismissed. According to The Miami Herald, the high level meeting between the two men was not planned in advance. It took place on the spur of the moment because of the shut down of air traffic, which prevented General Mahmoud from flying back home to Islamabad on a commercial flight, when in all probability the General and his delegation were traveling on a chartered government plane. With the exception of the Florida press (and Salon.com, 14 September, 2001), not a word was mentioned in the US media’s September coverage of 9-11 concerning this mysterious breakfast reunion.

“A Cloak but No Dagger”

Eight months later on the 18th of May 2002, two days after the “BUSH KNEW” headline hit the tabloids, the Washington Post published an article on Porter Goss, entitled: “A Cloak But No Dagger; An Ex-Spy Says He Seeks Solutions, Not Scapegoats for 9/11”.

Focusing on his career as a CIA agent, the article largely served to underscore the integrity and commitment of Porter Goss to waging a “war on terrorism”. Yet in an isolated paragraph, the article acknowledges the mysterious 9/11 breakfast meeting with ISI Chief Mahmoud Ahmad, while also confirming that “Ahmad ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban”:

“Now the main question facing Goss, as he helps steer a joint House-Senate investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks, is why nobody in the far-flung intelligence bureaucracy — 13 agencies spending billions of dollars — paid attention to the enemy among us. Until it was too late.”

Goss says he is looking for solutions, not scapegoats. “A lot of nonsense,” he calls this week’s uproar about a CIA briefing that alerted President Bush, five weeks before Sept. 11, that Osama bin Laden’s associates might be planning airline hijackings.

“None of this is news, but it’s all part of the finger-pointing,” Goss declared yesterday in a rare display of pique. “It’s foolishness.” [This statement comes from the man who was having breakfast with the alleged “money-man” behind 9-11 on the morning of September 11]

(…) Goss has repeatedly refused to blame an “intelligence failure” for the terror attacks. As a 10-year veteran of the CIA’s clandestine operations wing, Goss prefers to praise the agency’s “fine work.”

(…)

On the morning of Sept. 11, Goss and Graham were having breakfast with a Pakistani general named Mahmud Ahmed — the soon-to-be-sacked head of Pakistan’s intelligence service. Ahmed ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. 6 (Washington Post, 18 May 2002)

“Putting Two and Two together”

While the Washington Post scores in on the “notoriously close” links between General Ahmad and Osama bin Laden, it fails to dwell on the more important question: what were Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham and other members of the Senate and House intelligence committees doing together with the alleged 9/11 “money-man” at breakfast on the morning of 9/11. In other words, the Washington Post report does not go one inch further in begging the real question: Was this mysterious breakfast venue a “political lapse”, an intelligence failure or something far more serious? How come the very same individuals (Goss and Graham) who had developed a personal rapport with General Ahmad, had been entrusted under the joint committee inquiry “to reveal the truth on 9-11.”(see p. )

The media trivialises the breakfast meeting, it presents it as a simple fait divers and fails to “put two and two together”. Neither does it acknowledge the fact, amply documented, that “the money-man” behind the hijackers had been entrusted by the Pakistani government to discuss the precise terms of Pakistan’s “collaboration” in the “war on terrorism” in meetings held behind closed doors at the State department on the 12th and 13th of September. 11 7(See Michel Chossudovsky, op cit)

Smoking Gun

When the “foreknowledge” issue hit the street on May 16th 2002, “Chairman Porter Goss said an existing congressional inquiry has so far found ‘no smoking gun’ that would warrant another inquiry.” 8 This statement points to an obvious “cover-up”. The smoking gun was right there sitting in the plush surroundings of the Congressional breakfast venue on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11.

Notes

1 Agence France Presse (AFP), 28 August 2001.

2. Michel Chossudovsky, Political Deception, The Missing Link behind 9/11, Global Outlook, No. 2, 2002, See also . http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html ; See also Michel Chossudovsky, Cover-up or Complicity of the Bush Administration? The Role of Pakistan’s Military Intelligence (ISI) in the September 11 Attacks, November 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html

3. The Hotline, 1 October 2002.

4 Stuart News Company Press Journal, Vero Beach, FL, 12 September 2001.

5 Miami Herald, 16 September 2001.

6. Washington Post, 18 May 2002.

7. Michel Chossudovsky, op. cit.

8. White House Bulletin, 17 May 2002.

 

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 Twitterand subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

*** 

We are again reposting this article by Peter Kornbluh to commemorate the military coup that deposed Chilean President Salvador Allende, fifty years ago on September 11, 1973. 

*

GR Editor’s Note

I lived through the September 11, 1973 military coup in Chile. I was a Visiting Professor at the Catholic University of Chile in Santiago.

Project FUBELT” was  the codename for CIA covert operations to promote a military coup against the Allende government.

The covert operations revealed some 25 years later confirm the complicity of Chile’s Christian Democrats (DC) as well as the actions on the part of the US government to destabilize the Chilean economy. The US was  also involved in endorsing the torture and disappearance of the opponents of the Pinochet regime.

Reflecting on Trump’s threats to trigger a military coup in Venezuela, compared to Chile, the intelligence apparatus today is far more sophisticated. Moreover, in 1973, the Nixon administration did not have the full-fledged support of the Western media and the “international community”.

Today, the US is using advanced techniques of interference, surveillance, financial warfare, sabotage and propaganda.

With the internet, the propaganda apparatus is being used to build a consensus into what constitutes a criminal undertaking directed against the people of Venezuela.

Today [2019] it’s Mike Pompeo and John Bolton who are calling the shots, in tandem with the CIA.

Bolton has gone far beyond the Nixon-Kissinger agenda formulated at the height of the Cold War.  The US sponsored coup against Venezuela is also directed against Cuba. And from Washington’s standpoint “after Venezuela, Cuba is next”.

-Michel Chossudovsky, February 11, 2019

*

September 11, 1998 [declassified docs released in 1998] marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of the military coup led by General Augusto Pinochet. The violent overthrow of the democratically-elected Popular Unity government of Salvador Allende changed the course of the country that Chilean poet Pablo Neruda described as “a long petal of sea, wine and snow”; because of CIA covert intervention in Chile, and the repressive character of General Pinochet’s rule, the coup became the most notorious military takeover in the annals of Latin American history.

Revelations that President Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to “make the economy scream” in Chile to “prevent Allende from coming to power or to unseat him,” prompted a major scandal in the mid-1970s, and a major investigation by the U.S. Senate. Since the coup, however, few U.S. documents relating to Chile have been actually declassified — until recently. Through Freedom of Information Act requests, and other avenues of declassification, the National Security Archive has been able to compile a collection of declassified records that shed light on events in Chile between 1970 and 1976.

These documents include:

• Cables written by U.S. Ambassador Edward Korry after Allende’s election, detailing conversations with President Eduardo Frei on how to block the president-elect from being inaugurated. The cables contain detailed descriptions and opinions on the various political forces in Chile, including the Chilean military, the Christian Democrat Party, and the U.S. business community.
• CIA memoranda and reports on “Project FUBELT”–the codename for covert operations to promote a military coup and undermine Allende’s government. The documents, including minutes of meetings between Henry Kissinger and CIA officials, CIA cables to its Santiago station, and summaries of covert action in 1970, provide a clear paper trail to the decisions and operations against Allende’s government
• National Security Council strategy papers which record efforts to “destabilize” Chile economically, and isolate Allende’s government diplomatically, between 1970 and 1973.
• State Department and NSC memoranda and cables after the coup, providing evidence of human rights atrocities under the new military regime led by General Pinochet.
• FBI documents on Operation Condor–the state-sponsored terrorism of the Chilean secret police, DINA. The documents, including summaries of prison letters written by DINA agent Michael Townley, provide evidence on the carbombing assassination of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt in Washington D.C., and the murder of Chilean General Carlos Prats and his wife in Buenos Aires, among other operations.

These documents, and many thousands of other CIA, NSC, and Defense Department records that are still classified secret, remain relevant to ongoing human rights investigations in Chile, Spain and other countries, and unresolved acts of international terrorism conducted by the Chilean secret police. Eventually, international pressure, and concerted use of the U.S. laws on declassification will force more of the still-buried record into the public domain–providing evidence for future judicial, and historical accountability.

Click here to read the documents.

*

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

The West’s Sanctions Hypocrisy: Russia’s Import Substitution Programme. Sanctions Backfire

By Rodney Atkinson, September 04, 2023

Sanctions against Russia have proved to be a farce, with damaging blowback against European economies, continued (but never mentioned) western energy imports from Russia, a big recovery in Russian GDP growth since early 2022 and a major Russian programme of import substitution aiming at long term self sufficiency in goods and services previously bought from the West.

COVID-19 Vaccine and Booster Hesitancy: How Do mRNA Vaccine Con-artists and Big Pharma Drug Pushers View Those Who Don’t Want Their Toxic Products Anymore?

By Dr. William Makis, September 05, 2023

COVID-19 booster “hesitancy” is a huge problem for big pharma (at the time, they thought 44% of Americans would continue taking boosters, but that number is now down to 5%, so the situation for them is much worse now).

G20 Anticipating New Dawn with African Union

By Prof. Maurice Okoli, September 05, 2023

Johannesburg was the scene for the 15th BRICS — Brazil, China, India, Russia and South Africa — summit held late August during which leaders raised African Union’s permanent seat in the G20. Early September, New Delhi is the scene for the G20 summit to discuss changing geopolitical situation and global development and most likely to make historic approval finally of AU’s permanent seat in G20.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Applied at the Level of the Entire Planet. It’s a Criminal Undertaking

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 05, 2023

A sensationalist BBC report under the title: Why is the Virus such a Threat” … Quoting “scientific opinion” the virus’ has a “hit and run killer evolutionary tactic” to spread the Covid-19 infection far and wide. Timely report published two weeks prior to the launching of the mRNA vaccine in November 2020. The objective of this insiduous BBC report was to generate fear throughout the UK as well as acceptance of the mRNA vaccine.

The Late Graeme MacQueen and 9/11: In His Own Words

By Michael Welch, Prof. Graeme MacQueen, and Ted Walter, September 04, 2023

While not exactly the first person out of the gate to expose these horrific discoveries, Graeme MacQueen, an academic who would rise to a position of prominence within the 9/11 truth movement would not only cast his gaze on some of the most profound discoveries, but would network and organize in his request to get to the heart of what 9/11 and the war on terrorism was really all about.

U.S. War Crimes Against the People of Japan: Emanuel Pastreich

By Emanuel Pastreich, September 04, 2023

The United States would never return to a peace economy after 1945, and the dependency on the production of petroleum, vehicles, planes, and weapons to drive a consumption economy that resulted from the war would reshape the America forever.

Polish Anti-War Debates: Criticism of Kiev Regime or NATO, Punishable with Prison Sentence

By Konrad Rękas, September 04, 2023

Polish Anti-War Debates are a kind of phenomenon. Even though Poland is not formally a belligerent, there is strict war censorship there. Secret Service has the right to limit access to independent media without giving a reason.

China Bans Sale of Japanese Seafood Due to Fukushima Radiation Contamination. Tokyo to File Appeal at WTO

By Ethan Huff, September 04, 2023

Not everyone is a-okay with Japan’s recent decision to dilute radioactive wastewater from the melted-down Fukushima nuclear power plant and dump it back into the Pacific Ocean, most notably communist China, which is no longer buying seafood from Japan due to concerns about it being contaminated with radiation.

On the Future of Manufactured Pandemics: Origins of COVID-19, the U.S. Military’s Bioweapons Program, Global Vaccine Resistance

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, September 04, 2023

Release a bioweapon, discover a vaccine as the cure, and then scare or force people to take the so-called “vaccine” or what I like to call “experimental shots.” Besides the goals of depopulation, the political and corporate establishment and their Big Pharma cartels have created long-term patients from the injuries caused by the Covid-19 experimental shots which in their perspective, is good for business.     

G20: Last Waltz in a World Torn Apart

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, September 04, 2023

The Modi government is not perplexed by the absence of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in the G20 Summit on September 9-10. Its intuitive cognition helps to be stoical. This is, arguably, a Shakespearean predicament — “I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that, should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o’er.”

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.

*** 

New Studies on “Vaccine Hesitancy”

I briefly review the following studies:

• Jan.12, 2023, Aashka Shah et al. – COVID-19 booster hesitation around the world
• Jan.17, 2023, Alice Cancer et al – Not getting vaccinated?

Jan. 17, 2023, Alice Cancer et al – Not Getting Vaccinated? It Is a Matter of Problem-Solving Abilities and Socio-Cognitive Polarization 

• This study comes from University of Texas and Italy
• They studied 277 US participants, ages 18 to 50, who completed an online survey that measured how conservative, rigid thinking, and anti-immigrant (xenophobic) they were.
• WHO defines “vaccine hesitancy” as “delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite the availability of vaccination services’’
• Early research on “vaccine skepticism” found correlation with female gender, low income, social media misinformation, conspiracy theories, government mistrust, anti-govt sentiment
• those with more conservative, right leaning political views were more likely to report anti-vaccination attitudes and lower vaccination uptake.
• conservatives can’t handle complexity, so they seek oversimplified solutions, and fail to seek out alternative explanations.
• conservatives tend to be “cognitively rigid” and less open to new information and “alternative viewpoints”
• Parents hesitated to vaccinate their young children because of “cognitive rigidity”
• Study Results: 71% were pro vax, 29% were anti-vax
• Anti-vaxxers had low problem-solving skills combined with cognitive and social rigidity
• what authors define as problem-solving skills: “flexible political perspectives, tolerance of diversity and fake news discernment.”
• My take: this entire paper was pseudo-scientific bullshit and very painful to read.

Jan. 12, 2023, Aashka Shah et al. – COVID-19 vaccine and booster hesitation around the world: A literature review

• This study comes from University of Illinois
• USA: 103.4 million cases, 1.13 million deaths (WHO latest data)
• 68.5% of world’s population has received at least 1 dose of 10 approved vaccinesThe propaganda:
• Pfizer & Moderna vaccines had 95% efficacy but this dropped due to “natural decrease in antibodies” and “spike protein mutations in COVID-19 variants”
• Optimism on vaccines “faded away” because hospitals filled up with COVID-19 cases again
• “With mutations of SARS-CoV-2, booster vaccinations have become important in maintaining immunity in the general population”
• boosters decrease hospitalizations and ER visits, decrease viral transmission, shorten recovery time.Vaccine hesitancy in the USA:
• COVID-19 booster uptake in USA is 44% and the rest are “booster hesitant”
• due to “low vaccine literacy” – you’re too stupid to understand vaccines and you also are likely to not wear masks or wash your hands, if only Public Health could educate you, then you’d probably take the vaccine.
• misinformation is an obstacle to “vaccine literacy” and is a “large reason why Americans choose to not be vaccinated”
• “it continues to be a driver in the low acceptance rate of the booster”
• Fact checking and refuting false claims is not enough to counteract misinformation
• solution: get boosters in a clinical setting, have conversation with a “trusted physician” and “allow for the COVID-19 booster to become a part of your regular appointment”Vaccine side effects
• Personal experience & anectodal evidence are major factors in decision making about COVID-19 booster.
• authors admit “stories of severe side effects invoke an emotional response and thus stay engrained in memories”
• solution: mainstream media must focus attention on scientific studies that show severe side effects are “rare”.Social Media
• 75-80% of Americans look to internet to get health information
• even a 5-10 minute exposure to “vaccine critical content” leads to decreased intention to vaccinate (LOL!)
• Why? “vivid narrative and imagery that social media is able to create”
• People usually post negative experiences and this makes them seem like they are more common
• 87% have made a strong decision about a booster either way, but the 13% can be persuaded.
• Solution: use media tactics – message should be “tailored” to the “altruism of receiving the vaccine”, “emphasis on dangers of COVID-19” and “regret of not having received the COVID-19 booster”
• Even more effective: family doctors need to take time to explain benefits of receiving COVID-19 booster but must not talk about risks.Distrust of Government
• “for certain ethnic groups such as Blacks and Latino Americans, monetary incentives to receive the booster have decreased the trust in the vaccine, while for the general population, vaccine acceptance modestly increased with monetary incentives”
• “with lessons learned from the marketing of the vaccine, officials can make sure to market the booster in audience specific ways”
• healthcare workers are KEY to selling the booster to the general population
• less vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers leads to increased vaccine uptake in general population
• Solution: emphasize “prominent civilian groups”, like healthcare workers, and their response to the COVID-19 vaccineBooster hesitancy around the World
• reasons why people don’t want boosters vary around the world
• China has higher vaccination and booster uptake rates than USA
• China emphasizes getting booster to protect loved ones, bigger incentive than personal safety.
• Chinese also highly respect doctors and doctor convinces many to get it.
• authors are surprised that vaccine acceptance rates dropped in UK, US, Canada and some European countries “as it would be expected that as the vaccine spends more time on the market, vaccine confidence would grow among the population”
• government trust was cited as “most important factor” in vaccine acceptanceGlobal vaccine inequity
• Only 28.3% of people in low income countries have had at least one vaccine dose, versus 72.8% in high income countries
• “Low and middle income countries (LMIC) have had higher mortality rates and transmission rates during the pandemic due to limited protective equipment, insufficient medical resources, and increased comorbid conditions”
• Low and middle income countries (LMIC) are “hotspots for SARS-CoV-2 mutations that can quickly spread globally”
• “We have already seen a decrease in effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine and further mutations could eventually render the vaccine ineffective”
• “spread of the Omicron variant has been documented to be in part due to global vaccine inequality; higher transmission rates in South Africa led to mutations that in turn spread world-wide”COVID-19 booster mandates
• “Abroad, some countries have already implemented mandatory COVID-19 vaccination and these countries can be used as a model to predict the result of this mandate in the US.”
• one study showed increase in vaccination from 20 days before start of mandate to 40 days after start of mandate.
• Those under 20 and 20–29-year-olds had the largest response to the mandate as vaccination rates in this age group increased the most
• The most responsive age group also depended on what venues were only available to vaccinated people – when nightclubs were restricted in Switzerland, increased vaccination rates was steepest with people under 20 years and it wasn’t until more locations were restricted (any location with > 30 people) that vaccination rates increased significantly for other age groups
• “mandated vaccination…could lead US to the desired increased vaccination rate”
• Requiring the COVID-19 vaccine and booster among healthcare workers may have far reaching implications
• By invoking the Hippocratic Oath, a physician’s first duty is to “do no harm” to their patient. Mandating the COVID-19 vaccine would ensure that the physician is limiting the risk of COVID-19 transmission to their patient
• As we have seen from the influenza vaccine, mandatory vaccination policies among healthcare workers was the most effective way to obtain maximum vaccination rates
• problem with mandating COVID-19 boosters – no long term safety data – creates discussions that won’t go away
• growing need for a universal COVID-19 vaccine is becoming imperative to have broader immunity
• In the meantime, until a broader vaccine is created, ongoing booster shots may be necessary to prevent a surge in coronavirus cases.
• Mandating yearly COVID boosters – because influenza vaccine uptake increased over the years, mandating yearly COVID boosters may have similar effect.
• If the vaccine were required yearly, patients might feel more comfortable receiving the vaccine since it has been approved for a longer time. The CDC reports that in 1980, there were only 12.4 million doses of the influenza vaccine administered but by 2020, had increased to 194 million doses
• It can be assumed that over time, the COVID-19 vaccine will follow the same trend and higher vaccination rates will be achieved the longer that the vaccine is on the market and if the vaccine is mandated yearly.

My Take…

Reading papers like this, is like entering the mind of a psychopath or a serial killer. You want to know how they think, to understand what they’ll do next.

Stripping away the scientific fraud and propaganda, this is what remains:

• COVID-19 booster “hesitancy” is a huge problem for big pharma (at the time, they thought 44% of Americans would continue taking boosters, but that number is now down to 5%, so the situation for them is much worse now).
• Big pharma labels those who don’t want their jabs as “vaccine illiterate” – smear tactics, using derogatory terms like “uneducated”, “rigid thinking”, “inflexible”, including against parents who want to protect their kids from jabs.
• Big pharma believes “misinformation” is the key driver for people avoiding COVID-19 booster shots.
• Most damaging to big pharma are personal stories of vaccine injury and anecdotes – vivid narratives and images that people remember!
• Fact checks don’t work, mainstream media needs to increase brainwashing: focus on altruism of getting jabbed, fear porn of COVID-19, regret of not getting a booster, and just how rare vaccine injuries are.
• Most effective: a trusted doctor selling the benefits of jabs (no talk of risks)
• Marketing the jabs: they’ve learned many lessons and will market better to specific groups of people next time. Financial incentives backfired in many cases causing more distrust than they anticipated.

COVID-19 Booster Mandates Are Coming

• Big pharma loves how China has managed to get high vaccine uptake through propaganda, brainwashing (protect your loved ones) and brute force.
• COVID-19 booster mandates are the only way to get 85% of Americans to take mRNA jabs again on a regular basis.
• Booster mandates will be implemented as annual shots, like flu shots, they think people will comply because they accepted flu shots over the years.
• COVID-19 boosters will become a regular part of a doctor visit – you probably won’t be able to see a doctor unless you agree to get your booster shot.
• Mandating doctors and healthcare workers to keep taking COVID-19 booster shots is key for big pharma, but they may focus on other “civilian groups” with high vaccine uptake, to convince the population to take boosters again.
• Doctors will be expected to spend more time with, and convince all of their patients to take COVID-19 booster shots

• They intend to keep regular mandated booster shots going until there is a “Universal COVID-19 vaccine”, which will then be mandated on the population.

I think the intent of these psychopaths is quite clear.

*

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

---

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.

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.

*** 

Johannesburg was the scene for the 15th BRICS — Brazil, China, India, Russia and South Africa — summit held late August during which leaders raised African Union’s permanent seat in the G20. Early September, New Delhi is the scene for the G20 summit to discuss changing geopolitical situation and global development and most likely to make historic approval finally of AU’s permanent seat in G20.

South Africa and India are both members of BRICS, and are both members of G20. President Cyril Ramaphosa witnessed two new African States (Egypt and Ethiopia) entry into BRICS. On the other hand, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeks admission for African Union (an organization of 54 Member-States) into G20.

As the BRICS leaders converged in Johannesburg, the consensus is to undertake collective work towards a multipolar world.

By taking this muscular step in the current geopolitical changes, it means opening a new chapter in human history and it is a strong resolve by nations of the global south represented by vast majority of the world population to end forever many years of colonialism and neocolonialism and to establish a new world order and the political, economic and cultural system that encourages equitable development of all nations, elimination of poverty and creation of decent living for all.

In New Delhi, however, the summit chorus will have a different rhythm, as the G20 members are wealthy nations mostly from the Global North. These are also well-represented in all international organizations and well-structured institutions including the World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF). One distinctive feature here is that the G20 brings together both rich and poor nations, and of India, a key member of both clubs.

Noticeably there are wide policy differences: while BRICS is considered as evolving into some kind of geopolitical rival to the Global North, some BRICS members hold confrontational opinions and thoughts. Emerging nations are simply “looking for alternatives, not replacements” of any system. Despite the fact that some differences on policy approach, the desire for BRICS expansion also showed the demand for a change.

For this discussion, it is necessary to note two distinctive features here, the first is that G20 plays an important role in shaping and strengthening global architecture and governance on all major international economic issues.

And the second is that BRICS expansion was “more about progressive efforts to find a system that will help to solve the problem of poverty, hunger, and the underdevelopment of billions people in the developing countries” demonstrated by the horrendous migrant crisis where thousands of desperate people are assembling at national borders like between the US and Mexico or be it along the Mediterranean which has already become a mass grave for migrants) of showing that developing countries are heartily rallying to its side against western hegemony, rather than concrete plans to work together.

For African States, BRICS serves as an alternative avenue to explore its support against further economic exploitation and to control interruption in their internal affairs in the continent, and to assert their right to process their resources and produce value added goods as means of becoming middle income societies in the foreseeable future through high technology and industrialization largely ignoring the fact that much rather depends on their own policies and approach as well as system of governance.

AU on the Summit Agenda

As the BRICS group grows, so G20 will also expand in numerical strength. The pendulum is noticeably turning; global leaders have already supported the appeal for admission of African Union (AU) into the G20. The G20’s three-day conference this September 9-10 in New Delhi, India will definitely push AU’s ascension, with a permanent seat, in the powerful group, making an indelible milestone history for both AU and G20.

While witnessing this historical moment, the greatest questions for politicians, academics, business community and the general public is the strategic significance and geopolitical implications for the African Union as a continental organization and for Africa.

Long before the summit, Modi says India as G20 host will be inclusive and invites African Union to become permanent member. The concern was similar during the time of forming Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) which until today embraces in its entirety the Global South. The NAM meets regularly to deliberate on pertinent issues affecting its members.

Modi underlined India’s role as the G20 host this year and hinted that it would focus on highlighting the concerns of the developing world, and has unreservedly proposed the African Union to become permanent members of the forum.

“We have a vision of inclusiveness and with that vision, we have invited the African Union to become permanent members of the G20,” Modi said as he addressed the Business 20 Summit in New Delhi.

The G20 is an industry event and part of the summit of the G20 leading rich and developing nations. Over three days, industry and policy leaders from around the world have discussed themes like building resilient supply chains, digital transformation, debt distress facing developing countries and how to advance on climate change goals. Their recommendations will be shared with the G20 governments, according to the organizers.

A key part of that strategy is bringing the African Union into the G20 fold, analysts say.

“When India assumed the G20 presidency last December, we were acutely conscious that most of the Global South would not be at the table when we meet,” said External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. “This mattered very much because the really urgent problems are those faced by them. … And India, itself so much a part of the Global South, could not stand by and let that happen.”

He said the G20 has so far deliberated on rising debt, sustainable development, climate action and food security, among other issues that affect low to middle-income countries.

“The core mandate of the G20 is to promote economic growth and development. This cannot advance if the crucial concerns of the Global South are not addressed,” Jaishankar added.

During the previous summit, G20 nations agreed to work on reforms to the World Trade Organization, At the Rajasthan meeting for instance, G20 members agreed to improve WTO functioning and strengthen trust in the multilateral trading system. The G20 takes in nations conducting over 75% of global trade and is presently functioning under Indian presidency.

Proposed reforms would include having a well-functioning Dispute Settlement System accessible to all members by 2024, as per the official statement. Disputes over trade largely persistent. India’s trade deficit with China is the highest of any country, and stood at $101.28 billion in 2022, according to official data. Now there are similar arguments and concerns over China’s trade with Africa.

Global Leaders Call for AU’s Membership

At the same time, world leaders have overwhelmingly declared support, and viewed it in a broader context, that African Union has a permanent representation at G20. As part of the priority call for some structural reforms, African Union’s permanent membership will top the agenda, which Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has proposed granting at the upcoming summit in New Delhi.

Interestingly, African Union’s proposed ascension unto G20 has unflinching support from many leaders, at least, over the past few years. It includes the United States, Europe, China, India and Russia.

President Joe Biden, during the the U.S.-Africa Leaders’ Summit held mid-December 2022, described as a platform for 49 African leaders + the African Union, jointly pitched their collective expectations and aspirations in the emerging new global world.

Scanning through the discussions, what is probably appealing is United States’ desire towards (re)defining its relationship with Africa on African terms. In addition, Biden has urged that the African Union be given a permanent seat in the G20 – an influential collection of the strongest economies in the world. South Africa is the only member from the continent. Notwithstanding any criticisms, Biden has thrown his backing behind the African Union securing a permanent membership in G20 which will enhance economic ties in its own right with Africa.

As Chair of the African Union (2022 – 2023), Senegalese President Macky Sall, asserted that Africa’s future prosperity is linked to the global economic system, the African Union, on behalf of Africa, uses its leadership and geo-strategic position to optimize necessary links suitable for economic development, industrialization and promoting trade with the continent, and for the next generations.

Sall emphasized several reasons such as the necessity of adopting fundamental policy leveraging the industrialized poles, rather than partitioning the world, describing this step as a smart decision in the age of multi-polarity. Due to its geopolitical importance of the United States, African nations need not have to jettison their cooperative relations, but make strong call for restructuring and reforms, lobby for long-term strategic and inclusive relations.

Early April 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an order to endorse Russia’s updated foreign policy concept which was compiled and presented by the Ministry of Foreign of Affairs. The new concept was updated to incorporate additional measures and redefine parameters of necessary actions in relation to the United States, Western and European confrontation and determine important roles in the emerging multipolar world by the Russian Federation. In the same document, and even long before its adoption, Russia has consistently been advocating for United Nations reforms, calling for broadening the representation of Africa and in other similar foreign organizations including the G20.

Without mincing words, Putin said:

“Russia proactively supported the initiative to grant the African Union membership in the Group of 20. It is the right decision reflecting the reality and the balance of power in today’s world.”

In addition to that, Moscow supports the legitimate aspiration of African States to pursue their own independent policy, to decide on their own future without imposed ‘assistance’ by third parties.

President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, during the China-Africa Leaders’ Dialogue held August 24 in Johannesburg, rained praises that Africa has made big strides on the path of independence, seeking strength through unity and integration. With steady progress under Agenda 2063 of the African Union (AU), the official launch of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), and growing coordination among the sub-regional groups, Africa is becoming an important pole with global influence.

Xi Jinping also said that

“China will continue to support Africa in speaking with one voice on international affairs and continuously elevating its international standing. China will work actively at the G20 summit to support the AU’s full membership in the group. China supports making special arrangements on the U.N. Security Council reform to meet Africa’s aspiration as a priority.”

The new historic galloping convergence between G20 and African Union really requires close attention since it will definitely re-shape the growing relations which is most important in the emerging multipolar world. At least the African side of it largely boils down to the acceptance speeches, the main long-term objectives and primacy of conceptual ideas of the President of Comoros Islands and Chairperson of the African Union (2023 – 2024), Azali Assoumani, Chairman of African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, will definitely remain for future generations.

Among high dignitaries, there are also in attendance to witness AU’s ascendency into G20, are Egyptian President and 2023 Chairperson of NEPAD, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and Nigerian President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Director-General of World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus from Ethiopia, and Director-General of the World Trade Organization, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala from Nigeria.

By joining G20 this September 2023, the AU with a permanent seat will now have the explicit solid voice to make cases on behalf of Africa, especially this crucial time of political and economic reconfiguration. The processes could present, to some extent, complexities and contradictions. 

Nevertheless, the AU in view of the substantial expertise accumulated down the years, the next logical step is to foster dialogue and exchange experience, with the aim of optimizing all aspects integration processes including the political, economic and cultural spheres and collaborating on the widest possible range of external issues, at the forefront of integrating with G20.

It primarily highlights the fulfilling the promise promoted widely at conferences and summits, further re-enforces the necessity for multifaceted partnership with Africa by the G20. It is one-step, if not a big-leap forward from mere intentions, diplomatic niceties and rhetoric previously expressed to concrete deeds making Africa more visible in G20. It has many interpretations though, depending on diverse perspectives, politics, economy and social and cultural.

Importance of B20 Business Platform

On its website, India’s G20 says Nigerian Tony Elumelu, Chairman of Heirs Holdings, is named to co-chair the Business 20 (B20) India Action Council focusing on African economic integration. Established in 2010 within the G20, it comprises corporate business enterprises and organizations and serves as the official platform for dialogue between the G20 and the global business community.

Africa is undoubtedly facing greater multifaceted challenges and these will definitely continue in the near future, so it implies that the B20 has a pivotal role and a unified voice in uniting global business leaders to provide their perspectives on matters concerning global economic and trade governance, and determine its slice for Africa.

With the global attention turing to Africa, this also underscores the ambitious endeavor of African economies toward achieving continent-wide economic integration. It emphasizes the need for the B20 to unite and provide substantial support in facilitating the success of this integration process, ultimately contributing to African economic development.

Without over-estimating its importance, this platform has a meaningful advantage for Africa and beyond. By facilitating increased business participation in Africa, international cooperation in this realm will create an enabling environment conducive to inclusive growth.

G20 – Economic implications for Africa

The African Union’s strategic framework Agenda 2063 highlights the importance of preserving African values and unity, and Pan-Africanism.

As we expect in coming years, AU has to use its G20 membership – a qualitatively new status – for the development of high-tech and export-oriented industries in the sector. It has lay the groundwork for expanding areas of collaboration and launching ambitious long-term projects, rather than engage in geopolitical games.

The basic question here is what needs to be done to bring about a substantial improvement in collaboration between G20 and 54-member-states African Union? The new global challenge is not only lining up for or in search for new funding but rather completely new mindsets about economic development paradigm shift. Today, Africa is one of the most promising and fastest-growing regions of the world, with leading powers actively competing with one another.

Seemingly the accelerated economic integration processes have become an overarching trend throughout the world. Therefore, the AU has to critically revitalize this economic integration with the G20 to provide new perspectives on crucial projects related to infrastructure, logistics, energy, trade, agricultural and industrial development, digitalization, migration policy, and employment.

At first since its creation, G20’s primary tasks include support economic development of the Global South, but it has over these years and to a considerable extent, distanced from its initial driven visions, promoting a more unequitable distribution of resources and supporting largely a unipolar sort of world. It is, therefore, necessary to use the platform to think of building an alternative mechanism for international cooperation with a focus on the developing world.

Final Hope for Africa

With the current situation, G20 is now only as a formidable alliance that fosters its members. Majority of developing nations, mainly located in the south including Africa, express growing frustration over outdated structures of global governance, under-representation in many international organizations that no longer reflect the realities of the 21st century. Hence one of the important questions taking place at the summit is seeking collaboration between G20 and the African Union.

Judging from the historical landmark the AU has the potential, despite the widespread political vulnerabilities, to make an invaluable contribution to developing and tackling current economic challenges facing Africa, with its estimated 1.4 billion people, by collaborating and partnering through G20. After all, the G20 members, account for nearly 85% of global Gross Domestic Product (GDP), have bilateral and multilateral relations, and in addition multiple partnerships with Africa.

By simple definition, the G20 includes the world’s 19 wealthiest nations plus the European Union. With African Union, it becomes G21 or G20+African Union. The 54-member AU was created in May 1963 and now experiencing dynamic political changes on the landscape and has unique stipulated models of transforming the continent – incorporated into what is popularly referred to as the AU Agenda 2063.

*

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.

Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University of Russia. He is an expert at the Roscongress Foundation and the Valdai Discussion Club.

As an academic researcher and economist with keen interest in current geopolitical changes and the emerging world order, Maurice Okoli frequently contributes articles for publication in reputable media portals on different aspects of the interconnection between developing and developed countries, particularly in Asia, Africa and Europe. With comments and suggestions, he can be reached via email: markolconsult (at) gmail (dot) com

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

This incisive video produced by James Corbett was published 11 years ago on September 11, 2012

***

In his latest weekly address to the nation, President Obama asserts that America’s questions about 9/11 have been answered. If only it were so.

The questions of 9/11 have only continued to pile up higher since that fateful day, and despite official platitudes we are no closer to having those questions answered today then we were when they first arose. In fact, for some of the most important 9/11 questions, the government’s own documents and records that could conceivably answered them have been destroyed, meaning we may never have answers.

The unanswered questions of 9/11 are too numerous to enumerate, but they include:

-Why has NIST classified the data that they used to make their computer animation of the WTC7 collapse? Would knowledge of how NIST believes the building collapsed really “jeopardize public safety“?

-Why did the DIA destroy more than 2.5 terabytes of data on their Able Danger investigation that reportedly identified four of the alleged hijackers years in advance of the attack? Why did the Pentagon buy up and burn the entire first print run of Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer’s book on the program?

-Why did the SEC destroy their records on the 9/11 insider trading question, presumably the most important investigation in the agency’s history?

-Why did the alleged “mastermind” of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, confess not only to plotting 9/11 “from A to Z” but also confess to masterminding numerous crimes that he could not have committed?

-Why did Osama bin Laden repeatedly deny any involvement in the attacks until a series of mistranslated and otherwise manipulated videos came along appearing to portray him as taking credit for those attacks?

-Why was the report of US State Department official Frank Taylor supposedly proving the case for Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11, which NATO used to justify its invasion of Afghanistan, presented in a classified briefing? Why is that report still classified to this day?

-Why did the 9/11 commission rely so heavily on the confessions extracted through torture which even the Senate’s Armed Services committee points out is specifically used to extract false confessions?

-Why did the CIA destroy 92 videotapes of their illegal torture sessions after being specifically ordered by a court not to do so? Why did the courts eventually absolve the CIA of any culpability for this crime?

-Why did Donald Rumsfeld announce a new “war” on September 10, 2001? What was the reason for the 2.3 trillion missing dollars which the Pentagon had lost up until that point, what did Rumsfeld’s “war on bureaucracy” hope to achieve, how was that “war” hindered when the budget analyst office in the Pentagon was destroyed the following morning, and where are the public records into this accounting scandal?

-Why did Rumsfeld go into a regularly scheduled meeting with a CIA officer in his office on the morning of 9/11, after both of the Twin Towers had been struck by airplanes and it had been determined that “America was under attack.” Why did the highest ranking official in the US military remain in that meeting and unavailable for contact even by his highest staff members as the worst attack on US soil in history continued to unfold? Why did he suddenly come out for a photo op on the Pentalawn after the explosion instead of helping to coordinate the defense of the nation?

-Why is there such a massive discrepancy between the 9/11 commission’s official finding of the time of entry of Dick Cheney into the Presidential Emergency Operation Center on the morning of 9/11 and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta’s testimony of the timing of that arrival?

-Why did the US government contract with Ptech, an enterprise architecture software firm, to install its backdoor access software on some of the most sensitive databases in the US government? Why did they continue to use Ptech even after it was discovered that its sweetheart investor was a specially designated global terrorist on the Treasury’s own terror list? Why did they declare that there was nothing untoward in the software mere hours after raiding Ptech’s offices in 2002? And what was Ptech doing in the basement of the Pentagon on 9/11? What interoperability tests was it running on the link between FAA and NORAD systems on 9/11, and how did that interfere with the FAA and NORAD’s response?

-And, perhaps most tellingly of all, how did four highjacked aircraft fly so wildly off course for such lengthy periods of time without being confronted by a single fighter interceptor, and why did the Pentagon admittedly and on the record lie to the American public about the timing of its response that day?

These and many, many questions like them have been asked by the victims’ family members, the first responders, members of the US military, American congressmen and women, intelligence agents, foreign dignitaries and heads of state, and concerned members of the public across America and around the globe. And still, 11 years after the events themselves, the American president has the gall to suggest that all questions have been answered and it is time for Americans to move on.

See our GRTV Feature 9/11 Video, produced by James Corbett

 

On the contrary, Mr. President. Those who are concerned with 9/11 truth and justice will continue to fight on, to answer the questions that your government cannot and will not answer, whether those answers come now, 11 years from now, or generations from now. Those who fight for 9/11 truth will not give up until these questions have been answered. Echoing the words of those brave souls in the wake of that other great American tragedy, the OKC bombing:

“We search for the truth. We seek justice. The courts require it. The victims cry for it. And God demands it.”

For more on the unanswered questions of 9/11 truth, please watch the latest episode of The Corbett Report podcast, “The Meaning of 9/11 Truth“:

 

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.

***

“The American people are willing to fight wars if their blood is out. If their blood is boiling hot. Well, what is it that triggers that phase change?” – Graeme MacQueen, from the film Peace, War and 9/11 [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

On October 1, 2001, days prior to launching an attack on Afghanistan as an act of “self-defence,” the Tanzanian-Canadian feminist sociologist, academic and activist Sunera Thobani, said the following at the “Women’s Resistance: From Victimization to Criminalization” conference in Ottawa…

“We feel the pain of those attacks every day; we have been watching it replayed constantly on television. But do we feel any pain for the victims of U.S. aggression? Two hundred thousand people were killed in the initial war on Iraq. That bombing of Iraq has continued for 10 years now. Do we feel the pain of all the children in Iraq who are dying from the sanctions that were imposed by the United States? … Do we feel the pain of Palestinians who now for 50 years have been living in refugee camps? U.S. foreign policy is soaked in blood. And other countries of the West including “shamefully” Canada, cannot line up fast enough behind it. All want to sign up now as Americans and I think it is the responsibility of the women’s movement in this country to stop that, to fight against it.” [2]

Ms Thobani, an Associate Professor and once the president of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC) took a great deal of heat for blaming the resulting violence of September 11 on U.S. foreign policy! How DARE she try to find an explanation for what might motivate these horrendous attacks!

These are sensible comments, especially when Operation Enduring Freedom and the War on Terrorism cannot be acceptably challenged. Yet she was condemned by Prime Minister Chretien, had received death threats, and been the target of petitions trying to get her fired. [3][4]

Such was the frenzy the massive attacks generated. And as this website has been trying to communicate for now nearly 22 years, there are problems with the official story of the 9/11 attacks that suggest it was far worse than the news suggested. That there was, at the very least, FULL FOREKNOWLEDGE of the event!

While not exactly the first person out of the gate to expose these horrific discoveries, Graeme MacQueen, an academic who would rise to a position of prominence within the 9/11 truth movement would not only cast his gaze on some of the most profound discoveries, but would network and organize in his request to get to the heart of what 9/11 and the war on terrorism was really all about.

Graeme MacQueen’s Legacy Will Live

We reported on his passing in late April and featured a number of prominent figures paying their last respects to the man’s solid research. 

This week, as our anniversary tribute to 9/11, we present excerpts of speeches and interviews we shared in previous years on the Global Research News Hour.

In addition, we also present a NEW interview with his fellow 9/11 Researcher Ted Walter about the film Graeme contributed to that will be screening for the first time on September 6 in Hamilton (hosted by the Hamilton Coalition to stop the War) before it is released on YouTube on September 11.

Here is a sneak peak of Graeme MacQueen’s ultimate statement on 9/11 and its aftermath.

For people living in Hamilton:

The debut screening of Peace, War and 9/11 takes place Wednesday, September 6 7 – 9:30pm EDT @ The Westdale – 1014 King Street West, Hamilton. You can get tickets via Eventbrite.

Graeme MacQueen is a Religious Studies Professor, and the founding Director of the Centre for Peace Studies, both at McMaster University, and also what would become a major brain developing the cogent arguments that the official narrative of the September 11 attacks. MacQueen, also the co-editor of Journal of 9/11 studies, the organizer of the Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering Ten Years of Deception, and author of The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy and the more recent ebook The Pentagon’s B-Movie. Looking Closely at the September 2001 Attacks.

Graeme MacQueen was a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Archive of Graeme MacQueen’s GR articles.

Ted Walter is currently the director of the Internation Center for 9/11 Justice. He was previously the director of strategy and development for AE911Truth from 2015 until early 2023. He is the author of AE911Truth’s 2015 publication Beyond Misinformation: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7 and its 2016 publication World Trade Center Physics: Why Constant Acceleration Disproves Progressive Collapse and co-author of AE911Truth’s 2017 preliminary assessment of the Plasco Building collapse in Tehran. He holds a Master of Public Policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

(Global Research News Hour episode 398)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mEIPhNrRRA
2. https://herizons.ca/archives/cover/the-speech-that-shook-the-country
3. ibid
4. Sean Boynton (September 10, 2021),’Since 9/11, Islamophobia has been ‘a constant feature’ in Canada, experts say’, Global News; https://globalnews.ca/news/8174029/9-11-islamophobia-canada/

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.

*** 

On August 2^nd, 2019, a local newspaper based in Frederick, Maryland called The Frederick News-Post published a report ‘Fort Detrick lab shut down after failed safety inspection; all research halted indefinitely’ on the sudden closure of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases lab located at Ft. Detrick, Maryland:    

All research at a Fort Detrick laboratory that handles high-level disease-causing material, such as Ebola, is on hold indefinitely after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found the organization failed to meet biosafety standards.

No infectious pathogens, or disease-causing material, have been found outside authorized areas at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases

The reasons for the shut down is questionable: 

According to the Code of Federal Regulations, which also lists required training, records and biosafety plans, Federal Select Agents Program registration can be suspended to protect public health and safety. It is not clear if this is why the USAMRIID registration was suspended

However, the reasons they shut down the lab ranged from workers not getting recertified to the wastewater decontamination system that failed to meet the required safety standards:

The suspension was due to multiple causes, including failure to follow local procedures and a lack of periodic recertification training for workers in the biocontainment laboratories, according to Vander Linden. The wastewater decontamination system also failed to meet standards set by the Federal Select Agent Program

Shortly after, on January 30th, 2020, the coronavirus pandemic was announced. I am not saying that Covid-19 began in Ft. Detrick [NO EVIDENCE], but it is worth reexamining what really happened that compelled CDC officials to order the shutdown of the lab over employees not getting recertified or problems with managing the wastewater decontamination system.     

On March 13^th, 2020, The New York Times headlined with ‘China Spins Tale That the U.S. Army Started the Coronavirus Epidemic’ which was based on China’s “conspiracy theories”, and that it was the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) based in Fort Detrick, Maryland who released Covid-19,

“After criticizing American officials for politicizing the pandemic, Chinese officials and news outlets have floated unfounded theories that the United States was the source of the virus.” 

Chinese authorities were referring to an article published from The New York Times on August 5^th, 2019 ‘Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns’ that claimed why the US military lab was shut down and had cancelled all research concerning lethal microbes “Safety concerns at a prominent military germ lab have led the government to shut down research involving dangerous microbes like the Ebola virus.” 

The spokesperson from the US Army, Ms. Vander Linden declared that “Research is currently on hold.” However, The NY Times had some positive news I suppose, “But there has been no threat to public health, no injuries to employees and no leaks of dangerous material outside the laboratory.” But no more information from that point on, “In the statement, the C.D.C. cited “national security reasons” as the rationale for not releasing information about its decision.” Very strange in my opinion. 

Cui Bono: Russia Exposes Who Benefits from the US Military’s Bioweapons Program

However, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the Chief of Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Protection Troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation recently conducted an important briefing on the U.S. military biological activities and present danger it imposes to all of us.

In fact, it is a warning to what the U.S. government is capable of and that is releasing another biological weapon, whether dangerous or not for its geopolitical agendas including the WEF’s goal of depopulating the earth. As for the globalists, less people on the planet will be much easier to control.

Release a bioweapon, discover a vaccine as the cure, and then scare or force people to take the so-called “vaccine” or what I like to call “experimental shots.”

Besides the goals of depopulation, the political and corporate establishment and their Big Pharma cartels have created long-term patients from the injuries caused by the Covid-19 experimental shots which in their perspective, is good for business.     

The next pandemic is the second phase of a long-term war against humanity as Kirillov laid out the US government’s stated goals which

“are primarily aimed at studying potential agents of biological weapons — anthrax, tularemia, coronavirus, as well as pathogens of economically significant infections — pathogenic avian influenza and African swine fever”

he continued

“there is a clear trend: pathogens that fall within the Pentagon’s area of interest, such as COVID-19, avian influenza, African swine fever, subsequently become pandemic, and American pharmaceutical companies become the beneficiaries.” 

Kirillov also mentioned Event 201, an exercise conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic on October 18^th, 2019, that

“simulated the epidemic of a previously unknown coronavirus that, according to the scenario, was transmitted from bats to humans via a porcine organism, the intermediary virus carrier.”  

For Russian authorities “the development of the pandemic under this scenario, as well as the implementation of EcoHealth Alliance projects, raises questions about the possible intentional nature of COVID-19 and U.S. involvement in the incident.” 

So, the US Military Creates a Problem, Big Pharma Creates the Solution

The question remains, was the US government behind the Covid-19 outbreak?

It’s hard to say at this point, but one thing is for sure, Big Pharma executives from Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and other biotech companies were licking their lips for the future profits that they were about to make on the vaccines they produced. The propaganda campaign to scare humanity into taking these so-called vaccines worked to an extent despite those who fell into the trap of getting the Covid-19 experimental shot. 

However, it was estimated that more than 2 billion people did not take the Covid-19 experimental shot, and that should give us hope to be more optimistic about any future virus currently being created by Western funded biolabs around the world including those in the Ukraine and elsewhere. 

A platform created by the Center for Global Development and the United Nations Development Programme called Pandem-ic.com published an updated report on August 6, 2023,

‘Mapping our unvaccinated world’ and said that “Globally, 2.2 billion people are completely unvaccinated.

“This is the global tally as of today based on the latest information available. It represents the total number of people who have yet to receive their first shot.” 

And Thank God! Make no mistake, this was and still is biological warfare and many people around the world fought back and resisted Western authorities and their institutions such as Big Pharma, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO). 

There is hope and optimism regarding the next ‘plandemic’ because the people have awakened to the fact that there is a cult of death and destruction called the ‘globalists’ who want to depopulate our planet. 

Below is the relevant data published by the WHO (June 27, 2023)

• 13,461,751,619 vaccine doses administered
• 5,579,548,776 persons vaccinated with at least one dose
• 5,137,861,772 persons vaccinated with complete primary series (CPS)

“The figures above confirm that approximately 70% ( 5.138 billion people) of the World’s population has been vaccinated with “a complete primary series” which normally consists  of at least two vaccine doses.

The WHO map below should be carefully analyzed. 13,5 billion doses have been administered. 

In most countries, including the most populated countries on the planet, the total number of vaccine doses administered per 100 population is well in excess of 100 (dark green in map below).

The only region of the World which so far has escaped the “Killer Vaccine” is Africa, with barely 25% of its 1.4 billion population fully vaccinated (Africa CDC) (see map below)” (For Further Details see Michel Chossudovsky, July, 2023)

Worldwide Resistance against Lockdowns and Vaccine Mandates

The worldwide resistance against the Covid-19 lockdowns, vaccine mandates, face masks, and social distancing at the height of the pandemic was and still is, inspiring for us all. Although they were many people who resisted the medical establishment worldwide, I want to mention several countries, resistance groups, organizations and the people who have resisted the lies and they all should be recognized for it. 

Big Pharma’s Major Problem: The Global Resistance

Kirillov said that when the US military works with dangerous pathogens “American pharmaceutical companies become the beneficiaries” which is a factual statement.

Whatever the US government and Big Pharma are planning behind closed doors, they will fail. It’s just like that old saying, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”.

The good news is that there is no trust in Big Pharma around the world, especially in most African countries.

On March 9^th, 2021, Afrobarometer, a pan-African, nonpartisan survey research network published

‘Who wants COVID-19 vaccination? In 5 West African countries, hesitancy is high, trust low’ based on a survey on five countries in Africa where they conducted face to face interviews on their views about Covid-19 vaccines:  

This dispatch is based on data collected during the period October 2020-January 2021 in five West African countries: Benin, Liberia, Niger, Senegal, and Togo. In each country, Afrobarometer conducted face-to-face interviews in the language of the respondent’s choice with a nationally representative sample of 1,200 adult citizens that yields country-level results with a margin of error of +/-3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level

Here are the most important findings to consider in the Survey: 

• In the five surveyed countries in West Africa, most citizens – 92% on average – say they are “somewhat well informed” or “very well informed” about the COVID-19 pandemic and efforts to combat it
• Only three in 10 respondents (31%) say they trust their government “somewhat” or “a lot” to ensure that any vaccine is safe before it is offered to citizens. Mistrust is particularly high in Senegal (83%) and Liberia (78%)
• Six in 10 citizens (60%), on average, say they are unlikely to try to get vaccinated, including 44% who consider it “highly unlikely.” Senegalese (79%) and Liberians (66%) are most likely to express a reluctance to take the vaccine
• Vaccine hesitancy/resistance skyrockets alongside doubts about the government’s ability to ensure that vaccines are safe. Those who fully trust their government on this score are five to 10 times as likely to want the vaccine as those who don’t trust it
• Large majorities in Niger (89%), Liberia (86%), and Senegal (71%) believe that prayer is more effective than a vaccine in preventing coronavirus infection. Views are more divided in Benin (41%) and Togo (40%)
• Poor respondents express a greater reluctance to get vaccinated than their better off counterparts.
• “Except in Liberia, citizens with more formal education are not significantly more likely to want the vaccine than their less educated counterparts“
• “Vaccine hesitancy is significantly stronger in cities than in rural areas in Benin, Togo, and Niger“

In another report published on November 24^th, 2022, this time by the BBC ‘The vaccine hesitancy in North Africa’s Covid ‘black hole’ reported on Morocco’s population and their high-rate of vaccinations as to those in the Western Sahara who were not, “according to one international survey published in 2019 before the pandemic began, 80% of Moroccans trusted vaccines to be safe, among the highest rates in the world.” However, in the Western Sahara, it is a different story:   

But that high level of trust may be far lower among the 600,000 people living in Western Sahara – a non-self-governing territory that is administered by Morocco. When it comes to the Covid-19 pandemic, Western Sahara is a black hole: no information exists. The area is a blank spot on the World Health Organization’s global map of Covid-19 cases and vaccines because Morocco refuses to publish data about how many Sahrawis have been vaccinated in this politically sensitive region

In the Western Sahara, the BBC interviewed a truck driver by the name of Hanzali who knows people who bought a vaccine certificate to avoid taking the vaccine, “even the people who took the vaccine took it not because they wanted to but because they were told to or had to” Hanzali continued “I’m not against the vaccine – I’m against the people who try to force me to get the vaccine.” 

There were unvaccinated Sahrawis who do not trust their politicians, they were the ones that pushed these vaccines on the Sahrawis, “several unvaccinated Sahrawis told the BBC that their hesitancy stems from the fact that Morocco’s politicians – not its doctors – have been at the forefront of the country’s vaccination campaign.” An unnamed student of media and technology in Laayoune told BBC “In my opinion the government used ‘corona’ for political purposes” he continued “In Casablanca and Rabat, there were lots of protests against the government – and here too [in Laayoune]. It’s because it comes from the government that people don’t agree.” The highlight of the story is that the unnamed student still refuses the vaccine, “three years into the pandemic, he says he still refuses to take the vaccine. His view is shared by others the BBC spoke to in the region.” 

Africa: The Continent of Resistance

In a article by World Bank Blogs written by several authors including Neia Prata Muloongo Simuzingili, Zelalem Yilma Debebe, Fedja Pivodic and Ernest Massiah titled ‘What is driving COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Sub-Saharan Africa?’ on the reasons why so many Africans are rejecting Covid-19 vaccines:

In Africa, there are multiple drivers of vaccine hesitancy . Concerns about safety, side effects, and effectiveness are widespread—and observed among health workers in Zimbabwe, Ghana, South Africa, Kenya, Sudan, and Ethiopia. The Africa CDC survey noted that respondents  viewed COVID-19 vaccines as less safe and effective than other vaccines, similar findings have been observed in Uganda, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Mozambique, Burkina Faso,  Cameroon and South Africa. The suspension of AstraZeneca’s roll out in some European countries, the South African data on its effectiveness and the temporary suspension of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in the United States to evaluate reports of  blood clotting, affected confidence in COVID-19 vaccination. Ultimately, AstraZeneca’s vaccine was refused by several African countries

So why Africans reject Big Pharma’s experimental shots? Authorities blame the internet and social media for the “conspiracy theories” that spreads medical misinformation:   

Access to social media has facilitated the spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories. In the Africa CDC study, people with high levels of hesitancy were more likely to use social media and be exposed to disinformation. Half of those surveyed in South Africa believed the virus was linked to 5G technology. In another South African study,  approximately a third of those who would refuse the vaccine trusted social media as a primary source of information. A small study in Addis Ababa showed that hesitancy was 3.6 times higher among those who received their information from social media compared to those who relied on television and radio  

The African people are awake to the fact that they don’t want to be guinea pigs in any form:

Mistrust of vaccines developed in Western countries is not new in Africa. It is rooted in the history of unethical Western medical practices on the continent where early efforts to address disease diminished trust in Western medicine and led to underutilization of health services. Approximately 43% of those surveyed by the Africa CDC 15-country study believed that Africans were being used as guinea pigs in vaccine trials. Similar findings were noted in DRC; and, a 2021 survey in Addis Ababa  hesitancy was associated with the belief that the vaccine was a biological weapon from developed countries to control population growth 

Remembering Tanzania’s President, John Magufuli, a Fighter Against Big Pharma’s COVID-19 Vaccine Propaganda

Tanzania’s President John Magufuli who passed away on March 17^th, 2021, rejected the dictates of Western governments, their institutions and corporations including the WHO and Big Pharma. Magufuli once said that

“The ministry of health should be careful, they should not hurry to try these vaccines without doing research, not every vaccine is important to us, we should be careful.”

He staunchly said, “We should not be used as ‘guinea pigs’.” Magufuli exposed the mass hysteria of the Covid-19 virus as an over-exaggeration right from the start. 

Now Tanzania has changed its attitude towards Covid-19 vaccines since the passing of Magufuli, in fact, there is a propaganda campaign. In what we can call a propaganda article by Health Policy Watch, ‘Tanzania Mobilises Musicians and Influencers to Shed the Legacy of its COVID-denying Ex-president’ based on the increase of vaccinations from 10% of the population to 50%:  

However, Tanzania has repeatedly struggled to counter misinformation and people’s reluctance to be vaccinated. To quell growing scepticism against COVID-19 vaccines, Tanzania’s Ministry of Health embarked on community mobilisation campaigns that included community influencers.

Community health workers, musicians and others have become part of the government-led communication strategy to share reliable information about the pandemic, dispel the tide of misinformation and boost the vaccine numbers

If the statistics are correct, with a population of 62 million, only half has been vaccinated, so over 30 million people did not. Many in Tanzania are not falling for the propaganda that Covid-19 experimental shots are safe and effective. 

The legacy of John Magafuli will be that he opposed the dictates of Western institutions and Big Pharma. History will remember him as a hero for the Tanzanian people because since the Covid pandemic was announced, he warned the people about the dangers of Big Pharma and their Western institutions.

John Magafuli will be remembered as a hero not only to the Tanzanian people and to continent of Africa, but to all of us around the world who oppose the globalist operators and their agenda of vaccinating the planet to either create a sick population that will benefit Big Pharma or just eliminate the “useless eaters” that are in their way of achieving their goals.              

Forget Opposing an Illegal Occupation, the Palestinians Are Now Anti-Vaxx Conspiracy Theorists!  

If any of us were Palestinian living in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or other areas in and around Palestine, I would absolutely reject the Covid-19 vaccine for several reasons. First, would you take a vaccine from Western countries who have been supporting Israel unconditionally since 1948? How would you know if they are safe? Second, would you trust Western biotech corporations who produced a vaccine in under several months while most vaccines had acquired many years of studies and tests before they were approved? 

Bottom line, Palestinians don’t want to be test subjects like the Israelis. 

“The CEO of Pfizer said he chose Israel to be the “one country” to demonstrate his company’s anti-COVID vaccine because he was “impressed, frankly, with the obsession of your prime minister” according to allisraelnews.com. “He called me 30 times. He would call me at 3 o’clock in the morning and he would ask me about the (coronavirus) variants, what data we have,” Bourla continued “and I would say, ‘Prime Minister, it’s 3 o’clock in the morning,’ and he would say, ‘No, no, don’t worry, just tell me.’ Or he would call me to ask about children, ‘I need to vaccinate the schools.’ Or about pregnant women.” 

Bourla said “he convinced me, frankly, that he would be on top of things” and that “we placed our bet with Israel and we are so happy because of the way that you executed the vaccination. And a year from the declaration of the pandemic by the WHO (World Health Organization) we were able today to issue a press release together with the Ministry of Health of your country about the results.”

In a scientific report from 2022 based on the results from Big Pharma’s experimental shots on the 16–39-year-old population in Israel with factors associated between Covid-19 infection rates and those who received the Covid-19 vaccine are as follows:

Using a unique dataset from Israel National Emergency Medical Services (EMS) from 2019 to 2021, the study aims to evaluate the association between the volume of cardiac arrest and acute coronary syndrome EMS calls in the 16–39-year-old population with potential factors including COVID-19 infection and vaccination rates. An increase of over 25%  was detected in both call types during January–May 2021

The report admits that there are legitimate concerns,

“While not establishing causal relationships, the findings raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side-effects and underscore the already established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals.”

On July 23^rd, 2021, Al Jazeera ‘Reluctance and distrust define vaccine attitudes in Gaza’ reported on the mistrust of Covid-19 vaccines among Palestinians. “Suhair Zakkout, spokeswoman for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in the Gaza Strip, said its health sector has long faced major systemic issues” but concerns remain because a third of people in the Gaza Strip and West Bank refuse to get vaccinated with Covid-19 experimental shots:

The reluctance of people to get vaccinated, however, has raised concerns and prompted the ICRC – alongside the health ministry and the ministry of endowment and religious affairs – to launch a campaign aimed at increasing awareness about the positive effects of the shots

On June 15^th, 2021, The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) found that “35% (37% in the West Bank and 32% in the Gaza Strip) say they and their families are not willing to take the vaccine when it becomes available to them.”  One third of the Palestinian people will not take any Covid-19 experimental shot and that is a good thing. 

Yemen’s Houthi Movement and the Resistance Against COVID-19 Vaccines

Daraj, a so-called independent media outlet sponsored by the Soros foundation published a report on February 23^rd, 2021 ‘Yemen: “We Don’t Want Vaccines. There is No Corona Here. We Are Fine” clearly calls those who reject Covid-19 vaccines conspiracy theorists: 

Opinions on the coronavirus in Yemen are as divided as the country itself. While the south is awaiting the first vaccines, the north claims to have no need for immunization. What the two sides have in common is a health sector in shambles and a striking love for conspiracy theories

They say Yemen is divided between the Yemeni government in the south who are eagerly waiting for their first vaccines while the north which is controlled by the Houthi movement who has been fighting the Saudi coalition since March 26^th, 2015, had declared, they don’t want them:

While countries across the world are racing to provide their citizens with the coronavirus vaccine, the Yemeni authorities remain confused and divided. The internationally recognized Yemeni government on the one hand is trying to gradually obtain the vaccine for free, while the Houthi movement (Ansar Allah) on the other hand categorically rejects the vaccine

Daraj mentioned the war and storage issues are some factors on why the Yemeni population has not been vaccinated, but residents who live in the north such as 31-year-old Ahmed Al-Washali who said that

“We do not want vaccines, there is no corona in Yemen, we are fine” and that “It has not affected us. While other countries were imprisoned in their homes, and could not work, we lived normally and nothing happened.” 

Daraj reporters asked 52 people who live in Houthi territory about the Covid vaccine and here is the result:

Our team met with 53 people in areas under control of the Houthi movement, most of whom hold a university degree, are employed in the public or private sector and have an average age of 27 to 35.

We found that 42 out of 53 people refuse to receive the vaccine if it were available. Because they did not need it, most said, while 17 claimed the vaccine may be a “conspiracy” posing a threat to their health. Of the 9 people willing to receive the vaccine, 7 stipulated it should be free of charge. Two people said to have never heard about a vaccine against the virus

The results are inspiring to say the least. Western-backed organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) are not trusted at all:

Some people found the lack of a complete outbreak of the epidemic a reason to reject the vaccine and denounce the integrity of the WHO. A doctor in Taiz, who requested anonymity, said he supported the Great Barrington Declaration, a statement signed by thousands of scholars in the field of medicine and public health calling for an alternative approach to the Covid pandemic based on “focused protection” of those most at risk.

Despite the low rate of illiteracy compared to other governorates, in Taiz too resistance to vaccination remained high. And here too it was not just limited to religious people but included holders of university degrees and secular people. For 49-year-old teacher Jamil, for example, corona was “just an illusion”

In the city of Aden, the results were similar:

Things were not too different in Aden, as fear for the vaccine prevailed. In a poll conducted by our team among 121 residents in the city of Aden, over 84% refused to have the vaccine. The main reason was a lack of confidence in the authorities responsible for importing the vaccine and a fear for the conditions in which the vaccine would be cooled and stored. Even some health workers feared the vaccine in terms of safety and potential side effects

The Houthi movement and the people who support them are clearly awake to the fact that Western nations and their Big Pharma corporations are promoting dangerous Covid-19 experimental shots. They see the dangers. 

The Houthi movement knows that these Covid-19 experimental shots are used as another weapon of war, a bioweapon that can used to depopulate their society. At least we know that in the next manufactured pandemic, the Houthi movement will continue to resist Western countries and Big Pharma just like they been resisting the Western-backed Yemeni government led by Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi and a coalition of military forces led by Saudi Arabia since 2014. 

Vaccine Hesitancy in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean

A Brazilian study on vaccine hesitancy by Cardenos De Saude Publica (CSP), English translation ‘Reports in Public Health’ called ‘COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Latin America and Africa: a scoping review’ said that several countries had a percentage of people who refused Covid-19 experimental shots for various reasons:

In the case of vaccination against COVID-19, studies conducted in African and Latin American countries showed that hesitancy was linked with religious beliefs, association between vaccination and surveillance of government authorities, lack of information about adverse events, vaccine safety and efficacy, and dissemination of fake news

Who were the main Latin American countries with high rates of hesitancy?

In Latin American countries, the highest vaccine hesitancy rate of 26.1% and the lowest 8.4% were reported in Brazil. In Ecuador, hesitancy ranged from 73% to 9%, depending on the vaccine efficacy. In Chile, 28% were hesitant and 23% refused the vaccine. Peru had 10.1% refusal and 19.5% hesitancy. In Venezuela, vaccine hesitancy was 28.75%

One point that the Brazilian study reflected on was the history of the Global North (Western Nations) which was the legacy of colonialism and the violence (military invasions, regime change and their depopulation schemes) which the people in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean remember from their histories with Western Imperial powers:

Underdeveloped countries were repeatedly used for tests with human beings, which today resulted in vaccine refusal due to the fear of being laboratory subjects. The power relationship between the Global North and the Global South, expressed in a past of coloniality and violence still alive in the memory of colonized countries, is reflected in the rejection of practices that supposedly come from the North. Then vaccines are seen by different groups as population control strategies in underdeveloped countries, as “western malevolence”, or as a method to extinguish undesirable groups

The people who refused Covid-19 vaccines in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean during the last pandemic will continue to resist Western nations and their Big Pharma scams because they know that there is an agenda in the next manufactured pandemic.

Vaccine Resistance in Western Nations

Forbes magazine reported on March 8^th, 2021, ‘Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Is Worse In E.U. Than U.S.’ claimed that the “but getting shots into the arms of European Union (E.U.) residents has proven to be much trickier. The U.S. is vaccinating at a faster pace than any member of the E.U., and three times the E.U. average” and that is in a way the good news. Polls suggest that the Europeans don’t trust Big Pharma as well since “only 36% of the surveyed Europeans strongly agree with the statement that vaccines are safe.” In fact, Europe has a history of resistance against Big Pharma’s AstraZeneca vaccine:

In Europe, even approved products that don’t necessarily have supply issues have faced stiff resistance. In France and Germany, for example, the approved AstraZeneca vaccine has an image problem, which means many are reluctant to take it, including healthcare workers on the front lines. Poor, inconsistent messaging has fueled the public’s confusion over the safety and efficacy of AstraZeneca’s vaccine. President Macron’s claim last month that the vaccine was “quasi-ineffective” for the elderly didn’t help matters. He has since reversed himself and is now pleading that people get vaccinated with whatever vaccine is available to them. But the damage was already done

The Europeans of both political movements, whether far-left or far-right, are usually anti-establishment so obviously, they don’t trust Big Pharma’s Covid-19 experimental shots as well:

Europe’s degree of Covid-19 vaccine aversion is perhaps surprising, but not if one views it in the context of fiercely anti-establishment politics on the far-left and far-right, and a particularly virulent anti-science sentiment that existed long before Covid-19 hit. To illustrate, the far-right Lega and leftist Five Star Movement in Italy have both incited fearmongering about vaccines. Likewise, far-right and far-left political leaders in France, such as Le Pen and Mélenchon, have stoked anti-vaccine attitudes

From Africa, the Middle East, Latin America to Europe and even in the United States where one-third of the population did not take the Covid-19 experimental shots for whatever reason, there will be another popular resistance against Big Pharma’s experimental shots and a possible future lockdown. 

For the next manufactured pandemic, the globalists, and the Pentagon, including all their institutions including the elephant in the room, Big Pharma will face a resistance by people from all walks of life and they will fail because the 2 billion people around the world will continue to oppose Big Pharma’s Covid-19 experimental shots and that is something the globalists are not looking forward to.    

*

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.

Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his own blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from SCN

---

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.

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.

*** 

Sanctions against Russia have proved to be a farce, with damaging blowback against European economies, continued (but never mentioned) western energy imports from Russia, a big recovery in Russian GDP growth since early 2022 and a major Russian programme of import substitution aiming at long term self sufficiency in goods and services previously bought from the West.

In the first 7 months of 2023 Russia has been the second biggest supplier of LNG to EU countries:

Banning Gas but Importing Gas Products

While Russian oil is banned, fuels derived from Russian oil are flooding Europe. This is because Russian oil sales to China, India and Turkey have boomed – from where it is turned into oil products which are exported to the West.

India’s oil imports from Russia peaked at 69 million barrels in May, almost ten times more than in the same period in 2021 while India shipped 5.1 million barrels of diesel fuel and 3.2 million barrels of jet fuel to the EU in June, compared to 1.68m barrels and 0.51m barrels in June 2021. 

Ukraine has called on the West to ban the supply of all refined oil products to G7 countries if they were produced using Russian oil but such a measure would risk serious economic costs on the industrial economies at a time of high inflation and a feared recession.

In addition to high sales to Europe the NGO Global Witness found that China was a major buyer of Russian LNG. Overall imports to Europe have increased by 40 percent compared to the same period in 2021, and the value of LNG imported between January and July was €5.29 billion.

In a classic case of energy sanctions backfiring Germany stopped Russian gas only to import massive amounts of fertilisers produced from that gas. Cheaper imports of Russian fertilizers have increased by 334%.

And contrary to the mythology of the West that Russia is “only a gas station” the country’s manufacturing has staged a substantial recovery: 

How this contrasts with the USA’s Purchasing Managers Index:

Hypocrisy of Continuing Western Trade with Russia

While preaching hatred of Russia certain western countries still manage to export vast amounts to the country.

For instance there has been a massive increase in German exports to Kyrgyzstan! Why? – because from there they can be exported to Russia!

Similarly German car exports to Kazakhstan grew by 507% between 2021 and 2022, and to Armenia by 761%.

Exports of chemical products to Armenia increased by 110 percent, and to Kazakhstan by 129 percent. Sales of electric and computer equipment to Armenia grew by 343%. Nearly all for on sale to Russia!

And the USA, as Bloomberg points out still imports massive amounts of uranium from Russia because Rosatom is still the world’s largest supplier of uranium and still supplies almost a quarter of the 92 US nuclear reactors.

20% of US electricity production is from nuclear and the USA is the world’s largest producer of nuclear power accounting for about 30% of worldwide nuclear generated  electricity.

The USA is totally reliant on Russian uranium supplies for its energy security since the last uranium enrichment facility in the United States closed in 2013, and the nuclear fuel reserve will last for 18 months. On August 24, it was reported that the United States had sharply increased its purchases of uranium-235 from Russia. The volume of deliveries of nuclear fuel increased by 2.2 times. The US paid $696.5 million for the supplies, a record since 2002.

Another example of continued and hypocritical trade with Russia involves the Estonian Prime Minister, Kaja Kallas, one of the most outspoken Russophobes, demanding that all trade with and business in Russia should cease.

Stark Logistics, a transportation company partially owned by Kallas’ husband, Arvo Hallik, is still operating in Russia and the prime minister provided a “loan” of 350 thousand euros to her husband’s other company, Novaria Consult, which holds a 24.8% stake in Stark Logistics. Kallas is under pressure to resign. 

Russia’s Import Substitution Programme

After the exit of Visa and MasterCard from Russia as sanctions were applied the Russians were able to greatly expand their own Mir national payment system which Russia’s Central Bank and the Finance Ministry had introduced in 2015. Mir has greatly expanded since 2022 not least because sanctions meant that Russian banks were banned from the International SWIFT payment system.

Together with fundamental changes in gas and oil trade away from Europe and towards the East, such structural changes in trade and finance are long term and not easily reversible losses to the western interests who previously provided those goods and services.

No wonder the German newspaper Bild published details of a conversation between Scholz and Macron who bewailed the fact that Putin had not even mentioned the  sanctions in his conversation with them! The list of immediate and long term Russian self sufficiency at the cost of Europe and the West in general is extensive:

Civilian Aircraft

The prototype of the Russian SJ-100 short-haul aircraft manufactured by the Yakovlev Production Center has made its maiden flight. The test was successful and the French Russian engines used will soon be replaced by purely Russian ones.

3D Printers

The Moscow Digital Plant (MDP) was officially opened. It includes:

– manufacturing and designing industrial 3D printers;

– FHZL RUS is a Russian-Chinese enterprise localising the assembly of 3D printers

– “SPIN” – full-cycle additive manufacturing with 3D printing services.

No need to import pasta!

The first pasta production enterprise was launched in Kalmykia – a full-cycle project – from field to counter. The project provides for the development of a plant growing enterprise and the organization of the first pasta production in the region. There will be about 10 types of pasta products, including those made of durum wheat.

Steel production

The Shakhta Pipe Plant was opened in the Rostov Region. Its products are rolled steel sheets. Capacity at the first stage is 8 thousand tons per month, and at maximum load – up to 15 thousand tons per month. The new plant is part of Techmash, which produces steel pipes. West Siberian Iron and Steel Works expanded production of rolling rolls and bands. Previously, the company purchased these components for the rail and beam mill, ball mill and small section mill abroad.

Combine Harvesters

When reporting a record harvest in the Rostov area it was emphasised that the combine harvesters were domestically manufactured not imported.

Military transport aircraft

Another IL-76MD-90A heavy military transport aircraft has been manufactured and delivered to the customer at Aviastar, a division of PJSC “IL.” It represents a significantly modernized version of the IL-76MD aircraft, constructed using domestically sourced components. It is specifically engineered for the transportation and parachute deployment of military equipment, personnel, and cargo.

Marine engines

Petrozavodskmash Foundry (Karelia) has completed production of Russia’s first cylinder block for the new D500 family of marine engines. Previously not manufactured in Russia, they are not inferior to those of foreign equivalents.

No wonder Russia is on track for between 2.5% and 3% growth in 2023 which is higher than the USA, UK and every EU country except the Czech Republic. The Eurozone is expected to grow by less than 1%. Meanwhile German industry collapses.

Yes, those sanctions were a great idea!

*

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 Freenations.

Rodney Atkinson 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.

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 am writing this paper to warn the world about the destructive impact of the trilateral military alliance that will not only kill South Korean democracy, security and economy but also widens the expressway to the East-West war. 

This trilateral summit was a summit of three dangerous men. 

The President of U.S. Joe Biden has pathological obsession to kill Asia led by China.

The Prime Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida has the dangerously outdated dream of conquering again Asia starting with Korea and restoring the past years’ imperial power and glory of Japan.

The President of South Korea, Yoon Suk-yeol is idiotic and cowardly enough to sell his country for his own protection from angry South Koreas and the vengeful North Koreans.

The trilateral summit was a summit of three leaders who do not have the necessary condition for being leader, namely, the love for the people. Biden is indifferent to ordinary Americans’ suffering. Kishida despises ordinary Japanese people. Yoon hates ordinary Korean people.

The trilateral summit was a summit of the most unpopular global leaders. According to Global Leader Approval Rating Tractor (August 16-22, 2023). The approval rates were: Biden (40%), Kishida (23%), Yoon (22%). Yoon was just before the most unpopular Petr Fiala of Czech Republic (21%).  

By the way, Biden’s approval rate after two-year presidency is the lowest in comparison with other presidents’ corresponding approval rates.

What happened at the summits is a story of how two seasoned diplomats have mercilessly exploited an idiotic and stupid man in order to promote their interests, especially, their personal political and other interests. 

It is a story of a wrong man (Yoon Suk-yeol) who appeared at wrong time to do wrong things.

This paper offers the story of why and how Yoon Suk-yeol offered South Korea to powerful U.S. and cunning Japan.

This summit is a cursed summit, for two reasons:

• First, it will destroy South Korea
• Second, it will lead to the Mutual Destructive War (MDW) of the West’s crusade war against the East

This paper discusses the following issues:

• Historical context of Yoon’s anti-Korea behaviour
• Yoon’s anti-Korea diplomacy
• Impact of Yoon’s anti-Korea diplomacy

***

Historical Context of Yoon’s Anti-Korea Behaviour

To understand Yoon’s anti-Korea behaviour, we need to know more about the fatal fight between the pro-Japan conservative South Korea (PJCSK) and the liberal nationalist South Korea (LNSK).

I have published a Global Research article (Ultimate Battle Between Pro-Japan South Korea and Nationalist South Korea: Democracy at Stake, Economy in Crisis, Security at Risk, December 22, 2022) which provided more information on this intra-South Korea fight.

Yoon Suk Yeol leaving the People Power Party (PPP) headquarters shortly after joining the party on 30 July 2021 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

The PJCSK was formed during the Japanese colonial era (1910-1945). Korea was annexed to Japan in 1910 due to the treason of pro-Japan politicians led by the traitor, Lee Wan Yong. 

This group collaborated with colonial Japan in the stealing of Korea’s assets, in capturing more than 200,000 young girls to be sent to the Japanese military comfort women camp, in mobilizing about 800,000 Korean workers to work as salves in Japanese mines and factories, in forcing Koreans to give up their Korean family name and pick up a Japanese name and other treasonable activities designed to oppress and exploit Koreans.

Thus, the PJCSK were “traitors” who betrayed Korea.

You may ask me why I call the PJCSK as pro-Japan and conservative.

They identified themselves more with Japan than with Korea. Moreover, they were and are more interested in promoting Japan’s interests than protecting Korea’s interests. So, they were and are pro-Japan.

They did every illegal and immoral activity to conserve their wealth which was and is largely stolen. So they were and are conservative.

Their conservatism has little to do with the conservation of some noble values. This fact may be applied to many countries throughout the world.

The present PJCSK is composed of the traitors and their descendents. It is represented by the People Power Party (PPP) which is the linear descendent of the Republican Party created in 1963 by General Park Chung-hee with USD 66 million given by Kishi Nobuske who was the key aid of Tojo Hidekki, Japan’s prime minister during the Pacific War.

The opposing political force in South Korea is the liberal nationalist South Korea (LNSK) represented by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK). The leader of the DPK is Lee Jae-myung.

The PJCSK represents about 30% of the South Korean population, while non-PJCSK population represents 70% led by the LNSK group.

I may add here that, in a way, the post-WWII political history of South Korea has been the history of PJCSK-LNSK battle.

After WWII, the leaders of the PJCSK (traitors) were supposed to be punished even liquidated. In fact, the LNSK made a list of these traitors, but the list was confiscated by the pro-Japan police.

Furthermore, the American military government (1945-1948) and the rotten government of Syngman Rhee (1948-1960) appointed the traitors to key positions of the government.

There were a series of large-scale protests movements against the American military government and Rhee’s government resulting in massacre of several hundreds of thousands of civilians by the American CIC (Counter Intelligence Corps) and Rhee’s terrorist youth gangs and the police.

The traitors’ big headache was the survival and the protection of their privileges and wealth obtained illegally and immorally.

To do that, they had to keep control the South Korean people through the perpetual government. But, they knew that they could never get the power through democratic way. Only way was the dictatorship.

As a matter of fact, South Korea was oppressed and exploited by the merciless and criminal military dictatorship for 25 years from 1962 to 1987. General, Park Chung-hee ruled from 1962 to 1979, while General Chun Doo-hwan ruled from 1980 to 1987.

After 1987, General Rho Tae-woo governed South Korea from 1987 to 1993 followed by Kim Yong-sam from 1993 to 1998. During this 10-year period, the PJCSK continued to strengthen their power through well organized system of the embezzlement of tax payers’ money.

In 1998, something happened. Kim Dae-jung was elected as president of South Korea. Kim was the leader of the LNSK. Kim’s victory was the results of the LNSk’s sustained fight against the PJCSK. Kim’s victory was also the results of his remarkable plans of handling of the foreign currency crisis of 1997 caused by the corruption of the traitors.

Kim’s government (1998-2003) was succeeded by the government of Rho Moo-hyun (2003-2008). Kim and Rho, leaders of the LNSK, did two things which alarmed the PJCSK.

One was the increase allocation of tax payers’ money for the welfare of all the citizens. This meant less money to be stolen by the traitors.

The other was something which threatened the future of the PJCSK, because Kim and Rho were able to produce the North-South peace process.

They also produced North-South joint statements for peaceful unification and economic cooperation. Kim Dae-jung produced it on the 15th of June 2000; Rho Moo-hyun produced it on October 4, 2007.

It must be pointed out that the peaceful unification of Korea means, as far as the PJCSK was concerned, not only the marginalization of the PJCSK community but also harsh punishment of the traitors by North Koreans.

The peace process and the North-South economic cooperation have resulted in the weakening of the PJCSK’s political and economic position.

However, the PJCSK was not idle. It fought back. In 2008, Lee Mung-bak became president of South Korea (2008-2013). Lee was notorious for his cunning methods of killing adversaries and enriching the corruption culture community of the PJCSK.

He forced Rho Moo-hyun to kill himself through the manufactured bribe scandal of Mrs. Rho.

However, the vision and the spirit of Rho are still alive and they remain the source of the courage and the determination of LNSK to get rid of the traitors.

Lee Myung-bak would have embezzles billions of dollars through the “4-Rivers Project” and the “Natural Resources Diplomacy.”

Lee was succeeded by Park Geun-hye, daughter of General Park Chung-hee (2013-2017).She was not qualified to run a government. But she was picked to enrich the PJCSK.

However, what was a historical irony was the fact that their complicity to enrich the PJCSK with stolen money has resulted in the further loss of PJCSK’s legitimacy and credibility.

Thus, the force and the credibility of the PJCSK which began to fall due to the ten-year governing by the LNSK under Kim Dae-jung and Rho Moo-hyun has been further damaged by the corruption and the abuse of power by Lee Mung-bak and Park Geun-hye.

Then, in 2017, Moon Jae-in came along and became president after the 8-month long Candle-Light Revolution carried out by 27,000,000 South Koreans.  

Moon hit hard the PJCSK through the social and economic reforms, the promotion of PMEs along with the war against the corruption culture of the PJCSK.

I may point out here that the power of the LNSK has been attributable to a series of mass protest demonstrations leading to the ruin of PJCSK presidents and the LNSK’s access to power.

Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in, Panmunjom Declaration (2018) 

The following is the list of massive protest demonstrations by the LNSK and the punishment of the six PJCSK presidents:

April 19, 1960: The Student Revolution forcing President Rhee Syngman to flee after being accused for corruption and abuse of power.

October 16 1979: the BUMA Protest leading to the assassination of President Park Chung-hee for corruption and abuse of power.

May 18, 1980: the Kwangju Democratic Movement leading to the imprisonment of Presidents Chun Doo-hwan and Rho Tae-woo for treason (Chun), corruption and abuse of power.

June10, 1987: the Democratic Movement leading to the amendment of the Constitution leading o the formation of civil government.

2016-2017: the Candle-light Revolution resulting in the imprisonment of Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye for corruption, abuse of power and incompetence de govern (Park).

Thus, none of the six presidents of the PJCSK has ended his or her presidency in honourable way. 

This shows how deeply the PJCSK has been corrupted on the one hand, and, on the other, how hard the LNSK has fought back risking the lives of its members.

This is what has made the PJCSK panicky and made it to do everything possible to take back the power.

The PJCSK was searching for the possible presidential candidate who could restore the PJCSK’s power, privileges and wealth. They picked Yoon Suk-yeol.

As I mentioned several times in my previous Global Research articles, Yoon has none of the qualities to become president.

On the other hand, he has one quality useful for the PJCSK — he has the desire and means to kill the enemies of the PJCSK which may threaten the vested interests of the corrupted PJCSK.

He has been a prosecutor all his professional life capturing, sending innocent people to prison and even destroying the entire family of those who are suspected to be against the interests of the PJCSK.

Despite the absence of presidential qualities, the PJCSK chose Yoon as their presidential candidate at the 2022 election.

Once elected, the first priority of Yoon Suk-yeol was the destruction of the LNSK on the one hand and, on the other, the survival of the PJCSK allowing the recovery of its wealth and the privilege. To do so, Yoon applied the following measures.

• The destruction of the trace of the DPK by imprisoning the all of the key former aids of the Moon Jae-in government.
• The killing of possible leaders of the LNSK trough fabricated scandals, usually sex scandals or bribes scandals.
• The mobilization of the media, the prosecutor office and the police to do politically assassinate the leader of the opposition party, Lee Jae-myung.
• The nomination of prosecutors to most of the major minister jobs and deputy minister positions in order to create the prosecutor dictatorship.

In fact, South Korea is now run by prosecutors who are absolutely ignorant about running a government.

• The imposition of extreme form of neo-liberal economic system by facilitating the PJCSK’s embezzlement of public funds, by making the Chaebols richer and more powerful and by preventing job creation through the prevention of SME expansion.

Yoon has been deploying every possible means to destroy the LNSK. But, he still feels unsecure and seeks protectors, which are Japan and the U.S.

Now, we will see below how Yoon has been trying to destroy South Korea through dangerous and criminal diplomacy in complicity with Kishida and Biden.

Yoon’s Anti-Korea Diplomacy

Diplomacy with Japan

The relation between PJCSK and Japan has always been the master-servant relations. In fact, the PJCSK has been Japan’s neo-colony, ever since 1945, in the sense that the PJCSK has been promoting the economic, political and ideological interests of Japan and those of the PJCSK at the expense of the interests of the LNSK.

What is amazing is this. The PJCSK thinks that its fate depends on the destiny of Japan, because the PJCSK was co-offender of war crimes committed during the Japanese colonial era (1910-1945).

The PJCSK thinks that Korea is an extension of Japan. It may even wish for Korea’s annexation to Japan 2.0.

This may sound absurd. Is it? It happened before in 1910 because of the traitor Lee Wan Yong. Many think that Yoon Suk-yeol is the reincarnation of Lee Wan Yong.

Yoon’s diplomacy with Kishida has produced two results which are catastrophic to Korea.

One was the justification of Japanese colonialism and the other was the promotion of the Japanese interests at the expense of Korea’s interests.

Justification of Japanese colonialism

• Yoon supports the Japanese arguments that the Japanese colonialism was beneficial to Korea, that Korea was annexed, because of Korea’s incapacity to govern Korea, that the crime of the sex slavery of the 200,000 comfort women never happened, that the labour slavery of 800,000 Korean workers never took place.
• Yoon did not protest when Kishida hinted that Dokdo/Takeshima Island was Japanese territory. The issue of Dokto /Takeshima Island can provoke ROK-Japan war.
• Japan does not like to pay compensation to the Korean workers who were exploited by the Japanese firms as salves. The Supreme Court of Korea ordered the guilty Japanese firms to pay the compensation. Japanese firms refused to pay. Stupid Yoon has asked the Korean firms that have nothing to do with labour slavery to pay it.

Promotion of Japanese Interest at the expense of Korea’s interests

• South Korean GDP per capita has been catching up rapidly the Japanese GDP per capita. In 2004, Japan’s per capita GNP (nominal) was USD 38,307 as against USD 16,283 for South Korea. Thus, the ROK’s per capita GDP was mere 43% of the Japanese per capita GDP. 

Now in 2023, the Japanese per capita GDP is USD 35,400 as against USD 34,967 for South Korea. Thus, in 2023, the South Korea’s per capita GDP is 96.5% of the Japanese per capita GDP.

Moreover, if we compare the two countries’ per capita GDP (PPP), Korean per capita GDP (PPP) is USD 56,693 as against USD 51,800 for Japan. Thus, South Korean per capita GDP (PPP) is 9% higher than the Japanese per capita GDP (PPP). By the way, PPP stands for purchasing power parity.

• Yoon has applied every possible measure to sow down the ROK’s GDP growth so that the Korean economy stops being competitive with the Japanese economy.
• Yoon has adopted the extreme form of neo-liberal economic policy by favouring large corporations at the expense of the welfare of the people. This policy leads to the fall of the GDP growth due to falling domestic demand resulting from skewed income distribution in favour of the PJCSK and Japan which dislikes fast growth of ROK’s GDP.
• Japan does not like the competitive South Korean small and medium enterprises (SMEs) which provide chemical products needed for the production of semi-conductors. Therefore, Yoon cut subsidies usually given to Korean SMEs and brought in Japanese SMEs to South Korea.
• Yoon does not care much about the falling Korean exports to China which is attributable to ROK’s joining the American war camp preparing the war against China. The reason is that Japan will fill the trade vacuum left by South Korea.

Yoon’s diplomacy with Biden 

Yoon’s diplomacy with Biden has resulted in the de fact trilateral military alliance.

Image: Yoon with President Biden in the Oval Office, April 2023. (Licensed under the Public Domain)

The joint statement said: “If one member country is attacked, it is considered as attack to all the three countries.” [Is this not “a copy and paste” of Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty]  It means, in fact, the trilateral military alliance.

Moreover, the military alliance will be institutionalized. This means that even if the government changes in the countries, the alliance will be made to stay through every possible mean including, most likely, cyber manipulation of the election results and even covert operation to destroy government which tries to break the military alliance.

In the trilateral military alliance, the whole strategy of the alliance will be determined by Washington; Japanese army will have the task of the field command; South Korean army will do all the dirty works.

The trilateral military alliance is more than welcome by Washington.

It has been long time since Washington wanted the trilateral military alliance needed to preserve its global hegemony and to eliminate those countries which may challenge America’s hegemony such as China and Russia.

True, Washington has the AUKUS and QUAD. But, the AUKUS is not strong enough. The UK is far away from Asia, Australia a small military power. The QUAD is not reliable, because India is not a sure military ally.

Therefore, Washington’s is more than happy to have the ROK army in its war camp. Remember, the ROK army had, in 2021, 500,000 regular soldiers 3,100,000 reserves giving a powerful military might.

ROK army is now the 6th most powerful army in the world in fire power. The Japanese military is the 8th most powerful military. 

The country that gained most from the three summits is surely Washington. I am sure that the American pro-war community (APWC) is very happy, because the trilateral military alliance increases the probability of shooting Sino-American war.

Therefore, the defence budget will rise substantially. It will make the APWC richer.

But, this will reduce the resources needed to solve internal problems including the infrastructure decaying, widening income gap, street violence, the jobless, the homeless. 

Impact of Yoon’s Anti-Korea Diplomacy

The impacts of Yoon’s diplomacy may be grouped into two sets of impacts: economic impacts and security impacts.

Economic Impacts

The economy of South Korea has been declining ever since Yoon Suk-yeol took over the power in 2022. The rate of GDP growth has been continuously downward adjustment and the 2023 projection is not far from 1.0% even lower than the Japanese GDP growth rate (2%).

The slowing down of GDP growth is due to several factors: pro-PJCSK economic policy; pro-Japan economic policy and the weaponization of trade.

The Pro-PJCSK economic policy Yoon’s economic policy has been designed to maximize the wealth of the PJCSK at the expense of the income of the ordinary South Koreans. Yoon cut down corporate tax, increased subsidies to large corporations, cut subsidies to SMEs and cut down welfare expenditures. This has resulted in falling domestic demand inviting slower GDP growth.

The pro-Japan economic policy: The objective of Yoon’s pro-Japan economic policy consists in making the ROK economy more dependent on the Japanese economy. To do this, Yoon has begun to discourage the domestic production of major high-value added intermediate materials needed for the production of high-tech goods including semi-conductors.

The weaponization of trade and investments: Under the system of military alliance, the trade becomes highly strategic and selective determined by Washington. ROK is no longer free in selecting trade partners and the choice trade goods.

Similarly, international investments become strategic and selective determined by Washington. The ROK companies are no longer free in selecting out-going and incoming investing countries and investing fields.

The combination of the above three sets of policies can lead to the long-run stagnation of the South Korean economy.

Security Impacts 

The security impact of the trilateral military alliance includes these impacts:

• Rapid increase of the number of enemies and loss of ROK’s international markets,
• The loss of credibility of South Korea’s foreign relations,
• The increasing danger of the Korean War 2.0,
• The danger of forming the trilateral military alliance among North Korea, China and Russia,
• The increasing danger of Japan’s holy war 2.0.

Increasing number of enemies and loss of ROK’s international markets: South Korea has no enemies so far. It is true that North Korea has been regarded as enemy, but most of South Koreans regard North Koreans as brother and sisters. The PJCSK and the U.S consider North Korea as enemy either for the maintenance of power or weapon sales.

ROK’s joining the trilateral military alliance has made all the American enemies and all the Japanese enemies South Korea enemies including of course China, Russia and North Korea, let alone American enemies in the Middle East, Africa and the South America.

It is just horrible to imagine the impact of these enemies on ROK’s trade. Remember this. In South Korea, the two-way trade represent as much as 100% of its GDP.

The Loss of credibility of South Korea’s foreign relations: Under President Moon Jae-in (2017-2022), South Korea’s foreign relations received credibility and respect throughout the world due to the fact that Washington’s interference was relatively weak. President Moon had the courage and the wisdom to develop more autonomous foreign relations. But under the trilateral military alliance, Seoul’s autonomous foreign relations become much more difficult.

Increasing danger of Korean war 2.0: The trilateral military alliance increases the danger of the second Korean War. Ever since Yoon took the power, he has been provoking North Korea in words and in actions. He mentioned his intention of undertaking the pre-emptive attack in addition to expanding scale of the ROK-US-Japan military exercises.

North Korea is angry and has been increasing the frequency and destructive power missile tests. Kim Yo-jong, second in command in North Korea said about Yoon Suk-yeol: “I don’t like him as human being.” 

What is scaring is the possibility of Yoon’s provocation of North Korea with small scale military attack in order to increase his falling approval rate knowing well that this can lead to the Korean War 2.0.

The danger of forming the trilateral military alliance among North Korea, China and Russia (NKCR): The Japan-ROK-U.S. military alliance (JKORUS) can accelerate the formation of NKCR which can lead to the exclusion of South Korea from the Eurasian economic block.

The future of the ROK economy will be determined by its integration into the Eurasian economic bloc not the Indo-Pacific economic bloc. Hence the JKORUS can be a fatal factor of long-run stagnation of the ROK economy.

The increasing danger of the Japan’s Holy War 2.0:

There are several signs of the feasibility of Japan’s ambition to dominate Asia and restore the Great Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (GACPS)

• Yoon’s defence of the Japanese colonialism: Japanese colonialism was beneficial to Korea; the crime of comfort women never took place, the slavery of Korea workers never happened.
• The Japanese elite group is composed of the descendents of the elite group of former imperial Japan who ruled Asia. This group is represented by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) led by the Kishi Nobuske-Shinzo Abe line of political and business leaders whom I call as the Neo-Meiji-Reformation Group (NMRG).
• The existence of powerful pro-war think tank, the Japan Conference
• The creation of pro-war social climate: return of Shintoism and Bushido
• The persistence of Japanese complex of racial superiority of the elite group over Koreans and Chinese and the missionary conviction to enlighten Asians.

The Japanese racial superiority complex and the mission to rule Korea and China had its origin in the famous speech of  Fukizawa Yukichi, founder of Keio University, “Good-by Asia” of 1885.

• The persistent campaign to amend Article 9 of the 1948 Peace Constitution
• The 2015 law allowing Japan to join the war to help ally
• The plan of doubling Japanese defence budget in five years
• The trilateral military alliance allowing Japanese to find excuse to intervene in Korean military conflict.
• The trilateral military alliance allow Japan to use ROK military in Japan’s Asia conquest.
• The possibility of the existence of the Biden-Kishida Agrement of 2023 similar to the Katsura-Taft Agreement of 1905 allowing Japan to annex Korea and letting the U.S to colonize the Philippines.

Already in South Korea, opinion makers are talking about the revival of the Japanese colonial government in Seoul.

It is now common belief that Yoon wants the revival of Japanese colonialism in Korea in order to protect himself and the PJCSK so that himself and members of the PJCSK can feel security and enjoy the wealth stolen from Koreans just like Lee wan Wong and has gang did under Japanese colonial rule of Korea from 1910 to 1945.

Conclusion

My first conclusion is that the tragic and catastrophic destruction of a country (South Korea) has happened due to the choice of a wrong leader whose actions are only for the protection of the stolen wealth and power for the PJCSK. The wrong leader is Yoon Suk-yeol.

Yoon knows nothing about economics, politics and diplomacy. He has spent all his professional life by arresting and imprisoning those who were critical about the corrupted culture of the PJCSK.

His policy decisions are affected by Shaman. His mother-in-law is in prison for frauds, bribes, blackmailing and other crimes. His wife has committed so many crimes deserving a very long imprisonment. But she is still free because of the corrupted prosecutors.

Yoon is a psychopath and has absolute worship for the strong. Biden is the strong; Japan is the strong. That is why he worships Biden and Kishida.

Let me repeat this. Yoon is coward who is afraid of Koreans and seeks refuge in Japan-dominated Korea. In other words, he wishes for the return of Japanese colonial power to Korea in which he may feel secure and in which he can exploit Koreans to become richer, more powerful and more comfortable just like Lee Wan-yong , the traitor, did in 1910.

My second conclusion is about Kishida and Biden. These two leaders know who and what Yoon is and, nonetheless, lured him to sign the cursed trilateral military alliance.

I am just wondering how far Biden and Kishida can go in using stupid Yoon to destroy South Korea. Don’t they have any sense of guilt? One would expect a little decency and compassion, if they are really world leaders.

Besides, South Korea is an ally of Japan and the U.S. Is it ethical to treat an ally in this way?

My third conclusion is about the anti-humanity behaviour of Biden and Kishida.

Biden is obsessed by the idea of destroying Asia led by China.

Kishida is infatuated with the imperialist dream of conquering again Korea and Asia.

The sad thing is that Biden’s obsession and Kishida’s dream will lead to global East-West war in which nobody is winner.

It will speed up the end of the humanity which has already started because of human greed, perpetual wars and man’s savage and irrational handling of the God-given nature.

I hope that the leadership in South Korea will change soon so that the dangerous military alliance can be broken. The mass movement for Yoon’s impeachment is getting strength. Bonne chance to the impeachment fight!

*

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. Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM) and member of the Research Center on Integration and Globalization (CEIM-UQAM).

He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from The White House Facebook

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.

*** 

 

 

 

 

I gave the following speech in Tokyo, Japan on September 2, 2023, the seventy-eighth anniversary of the formal surrender of Japan to the United States on the battleship USS Missouri anchored in Tokyo Bay.

On that occasion, Japanese Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu signed on behalf of the Japanese government and General Yoshijiro Umezu signed for the Japanese military.

Supreme Commander Douglas MacArthur then gave a speech in which he declared that

“It is my earnest hope and indeed the hope of all mankind that from this solemn occasion a better world shall emerge out of the blood and carnage of the past.”

But although peace found its way to Japan somehow through that signing, the United States was just starting a horrific war with the world that has continued down to the present day, and threatens to be the cause, not the end, of a new world war today.

The United States would never return to a peace economy after 1945, and the dependency on the production of petroleum, vehicles, planes, and weapons to drive a consumption economy that resulted from the war would reshape the America forever.

My speech (text in Japanese below) explains that the only way for the United States to snap out of the current drive for world war, and for nuclear war, which now poses an overwhelming threat for humanity, is to recognize the profound manner in which the nation was transformed into an empire driven by war wherein the core of governance is conducted in secret, in the shadows, during the Second World War—especially the final two years.

That process was driven in part by the melding together of the United States with the British Empire during the war in an economic, technical and ideological sense. The introduction of British colonial cruelty, combined with the gentleman’s polite rhetoric, was best represented by the firebombing of Dresden (February 13-15, 1945). That action introduced an unprecedented level of institutional brutality into American governance that went even further than the worst of American colonial policy in the Philippines.

Even more importantly, the establishment of the Manhattan Project, a top- secret government project within the Department of War that brought together politicians, scientific experts, private industry, military officers, and other interests to pursue the development of, and the needless and cruel use of, two nuclear weapons, changed everything in governance utterly.

This new form of unaccountable secret governance within the Manhattan Project, as I explain in the speech, made possible the constant criminal drive for war, and specifically for nuclear war, that continues to this day, unaccountable to the constitution, the citizens, or even the politicians. RAND Corporation was the direct fruit of this secret and unaccountable fusion of finance, industry, military and government after the war, but there are many other such parasitic institutions today.

The final result is the concrete plans for a catastrophic nuclear war with Russia and China now at an advanced planning stage and nuclear was is entirely possible, if not inevitable, if we follow the current game plan to its natural conclusion.

The use of classified directives, secret law and nondisclosure agreements to govern the United States, and much of the Earth, in complete secrecy can be traced back to the Manhattan Project.

I also talk in the speech about the development of napalm and other chemical and biological weapons that were used in the totally unnecessary bombings of the Tokyo and other Japanese cities as part of a new form of industrialized and brutal warfare that would be taken to its extreme, in part as a form of economic stimulus for American industry, during the Korean War.

I apologize on behalf of the American people and the American government for these criminal actions, and I pledge that all classified documents related to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the carpet bombing of Tokyo (March 10, 1945), and also related to American interference in Japanese politics and education after the war will be declassified immediately.

I promise that in my administration the United States will uphold the 1970 Non-proliferation Treaty and will reduce the number of nuclear weapons we possess to 500 within five years, and to zero within ten years.

This move will give America some moral legitimacy for the first time since the dropping of the atomic bombs and let us to focus on real security threats like the destruction of the environment, the collapse of biodiversity, the use of technology to dumb down and destroy the vast majority of humanity, and the economic violence resulting from the overwhelming concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few.

*

An English AI translation of the speech from the Japanese version: 

On the 78th Anniversary of the Signing of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender

Seventy-eight years ago, on September 2, 1945, representatives of the Japanese government signed the articles of surrender offered by the United States on the deck of the warship Missouri then anchored in Tokyo Bay, bringing the Greater East Asia War, the Pacific War for the United States, to an end.

On that day, after a speech by the General of the Army Douglass MacArthur, Japanese Foreign Minister Aoi Shigemitsu signed on behalf of the Government of the Empire of Japan, followed by Chief of the Army General Staff Yoshijiro Umezu on behalf of the Japanese Armed Forces.   

At that time, the Japanese people were eating weeds to survive. Their homes had been burned by continuous American air strikes that continued day and night, and they had no choice but to cover the children’s wounds with rags. Yet, granted the means were harsh and brutal, substantive peace came to Japan, albeit in a painful and cruel manner.  

From that day on, however, America set out on a course for eternal war. At the same time, that signing marked the beginning of Japan’s occupation period, which continues to this day, by an unaccountable secret dual government lodged deep in the military.   

The United States had been possessed by the demon of war and was jinxed by the sweet curse of victory. The result was a United States that continued to wage indiscriminate wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries. That series of wars allowed a ruthless demon to reach its bloody hands deep into the American soul. The “rights of the people” enshrined in the Constitution degenerated into “consumer hedonism,” “freedom” was replaced with “narcissism,” and America, the victorious nation, had bravely set out on a course to damnation.   

Dear respected citizens of Japan. My name is Emanuel Pastreich and I am an American who served as a professor of Japanese literature for many years, and has written on East Asian security.   

On the 78th anniversary of the signing of the signing of the surrender to the United States by Japan, as someone who is preparing to run as a presidential candidate in the Green Party of the United States, there is something I would like to share with you.   

In light of America’s desperate political culture in 2020, I decided to run for president. I made my campaign slogan “Make America great for the first time.” Maybe you remember a similar slogan?  

That’s right. As a candidate in 2016, President Donald Trump employed the slogan “Make America Great Again.” However, granted the chaos and violence that Japanese and Americans are facing at home and abroad, we have no time for such vague nostalgia.   

The old America may have had its charms, but it was never a great country.   

Today there really is not much we can say about America that is “great” seeing as its military is planning a global nuclear war while secretly pursuing plans to wipe out its own citizens.   

I want team up with Japanese, and first to acknowledge America’s crimes, and then to rebuild America. I am deeply impressed by Japanese culture, and I want to use Japanese wisdom to help change America.  

It is necessary for us to recognize what kind of a country Japan surrendered to 78 years ago.   

And we must clearly recognize what kind of country America is as it currently plans for nuclear war against China and Russia.   

Only by joining with you, and acknowledging the crimes that our country, the United States, has committed in the past, and continues to commit in the present, will there be hope for Japan and the United States.   

President Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” meant that America must have the world’s strongest military, spread military bases all over the world, and intervene in almost all military conflicts in the world.  It meant that the United States should keep claiming to be the world’s police force and keep funneling tax dollars into nuclear weapons to prepare for a global nightmare.   

No, I cannot see anything great about that at all.   

The Secret Military Command System that Possesses America Like an Evil Spirit   

The American players who effectively continue an economic and ideological occupation of Japan are not the poor American workers who make up the majority of our population, but a secret military command system centered around the Pentagon and intelligence agencies. The reality of the United States, a nation that advocates democracy but uses secretive methods, backed by violence, to carry out its politics, can be traced back to the Manhattan Project, that classified plan that developed, and then dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, changed everything.   

The Manhattan Project was a criminal plan that prepared the dangerous and unnecessary nuclear attack on Japan, and did it in such extreme secrecy that even the members of the project did not know what was going on. This system was set up in this manner not so much to be secret, as to be unaccountable. It was an administrative system that had no responsibility to the Constitution, to the people, or to ethics.  

That malignant form of secret governance has metastasized across the entire Federal government, which is now preparing for nuclear war far from the reach of the citizens, or the government itself.  

The recent global blockbuster movie “Oppenheimer” introduces Robert Oppenheimer, the physics professor who played the central role in the Manhattan Project, misleading and seducing the best and the brightest into participating in this pact with the devil.   

Strangely, although the movie has been released around the world, no date for a release in Japan has been scheduled.     

Perhaps the mysterious Japan-US Joint Committee was involved in preventing the screening of a film that exposes American crimes against Japan.   

The historian Masao Maruyama described prewar Japanese politics as a “system of irresponsibility.” Although apt, the more I read of history, the more convinced I am that the “system of irresponsibility” existed not in Tokyo, but in Washington.   

The Crime of the United States   

The nuclear attacks on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945, were aimed at testing uranium and plutonium based atomic bombs and collecting data about the results.   

Japan was already taking concrete steps to accept the Potsdam Declaration and surrender at the time. The bombings were not strategically necessary.   

Even after the war, America’s military secrecy continued. The U.S. government to dismiss reports of radiation-related illnesses in the year after the atomic bombing, dismissing accounts as mere conspiracy theories. It took a great deal of fighting not only in the United States, but also around the world, before the US government even acknowledged that the atomic bomb was different from conventional weapons.   

America’s secret war plans are only possible because of secret pacts and treaties with other countries, including Japan. These agreements, unconstitutional yet legally binding, empower the psychopaths in the Pentagon who dream of global destruction.   

America has stockpiled thousands of nuclear weapons without any justification, and the insane who work behind the curtains at the  Strategic Command openly discuss plans for a winnable nuclear war. They have written up detailed plans for a pre-emptive nuclear attack that will kill hundreds of millions of innocent civilians in both Russia and China, if not all of humanity.     

The two nuclear attacks against the Japanese were not America’s only crimes during the Pacific War.   

During the Pacific War, the United States conducted approximately 2,000 bombing raids targeting Japanese citizens, not military installations. In just three and a half years, the United States dropped approximately 20 million napalm bombs on Japanese urban spaces. Those napalm bombs were developed so as to effectively burn down Japanese wooden houses and burn Japanese citizens to death.   

In particular, the Great Tokyo Bombing, carried out in the middle of the night on March 10, 1945, purposely targeted the most densely populated areas using napalm to bomb private homes, and injuring at least 300,000 people and killing over 115,000 in one night. It was a large-scale massacre of civilians that left over 800,000 homes destroyed through the use of Napalm.  

When the war ended on August 15th, there remained still 86,000 mustard gas and phosgene bombs, and bombs filled with anthrax still waiting to be used. Over three million Japanese citizens were killed by the attacks of the United States over three and a half years.     

We Americans were taught that the two nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary to save Japanese lives. Most do not even know about other crimes against the Japanese people. I strongly believe that in order to rebuild America, Americans have the right, and the need, to know what they did in Japan.   

The nightmare of eternal war continues today in America. The US continues nuclear war in a different form by firing depleted uranium shells in Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria, and Hawaii.   

Similarly, the United States uses, or sells, cluster bombs that are made to look like toys so as to lead children to their deaths.  

We are planting nightmares with these cluster bombs that will last for decades.  

War haunts the American soul like a demon, transformed into a spiritual cancer that seeps into the nation’s marrow. The culture of war has transformed American culture into a world of pleasure and narcissism, a bland Disneyland wherein consumption becomes the purpose of life.   

The rich and powerful use this sick culture, with its foundations in violence, to promote superficial excitement, instead of ethical behavior, and thus make possible brutal exploitation and domination at home and abroad.   

Americans have lost the independence of mind. We lack the will or the inclination to contemplate civilization and historical processes, to consider the importance of values for a healthy society.   

In the vacuum that remains, we see serious conflicts, fed by interested parties, accelerating over ideological issues, over race, religion, and gender.   

Americans, now incapable of independent thinking, are easily manipulated by others. There can be no doubt that the United States is headed for conflicts at home and abroad.   

For Japan, which has been under the influence of American culture for two generations, the palpable decline of American culture is a direct blow.   

As someone who studied classical Japanese literature, who was inspired by reading The Tale of Genji and Hojoki, who tried to realize a new politics in America by employing the political ideas of Jinsai Ito and Sorai Ogyu of Tokugawa Japan, I am saddened by the disappearance of what I thought was the best of Japanese culture. America’s rotten, pleasure-oriented, consumer culture has extended its fingers into every corner of Japan.   

We must look at the transformation of the United States during the Second World War, especially after 1941, which increasingly tossed away the spirit, and the policy, of independence grounded in the Declaration of Independence, and replaced it with an alliance with the British Empire. As a result, policy makers in the United States shifted away from the ideals of fighting fascism and towards the power and the loot to be found if they took control of the wreckage of the British Empire—and were therefore made a part of it. The United States ceased to be a republic and started to act like a global empire.   

The result was that the US government has effectively treated Japan as a client state since the end of the war. American corporations planted in Japan a parasitic economic structure that undermined the integrity and the self-sufficiency of Japanese culture that was founded on narcissistic consumption.  

Most insidious was the establishment of a narrative in education and the media by the United States that glorified Western civilization and established it as a model for Japan’s future development. That is to say that the achievements of European nations, the developments in science and technology in Europe and America, were attributed to an advanced and superior civilization that must be emulated; the fact that such wealth was generated by enslaving the indigenous peoples of Africa, Asia, and the Americas and exploiting their resources was hidden from view.      

It was a sin to destroy Japan’s traditional craft culture, a noble tradition that placed value on enduring objects made from bamboo, wood, and stone, and to replace it with a consumer society that dependent on disposable plastic utensils and other items designed for built-in obsolescence.   

It was a sin to undermine Japanese values of respecting humanity, living in harmony with nature, and frugality, and to brainwash Japanese into believing that business administration focused on gaining short-term profits by taking advantage others was more respectable than supporting community and family.   

Japanese novels, waka and haiku poetry, and the inspiring diaries of the Heian period that I studied in graduate school are lost on young Japanese who have been seduced by corporations into relying on video games, YouTube broadcasts and Instagram memes, and various forms of pornography for continuous and dizzying stimulation. The resulting psychological state means that youth are unable to concentrate, numb to the experience of “wabi” (austere beauty), “sabi” (subtle sadness) or “aware” (deep empathy with sorrow) that were at the core of Japanese aesthetics.   

Traditional Japanese fabric made from flax, silk, or cotton, was woven to last and used for the most comfortable and healthy clothing appropriate to Japan’s climate. But the kimono and yukata dresses, the zori and geta sandals, that I saw when I first visited Japan have disappeared. In their place are disposable Western-style nylon and polyester clothes, plastic shoes, that do not fit the Japanese body, cause discomfort and disease, and produce mountains of undegradable waste.   

Wooden Japanese houses breathe with the wind, water, and soil around, creating a true refuge for the family. They have been replaced with cold-blooded concrete housing complexes funded by multinational banks that have devastated traditional neighborhoods even more brutally than the airstrikes.   

Japanese food highly nutritious and delicious, has become a rarity these days. It its place spreads American-style fast food, processed foods heavy with sugar and carbohydrates and injected with cancer-causing additives. What is left of traditional Japanese cusine is for tourism and novelty.   

The highly literate, artistic, and expressive Japanese have been stripped of their identity through decades of bombardment with consumerism propaganda that has distorted basic values. The role of American corporations promoting a culture based on money and waste was substantial.   

The United States destroyed Japan’s traditional culture through a violence of the soul. It was a crime to give multinational corporations, and private banks, such control over Japan’s economy.   

We Americans should not hide from these truths; we should be fully aware, and we should repent.    

Apology as a Presidential Candidate, Confession as a United States of America   

It was a sin to push American culture as a model while hiding its shameful core, to introduce to Japan a narcissistic consumer culture that reduces citizens to idiots.   

The original sin can be found in the conquest of North America, from the East Coast, to the Midwest, to California, to Hawaii and to Japan and Asia. The crazy culture of the Europeans made material development and consumption more important than spirituality and morality. It made the extermination of Native Americans, and the erasure of their culture, a culture that featured a remarkable balance of human settlements with nature.   

That cultural violence continues on today in Japan and across Asia.   

Enough is enough. It must end now.   

Americans must be aware of our crimes in the Pacific War, of our constant interference in Japanese politics after the war, and of our introduction to Japan of a toxic narcissistic consumption culture that promoted narcissism and growth over spiritual insight and community harmony.     

I want Americans to understand what happened and to take responsibility for it.   

We must repent and purify ourselves and our culture, so that we can make America great “for the first time.”  

Dear citizens of Japan, I am sorry for the crimes of the United States I have described.   

“Gomen nasai!” (I am sorry!)   

And from now on, I hope that you will consider becoming true friends with a new repentant and honest America.   

My Promise as Future President of the United States   

I am seeing the nomination for the nomination of the Green Party US as a candidate for president. It is in this capacity that I address you concerning the criminality and brutality of the two nuclear attacks of 1945, and the deaths of civilians in Tokyo and other cities during the Pacific War. I sincerely and sincerely apologize to all Japanese people, and to the world.     

I will demand that the U.S. government admit how America has been transformed by its own evil acts, and how the secrecy surrounding these acts has laid the foundation for an unaccountable military-industrial complex that threatens the entire Earth today.   

Americans lacked the courage to confront the serious corruption in the American government that resulted from the expansion of secret administration within the American military after 1941. I would like to apologize to the Japanese people, and the world, for that lapse that continues to this day. We Americans should be ashamed of ourselves.   

Furthermore, as president, I will insist that all materials related to the Manhattan Project, and to the employment of the atomic bomb, and other weapons for killing civilians, be immediately declassified. I will also demand that all the operations carried on in Japan after the war by American intelligence agencies and corporations to interfere in Japanese politics and society be declassified as well.   

The true story must be known to Americans and to Japanese.   

Finally, if elected President, I will lead the United States to adhere to its commitment to eliminate nuclear weapons under the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) which we signed and to which we supposedly adhere.   

First, we will reduce the number of nuclear weapons held by the United States to less than 500 over the next five years, and then we will eliminate them completely within 10 years. We can defuse the vast majority within a few months of my inauguration.   

Only when our country, the United States, expresses its resolve and its commitment to nonproliferation at home will we have the legitimacy, and the moral authority, to demand the same from the rest of the world.   

Stupidly, foolishly, the United States has wasted trillions of dollars on the “modernization” of America’s nuclear forces under the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations in blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The U.S. military’s Strategic Command is currently discussing extremely concrete plans for a preemptive nuclear strike on both Russia and China. I will order that this suicidal idiocy stop immediately.   

If America is preparing for a global nuclear war, and trying to draw Japan into that catastrophe, it has no right to criticize Iran, North Korea, or any other country.   

The United States, now facing economic, political, and cultural collapse, needs Japan’s assistance now. We do not need money, but rather a courageous spiritual tradition of courageously seeking truth, peace, and justice. I found that tradition in the Japanese classic Hagakure which I shared with my students as a professor of Japanese literature.  

From now on, Americans, with due humility, will learn from the Japanese, and we will join together the best of Eastern and Western civilizations so as to form a truly universal culture wherein there will be an equal, balanced, transparent, and accountable relationship between the United States and Japan.  

Let us get to work.   

The first step must be for the United States to admit clearly its past crimes and to apologize.   

Dear citizens of Japan, thank you for kindly listening to me today.  

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 Fear No Evil.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Fear No Evil

---

Annex: Original Japanese version

日本降伏文書署名７８周年に当たって

七八年前の一九四五年九月二日、東京湾に停泊したアメリカの軍艦ミズーリ号甲板上に於ける降伏文書署名を以て、当時の大東亜戦争、今日言う処の太平洋戦争そのものは終結したと言えます。

 その日、まずマッカーサー陸軍元帥によるスピーチの後、天皇陛下と大日本帝国政府の代理として、重光葵外務大臣が署名を行い、続いて日本軍の大本営の代表として梅津美治郎参謀総長が署名をしました。

 その当時、日本国民は雑草を食べて命をつないでいる有様でした。昼夜休み無く続いたアメリカによる空爆で家も焼き尽くされ、子供達の傷口もぼろ切れで覆うしか手立てはありませんでした。ともあれ、その様な過酷な状況の中、たいへんな痛みを伴う残酷な形ではありましたが、実質的な平和が日本に訪れたのでした。

 しかし、その日からアメリカは永遠の戦争に向かって出発したのです。同時に現在まで継続されている日本の被占領時代の始まりともなりました。

 アメリカが「戦争という悪霊」に取りつかれ、「勝利という甘美な呪い」をかけられた事で、アメリカはその後も朝鮮、ベトナム、イラン、イラクなどで、無差別な戦争を続ける事になりました。一連の戦争によってアメリカ人の魂はその奥深くまで、血塗られた悪霊の手先とされてしまったのです。合衆国憲法に明言された「国民の権利」は「消費者の快楽主義」へと堕落し、「自由」は「ナルシシズム」に置き換えられ、戦勝国であるアメリカは、破滅への道を歩み始めたのです。

 さて、親愛なる日本の皆様。私はアメリカ人で、日本文学の教授を務め、東アジア安全保障について長く研究したエマニュエル・パストリッチと申します。

日本降伏文書署名七八年目に当たって、アメリカ緑の党の大統領候補者出馬を準備している者として、どうしても皆様にお話ししたい事が有ります。

 二〇二〇年からのアメリカの絶望的な政治文化に鑑み、大統領候補者の準備を始めた頃、私は自分のキャンペーン・スローガンを “Make America Great for the First Time”、即ち「アメリカを初めて偉大な国にしよう。」としました。もしかしたら皆様はこれに似たスローガンを覚えておられるかもしれません。そうです。二〇一六年にトランプ大統領は候補者として “Make America Great Again” 即ち「アメリカを再び偉大な国にしよう。」というスローガンを挙げたのです。しかし日本人とアメリカ人が国内国外の深刻な混乱に直面している現状に於いては、そのような漠然としたノスタルジアに落ち込む暇もありません。昔のアメリカには確かに魅力的な部分が在ったかもしれませんが、決して偉大な国ではなかったのです。

 現在のアメリカは、秘密裏に国民を抹殺する計画を進展させながら、全世界核戦争を計画している国であり、絶対に偉大ではありません。

 私は日本人有志と手を組んで、アメリカの犯罪を認め、アメリカを改めて、アメリカを立て直します。日本の文化に深い感銘を受け、日本の知恵を生かして、アメリカを変えようと思います。

７８年前、日本がどういう国に降伏したのか、正しく認識する必要があります。

 現在、中国とロシアに対する核戦争を計画しているアメリカがどういう国であるか、それをまず明確に認識する必要があるのです。

 皆様と一緒に、わが国アメリカが、過去のみならず、現在もなお犯し続けている犯罪を認める事によって、初めて日本にもアメリカにも希望が生じます。

 トランプ大統領による「アメリカを再び偉大な国にしよう」というスローガンは、つまり「アメリカが世界最強の軍隊を持って、世界中に軍事基地を配備し、世界中で発生した殆どの戦争に介入し、世界の警察だと公言して、税金を核兵器に注ぎ込んでいた悪夢をもう一度蘇らせる事」です。私にはこれが、「偉大な事」とは到底思えません。

【アメリカにとりついた悪霊の機密国防制度】

 日本を占領しているアメリカの主体とは、多数派である貧しいアメリカの労働者ではなく、国防総省と情報機関を中心とした影の機密国防制度なのです。民主主義を訴えながら、極端な機密手段で政治を遂行するアメリカの実態は、まさに広島長崎原爆投下を準備したマンハッタン計画に顕著に現れています。

 マンハッタン計画は、人類史上最も危険、且つ必要の無い核戦争を準備して、計画関係者以外に何の相談も無しに実行した犯罪計画でした。しかも、そのような事を実行しても、憲法、国民、良心に何の責任も発生しない行政システムは、現在もそのままアメリカの政府の中に残っており、それ故に、現在のロシアと中国に対する核戦争の本格的準備が進められているのです。

 現在も日本を占領している機密国防制度が、その真実を常に否定しています。

 最近の世界的大ヒット映画『オッペンハイマー』は、マンハッタン計画の中心人物であったオッペンハイマー博士を紹介するもので、奇妙な事に公開予定日を超えても、日本では上映されていません。その背景には間違いなく、法律を超える機密行政が在り、それが日本を牛耳っているのです。

 おそらく、その当時のアメリカの犯罪を暴く映画上映を阻む過程に、謎に包まれている日米合同委員会の働きが在ったでしょう。

 丸山眞男博士は戦前の日本政治を「無責任の体系」と表現しましたが、私は歴史を研究するにつれ、どうもその「無責任の体系」は東京にではなく、ワシントンにこそ在ったと確信しております。

【原爆の犯罪】

 一九四五年八月六日の広島、九日の長崎への核攻撃はそれぞれウラン型、プルトニウム型の原爆の実験とデータ収集を目的としたものであり、当時、既にポツダム宣言受諾の方向に動いていた日本に対して戦略上必要な攻撃ではありませんでした。

 戦後もアメリカの軍事秘密主義は続いています。原爆投下後の一年間、日本から報告された放射線による病気やその他の症状を、アメリカ政府が陰謀論だとして一蹴したのも継続している軍事秘密主義故の事です。原爆が通常兵器とは異なるものである事をアメリカ政府が認めるまでには、アメリカ国内だけではなく世界中で多大な論争が在ったのです。

 アメリカの秘密戦争計画は、秘密の協定と条約、 違憲の状態でありながら、法律に守られ、世界の破滅を夢見るサイコパスの軍事専門勢力を生み出しました。

 アメリカは何千発もの核兵器を蓄え、戦略司令部には狂った連中が暗躍しています。その様な連中は、勝ち目の有る核戦争について公然と語り、全人類とは言わないまでも、ロシアと中国の両方に於いて数億人の罪無き市民を殺すであろう先制核戦争の具体的な計画を、今も練っているのです。

 日本人に対する二度に渡る核攻撃が、第二次世界大戦中のアメリカの唯一の犯罪ではありません。

 太平洋戦争に於いて、アメリカは約二千回にも及ぶ一般日本人（一般人?　一般市民？）

をも目標とした無差別爆撃を実行しました。僅か三年半の間に、アメリカが落としたナパーム弾はなんと約２０４０万発に及びます。ナパーム弾は軍事施設ではなく、木造で建てられた日本の民家を焼き尽くし、日本人を焼き殺す為に開発されました。

 特に一九四五年三月一〇日深夜に実行された東京大空襲は、民家が密集した人口密度の高い所を狙い、一夜にして被災者は約３０万人、死者は１１万5千人以上、負傷者は１５万人以上、損害家屋は８０万軒以上という大規模な民間人殺戮となりました。

 八月一五日に終戦した為に、次に日本の一般市民に対して使用しようと用意していたマスタード　ガス、ホスゲンなどの強力な毒ガス爆弾八万六千発と、炭疽菌を充満させた細菌兵器一〇〇万発は、幸いにも未使用に終わりました。

 僅か三年半の間に３００万人以上の日本人が殺されたのは事実です。

 しかし多くのアメリカ人は、広島と長崎の二度に渡る核攻撃は、日本人の命を救う為に必要だったと教えられ、信じています。そして、それ以外の日本人に対する虐殺も知りません。アメリカを建て替えるには、アメリカ人が日本で行った事を知る権利が有り、知る必要が有ると、私は強く考えるのです。

 アメリカには永遠の戦争という悪夢が、現在でも続いています。アメリカが劣化ウラン弾をイラク、アフガニスタン、ウクライナ、シリア、ハワイにばら撒いて、実際に核戦争を違う形で継続しています。

 同じくアメリカは子供達を騙す為に玩具に似せて作ったクラスター爆弾を、それらの国、その他の所にも、ばら撒いています。地雷と同様に今後、何十年間と続く悪夢を他国に植えているのです。

 戦争は悪霊のように、アメリカ人の魂に取り憑き、国の骨髄に浸み込んで精神的なガンとなって、アメリカの文化を快楽とナルシシズムを勧誘し、消費こそが人生の目的であるかの様に、アメリカの一部の権力者が、一般のアメリカ国民を操作してきました。

 その結果、くだらない表面的な興奮を重んじさせられ、その裏に残忍な搾取と支配の計画を立てられました。

 その結果、アメリカ人は文明、価値観、健全な社会を考える主体性が無くなり、人種、宗教、ジェンダーなどに関連したイデオロギーの問題を以って、深刻な衝突が加速しています。

 独立思考できない多くのアメリカ人が簡単に何者かに操られて、間違い無くアメリカ国内が重大な紛争に向かっています。

 アメリカ文化の影響下に置かれた日本にとって、アメリカ文化の退廃は直接に深い打撃を与えています。

 日本の古典文学を研究し、『源氏物語』、『方丈記』を読んで感銘を受け、徳川時代の伊藤仁斎と荻生徂徠の思想に習って、アメリカの新しい政治を実現しようとする者として、私は最近になって日本の文化が消えていく事に鑑み、たいへん遺憾の思いを抱きます。

 それは間違いなく日本に存在しているアメリカの腐った快楽中心の消費文化の影響です。

 まず、アメリカが一九四一年以降、独立精神を失って、密かに大英帝国と合併する事で、共和国ではなく全地球の帝国の様に振舞い始めた事に端を発します。

 その結果、アメリカ政府は事実上、日本を属国として扱ってきています。日本の文化を無視してアメリカに都合の良い様に勝手に憲法を作り変えさせた上に、アフリカ、アジア、アメリカの先住民を奴隷にして、その資源を吸い取って実現した寄生的な経済構造の結果として、西洋諸国が驚異的な経済発展を実現したにも関わらず、その事実を隠して、日本に新しい教育制度を導入させ、いつまでも素晴らしい西洋文明こそが、日本人が習うべき立派な模範だと讃えさせ続けています。

 加えて、アメリカの企業が映画とテレビ放送を通して、日本人の主体性を破壊するナルシシズム文化を戦略的に紹介し続けています。

 竹と木と石から作られた器を尊ぶ日本の伝統工芸文化を破壊し、プラスティック使い捨て道具に依存する消費社会を以て、多国籍大企業に日本の経済を任せたのは罪深い事でした。

 人情と自然と和を重んじる日本の哲学を軽視して、隣人を利用して短期的な利益を得ようとする経営学などを日本人に信じ込ませたのは罪深い事でした。

 現在の若い日本人が連続的で目まぐるしい刺激を与えるゲーム、YouTube、ポルノに慣れさせられて、集中不可能な心理状態になり、侘び、寂び、哀れを深く察する日本の物語、和歌、俳諧、日記文学を読めない、書けないという悲しい世の中に成り果てたのも、その背景にやはりお金を儲ける消費文化を紹介したアメリカ企業の罪が深いのです。

 誠心を以て絹や木綿を織り上げた日本の伝統衣装は、日本の気候に最も相応しいもので、孫子まごこの代まで持ちましたが、その着物、浴衣、草履が消えてしまって、代わりにナイロンで作られて長持ちしない西洋風な洋服が人間らしくない大都会に溢れています。

風土に合って、風、水、土と木と呼吸する日本家屋が消えて、その代わりに冷血的なコンクリートの団地が、空爆よりも残酷に日本の街並みを壊してしまいました。

 栄養価に優れ美味しい日本料理も現在では非日常的なものとなり、アメリカ風にカロリー過多とガンになる添加物を混ぜた加工食品などファストフードが当たり前に一般的となって、もはや嘗ての優れた食文化は、単なる観光誘致の方法（手段？）になってしまいました。

 よく考えれば、過去、アメリカは自国の利益の為に、非常に暴力的な外交手段として日本の伝統文化を破壊しようとしてきました。

 それらを、隠さずに、しっかりと自覚し、悔い改めます。

【大統領候補者としての謝罪、アメリカ合衆国としての懺悔】

 アメリカ文化の良い点を拡張しながら、その恥ずべき点を隠して、人を馬鹿にするナルシシズム消費文化を当然の様に紹介してきた背景には、やはり罪の継承が在ります。要するに、最初から北米大陸に自然と均衡をとった素晴らしい文化をもっていた原住民ネイティブ・アメリカンを皆殺しにして、物質開発を精神よりも重要視した白人の狂った文化があるのです。

 日本にもアジアにも同じ様な文化的暴力が為されました。

 もうこれ以上は、たくさんです。

 きちんとアメリカ人は自覚し、謝る事で懺悔、禊ぎを行われなければならない筈なのです。

 私のこの思いがアメリカ人に伝わり、悔い改め、懺悔し、その汚い歴史を明確に自覚し、罪を清める禊ぎを行なって初めて、そこから真の新しい「偉大な国アメリカ」への道が始まると確信しております。

 親愛なる日本の皆様、誠に申し訳ありませんでした。

「ごめんなさい。」

そしてこれから、悔い改めた新しいアメリカと、本当の親友となってください。

【アメリカ合衆国の大統領としての約束】

 現在、緑の党で来年の米国大統領候補として指名が検討されている者として、私は一九四五年の二度に渡る核攻撃の犯罪性と残虐性、そして東京やその他の都市への一般市民を狙ったナパーム弾による絨毯爆撃について、加えて戦後の日本の国内政治と文化に対する干渉と攪乱について、全ての日本国民に対して、そして世界に対して、厳粛に誠意を持って心よりお詫び申し上げます。

 私は、こうした自らの邪悪な行為によって、アメリカが如何に変貌してきたか、そしてこうした行為に関する秘密の存在が、如何に説明責任を果たさない軍産複合体を育成する素地を作り上げたか、をアメリカ政府が正式に認めるように求めます。

 また一九四一年から一九四五年にかけて、アメリカ軍内部での機密行政と支配の拡大から生じたアメリカ政府の深刻な腐敗に立ち向かえる勇気が、アメリカ人に欠けていた事を、日本国民と世界に深くお詫びしたいと思います。恥の極まりでございます。

 しかも、私は大統領として、アメリカが核兵器を開発したマンハッタン計画や、日本への核攻撃を計画した陸軍航空部隊に関するあらゆる資料、戦後にもアメリカの情報機関と大企業が日本政治に干渉した作戦に関連した全ての資料の機密指定を解除して、全世界にお詫びしながら公開します。

 私は大統領として、アメリカが1970年の核不拡散条約に基づいて、核兵器を廃絶するという約束を厳守するように求めます。まず今後五年間でアメリカ国内の核兵器の数を五〇〇発以下に減らし、その上で、一〇年以内に完全に核兵器を廃絶します。我が国、アメリカ合衆国がその覚悟と約束を表明して初めて、世界の他の国々にも同じ事を求める正当性と道徳的な力が生まれるのです。

 オバマ政権、トランプ政権、バイデン政権の下で行われたアメリカの核戦力の「近代化」は、核不拡散条約（NPT）にあからさまに違反しており、米軍の戦略司令部にロシアや中国への先制核攻撃の選択肢を秘密裏に真剣に準備している事を止めるように命令します。

 本格的に全世界核戦争を準備して、日本を巻き込もうとしている限り、アメリカにはイランと北朝鮮などを批判する資格は全くありません。

 経済、政治、文化の崩壊に向かっているアメリカは今こそ真に日本の援助が必要です。その援助は金銭的な援助ではなく、「葉隠」などに表れた日本の素晴らしい文化に由来する勇気をもって、真実・平和・正義を求める伝統です。

 これからアメリカ人が謙虚な態度をもって、日本人から習って、東洋文明と西洋文明の接合によって初めて、アメリカと日本の間に平等でバランスの取れた、 透明性を持って、説明責任を果たせる関係が成り立ちます。

 そのため、アメリカがまず過去の犯罪をはっきり認めて、謝罪しなければなりません。

 日本人の皆様、今日親切にお話を聞いてくださいまして、誠にありがとうございます。皆さまのお教え頂きたく、よろしくお願いいたします。

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.

*** 

Aug. 28, 2023 – Larissa Borges, 33 year old Brazilian fitness influencer died suddenly on Aug.28, 2023 after suffering double cardiac arrests. She was traveling in Gramado, Brazil when she had 1st cardiac arrest, went into a coma, then had a 2nd cardiac arrest that was fatal.

Aug. 22, 2023 – Northern Ireland – 30s year old Irish doctor Dr. Sean McMahon collapsed in the FITNESS SUITE at Craigavon’s South Lake Leisure Centre on Aug. 22, 2023 and died suddenly. He was due to get married in 4 days.

Aug. 10, 2023 – Slovakia – 28 year old Dayana Dulovcova, personal trainer who has been training since age 16 was found dead in the bathtub in her apartment by her mother on Aug. 10, 2023.

July 2023 – Dallas, TX – 57 year old Kathryn Wyant Huffman, a nurse at Medical City Dallas Hospital died suddenly in early July 2023. She was preparing for a fitness competition when she died.

July 4, 2023 – Goiania, Brazil – 22 year old personal trainer Daniel Ribeiro da Silva was found dead inside his house on July 4, 2023. Cause of death suspected to be cardiac arrest.

July 2, 2023 – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – 18 year old Luiz Nathan, one of the greatest talents in the world of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu died suddenly on July 2, 2023.

June 24, 2023 – Glastonbury, CT – 44 year old Susana Barraza Herrick, DMD, dentist and owner of Herrick Family Dentistry, youth lacrosse coach and CrossFit fitness enthusiast died suddenly in Miami, FL, on June 24, 2023.

May 27, 2023 – Limerick, Ireland – 32 yo European fitness model champion & nurse Judy Fitzgerald died unexpectedly on May 27, 2023.

May 19, 2023 – Nousty, France, 31 year old Sandra Badie, World runner up Jiu-Jitsu champion, and practitioner of judo, karate and aikido, died suddenly of a cardiac arrest during the night of May 18/19.

April 21, 2023 – Naples, FL – 35 year old Amy Brooke Jordan, a certified personal trainer who studied kinesiology died suddenly in her sleep on April 21, 2023.

March 26, 2023 – Orange County, FL – 31 year old Sheriff’s Deputy Michael Milmerstadt died suddenly on March 26, 2023 after suffering a brain injury during training session at gym which started out as severe headache after his workout.

March 25, 2023 – Uruacu, Brazil – 24 year old personal trainer Jhonatan Saraiva had a sudden medical emergency while swimming in a lake on March 25, 2023 and died unexpectedly. He leaves a pregnant wife.

Feb. 6, 2023 – 55 year old fitness industry leader Laurie McCartney died suddenly on Feb. 6, 2023. She supported Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates in fitness facilities, gyms, health clubs, etc. “gyms should take the necessary steps prescribed by government to stay open”.

Feb. 1, 2023 – UK Teacher, Katy Hancock, age 32, died of brain aneurysm on Feb. 1, 2023 was described as “massively fit and healthy” by her dad but collapsed of a brain aneurysm while teaching a fitness class.

Jan. 23, 2023 – Whitehaven, UK – 26 year old school teacher Rachel Morgan died unexpectedly on Jan.23, 2023 She was a year 1 teacher at Kells Infant School. Rachel had a passion for health and fitness and was a keen member of her local gym, jogged regularly.

Dec. 14, 2022 – Brazil – 16 year old aspiring model and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioner Andressa Santos Monteiro died suddenly in her sleep on Dec. 14, 2022 from a sudden cardiac arrest. She had started suffering from seizures at school a few months prior to her death.

My Take…

It’s becoming harder and harder to keep up with reporting the endless sudden deaths.

When a prominent fitness influencer like Brazilian Larissa Borges dies suddenly (of double cardiac arrest), the news overshadows and pushes out all other similar recent deaths.

There has been a recent cluster of these deaths of “fitness enthusiasts”.

In this article I focused on regular people who were not professional athletes.

These were people who were personal trainers, fitness instructors, fitness enthusiasts, crossfit practitioners, brazilian jiu-jitsu practitioners and regular gym goers.

As always, the causes of death are typical for COVID-19 vaccine injury – vast majority are cardiac arrests, and then the occasional “died in sleep”, blood clots or brain injury.

COVID-19 mRNA vaccination is not just dangerous for professional athletes but is extremely dangerous for anyone who is a fitness enthusiast.

Doctors did not disclose these risks of sudden death after COVID-19 vaccination to their patients and that a person who is deeply involved in fitness, has a much higher risk of sudden death.

In my opinion, COVID-19 vaccinated individuals should not engage in any strenuous physical activity until they have an extensive cardiac work-up and are cleared by a team of specialists.

*

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.

---

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.

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 August 22, the US State Department renewed its ban on the use of US passports for travel to North Korea. This travel ban prohibits as many as 100,000 Korean Americans living in the United States from visiting their relatives in North Korea. The ban was first set in place by the Trump administration in 2017, and—in spite of Korean American activists’ repeated calls to lift the draconian ban—has been renewed annually since.

During his presidential campaign in 2020, Joe Biden had promised to “reunite Korean Americans separated from loved ones in North Korea for decades,” but has extended the travel ban each year he has been in office. This current ban will remain in place until August 31, 2024, at which point it will either be lifted or extended again.

Families Separated by the Travel Ban

Kate Youngjoo Shim, an activist with the women’s peace organization Korea Peace Now!, is one of the many Korean Americans the travel ban impacts. Born in Korea, Shim moved to the US at the age of 15. Both sides of her family are originally from North Korea, and the ban now prevents her from visiting cousins and other close relatives there.

Shim pointed out the hypocrisy of the US government lecturing North Korea on human rights while keeping so many Korean family members separated.

“The biggest human rights violation to me is not letting people see their family,” said Shim. “The US government is always trying to say things about [North Korea’s] human rights conditions, but if you’re not letting people meet their mothers, their children, their immediate families… there’s no excuse.”

Things were not always this way. Shim’s grandmother was separated from her oldest son—Shim’s uncle—during the Korean War. After decades of trying to track him down while living in South Korea, her grandmother moved to the US at the age of 65 in the 1980s in the hopes that it would improve her chances of finding and reuniting with him. The task had proved difficult for her in South Korea due to the political situation between the North and South at that time. Even after decades of not knowing where he was and against all odds, Shim’s grandmother remained hopeful that she and her long-lost son would meet again. After moving to the US, she even started working at a factory so that she could afford to bring him back gifts once he was found.

Eventually, Shim’s family was able to track down her lost uncle in North Korea, and her grandmother was finally reunited with her son after 37 years. While there, Shim’s grandmother also met her brother after decades of separation. She would return to North Korea again to attend her grandson’s wedding.

Shim’s grandmother died more than 10 years ago. If she were alive today, she would no longer be able to visit her own child or other family members because of the travel ban.

The ban is a cruel expression of US imperialist policy, and as the generation of Korean War survivors are now aging well into their 80s, lifting it is a matter of urgency now more than ever.

“My grandmother was one of the lucky ones,” said Shim. “There are so many unlucky people who cannot even see their family members. Or maybe a mother has her children there. Now it’s been 70 years [since the signing of the Armistice Agreement], so people are dying.”

Trips to North Korea Were ‘Life-Changing’

And it’s not only Korean Americans barred from visiting family members in North Korea—the travel ban prohibits any US passport holder from traveling there, effectively prohibiting any kind of cultural exchange between US citizens and Koreans in the North. These exchanges are essential to challenging the US propaganda campaign that dehumanizes North Koreans in order to justify sanctions.

Gloria La Riva, an organizer with the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition, called her travels to the North in 1989 and 2015 “life-changing experiences.”

“I saw people and a country that is the opposite of the hysterical, demonizing images we see in the West,” La Riva recalled. “I met people who were thoughtful and kind to visitors. That is what struck me most of all. When we boarded a full train, people immediately offered us their seats, smiling—the best language of all.”

“That is the real reason the US government bans its citizens from visiting North Korea,” she continued. “It is the same reason the US travel ban to Cuba has existed for more than 60 years. The US fears that we will see the Korean people as our friends, not our enemy. The travel ban is a denial of our right to see North Korea for ourselves.”

End the Korean War

The crimes that Washington has inflicted on Korea cannot be overstated. It was the US that divided Korea along the 38th parallel in 1945 and separated millions of families, occupied the South, and dropped more than 600,000 tons of bombs over the peninsula during the Korean War. So extensive was the bombing campaign that US pilots even ran out of targets and would drop bombs into the sea to safely land. Over the course of the war, the US military leveled “nearly 90% of major cities and villages in North Korea,” killing a staggering 20% of its population.

On top of the murderous carpet bombing campaign, the entire Korean War itself was punctuated by US-backed atrocities: the murder of more than 100,000 people during the Bodo League massacre in 1950, which was committed by the government forces of US-installed President of South Korea Syngman Rhee; the Sinchon massacre in which the US military and South Korean anti-communist forces killed more than 30,000 civilians; the No Gun Ri massacre where US military forces opened fire on civilian refugees, killing around 300 people. Taken altogether, US involvement in the Korean War was nothing short of genocidal.

While the signing of the 1953 Armistice Agreement brought an end to the fighting, it did not bring an end to the conflict. The US refuses to sign a peace treaty, and it, along with the South, remains suspended in an official state of war with the North. And even after the signing of the armistice, the US government maintains a heavy military presence in Korea and continues to ratchet up tensions between the North and the South. South Korea remains under occupation: it’s home to the largest US overseas base, and a total of 28,500 US military personnel are stationed in the country. South Korea also hosts the annual Ulchi Freedom Shield joint military exercises with the US. These annual drills simulate the invasion of North Korea and include live-fire practice attacks from the air, land, sea, and space. The war games present a dress rehearsal for regime change in North Korea. And especially since 2006, the US government, along with the United Nations Security Council, have relied on a brutal sanctions regime to punish North Korea for defying US imperialism. These sanctions have caused food insecurity, malnutrition, and medical supply shortages in the country, leading to enormous suffering and thousands of preventable deaths.

The travel ban for the US, then, is another weapon of war, part of its broader strategy to further isolate North Korea and inflame tensions between both halves of the peninsula. And with Washington forging stronger military ties with Australia, the Philippines, and other countries in the “Indo-Pacific,” as well as increasing its militarization of the South China Sea, the Pentagon’s ultimate goal is to secure South Korea as an ally in its road toward major power conflict in Asia.

“We’re in a period of extreme tension in Korea,” explained Ju-Hyun Park, an organizer with the nonprofit Nodutdol for Korean Community Development, which advocates for reunification of the country. “The US does not want to do anything to de-escalate that tension because the current situation benefits US interests. The more conflict there is in Korea, the easier it is to corral South Korea and Japan into an alliance against not only North Korea, but ultimately against China and Russia as well.”

This path that Washington is leading North and South Korea down will only lead to more war and devastation for the Korean people. The US government has never been interested in peace for the Korean peninsula. For more than 70 years, it’s done everything in its power to divide North and South, obstruct any and every path to lasting peace, and turn Koreans against each other. What the US government owes to the people of Korea can never be repaid. But the path toward justice begins with lifting the travel ban to North Korea—along with signing a peace treaty to bring an official end to the Korean War.

*

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 produced by Globetrotter.

Amanda Yee is a writer and organizer based out of Brooklyn. She is an editor of Liberation News, and her writing has appeared in Monthly Review Online, the Real News Network, and Peoples Dispatch. Follow her on Twitter @catcontentonly.

Featured image: Activists march in Washington DC on July 27, in recognition of the 70th anniversary of the armistice in Korea. Photo: Women Cross DMZ via Twitter

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.

*** 

Polish Anti-War Debates are a kind of phenomenon. Even though Poland is not formally a belligerent, there is strict war censorship there.

Secret Service has the right to limit access to independent media without giving a reason. The recent amendment to the Penal Code introduced the categories of “unconscious espionage” and “disinformation”, i.e. “dissemination of false or misleading information with the aim of causing serious disruptions in the system or economy of the Republic of Poland , an allied state or an international organisation of which the Republic of Poland is a member”. 

Simply: any criticism of pro-Kiev policy or NATO activities is punishable in Poland with a prison sentence of up to 8 years.

And yet there are still brave people who take this risk, trying to present the Polish public with true information about the war in Ukraine, as well as to raise awareness that even Western public opinion is by no means uniform in supporting the Zelensky regime. Thanks to independent media such as “Myśl Polska”, the oldest Polish political weekly, founded in 1941 in exile in London, and the online channel “Wbrew Cenzurze / Without Censorship”, Polish viewers and readers get know the opinions of leading Western analysts and activists of anti-war movements from the UK, USA, Ireland and Germany.

Source: Konrad Rekas

International Voices for Peace

The Anti-War Debates hosted i.a.: George Galloway, leader of the Workers Party of Britain and the No2NATO movement; Col. Douglas Macgregor, military expert, former advisor of the President Donald Trump’s administration; Larry C. Johnson, security expert, former CIA officer and analyst; Chris Williamson, ex-MP and former Labour Shadow Cabinet member; Diana Sosoaca, Romanian senator, president of the SOS Romania party; Grzegorz Braun, Polish Member of Parliament; Prof. Kees van der Pijl, a leading scientist in international political economy; David Pyne, former Pentagon analyst, advisor to the candidate in the Republican Party primaries, Vivek Ramaswamy; and Scott Ritter, military analyst, former disarmament inspector.

Guests of the last, special edition of the programme included: Clare Daly, Irish MEP, member of Independents 4 Change, The Left in the European Parliament – GUE/NGL, pro-neutrality, anti-war activist and renowned Palestinian right campaigner; Peter Ford, English diplomat, British ambassador to Bahrain from 1999 to 2003 and Syria from 2003 to 2006. Determined opponent of the British militarist involvement in the Middle East and in the Eastern Europe. Member of the Workers Party of Britain; Tommy Sheridan, Scottish Socialist MSP and current chair of the Scottish independence campaign Hope Over Fear. Mick Wallace, Irish MEP, leader of Independents 4 Change, The Left in the European Parliament – GUE/NGL renowned anti-war activist, a proven friend of the Palestinian cause, engaged in supporting anti-imperialist movements in the Middle East, Africa, South America. The discussion was organised on the anniversary of the outbreak of World War 2, to  emphasise  a warning against the tragic consequences of further escalation in the international relations.

False Anglo-Saxon Guarantees

Starting a discussion, I recalled the words of general Kazimierz Sosnkowski, Polish Commander-in-chief during the late period of the WW2. He has written to the Polish soldiers in 1944:

“Five years have passed since the day when Poland, having listened to the encouragement of the British government and received its guarantees, stood alone in the fight against the German power”.

After that harsh but true reminder, that Poland was pushed to fight by Britain, Churchill successfully demanded general Sosnkowski’s dismissal. Today we can see with no doubts, that it has been the encouragement of London and Washington pushing Kiev to pursue a policy that resulted in war with Russia.

“Ukraine was definitely under pressure from London and Washington to continue the war. In April last year, a peace agreement was already on the table that could end the conflict and seemed acceptable to Moscow and Kiev. In particular, it was Boris Johnson, then supported by the Americans and part of the EU, who ordered Ukraine to continue fighting. This is the Western proxy war with Russia, and the longer it lasts, the more Ukrainians are thrown into the meat grinder, the more destruction there is, and more territories are lost. This is an absolute disaster for Ukraine, commissioned by supposed Western friends who are in fact not friends of Ukraine at all,” Clare Daly agreed.

Centre of Extremism

“It is clear that British and American policy is failing. In fact, it never had a chance to succeed. The policy makers of London and Washington dreamed, taking their dreams for reality. Of course, they were never going to pay for it themselves. It was the Ukrainians who were thrown into the meat grinder. So it was a highly risky policy, although without much risk for London or Washington themselves. It is worth remembering that 10 years ago, in 2013, the British Labour Party in a Commons vote protected Britain from participating in the bombing of Syria. This was achieved with a small majority and with the help of a group of braves, rebellious Conservative MPs, but it was proof that there was a party of peace in my country. But those days are long gone. There has been a collapse of the true, authentic British left, all the main parties today are in positions of extreme centre, ready to fight to the last Ukrainian,” added Ambassador Ford.

Fight to the Last Ukrainian!

Mick Wallace emphasised that we are also dealing with a European crisis:

“We have just had a meeting of the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee on the financing of Ukraine. Some of the voices were truly shocking, so unreasonable were the speeches of the MEPs who kept repeating that he had to pump up Ukraine’s arsenals or Ukraine would lose the war. There is still talk of Ukraine regaining lost territories and Crimea. Ukraine will not regain Crimea without a nuclear war! Does Europe think of a nuclear war on its own continent as something that could realistically happen?! The speeches of European politicians have no connection with the interests of their own citizens or with the interests of Ukrainians, who are dying en masse in this war. This is a serious crisis. Party politics does not attract intelligent people. We are witnessing a serious lack of European leadership.”

Global Reconfiguration

Tommy Sheridan’s voice was particularly strong:

“Only Pope Francis had the courage to say that none of the European politicians had the balls to admit that Russia was provoked to invade. As the Pope said, when a dog barks at someone’s door, one cannot be surprised by the reaction. Would the American government be happy to learn tomorrow that China is installing its weapons in Mexico? This is terrible for socialists like me, who are completely against war, against nuclear weapons, against the very idea of militarism, which I sincerely hate, because only workers suffer because of it, and they die in wars. But I must admit: if I were Vladimir Putin, in the same situation, what could I do other than attack to defend my own sovereignty? So, with all due respect, I believe that this war was made inevitable as a result of NATO’s actions, obviously led by the US. And I must also add that they were wrong in their calculations. They expected that financing Ukraine and the widespread imposition of sanctions would bring Russia to its knees. Meanwhile, what happened was China, India, Brazil, Argentina, subsequent countries declaring: We do not want to be part of your imperialist expansion. We will not follow American orders. This is a global reconfiguration!”

By slightly opening the door of the Polish prison of thought, Polish anti-war groups try to participate, at least partially, in this global anti-imperialist transformation.

*

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.

Konrad Rękas 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.

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.

*** 

 

 

 

 

Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), the chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, wants to know what the U.S. Department of Justice is doing to recover an estimated $280 billion in U.S. COVID-19 relief spending that allegedly flowed to criminals inside and outside the United States.

On Tuesday, Mr. Wenstrup sent a letter (pdf) to Attorney General Merrick Garland, asking that he and the DOJ provide a full account of all current and past investigations into the misallocation of U.S. taxpayer funds as part of COVID-19 pandemic relief programs. Mr. Wenstrup cited a June Associated Press analysis, which estimated that around $280 billion of U.S. COVID-19 relief spending was lost to fraudulent schemes carried out both inside and outside the country.

Mr. Wenstrup further cited a 2021 NBC News report, claiming much of the COVID relief that was lost to fraud went to Russian, Chinese and Nigerian criminal organizations.

“Some of these fraudulent actors were based outside the United States and may involve international criminal organizations. Estimates imply that at least half of all stolen COVID-19 relief funds went to Russian, Chinese, and Nigerian criminals,” he wrote.

The U.S. government has been working to account for more than $4 trillion in COVID-19 relief spending. In addition to the $280 billion the Associated Press believes was lost to fraud, the media publication estimated another $123 billion was simply wasted or misspent.

In a March 2022 press release, the DOJ announced it had recovered about $8 billion worth of COVID-19 relief funds lost to fraud through a combination of criminal prosecutions and civil enforcement actions. That DOJ fund recovery effort amounts to about three percent of the money that may have been lost to fraud, and Mr. Wenstrup said it’s unclear just how much the DOJ has recovered from criminal actors living abroad.

“It is highly concerning that possibly billions of taxpayer dollars intended to help Americans suffering the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic were stolen by organized criminal rings in foreign countries,” the Republican lawmaker wrote. “Therefore, we write today to better understand the full scope of this problem and what actions the Department has taken to investigate international COVID-19 relief program fraud and hold these foreign actors accountable.”

Mr. Wenstrup requested the DOJ provide a country-by-country account of all current and closed COVID-19 fraud cases and dollar value estimates of COVID-19 relief spending they believe went missing in these fraud cases.

The DOJ is continuing to bring new cases to recover COVID-19 relief funds. Last week, the department announced it had conducted a nationwide enforcement effort resulting in 718 enforcement actions against 371 defendants, for alleged fraud offenses that resulted in the misallocation of around $836 million.

Even with this latest DOJ effort, the U.S. is still well short of recovering all of the funds that are likely missing as a result of COVID-19 fraud schemes. It could take years to recover all of those funds, assuming they can all eventually be recovered.

“The COVID-19 public health emergency may have ended, but the Justice Department’s work to identify and prosecute those who stole pandemic relief funds is far from over,” Mr. Garland said upon announcing the latest DOJ anti-fraud efforts last week.

Legislation extending the statute of limitations to prosecute pandemic-era fraud cases has enjoyed broad bipartisan support.

During last week’s anti-fraud announcement, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco announced the department had started a new COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Strike Force in Colorado and another one in Delaware.

“The two new Strike Forces launched today will increase our reach as we continue to pursue fraudsters and recover taxpayer funds, no matter how long it takes,” Ms. Monaco said.

*

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: US Congressman Brad Wenstrup (Licensed under Public Domain)

---

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.

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 Modi government is not perplexed by the absence of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in the G20 Summit on September 9-10. Its intuitive cognition helps to be stoical. This is, arguably, a Shakespearean predicament — “I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that, should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o’er.”

India’s high-calibre diplomats would have divined some time ago already that an event conceived in the world of yesterday, before the new cold war came roaring in, wouldn’t have the same scale and significance today.  

Yet, Delhi must feel disappointed, as the compulsions of Putin or Xi Jinping have nothing to do with their countries’ relations with India. The government has given a bureaucratic spin that

“The level of attendance at global summits varies from year to year. In today’s world with so many demands on the leaders’ time, it is not always possible for every leader to attend every summit.” 

That said, Delhi administration is sprucing up the city, removing the slums from public view, adding new alluring hoardings to catch the eye of the foreign dignitaries, and even lining flower pots along the roads their motorcades pass. 

One doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the common thread in the decisions taken in Moscow and Beijing is that their leaderships are not in the least interested in any interaction with the US President Joe Biden who will be camping in Delhi for four days with all the time at his disposal for some structured meetings, at the very least, some “pull asides” and the like at a minimum that could be caught on camera. 

Biden’s considerations are political: anything that helps to distract attention from the gathering storm in US politics which is threatening to culminate in his impeachment that might in turn blight his candidacy in the 2024 election. 

Of course, this not Biden’s Lyndon Johnson moment. Johnson made the tumultuous decision in March 1968 to retire from politics as a strong step toward healing the nation’s fissures, while agonising deeply that

“There is division in the American house now.” 

But Biden is anything but a visionary. He was setting up a bear trap for Putin to reinforce his false narrative that if only the latter dismounted from his high horse, the Ukraine war would end overnight, whereas on its part, the Kremlin is well aware that the White House continues to be the strongest proponent of the thesis that a prolonged war would weaken Russia. Indeed, Biden has gone to extraordinary extents that none of this predecessors ever dared to reach — aiding and abetting Ukrainian terrorist attacks deep inside Russia. 

In a way, Xi Jinping also faces a trap, as Biden administration is going to great extent to project itself as conciliatory toward China, as the beeline of US officials heading for Beijing recently would testify — Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken in June; Treasury Secretary and Climate Envoy John Kerry in July; and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo in August. 

The New York Times on Tuesday carried a report titled U.S. Officials Are Streaming to China. Will Beijing Return the Favor? It chastised Beijing: 

“China has much to gain from dispatching officials to the United States. It would signal to the world it was making an effort to ease tensions with Washington, particularly at a time when China needs to bolster confidence in its shaky economy. A visit could also help lay the groundwork for a potential, highly anticipated meeting between President Biden and China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, at a forum in San Francisco in November. 

“Beijing, however, has been noncommittal.”

The point is, all this while, Washington has also been incessantly taunting and provoking Beijing with belligerence and through calculated means to weaken China’s economy and incite Taiwan and the ASEAN countries to line up as the US’ Indo-Pacific allies, apart from vilifying China. 

Both Putin and Xi Jinping have learnt the hard way that Biden is a past-master in doublespeak, saying one thing behind closed doors and acting entirely to the contrary, often being rude and offensive at a personal level in unprecedented display of boorish public diplomacy. 

Of course, the symbolism of US-Russian “reconciliation” on Indian soil, howsoever contrived, can only work to Washington’s advantage to pull Modi away from India’s hugely consequential strategic partnership with Russia at a juncture when the West’s entreaties over Ukraine failed to get resonance in the Global South. 

As it is, India’s misconceived participation in the recent “peace talks” in Jeddah (which was actually the brainwave of the White House NSA Jake Sullivan) created misperceptions that Modi government “will be part of the implementation of the 10-point peace formula proposed by Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the details are being discussed.” 

Both Moscow and Beijing will be extremely wary of the Biden administration’s booby traps aimed at creating misunderstanding in their mutual relationships and create misperceptions about the stability of the Russian-Chinese strategic relationship at a critical juncture when Putin is preparing to visit Beijing. 

Putin’s possible visit to China in October can be considered as a response to Xi Jinping’s March visit to Moscow, but it has a substantial content as evident from Beijing’s invitation to him to be the main speaker at the third Belt and Road Forum marking the 10th anniversary of the appearance of BRI in Chinese foreign policies. 

Although in 2015 Putin and Xi signed a joint statement on cooperation on “linking the construction of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Silk Road Economic Belt”, so far Moscow’s support to BRI has been more of a declaratory character falling short of accession to it. The Chinese side, when it is convenient, mentions Russia as a Belt and Road country, while Moscow simply adheres to the previous formulations. 

This may change with Putin’s visit in October, and if so, it could be a historic game changer for the dynamics of Sino-Russian partnership and for the flow of international politics as a whole. 

Indian diplomats hope to produce a joint document that papers over the contradictions, which are not only over Ukraine but also climate change, the debt obligations of emerging markets, the Sustainable Development Goals, digital transformation, energy and food security, and so on. The confrontational line of the collective West poses a major obstacle. 

The G20 foreign ministers failed to adopt a joint declaration, and the deliberations, under pressure from the G7 countries, “strayed into emotional statements,” as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later said. Putin and Xi probably do not expect any breakthrough solutions from the G20 summit.

The strong likelihood is that the forthcoming Delhi event this weekend may turn out to be the last waltz of its kind between the cowboys of the Western world and the increasingly restless Global South. The revival of the anti-colonial struggle in Africa is ominous. Quite obviously, Russia and China are putting their eggs in the BRICS basket.

*

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.

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.

*** 

Not everyone is a-okay with Japan’s recent decision to dilute radioactive wastewater from the melted-down Fukushima nuclear power plant and dump it back into the Pacific Ocean, most notably communist China, which is no longer buying seafood from Japan due to concerns about it being contaminated with radiation.

According to reports, China is blocking all further import shipments of seafood from Japan, despite reassurances from the government of Japan and even the United Nations (UN) nuclear watchdog group International Atomic Energy Agency, which says everything is going to be just fine.

Chinese consumers, we are told, want more studies to be conducted before they dare to ever touch another piece of fish from their neighbors to the east. Many of them are calling for a boycott of other Japanese products as well, including high-end skin care creams and various household items.

“The effort is shaping up to be the largest campaign of state-supported nationalist outrage against Japan in more than a decade and comes at a time of widening divisions between China and U.S.-aligned countries in the region,” one media outlet reported about the matter.

Will China Eventually Ban Other Japanese Imports?

After “lists of products to be boycotted” started circulating online throughout China, many consumers started returning Japanese products that they had already purchased in retaliation.

Many Japanese manufacturers are now labeling their products as “radiation-free” to try to lure back Chinese consumers, some of whom have purchased handheld Geiger counters to test their Japanese-made products for radioactivity.

In response, Japanese analysts are accusing China of “scapegoating” Japan in an attempt to distract from its own nation’s many problems.

Not long after China gave the axe to all further imports of Japanese seafood, many Japanese businesses and government departments started receiving concerned and angry calls from Chinese consumers, including on the short-video platforms Kuaishou and Douyin.

Many users of these two platforms began uploading video footage of themselves calling Japan and expressing their concerns about nuclear-contaminated wastewater affecting Japanese-made products.

Following a two-year review, the IAEA concluded just last month that Japan’s plan to dump tens of thousands of tons’ worth of radioactive water straight into the Pacific Ocean is just swell, easily meeting international safety standards.

According to the IAEA, radioactive wastewater in the Pacific Ocean will have a “negligible” radiological impact on both people and the environment – case closed.

China does not agree with the IAEA’s assessment, though, with state-run media outlets throughout the country bashing Japan over the move. Environmental groups and residents in nearby South Korea, as well as some residents of Japan itself, further say that what Japan is now doing creates and “unnecessary risk.”

Obviously, China is trying to inflict serious economic damage on Japan, which says its nation’s businesses are already taking a “significant” hit, with more on the way.

Together with Hong Kong, China imports more than $1.1 billion worth of seafood from Japan every year – or at least it did before this recent decision was made. Nearly half of Japan’s seafood exports end up in China – or, again, they did before the change.

“While Japan’s government is deeply concerned by what it sees as the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, they understand that it is in their interests to maintain stable relations with their larger neighbor,” commented James DJ Brown from Temple University in Philadelphia.

“China’s growing economic difficulties could mean that any ban is relatively brief and narrow, so as to limit the negative impact on Chinese importers and business sentiment.”

*

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 Millennium Report

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.

*** 

“Repacking” of 3.5 miles of U.S. Military Red Hill Fuel Pipes in Hawaii Begins with October 16, 2023 as the Target Date to Begin “Defueling” the dangerous Underground Tanks

U.S. Military Now Has New Capacity to Store Above Ground 104 million gallons of fuel that Must be Removed from Massive Red Hill Underground Fuel Tanks

With the announcement on August 31, 2023, by Island Energy of Honolulu, of the completion of 63-million-gallon capacity for military fuel in five newly constructed above ground fuel tanks at Kapolei, a few miles from Pearl Harbor and the Red Hill underground tanks, the U.S. military has constructed sufficient storage capacity for the 104 million gallons of military fuel that is to be removed from the massive underground Red Hill fuel tanks.

Families Still Suffering from Effects of Toxic Fuel Poisoning

The May and November 2021 fuel leaks of 19,000 gallons of fuel at the 80-year-old Red Hill fuel storage facility into the drinking water aquifer of Honolulu gave toxic exposure to over 93,000 persons.  Many are suffering from toxic poisoning that will have lifelong effects.

27,000 gallons of fuel had “leaked” in January 2014. Some families who have lived in the 19 residential areas served by the Red Hill well report they have had health conditions for many years prior to the November 2021 spill that went directly into the Red Hill well. They feel that these health issues may be attributable to the leak in 2014, nine years before.

After the November 2021 leak, on March 7, 2022 Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered the Red Hill facility to be closed.  The 2023 National Defense Authorization Act required an additional certification that closing would not negatively affect U.S. national security.  That certification has not been issued.

“Repacking,” or filing the pipes to force air out of the 3.5 miles of pipes at the Red Hill fuel facility began on August 28. According to Joint Task Force Red Hill,

“During repacking, fuel operators will fill the lines using fuel from the upper tank farm and remove all air to ensure a stable flow of fuel when defueling the main underground storage tanks. The process is expected to take several days.”

“Defueling” of the 14 of 20 huge underground tanks that hold 104 million gallons of fuel is scheduled to begin on October 16, 2023 and should be completed by January 19, 2024. 6 tanks have been empty for several years. Between 100,000 and 400,000 gallons could remain in the tanks and low parts of the pipes at the conclusion of defueling and would still need to be removed, a process that the Red Hill Task Force has said is outside its scope of responsibility. The removal of this large amount of residual fuel has yet to be specifically addressed by the military. 

80-Million-Gallon U.S. Military Fuel Storage Facility Constructed in Australia

Another U.S. military fuel storage facility in Darwin, Australia has been completed under contract with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and provides an additional 80-million-gallon capacity for the Red Hill fuel.  The $270 million project has eleven fuel storage tanks constructed on East Arm of Darwin Harbor.

The contract for the Darwin facility was awarded in September 2021, the same time the Australia, United Kingdom, United States (AUKUS) pact was signed. The contract to provide energy logistics management and services to receive, store, protect and ship aviation-grade JP-5 turbine fuel and commercial grade Jet A-1 fuel for military forces was awarded to Florida-based Crowley Government Services Inc.  The contract is for four years, with a five-year option period.

One complicating factor for the US military is that  Darwin port was leased in 2015 for 99 years by the cash strapped Northern Territories provincial government to Chinese billionaire Ye Cheng’s Landbridge Group for about $355 million without notifying the Australian federal government. China is Australia’s largest trading partner, bigger than the next three — Japan, the U.S. and South Korea — combined. 

Massive Increase in Military Facilities in Australia Used by U.S. Military

Military ties between the U.S. and Australia continue to increase with the heated rhetoric of the West towards China. The U.S. and Australia have just completed Talisman Sabre, the largest land exercise in Asia with 34,000 military from 13 countries conducting war exercises throughout Australia.   A massive build-up of Australian military facilities included a $317 million upgrade to Darwin harbor wharf facilities with a 820-foot-long wharf at Larrakeyah Defence Precinct which will support surface warships, submarines, mine hunters and hydrographic ships.

Australian air bases in the Northern Territory frequently used by visiting U.S. aircraft are also being improved.  At Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Darwin $88.65 million was allocated to construct more fuel tanks, expand the airfield and erect maintenance facilities while 200 miles south of Darwin,  a $496 million project at RAAF Tindal upgraded the airfield and increased aviation fuel storage to accommodate U.S. B-52 bombers and U.S. stealth fighters including Marine Corps F-36B Lightning IIs deployed from Iwakuni, Japan, and Air Force F-22 Raptors from Hawaii.

*

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.

Ann Wright served 29 years in the U.S. Army and Army Reserves and retired as a Colonel.  She was also a U.S. diplomat for 16 years and served in U.S. Embassies in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia.  She resigned from the U.S. government in March 2003 in opposition to the U.S. war on Iraq.  In Hawaii, Ann is a member of Oahu Water Protectors, Shut Down Red Hill Coalition, Hawai’i Peace and Justice and Veterans For Peace Chapter 113-Hawai’i.

Featured image: Inside Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility. (Licensed under the Public Domain)

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.

*** 

Not everyone in the field of science has abandoned the truth that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other “greenhouse gases” are good for people and planet as opposed to bad.

More than 1,600 scientists – 1,609 as of this writing, to be precise – belonging to the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) signed the World Climate Declaration in August, declaring that man-made climate change is a myth.

Contrary to the leftist narrative, there is no “climate emergency,” which means there is no need to abandon earth-based “fossil” fuels like gas and oil in favor of loud and unsightly wind turbines and Chinese-made solar panels.

“There is no climate emergency,” CLINTEL says.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”

Most Climate Models Are False and Should Not be Used to Form Policy

For as long as the earth has existed, the climate has always been changing, this cohort of scientists and other experts says. Sometimes it gets cold, while other times it gets hot – and taking away meat, cars, and freedom is never going to change that.

As recently as 1850, the earth went through a “Little Ice Age,” so it is “no surprise,” the declaration states, “that we now are experiencing a period of warming.”

The government and media love to make much ado about nothing concerning the changing climate. All that “global warming” they love to rant on and on about is actually not that bad.

“Warming is happening ‘far slower’ than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” wrote Naveen Athrappully in a report for The Epoch Times.

As we have been saying for quite some time now, CO2 and other greenhouse gases are good for the planet. CO2 in particular is “essential” to all life on earth, and is extremely “favorable” for nature and the actual greening of the planet.

“Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools,” the coalition warns, adding that these same models “exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases” and “ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.”

Though they repeatedly try to denigrate it as a pollutant, the climate cultists are getting it wrong, wrong, and more wrong every time they refer to CO2 as some kind of planetary scourge that must be removed if we are to have any chance at survival.

“Extra CO2 results in the growth of global plant biomass while also boosting the yields of crops worldwide,” further explains Athrappully.

Furthermore, there is “no statistical evidence” to even remotely suggest that CO2 is in any way responsible for fueling more natural disasters like hurricanes, droughts, and floods.

“There is no climate emergency,” the group says. “Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are.”

“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models?”

*

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 NaturalNews.com

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.

*** 

When the Chilean military overthrew Salvador Allende’s democratically elected government in September 1973, UK officials supported and worked with the new junta as it indulged in widespread atrocities, declassified files show.

*

On 11 September 1973, a democratically-elected Chilean government under President Salvador Allende was overthrown in a brutal coup organised by the Chilean military with the backing of the CIA. 

The presidential palace was rocketed by the military and Allende committed suicide [was assassinated]. Thousands of people were imprisoned, Congress was suspended and all political parties and the trade union movement were banned.

General Augusto Pinochet soon emerged as the leader of the military junta as summary executions took place throughout the country. At least 3,000 people were soon killed, most executed, died under torture or “disappeared”.

Pinochet went on to rule Chile for 17 years. His regime became one of Latin America’s most repressive and bloody in modern history. 

After the fall of the dictatorship in 1990, a truth commission confirmed that more than 40,000 people were tortured and over 200,000 fled into exile. 

Declassified British files show UK officials described the 1973 coup as “cold-blooded” and “ruthless”. It was widely condemned throughout the world as an illegitimate overthrow of a progressive government. 

It also elicited much public outrage, including among the British public, especially as the Edward Heath government did nothing in public to strongly condemn the coup.

In fact, in private his Conservative government strongly supported it, the declassified files at the National Archives show.

Coup of September 11, 1973. Bombing of La Moneda (presidential palace) (Licensed under CC BY 3.0 cl)

‘Good Relations’

British planners in London and Santiago, Chile’s capital, immediately set about forging good relations with the new military rulers as repression increased, even secretly conniving with the junta to mislead the British public.

Officials were completely aware of the scale of atrocities. Three days after the coup, ambassador Reginald Secondé reported to the Foreign Office that “it is likely that casualties run into the thousands, certainly it has been far from a bloodless coup”. 

Six days after, he noted that “stories of military excesses and mounting casualties have begun increasingly to circulate. The extent of the bloodshed has shocked people”.

But it did not appear to shock Secondé and his staff in Santiago. He immediately reported that “we still have enough at stake in economic relations with Chile to require good relations with the government in power”. 

But he suggested those good relations should be kept secret, writing: “It would not be in anyone’s interests to identify too closely with those responsible for the coup”. 

‘Orderly Government’

After cabling London about casualties reaching into the thousands, Secondé further told the Foreign Office that “whatever the excesses of the military during the coup” the Allende government had been leading the country into “economic ruin”. 

Therefore, Britain should welcome the new rulers since “there is every reason to suppose that they will now… try to impose a period of sensible, orderly government”. 

Indeed, Secondé effectively condoned the political repression, noting that “the lack of political activity is, for the time being, no loss”.

The ambassador also told the Foreign Office that “most British businessmen… will be overjoyed at the prospect of consolidation which the new military regime offers”. British companies, such as Shell, he added, “are all breathing deep sighs of relief”. 

The reference was to Allende’s nationalisation campaign that had taken over some key Western commercial interests in the country, notably copper, the country’s principal economic resource. 

“Now is the time to get in”, he recommended, while urging the British government to provide early diplomatic recognition of the new regime.

‘Better Prospect’

The foreign secretary in Edward Heath’s Conservative government, Alec Douglas Home, sent an official ‘guidance’ memorandum to various British embassies on 21 September outlining British support for the new junta. 

It said:

“For British interests… there is no doubt that Chile under the junta is a better prospect than Allende’s chaotic road to socialism, our investments should do better, our loans may be successfully rescheduled, and export credits later resumed, and the sky-high price of copper (important to us) should fall as Chilean production is restored”.

Indeed, the Foreign Office decided to go to extraordinary lengths to assure the Chilean junta of Britain’s desire for good relations. 

Eleven days after the coup, Secondé met Admiral Huerta, the junta’s new foreign minister. The ambassador’s briefing notes for this meeting state that:

“I shall put it to him frankly that HMG [Her Majesty’s Government] understands the problems which the Chilean armed forces faced before the coup and are now facing: this is a particular reason why they are anxious to enter early into good relations with the new government”.

Then Secondé said he would refer to

“our own problems of public opinion at home. It would therefore help us if he [ie, Huerta] could agree that we should be able to say something to reassure public opinion at home”. 

Secondé’s record of his meeting with Huerta confirms that he said that the British government “understood the motives of the armed forces, intervention and the problems facing the military government” – diplomatic language for support for the junta. 

The British ambassador then gave Huerta a draft form of wording to be used in public by the UK government, to which Huerta was asked to agree.

Agreed Statement

This agreed statement was an apologia for what the military junta was then doing, undertaken in order to placate public opinion in Britain. 

It said Britain accepted that the internal situation in Chile “is of course a matter for the Chilean government only” and that the UK ambassador had expressed “the very strong feeling which exists in many quarters in Britain over the deaths of President Allende and others and over the many people arrested”. 

It added that “the Chilean government offered assurances that they will deal in a humane manner” with those in detention and in political opposition – an obvious lie, since Secondé and Whitehall were perfectly aware of the scale of atrocities being committed.

Image: The facilities of the National Stadium were used as a detention and torture center after the coup. (Licensed under the Public Domain)

Douglas Home was delighted with Secondé’s success in reaching agreement with the junta on a form of words. He cabled the ambassador praising him for carrying out a “difficult brief”, adding:

“The statement helped us to defend our relatively early recognition of the new government against domestic criticism”. 

‘Proper Perspective’

The removal of the democratically elected government was explained away by Secondé. He said in a reflective 20 page dispatch three weeks after the coup that “the overthrow of constitutional government was not what it may seem in Britain”. 

While he recognised that the armed forces were being widely condemned internationally “this must be put into its proper perspective”, Secondé added. 

His analysis referred to the regular defeats Allende’s government suffered in the Congress and the government’s retention of power on the basis of the 36 per cent of the vote won by Allende in the 1970 presidential election, which, Secondé was convinced, would never happen in Britain.

As for the new military junta, Secondé noted that “circumstances also will push them into directions which British public opinion will deplore” and “the next few years may be grey ones, in which freedom of expression may suffer”. 

“But this regime suits British interests much better than its predecessor”, he concluded, adding: “The prospects for British business in Chile are clearly much brighter under the new regime… The new leaders are unequivocally on our side and want to do business, in the widest sense, with us”’.

This was in the context of clear recognition by British planners that “torture is going on in Chile” and also of the “allegedly quasi-fascist inclination of the new leaders”. 

It was also recognised, as Secondé noted above, that the new regime was going to continue to be repressive for a long while. As one Foreign Office official noted: “It seems very hard to foresee a return for many years to anything like democratic government of the kind to which Chile has been accustomed for many years to come”.

Aiding the Regime

Foreign minister Leo Amery made clear in private meetings with Judith Hart, Labour’s shadow minister for overseas development, that the UK aid programme and credit lines would not be suspended, as some donors had done. 

In reply to a parliamentary question, the Foreign Office drafted:

“Our priorities in Latin America are determined largely by our trading and investment interests… On the recent events in Chile, our public policy is to refuse to be drawn into the controversy of the rights or wrongs of President Allende’s government or the new military government”.

The issue of British arms exports to the junta was especially pertinent since Hawker Hunter aircraft supplied by Britain had been used in the coup to attack Allende’s presidential palace and his residence. 

The ambassador noted that

“Hawker Hunters swept down with their aerial rockets, directed with remarkable accuracy at the palace, which was severely damaged and set on fire”.

With the junta in power, British officials made clear that arms contracts agreed with Allende would be honoured, involving eight Hawker Hunters and other equipment worth over £50m. 

But they went further, saying in the secret files that “we shall want in due course to make the most of the opportunities which will be presented by the change in government”. 

Expectations were for new requests for arms from the junta but “we shall wish to play these as quietly as possible for some time to come” owing to widespread public opposition. 

The Heath government defied calls from the Labour party to impose an arms embargo on Chile and all the Hawker Hunters had been delivered by the time of the 1974 British general election.

A further major task was to counter the British and international opposition to the military regime’s atrocities. 

‘Atrocity Stories’

One extraordinary note by Foreign Office official Hugh Carless to Secondé, in December 1973, stated that

“unfortunately, there is (as you have pointed out to us) a good deal of fact behind the atrocity stories and that alone makes it impossible for us to counter the propaganda”. 

“We can do little about the press”, he added “but you can assure them [the Chilean junta] that we and our ministers do understand the facts”. 

Carless also mused that

“Chileans must be wondering why on Earth… so much unfair attention is being paid to their change of government”. 

He continued by noting that due to the emergence of a worldwide Chile Solidarity Movement protesting against the new regime, “we shall, occasionally, have to adopt a lower profile than we would like”. 

This was especially the case in providing arms, helping the junta with debt relief and to “rescue them from being pilloried in international meetings”.

‘Violent Revolution’

The impact of the coup on Chileans was harsh. But the removal of a popular government may also have had another effect beyond the country, signalling that a peaceful, democratic path to improving the position of the poor in a developing country would be met by violence.

Ambassador Secondé noted in a dispatch after the coup that

“the final seal of failure has now been put on this experiment by the Chilean armed forces”. 

“This has some obvious advantages”, he noted, but also disadvantages, one of which was that “it will be widely concluded that violent revolution is the only effective way to communism”. 

Douglas Home similarly suggested that

“the overthrow of Allende has ruined prospects for social change to be achieved democratically in Latin America”.

‘Our Major Interest in Chile Is Copper’

A Foreign Office brief noted that “our major interest in Chile is copper” which accounted for one third of the UK’s copper imports. 

The disruption in Chile under Allende and “fear for the future” had recently meant large rises in copper prices which were costing the UK an extra £500,000 in foreign exchange. “We therefore have a major interest in Chile regaining stability, regardless of politics”, the Foreign Office stated.

Allende’s primary heresy as seen from London and Washington was nationalisation. In July 1971 the copper industry – which provided 70 per cent of Chile’s export earnings – was fully nationalised and the US-owned copper mines taken over by the government, with the unanimous approval of the Congress. 

The US reacted sharply and cut off all credit and new aid to the government and pressed the World Bank to do the same. The chief US mining corporations, Kennecott and Anaconda, began legal proceedings against the government.

The US ambassador, Nathaniel Davis, told Reginald Secondé that the US government was concerned “not only about the loss to the copper companies, but also about the precedent that the Chilean action would set for the nationalisation of other big American interests throughout the developing world”.

Several banks were also nationalised while in early 1972 the government announced its intention to take over 91 key firms which accounted for around half of Chile’s economic output. 

A British Conservative Party briefing paper noted that UK companies had been affected by nationalisation “but it was generally considered at the time that where nationalisation of British assets had taken place the compensation agreed upon had been fair”. 

In a despatch just eight days before the coup, Secondé admitted that

Chile “‘has at least caught her social problems by the tail: many people in the poorer and most depressed sections of the community have, as a result of President Allende’s administration, attained a new status and at least tasted, during its early days, a better standard of living, though it has been eroded by inflation”. 

Secondé concluded that

“this is a major achievement and has set Chile apart from most other Latin American states”.

Threat of a Good Example

Yet it was precisely because Allende’s government was being successful that British and US planners wanted him to be removed.

After being elected in 1970, Allende was appointed president of a Popular Unity government with the consent of the Christian Democratic Party. He inherited an economy that, as in most of Latin America, was controlled by a small elite. 

In his victory speech in November 1970 Allende proclaimed a programme for fundamental economic change, proposing to abolish the monopolies “which grant control of the economy to a few dozen families”. 

He also pledged to abolish the tax system that favoured the rich, abolish the “large estates which condemn thousands of peasants to serfdom” and “put an end to the foreign ownership of our industry”. 

“The road to socialism lies through democracy, pluralism and freedom”, Allende proclaimed.

The strategy was to create a restructured society based on state, mixed and private ownership of resources to be achieved mainly through the rapid extension of state control over large parts of the economy, either by direct nationalisation or government investment. 

These policies improved the position of the poor, especially in the early part of the Allende presidency, through raising the minimum wage and special bonuses paid to poorly paid workers. 

This was matched by rising popularity for the government; in congressional elections in the year of the coup, 1973, the Popular Unity coalition increased its vote to 44 per cent.

‘Redistribution of Income’

Britain’s Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) recognised

“the Allende government has been directing its economic efforts primarily at effecting a redistribution of income” in which prices had been held down and salaries allowed to rise. 

The strategy was “to put right what they regard as economic and social injustices (including foreign domination of certain sectors of the economy)”. Allende was “committed to proving that socialism can be brought to Chile in a peaceful and democratic fashion”.

Just three months after Allende assumed office, the JIC was concluding that “Washington is clearly very perturbed by developments in Chile”. 

As well as nationalisation of US business interests,

“the United States must view the prospect of a moderately successful extreme left-wing regime in Chile with considerable misgiving if only because of the effect this might have elsewhere in Latin America”, the JIC noted.

It also expressed the same fear from a British perspective, saying that the course of events in Chile is likely to have “important repercussions throughout Latin American and perhaps beyond”. 

It added:

“Allende’s victory has been hailed as strengthening the prevailing radical, anti-American trend in Latin America”. It may lead to a bloc of “like-minded states comprising Chile, Bolivia and Peru whose negative attitude towards foreign investment has already been demonstrated”.

Covert Action

The CIA had initially sought to prevent Allende taking office. A declassified CIA report reveals that throughout the 1960s and 1970s the US promoted “sustained propaganda efforts, including financial support for major news media, against Allende”. 

This included “political action projects” that “supported selected parties before and after the 1964 elections and after Allende’s 1970 election”. 

In the 1960s, activities included financial assistance to the Christian Democratic Party, the distribution of posters and leaflets, and financial assistance to selected candidates in Congressional elections. 

By the time of the 1964 election, won by favoured US candidate Eduardo Frei of the Christian Democratic Party, the CIA had provided $3m to prevent Allende winning.

In the run-up to the 1970 election won by Allende, the CIA conducted “spoiling operations” to prevent his victory while President Nixon authorised the agency “to seek to instigate a coup to prevent Allende from taking office”. 

Declassified has revealed that Britain also conducted a covert propaganda offensive to stop Allende winning the 1964 and 1970 elections. 

The Foreign Office’s Information Research Department (IRD) gathered information designed to damage Allende and lend legitimacy to his political opponents, and distributed material to influential figures within Chilean society.

The IRD also shared intelligence about left-wing activity in the country with the US government. British officials in Santiago assisted a CIA-funded media organisation which was part of extensive US covert action to overthrow Allende, culminating in the 1973 coup.

Overthrow

Image: General Augusto Pinochet

A few days after Allende assumed office in 1970, the CIA was authorised to establish direct contacts with Chilean military officers “to evaluate the possibilities of stimulating a military coup if a decision were to be made to do so”. 

Arms, including machine guns and ammunition, were provided to one of the groups plotting a coup. 

A fund of $10m was authorised “to prevent Allende from coming to power or unseat him”, which was used to strengthen opposition political parties and assist militant right-wing groups to undermine him. 

CIA money was also used for planting stories in local media and promoting opposition to Allende in the Chilean press. Also approved were efforts “to encourage Chilean businesses to carry out a program of economic disruption”. 

US ambassador Edward Korry explained that the strategy was to “do all within our power to condemn Chile and the Chileans to utmost deprivation and poverty, a policy designed for a long time to come to accelerate the hard features of a communist society in Chile”. 

After the Pinochet takeover, the CIA notes that it “continued some ongoing propaganda projects, including support for news media committed to creating a positive image for the military junta”.

Reginald Secondé went to become British ambassador to Romania and Venezuela, before dying in 2017 at the age of 95.

*

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 is an edited extract from Mark Curtis’ book, Unpeople: Britain’s Secret Human Rights Abuses, which includes full sources.

Mark Curtis is the editor of Declassified UK, and the author of five books and many articles on UK foreign policy.

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.

*** 

Taiwanese troops last month attended military exercises led by the US National Guard in Michigan, the Sankei Shimbun reported on Saturday.

More than 7,000 soldiers from several countries participated in the exercises, which were held from Aug. 5 to Aug. 19, the Japanese daily reported.

Following the joint exercises last summer, Taiwan and the US have continued to deepen military exchanges and enhance interoperability, it said.

Soldiers run after alighting from an assault amphibious vehicle during a military drill in Kaohsiung on Jan. 12. (Photo: Daniel Ceng, AP)

It is unclear how many Taiwanese troops attended the exercises, but the scale was larger than previous training with the US, the Sankei Shimbun said.

Taiwan could also send more troops to attend similar training, it added.

It was reported in July that the armed forces sent the entire joint battalion of the army’s 333rd Infantry Brigade to Michigan for training and to participate in the summer Northern Strike exercise organized by the US.

The Sankei Shimbun said that to not provoke China too much, the Michigan exercises were led by the National Guard — a strategic reserve force that is normally overseen by US state governments — instead of the US Armed Forces.

The US National Guard also helped train Ukrainian soldiers after Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014, it said.

US President Joe Biden’s administration in February said that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has instructed his nation’s military to “be ready by 2027” to invade Taiwan.

To prevent Xi from taking over Taiwan by force, the US continues to expand support to bolster Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities, the Sankei Shimbun said.

The US announced military assistance of US$345 million to Taiwan in July through the Presidential Drawdown Authority, which requires no approval from the US Congress. It also approved a military transfer of US$80 million under its Foreign Military Financing program last week.

In Taipei, the Army Command Headquarters yesterday said it “has no comment” on the report, stating only that “the armed forces continue to strengthen combat readiness and improve soldier training.”

As early as 2021 foreign media have reported on joint military training between Taiwan and the US at Camp Grayling in Michigan, Institute of National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said.

Asked in July whether the US National Guard helped train Taiwanese troops, US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs Ely Ratner said discussions about the issue should be kept behind closed doors, Su said.

Judging by Ratner’s response, in which he did not deny the issue, and the Sankei Shimbun’s report, the training “probably happened,” Su said.

The training demonstrated mutual trust between Taiwan and the US, and could also be seen as military diplomacy, he said.

Institute for National Defense and Security Research analyst Shu Hsiao-huang (舒孝煌) said the armed forces could benefit hugely by learning from the combat experience and tactics of the US National Guard.

High-level generals should also participate in the training, he said.

In other news, Jim Hockenhull, commander of the British Armed Forces’ Strategic Command, told Nikkei Asia yesterday that cutting-edge technologies would be crucial in preventing a conflict in the Taiwan Strait.

Hockenhull said that it would require “advanced military capabilities that go beyond ships, tanks or aircraft” to deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

The UK and Japan could “generate even greater and even better capabilities, which play a part in any deterrence approach” by bolstering cooperation on advanced technologies and cybersecurity to guard against disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, he added.

*

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.

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.

*** 

‘Pfizer Took My Career Away’

Tim McAdams, a 59-year-old pilot, health enthusiast, husband and father was content with his job training pilots for Airbus Helicopters — a job he held for over a decade — until Airbus mandated the COVID-19 vaccine for its employees.

Tim received his first Pfizer shot on Oct. 17, 2021, and the second on Nov. 7, 2021. Three weeks later he had two cerebellar strokes, a rare stroke in the cerebellum that accounts for only 1-4% of total strokes.

In the hospital, the McAdams asked the doctors repeatedly what could have caused this rare event, but “they always shrugged.”

Soon after, Tim started suffering from repeated brain swelling, resulting in a craniectomy and over 80 days in the hospital.

He also had double pneumonia, lung failure, and vocal cord damage from a tracheotomy and feeding tube. Today, Tim is still working to recover from the injury he received, and is unable to fly due to the physical limitations he now suffers from.

Pilot Larry Talks About Pilots Having Problems Passing EKG Tests

This video is making the rounds on social media, however, I have not been able to verify the exact identity of the pilot.

Click here to view the video

*

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.

*** 

On August 5, 1962, Nelson Mandela was apprehended by South African authorities while driving with Cecil Williams, a white Communist theater director, from Durban to Johannesburg.

At the time, Mandela, a leader of the military wing of the anti-Apartheid African National Congress (ANC), was a fugitive from South Africa’s Apartheid regime.

After his arrest, Mandela was tried for treason and served 27 years at the infamous Robben Island prison, before being freed and becoming South Africa’s first Black president after the fall of the Apartheid regime in 1994.

Details have since emerged indicating that the South African police who arrested Mandela had been tipped off about his whereabouts by the CIA.

August 1962 was during the height of the Cold War—Mandela’s capture occurred only a few weeks before the Cuban Missile Crisis—and the American intelligence community believed that Mandela and the ANC were secret allies of the Soviets—which indeed they were.

The U.S. government was also intent on keeping South Africa open to U.S. corporations—the U.S. signed a military cooperation agreement with South Africa, an important source of uranium and other strategic minerals—and did not like the left-wing character of the ANC and the prospect of it destabilizing the country.  

This past February, Richard Stengel wrote in Time magazine about his quest to uncover the truth about Mandela’s arrest.

Screenshot from Time

Stengel noted that, in 1986, while Mandela was still in prison, when the U.S. Congress was contemplating putting anti-Apartheid sanctions on South Africa, the Johannesburg Star printed an un-bylined news story that said, according to a “retired senior police officer,” the South African police had been tipped off to Mandela’s whereabouts by an American diplomat at the U.S. consulate in Durban who was “the CIA operative for that region.”

In 1963, the diplomat, according to the Star, had revealed his role while drunk at a party at the Durban apartment of “Mad” Mike Hoare, a well-known Anglo-Irish mercenary.

Four years after the Star article, at the time of Mandela’s release from prison in 1990 when he was about to visit the U.S. and get a hero’s welcome, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published a piece reporting that a “retired [American] intelligence official” said that, within hours of Mandela’s arrest, a “senior CIA operative” named Paul Eckel walked into his office in Washington and said,

“We have turned Mandela over to the South African security branch. We gave them every detail, what he would be wearing, the time of day, just where he would be. They have picked him up. It is one of our greatest coups.”

The article further quoted a former South African intelligence official named Gerard Ludi as saying the CIA had a paid informant in the ANC Durban branch who told the local case officer where Mandela would be.

Then, in 2016, a long-retired CIA officer named Donald Rickard, then 88 years old, gave an interview to British film director John Irvin in which he said he had informed the South African police about Mandela.

Speaking to Irvin for his dramatized documentary, Mandela’s Gun, Rickard confirmed that he had been operating under cover as a State Department vice-consul in Durban.

He described the city as a “cauldron” of anti-Apartheid activity and that the ANC was riling up the city’s substantial Indian community.

Rickard stated further that

“Mandela was going to come down and incite the Indians and I found when he was coming down and how he was coming, and he came in a black limousine with a guy sitting in the back as the passenger and he was the driver. That’s where I was involved and that’s where Mandela was caught.”

When I was a professor at Bucknell University from 2006 to 2009, my office was next to Donald’s nephew, a popular English professor who had been active in the anti-Vietnam War movement who had told me about his Uncle and Mandela.

Reached for this article, he said he could not add anything more to what was reported by Stengel in Time magazine.

A 2018 biography of mercenary Mike Hoare quotes him confirming Donald Rickard’s story.

Rickard was personally unrepentant about assisting in Mandela’s capture, saying:

“Mandela was completely under the control of the Soviet Union. He was a toy of Moscow. He could have incited a war in South Africa. The United [States] would have to get involved, grudgingly, and things could have gone to hell…The Soviet Union would have done anything to get its hands on the mineral chest—anything—and Khrushchev said: ‘When we get it we’ll dictate the terms of surrender for the West.’ We were teetering on the brink here and it had to be stopped, which meant Mandela had to be stopped. And I put a stop to it.”

Donald Rickard died two weeks after his confession. His only regret was that he had been indiscrete. Rickard said “the biggest mistake of my life” was boasting about it at Mike Hoare’s party. “I was never promoted again after I came back from South Africa. They were embarrassed that I embarrassed them.”

Richard Stengel has recently reviewed declassified documents, which point to the U.S. government’s concern about Mandela being a Communist organizer, and the CIA’s role in tracking him.

Stengel filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to see if they would confirm any details surrounding Mandela’s capture, which they refused to do.

Nevertheless, the evidence seems clear from Rickard’s testimony and other revelations that the CIA was behind the capture and long-term imprisonment of one of the 20^th century’s greatest historical figures.

*

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.

Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He can be reached at: [email protected].

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.

*** 

Welcome to the Censorship Industrial Complex. It’s rather like the old “military industrial complex,” which was shorthand for the military, private companies, and academia working together to achieve U.S. battlefield dominance, with the R&D funded by the government that buys the final product.

But the censorship industrial complex builds algorithms, not bombers. The players aren’t Raytheon and Boeing, but social media companies, tech startups, and universities and their institutes. The foes to be dominated are American citizens whose opinions diverge from government narratives on issues ranging from COVID-19 responses to electoral fraud to transgenderism.

When first exposed a few months ago, many of the actors and their media defenders perversely claimed that they, as private entities, were acting out of concern for “democracy” and exercising their own First Amendment rights.

However, the records and correspondence of an advisory committee to an obscure government agency tell a different story.

The Functional Government Initiative (FGI) has obtained through a public records request documents of the Cybersecurity Advisory Committee of the U.S. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

The committee was composed of academics and tech company officials working with government personnel in a much closer relationship than either they or the media want to admit. Several advisory committee members who appear throughout the documents as quasi-federal actors are among those loudly protesting that they were private actors when censoring lawful American speech (e.g., Kate Starbird, Vijaya Gadde, Alex Stamos).

But the advisory committee members met often and worked so closely with their government handlers that the federal liaison to the committee regularly offered members his personal cell phone and even reminded them to use the committee’s Slack channel. Your average concerned citizen doesn’t have a Homeland Security bureaucrat on speed dial.

What were they working on?

CISA’s “Mis-, Dis-, and Mal-information” (MDM) subcommittee discussed Orwellian “social listening” and “monitoring,” and considered the government’s best censorship “success metrics.”

Who was to be censored?

CISA was formed in response to misinformation campaigns from foreign actors, but it evolved toward domestic “threats.”

Meeting notes record that Suzanne Spaulding of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said they shouldn’t

“solely focus on addressing foreign threats … [but] to emphasize that domestic threats remain and while attribution is sometimes unclear, CISA should be sensitive to domestic distinctions, but cannot focus too heavily on such limitations.”

So CISA should combat “high-volume disinformation purveyors before the purveyor is attributed to a domestic or foreign threat” and not worry so much about First Amendment niceties.

More telling is the group’s attitude toward what it called “mal-information” – typically information that is true, but contrary to the preferred narratives of the censor. Dr. Starbird wrote in an email, “Unfortunately current public discourse (in part a result of information operations) seems to accept malinformation as ‘speech’ and within democratic norms …” Therein lies a dilemma for the censors, as Starbird wrote: “So, do we bend into a pretzel to counter bad faith efforts to undermine CISA’s mission? Or do we put down roots and own the ground that says this tactic is part of the suite of techniques used to undermine democracy?”

It is chilling that there is no consideration of whether the information is true or of the public’s right to know it. “Democracy” in this formulation is whatever maintains the government’s narrative.

Accordingly, the group discussed recommendations for countering “dangerously inaccurate health advice.” It contemplated the roles of the FBI and Homeland Security in addressing “domestic threats,” and a CISA staffer felt the need to remind the subcommittee “of CISA’s limitations in countering politically charged narratives.”

Image: Official government portrait of Nina Jankowicz, appointed to serve as Executive Director of the new “Disinformation Board” to be housed within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (posted by Jankowicz to Twitter)

CISA couldn’t censor all the people the advisors wanted. And it could face the same outrage that greeted President Biden’s Disinformation Governance Board, led by singing censor Nina Jankowicz. Americans didn’t want that body deciding what they could say, and Biden shut it down within three weeks. CISA’s advisers were acutely aware their work could be conflated with that of the DGB, and even considered changing the name of the MDM subcommittee. Dr. Starbird noted in an email that she’d “removed ‘monitoring’ from just about every place where it appeared” and made “other defensive word changes/deletions.” Similarly, Twitter’s Vijaya Gadde “cautioned the group against pursuing any social listening recommendations” for the time being.

The group also sought cover from outside and inside the government. They spent an inordinate amount of time talking about “socializing” the committee and its work – something DGB apparently hadn’t done. And like a partisan campaign, they looked for natural allies. Meeting notes record that they sought to “identify a point of contact from a progressive civil rights and civil liberties angle to recruit as a [subject matter expert].”

A government committee that seeks partisan allies, obfuscates its purpose, and can’t even be honest about the nature of its members’ participation is going to sort out online truth for Americans? Welcome to the Censorship Industrial Complex.

*

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.

Pete McGinnis is director of communications at the Functional Government Initiative.

Featured image: This image is available from the United States Library of Congress’s Prints and Photographs division under the digital ID highsm.04912. This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required.

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.

*** 

The first Ukrainian tank crews have completed training to operate American M1 Abrams battle tanks, after approximately 200 Ukrainian personnel began training at U.S. Army facilities in Germany earlier in the year. The last stages of training at the Hohenfels Training Area, the home of the U.S. Army’s Joint Multinational Readiness Center, included a combined arms force on force exercise simulating operations at battalion strength. Washington pledged to supply 31 Abrams tanks to support Kiev’s ongoing war effort against Russia, with U.S. Army Acquisition Chief Doug Bush having stated in August that the vehicles would arrive by “early fall,” indicating a delivery date before October. Reports from Politico indicate that the first 10 tanks will arrive in mid-September, with these vehicles “undergoing final refurbishments.” The United States has notably refused to provide its more capable M1A2 tanks, and is sending the older M1A1 which officials have stressed will have sensitive technologies removed. Although the U.S. Army retains very large reserves of Abrams tanks, refurbishing and downgrading the vehicles for export has proven to be time consuming. 

Image: Iraqi Army M1A1 Abrams Destroyed By HJ-8 Missile

M1A1 tanks built for export have consistently suffered from a questionable combat performance, as demonstrated by their operations in Iraq and Yemen in Iraqi and Saudi hands. The tank’s combat record is nevertheless far less tarnished than that of its German counterpart the Leopard 2 which took heavy losses in Turkish Army hands against lightly armed militias in Iraq and Syria. More modern Leopard 2 variants have more recently taken significant losses in Ukraine as well. Where Ukrainian Abrams tanks will differ from those exported to the Middle East is that they will benefit from integration of depleted uranium munitions, with Reuters having reported just hours after confirmation that the first crew had completed training that Washington would supply such rounds. Britain has already supplied depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine, with Russian officials having issued harsh warnings in response. A notable example was the statement by the head of the Russian delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control Konstantin Gavrilov on January 25 that

“If Washington and NATO countries provide Kiev with weapons for striking against the cities deep inside the Russian territory and for attempting to seize our constitutionally affirmed territories, it would force Moscow to undertake harsh retaliatory actions. Do not say that we did not warn you.”

This was interpreted by some sources at the time to be an indication that nuclear weapons use was not being ruled out.

Image: M1 Abrams Tank Firing

Depleted uranium is one of the heaviest elements on the planet, and is made from low-level radioactive waste produced during the manufacture of nuclear fuel and nuclear warheads which makes it affordable to use in large quantities. Although it has been used in the armour of Abrams tanks, the M1A1s built for the Ukrainian Army will not have this armour the composition of which is a sensitive Pentagon secret, meaning they will be similarly vulnerable to even lower end anti armour weapons as Iraqi Army Abrams tanks have proven to be. Use of depleted uranium munitions has been highly controversial due to its highly detrimental effects on human health, with British Royal Navy Commander Robert Green having reported after the Gulf War a resulting “surge of unexplained illnesses, cancers and children born with genetic deformities among the Iraqi people, especially in the south near the battlefields” A confidential UN report leaked in May 1999 similarly concluded regarding depleted uranium weapons: “this type of ammunition is nuclear waste, and its use is very dangerous and harmful.” In the subsequent Iraq War the city of Fallujah was heavily bombarded using depleted uranium weapons, with Professor Chris Busby who participated in a survey of 4,800 Fallujah residents referring to a “major mutagenic exposure” causing effects “similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout.”

*

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: U.S. Army M1 Abrams TankAndrew Greenwood (By Andrew Greenwood)

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.

*** 

On August 20, 2023, the Israeli government launched a new 3.2-billion-shekel five-year plan (2024-2028) to develop east Jerusalem.

Under pretexts of reducing social and economic disparities and increasing economic development in East Jerusalem, the Israeli government announcement also made it clear that over $1 billion CAD equivalent investment is focused on strengthening Israeli sovereignty over the city.

The plan is an update of the previous 2-billion-shekel five-year plan (2018-2023). That plan had also focused on strengthening the policy of annexation and so-called integration of Palestinian Jerusalemites into Israeli society.

This new plan will be managed and implemented by the Ministry of Jerusalem Affairs and Jewish Tradition, with annual report-backs around Jerusalem Day. Even the choice of the annual reporting date is an affront. Jerusalem Day is the day that Israel marks the 1967 capture of East Jerusalem, celebrating with provocative flag marches through Palestinian neighbourhoods

Strengthening the Israeli Narrative

In announcing the plan, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu indicated it shows that the Israeli government “attends to the needs of all citizens and residents of Israel and it is strengthening our policy to benefit a united and strong Jerusalem, under Israeli sovereignty.” 

In using the word “resident,” Netanyahu refers to those who hold Jerusalem residency but are not afforded Israeli citizenship.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, referencing “Jerusalem, our eternal capital,” stated,

“I am pleased to lead the largest five-year plan for East Jerusalem as someone who believes in strengthening [Israeli] sovereignty over Jerusalem as a whole.” 

The mayor of Jerusalem, Moshe Lion, said “the decision that was taken is a sovereign decision.” 

The Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, indicated that the Israeli government has allocated 120 million shekels for what he called “strengthening security sovereignty in East Jerusalem.”

He indicated this is “another important step in our relentless struggle to restore personal security in Jerusalem, our capital.” 

A Plan to Oppress Palestinians

For Palestinians, this means the money will be aimed at increasing surveillance, militarization, police stations, and security personnel, together with more isolation and racial segregation.

This reality means “Israelization of all aspects of life and obliterating the Palestinian-Arab identity of the city of Jerusalem,” says the Civic Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem.  

They continued,

“there has always been a clear difference between East and West Jerusalem for the 56 years of occupation of East Jerusalem.” 

Budgets, programs and services have been regularly dedicated to West Jerusalem and to the Israeli settlements. They serve the communities’ development and attract more settlers. On the other hand, Palestinian neighborhoods have been deliberately neglected over the decades of the city’s occupation since 1967. 

Even though Palestinian residents of occupied East Jerusalem pay taxes to the municipality, the quality of the services they receive is much lower than those in West Jerusalem. Beyond this, the Israeli authorities regularly pursue forced evictions of Palestinian residents, seizing their lands under different pretexts, including so-called public interest and development of the city and law organization, construction, absentee property law and other laws.

Education, Transport, to Serve Israeli State

Education is a key factor in the annexation of the city of Jerusalem. One-third of the new five-year plan’s budget goes toward enforcing the Israeli education system and its curriculum in Palestinian schools in East Jerusalem.  

Education is considered the main entrance to obliterating the Palestinian narrative, history and national identity. The Israeli government is intensifying this effort under what they call “reducing the gap.” 

Meanwhile, the plan’s funding for transportation infrastructure is not likely to focus on Palestinian communities. Rather, it will likely focus on linking Israeli settlements to each other, through a network of roads, trains, tunnels, bridges, and an air train. This will enable settlers’ movement into the city. 

The Civic Coalition notes that “this plan aims, in fact, above all to satisfy the interests and protect the settlers and to increase the isolation and segregation of Arab neighbourhoods.”

Canada’s Silence

So far, Canada’s government officials have remained quiet on this new plan. But this is not surprising. Despite Canada’s official policy that it “does not recognize Israel’s unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem,” it is also evidently not concerned about changing facts on the ground. Canada maintains that “the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.” 

This hands-off stance regarding Jerusalem is not new. In fact, Canada’s first vote against a United Nations Resolution associated with Palestine occurred on December 9, 1949. The resolution proposed a permanent international regime for the Jerusalem area and the protection of the Holy Places​.

This trend regarding Jerusalem has remained quite consistent over the last 75 years. For example, in 1981, Canada​​ abstained​ from a UN vote in regard to Israeli excavations in eastern Jerusalem. The resolution indicated that “the excavations and transformations of the landscape and of the historical, cultural and religious sites of Jerusalem constitute a flagrant violation of the principles of international law and the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention.” 

In 1987, Canada voted no to condemning “Israel’s decision to annex Jerusalem and to declare it as its ‘capital’ as well as the measures to alter its physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure, and status.” More recently, in 2016 and 2017, Canada abstained from UN votes on the status of Jerusalem. 

But interestingly in 2018, the year that the USA moved its embassy to Jerusalem, Canada switched back to a no vote. 

Canada’s Subsidies for Pro-Israel Charities 

Canadian charities continue to provide funds to organizations such as Elad/Ir David that use bogus archaeology and delegitimate excavations to advance a colonial narrative –  those narratives attempt to erase ancient Palestinian, Muslim, and other non-Jewish heritage in Jerusalem. 

There have been about a dozen or so recent complaints to the Canada Revenue Agency about the approximate $100 million out-of-country tax-subsidized funds that have been sent to various pro-Israel charities. Those include several organizations that support the annexation and the so-called “unification” of Jerusalem. 

Canada’s stance at the United Nations over the last three-quarters of a century, as with its tolerance for Canadian taxpayers subsidizing Jerusalem’s erasure, reveals its hypocrisy. 

Despite a policy that condemns East Jerusalem’s annexation, Canada seems to let the facts on the ground change without any response. Canada fails to uphold international law or even apply its own domestic laws such as the Income Tax Act. As a result, Canadians are inadvertently supporting this erasure of Palestine.

*

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: From left to right: Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Jerusalem Affairs and Jewish Heritage Minister Meir Porush, Jerusalem Mayor Moshe Lion. Credit: Koby Gideon / Municipality of Jerusalem

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 week saw widespread air strikes on the Russian Federation involving mass aerial drone attacks. Six regions were attacked including the capital, Moscow. Among the targets was the Kursk region where a nuclear plant is located. Several international airports across Russia were temporarily shut down. This is an incredible situation in which Russian territory is being targeted by a military assault not seen since the Great Patriotic War against Nazi Germany.

The U.S. media could barely contain its glee at the surge in air strikes on Russia. The New York Times hailed them as a “morale booster” for Ukraine, while CNN noted cryptically that the Kiev regime was “emboldened” to hit strategic targets inside Russia. The telling question of course not asked by CNN is: emboldened by whom?

Most of the incoming drones were shot down or disabled by Russian air defenses. But that is beside the point that Russian territory is now being targeted by mass attacks. And there can be no doubt that this “emboldened” military campaign is being enabled and directed by the United States and its NATO allies who are arming the Nazi regime in Kiev to the teeth.

The air strike, this week at Pskov airport is particularly revealing. Several Russian military cargo planes were reportedly destroyed. The location is only some 30 kilometers from Russia’s northwestern border with Estonia and over 600 km from Ukraine. It is almost certain that NATO members Estonia and possibly Latvia enabled that attack on Pskov. Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has openly accused NATO of participating in the air assaults on Russian territory. The British publication, The Economist, also reported that NATO hardware, satellite and navigational logistics were vital for the drone campaign.

Dmitry Medvedev, the Deputy Chairman of Russia’s National Security Council, this week stated that Russia now has legal justification for going to war with NATO members directly. He warned that the world is on the brink of a nuclear conflagration.

We need to step back here and see the process of the proverbial boiling-frog scenario. This describes an insidious creeping situation which would otherwise not be tolerated. A frog apparently will jump back from a pot of boiling water but if the frog is placed in the pot of water which is then slowly brought to the boil it will succumb passively to its ill fate.

The process seems apt as a metaphor for the conflict in Ukraine between the U.S.-led NATO bloc and Russia. The Kiev regime was installed in 2014 through a CIA-backed coup against a democratically elected president; it was armed and trained by NATO, despite its vile Nazi battalions, to attack ethnic Russians in Ukraine; when Russia intervened militarily in February 2022 after diplomatic offers were rejected by the U.S. and NATO, the conflict has steadily escalated over the past 18 months to the point where pre-war Russian territory is now coming under mass air strikes.

This mass assault on Russian territory by NATO forces would have been unthinkable only a few months ago. And yet here we are at that astounding point.

There seems little doubt that the air strikes on Russia are a sort of Plan B to compensate for the abject failure of the NATO-backed regime on the battlefields in Ukraine. The much-vaunted “counteroffensive” that started in June has become a debacle for the NATO sponsors. The turn towards drone strikes on Russia appears to be a change in tactic as a way of terrorizing the Russian population and destabilizing the authority of Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as distracting from NATO’s military incompetence.

Russia’s defense doctrine mandates the use of nuclear weapons if the state’s existential security is threatened. So far, the NATO-backed drone attacks on Russia have not reached that threshold. But the incremental process is dangerously heading in that dreadful direction.

If we were to turn the tables on the situation, the audacity would become even more apparent. Can anyone imagine for a second how the United States would react if a foreign adversary was enabling the launch of air strikes on Washington DC and other strategic centers, whereby airports were shut down and military infrastructure was being destroyed?

Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host, said this week that he believed the United States was heading towards a catastrophic hot war with Russia over the coming year. He pointed out that the Biden administration and most of the politicians in Washington are incapable of avoiding such an outcome because of their arrogance, ignorance and irrational Russophobia. The U.S. lackeys in the European Union are also equally pathetic in their acquiescence to such a doomsday scenario.

Russia’s forbearance has been remarkable given the relentless outrageous provocations from the U.S. and NATO. It has reached the stage where Russia has the legal right to defend itself by striking directly at NATO members. World War Three and the end of the planet are all but imminent and only checked because of the immense moral and military fortitude of Russia.

The United States’ incumbent leaders and those of the European Union (with a few honorable exceptions like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán) are showing themselves to the world as the reckless criminals that they are. They are willing to risk the deaths of millions of people and quite possibly planetary extinction.

Russia overcame the existential assault by Nazi Germany. It will do so again against the despicable NATO axis. The formidable strength of the Russian people and its military defenses will ensure that.

However, the ultimate fate of the corrupt Western states is one of definitive, historic failure. The longer this geopolitical conflict in Ukraine persists the deeper will be the fatal damage to Western presumptions of moral authority, governance and its war-driven capitalist economies. The boiling frogs are not in Russia. They are in the endemically corrupt Western regimes.

*

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 SCF

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 year, we commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the 9/11 WTC bombing. In line with this, we repost this important article by Ae911Truth, first published in 2019.

On September 11, 2001, at 5:20 PM, the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed into its footprint, falling more than 100 feet at the rate of gravity for 2.5 seconds of its seven-second destruction.

Despite calls for the evidence to be preserved, New York City officials had the building’s debris removed and destroyed in the ensuing weeks and months, preventing a proper forensic investigation from ever taking place. Seven years later, federal investigators concluded that WTC 7 was the first steel-framed high-rise ever to have collapsed solely as a result of normal office fires.

Today, we at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are pleased to partner with the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) in releasing the draft report of a four-year computer modeling study of WTC 7’s collapse conducted by researchers in the university’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. The UAF WTC 7 report concludes that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was caused not by fire but rather by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.

Click here to download the report.

*

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

Featured image is from the author

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.

*** 

To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the other “9/11” —the 1973 Chilean coup, we repost his article by Shane Quinn which was originally published in September 2017.

On September 11, 1973, Salvador Allende’s democratic government in Chile was ousted by United States-backed forces in one of the Cold War’s defining moments. Allende himself was killed during the coup while his presidential palace, La Moneda, was extensively bombed. Many thousands of Chileans were either murdered, “disappeared”, imprisoned, and coerced to emigrate or enter exile. Allende’s widow and family were forced to go into hiding in Mexico for many years.

In replacing Allende the Americans installed General Augusto Pinochet, one of the most notorious of the post-Second World War dictators. During the next 17 years of Pinochet’s dictatorship around 40,000 Chileans were tortured – often under the most sadistic fashion and overseen by doctors in the Josef Mengele style (the Nazi doctor at Auschwitz). The doctors would ensure the victims would remain alive for as long as possible, administer medication to resuscitate them, so the torture could then recommence.

A Chilean who suffered such treatment in these chambers, but survived and later became an international lawyer, was asked where these doctors are today? He replied, “they’re practicing in Santiago”. There have been a number of Mengele-style doctors not only walking free in Chile, but resuming employment unhindered.

There have been no calls from the United States or Israel to bring these Nazi-style physicians to justice. Indeed, the Pinochet regime was already protecting Nazi war criminals such as SS Colonel Walter Rauff, creator of the gas chambers, and Mengele himself.

As the US’s population is approximately 18 times bigger than Chile’s, with an infinitely bigger landmass, the Chilean 9/11 was felt on a far greater scale. Indeed, it was also more destructive. In the US’s 9/11, the White House was not bombed, the President (George W. Bush) was not killed, its people were not imprisoned and tortured en masse after the initial crimes were committed, a brutal dictator and his death squads were not imposed.

Before the Chilean coup in 1973, the country had been a lively, vibrant place where people were welcoming and cheerful. The Pinochet years afflicted upon the population persistent feelings of terror and suspicion.

A few days after the coup was implemented National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger described the situation in Chile as,

“Nothing of very great consequence”.

U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger with Pinochet in 1976 (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Except to the people of Chile that is. Following Allende’s election three years before, Kissinger told CIA director Richard Helms over the phone,

“We will not let Chile go down the drain”, to which Helms responded, “I am with you”.

Kissinger, a future Nobel Peace Prize winner, had been implicated in other war crimes such as an open call for genocide in Cambodia in 1969, “Anything that flies on everything that moves”.

Disturbed by Allende’s election victory in early September 1970, US President Richard Nixon ordered the CIA to, “prevent Allende from coming to power or to unseat him”. Allende was not due to take office until two months later. The US State Department suggested to, “let Allende come in and see what we can work out”, – the words “work out” denoting a sinister undertone judging by the record books.

However, President Nixon rejected the State Department’s proposal, protesting the possibility of,

“Like another Castro? Like in Czechoslovakia? The same people said the same thing. Don’t let them do that”.

President Nixon expressed caution saying that,

“We don’t want a big story leaking out that we are trying to overthrow the government”, before warning Kissinger “to be sure the paper record doesn’t look bad”.

Kissinger forwarded to Secretary of State William Rogers that,

“The President’s view is to do the maximum possible to prevent an Allende takeover”.

The aim of the Nixon administration in attempting to overthrow Allende’s incoming government was to destroy independent nationalism, or what was called a “virus” that might “infect” others – the domino effect. After all Henry Stimson, the US Secretary of War during World War II, described Latin America as “our little region over here which has never bothered anybody”.

Chile obviously came under the auspices of “our little region”, despite the fact its capital Santiago is over 8,000 km from Washington. The rights of nations to manage their own affairs is an unacceptable prospect to US planners. We see examples of this to the present day.

In the meantime, “the maximum possible to prevent an Allende takeover” failed as the former physician successfully assumed office in November 1970. The CIA had been sent to work in building support for Allende’s rival, former President Jorge Alessandri, but to no avail. Instead the CIA exerted covert pressure, including paying millions of dollars to opposition groups to speed up Allende’s ousting.

The four-week tour of Chile by Cuban leader Fidel Castro in late 1971 further alarmed policymakers in the US. Allende himself had visited Cuba about a decade before, and had been impressed by the progress made by Castro’s revolution, before again visiting the island nation in 1972.

Fidel Castro with Salvador Allende (Source: teleSUR / Twitter)

By the following year Allende was ousted and killed, with crucial CIA input, as Pinochet went about privatising the Chilean economy to suit American corporate requirements. The “Chicago boys”, neoliberal Chilean economists trained at University of Chicago, were welcomed into the government – and were supported by the IMF and the World Bank.

The Chicago boys’ policies had a disastrous effect on the population as unemployment more than doubled between 1974 and 1975, to over 18%. By 1983 unemployment further rocketed to 34.6%, far worse than the Great Depression in the US.

The population revolted at various stages but this is where Pinochet’s brutal methods of repression came in useful, and was no doubt welcomed by the US government, IMF, and so on. Furthermore, Pinochet was a major drug trafficker who sold cocaine to the US and Europe in the 1980s, amassing a personal fortune in the process, along with his cronies. Pinochet, who also had links to Colombian drug dealers, said

“Not a leaf moves in Chile if I don’t move it – let that be clear”.

Meanwhile, the population continued to slide into poverty and desolation.

*

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

Shane Quinn obtained an honors journalism degree. He is interested in writing primarily on foreign affairs, having been inspired by authors like Noam Chomsky. He is a frequent 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.

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 year, we commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the 9/11 WTC bombing. In line with this, we repost this important article by Stephen Lendman, first published in 2019.

David Ray Griffin’s Legacy Will Live. It Embodies 9/11 Truth

“The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False” by the late David Ray Griffin debunked the official account of what happened.

He explained that the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s official findings were fabricated.

He accused NIST of falsifying and ignoring hard evidence, sticking to the official Big Lie about WTC 7’s collapse.

AE911Truth’s Richard Gage said the following about Griffin’s book:

He “provided a comprehensive dismantling of NIST’s theory about WTC 7, according to which it suffered global collapse because of ordinary building fires,” adding:

“Besides showing that NIST committed massive scientific fraud, Griffin also points out that NIST was able to complete its theory only by affirming a miracle: a steel-framed high-rise building coming down in free fall even though explosives had not been used to remove its columns.”

Physics Professor John Wyndham said

“Griffin show(ed) that NIST’s WTC 7 report has no scientific credibility.”

Big Lies take on a life of their own because establishment media report them as facts — serving as press agents for powerful interests inimical to peace, equity and justice.

The official 9/11 story is the Biggest Big Lie of our time — about the mother of all state-sponsored false flags, dark forces in Washington responsible.

Osama bin Laden and so-called “crazed Arabs” had nothing to do with what happened on a day that will live in infamy forever.

It opened the gates of hell for endless US wars of aggression against nonbelligerent states threatening no one — responsible for countless millions of deaths and human misery on an appalling scale.

Seriously ill with kidney disease and other ailments, bin Ladin in mid-2001 was being treated at the American Hospital in Dubai.

On September 10, 2001 (one day before 9/11), CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported his admittance to a Rawalpindi, Pakistan hospital. He was dying.

On July 11, 2002, The NYT said “Osama bin Laden is dead. (He) died in December (2001) and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan.”

The BBC, Fox News, and other media sources reported the same information.

On December 26, 2001, a leading Pakistani newspaper reported bin Laden’s death. It cited a prominent Taliban official who attended his funeral – witnessing his dead body before it was laid to rest.

Obama didn’t kill Osama, another Big Lie of our time. So-called “Enemy Number One” was an unwitting CIA asset — recruited in the 1980s by Pakistani intelligence against Soviet Russia in Afghanistan.

The official 9/11 account was fabricated to conceal state-sponsored terrorism, dark forces in Washington responsible for what happened.

David Ray Griffin 10 books on the 9/11 Big Lie provide the most detailed account of what happened and its aftermath — including about the 9/11 (whitewash) Commission.

Jet fuel had nothing to do with bringing down the twin towers. The BBC reported WTC 7’s collapse nearly 30 minutes before it happened.

UK activist Tony Rooke refused to pay his BBC license fee — required of all Brits to watch television.

He cited Section 15 of Britain’s 2000 Terrorism Act, stating it’s an “offense for someone to invite another to provide money, intending that it should be used, or having reasonable cause to suspect that it may be used, for terrorism purposes.”

He accused the BBC of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it came down. A UK judge agreed with him, his victory unreported by US establishment media — part of their conspiracy of silence about hard truths dark forces want suppressed.

Fires and heavy debris from the twin towers had nothing to do with WTC 7’s collapse — the official Big Lie reported by Western media.

A four-year study by University of Alaska’s J. Leroy Hulsey, South Carolina Department of Transportation bridge engineer Zhili Quan, and Nanjing University of Science and Technology Department of Civil Engineering academic Feng Xiao titled “A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center” was in part funded by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth).

It provided detailed scientific evidence of what caused WTC 7’s collapse, debunking the official Big Lie.

The study’s “principle conclusion…is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on

9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse.”

The official 9/11 account was fabricated, suppressing hard truths about what happened on that fateful day, changing the course of history.

According to the study, scientific evidence shows that “fires could not have caused weakening or displacement of structural members capable of initiating any of the hypothetical local failures alleged to have triggered the total collapse of the building, nor could any local failures, even if they had occurred, have triggered a sequence of failures that would have resulted in the observed total collapse.”

WTC 7’s collapse “was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

No “progressive collapse involving the sequential failure of columns throughout the building” occurred.”

Nothing external to WTC 7 caused its free fall collapse in 2.5 seconds. Debris from the twin towers and building 7 was removed and destroyed to prevent a proper forensic analysis, AE911Truth explained.

On 9/11, remaining remnants of rule of law in the US died. Endless war on humanity at home and abroad replaced it.

Things are worsening, not improving — both right wings of the US war party responsible for an increasingly nightmarish scenario.

US rage for unchallenged dominance risks unthinkable/potentially catastrophic global war by accident or design, including possible use of nuclear weapons for the first time in earnest — a nightmarish scenario if things turn out this way.

*

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

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

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 year, we commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the 9/11 WTC bombing. In line with this, we repost this important article by Dr. Gary Kohls, first published in 2019.

“It is my firm belief that 9/11 skeptics—and true skeptics of any paradigm-shifting and taboo subject—who publicly expose lies and ‘naked emperors’ are heroes …They have suffered the ridicule and wrath of those emperors, their minions, and the just plain frightened…In our American society, many of our authority figures routinely lie to us, but nonetheless, many citizens continue to look to them for truth and safety—especially when fear is heightened.

This strong tendency to believe and obey authority is another obstacle with which skeptics of the official 9/11 account must contend…By unquestioningly believing and obeying authority, we make very bad decisions, which often negatively affect others. This can be equally true for the four human proclivities studied by social psychologists: doublethink, cognitive dissonance, conformity, and groupthink.” – Frances Shure, clinical psychologist and early skeptic of the official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory that two hi-jacked commercial jet planes caused three concrete, steel-reinforced towers to explode into fine dust and collapse into their own footprints in less than 12 seconds.

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” – Carl Sagan

“We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth … For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.” — Patrick Henry – March 23, 1775

“It also gives us a very special, secret pleasure to see how unaware the people around us are of what is really happening to them. … “What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think.” — Adolf Hitler

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.  …  Propaganda must always be essentially simple and repetitious. The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly… it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”– Joseph Goebbels, German Nazi “Minister of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment”

“We’ll know that our disinformation campaign has worked when everything the American public believes is false.” — William Casey, Ronald Reagan’s CIA Director at his first staff meeting, 1981

“Image of the World Trade Center’s South Tower as it explodes, from top to bottom, into fine dust and severed steel columns. Within the next 12 seconds much of the tower blows away and the rest collapses into its own footprint into a relatively small pile of debris. The arrow points to one of the exploding “squibs” from one of the multitude of pre-planted demolition charges that are intended to section all the massive steel 110 story columns (4 inches thick at their bases) which allowed the building to fall straight down rather than falling sideways and causing damage to adjacent structures or people. This image is typical of what it looks like when standard controlled demolitions take down high-rise buildings in the most cost-effective manner possible. In the 100 year history of skyscrapers, the only tall buildings that have ever fallen down without controlled demolitions (allegedly) were the 3 World Trade Center Towers 1, 2 and 7 – and they all happened on 9/11/2001!. ” (Check out  www.ae911truth.org for everything you need to know about the many anomalies that conclusively disprove the “official”, CIA-, Pentagon- White House- Mainstream Media-approved conspiracy theories about what happened of 9/11.)

***

The question posited by the title of this article, explores the dilemma faced by truth-seekers who have the facts that totally refute the Big Lies about 9/11/2001 about which the mainstream media, their elected representatives in Congress, their presidents and the Deep State refuse to debate.

These “9/11 Truthers” have been unfairly labeled “conspiracy theorists” (a pejorative term invented by the CIA after the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963 raised all sorts of skepticism doubting the official story blaming “the single shooter”).

This courageous group of truth-seekers have been attempting to inform and enlighten individuals and institutions that have chosen to disregard and/or disbelieve the overwhelmingly documentable evidence that proves that pre-planted controlled demolition charges – and not airplanes – pulverized into fine dust the three WTC towers on 9/11/01.

The corollary of course is that the three towers could not have bee demolished by anybody other than insiders using explosives.

Given that the alleged planes that allegedly hit 2 of the towers were commercial planes (that of course contained no explosives), no other conclusion can be drawn than that the explosives that brought down the three skyscrapers had been pre-planted in the manner of classical controlled demolitions, which are the only way that concrete, steel-reinforced, high-rise buildings can be efficiently demolished.

It is obvious to many folks who were alive and aware in the era of the assassinations of the 1960s (the Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King) that 9/11/01 was a false flag operation that has seriously (and intentionally, according to the Project for the New American Century – google it) destabilized the Middle East and the world and justified the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. And, of course the rapid passage of the Patriot Act by the bamboozled US Congress ensured that the United States took another step closer to becoming an armed police state, by seriously curtailing the civil liberties of its citizens.

That series of programmed events started a state of perpetual US-led wars in the Mideast (wars that only benefited our one ally in the area [Israel]. It also ensured the lucrative future of America’s military-industrial-congressional complex and global weapons manufacturers.

These self-perpetuating – and ultimately bankrupting – wars have destroyed and are continuing to destroy the physical and psychological well-being of the tens of thousands of duped patriot soldiers (and their families) as well as the millions of unarmed innocents that were victimized by the lethal, often indiscriminate weaponry of our military. Also victimized forever were their cultures, their religions, their economies and the very planet that militarism is making uninhabitable.

And, it must be mentioned, our illegal and ill-advised military aggressions have raised up billions of mortal enemies all around the world whose enmity and justified desire for revenge will never be quenched until “the Great Satan” is finally beaten.

The dilemma raised by the title question, “Why Do Good People Remain Silent”, has been faced throughout the history of the world by a multitude of truth-seekers and truth-tellers long before the events of 9/11. A short list of American examples that have shaped world history was enumerated in the previous two Duty to Warn columns, which are available at (See this).

The “bamboozle quote” from Carl Sagan above should help any thinking person to understand one of the psychological reasons why both human and inhuman entities (such as corporations and the corporate-controlled press) so readily accept – and even promote – Big Lies; and then, when the truth comes out that thoroughly refutes the lies, these entities refuse to admit that they have been bamboozled.

One expects major corporate media networks like ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, the New York Times, the Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal (not to mention the Duluth News-Tribune) to refuse to admit that they are shills for the Deep State or their corporate advertisers or just being duped by them, but even the more honorable BBC, PBS, NPR and MPR do the same by continuously using the phrase “terrorist attacks on 9/11” instead of telling the truth. Perhaps, if one could only get through to these unaccountable and unreachable talking heads, they might at least claim that they were unaware of what is blatantly obvious to most unbiased observers.

The quotes from Hitler and Goebbels could have easily been made by J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI, Allen Dulles’ CIA and right-wing politicians like the odious politicians during the McCarthy, leftist witch-hunt era, not to mention any number of the pro-militarization, pro-war, pseudo-patriotic “my country right or wrong” types that profitably occupy Wall Street, War Street and Washington, DC.

Those realities should help us understand how the misleaders of militarily powerful empires are able to manipulate the “Good Germans” of every nationality into believing Big Lies.

Clinical psychologist Frances Shure, who was an early skeptic of the official White House conspiracy theories has experienced her share of criticism from those who tend to implicitly trust their leaders. Her story, in a 9-part series on the subject, discusses the psychological background about how public opinion and beliefs can be manipulated. The series can be found here.

It is painful being an artificially demeaned and unfairly criticized “conspiracy theorist” about 9/11. Even though the 9/11 Truth-tellers have the scientific truth behind them, they have been mistreated by the mass media as a despised out-group for the past 18 years.

Being a 9/11 truth-teller is like being a black-listed anti-fascist author, writer or musician during Hitler’s thousand-year Reich or during the proto-fascist American McCarthy era of the 1950s.

One has to sympathize with Galileo who was persecuted by the authoritarian church when he proved that the earth revolved around the sun when 99.9% of the world believed that the sun revolved around the earth – because it said so in the bible.

I personally empathize with the Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis who proved in the mid-1800s that washing or sterilizing one’s hands before delivering a baby resulted in a dramatic decrease in post-delivery deaths of new mothers from “child-bed fever”. 99.9% of physicians at the time often delivered babies between performing autopsies without washing their hands. His discovery never caught on with the profession, although midwives understood the wisdom and washed their hands prior to deliveries. The midwive’s patients had 10 times fewer deaths from infection than the doctor’s patients. Dr Semmelweis, just like many other dissident physicians to follow, was ostracized by his arrogant and ignorant profession for promoting such a radical notion and, labeled as being mentally ill, died in disgrace in a mental institution a few years later.

Cognitive Dissonance and 9/11

One major psychological factor that helps explain why the Cheney/Bush White House’s official conspiracy theory has become so ingrained is the concept of cognitive dissonance. A good YouTube discussion of the title question – by a number of psychologist colleagues of Frances Shure – can be seen here. I highly recommend watching it.

I wrote a Duty to Warn column devoted to the subject of cognitive dissonance in 2013. It has been archived here.

Here are a couple of paragraphs from the article:

“Cognitive dissonance refers to the psychological or emotional discomfort felt when one is confronted with new information or a new reality that contradicts one’s deeply held beliefs.

“When there are conflicting, mutually exclusive beliefs, intelligent, open-minded and thoughtful people that have not been victimized by significant psychological trauma during their upbringing, are usually willing to change their minds by re-evaluating their prior stances, looking carefully and honestly at the new evidence, reassessing the credibility of both positions and then making a decision to adopt or reject the new information, depending on the evidence before them.

“Close-minded, distracted, uninformed, addicted, ignorant, too-busy, overly obedient, uber-patriotic, co-opted or radically conservative people may not have the time, inclination, intelligence or political will (or courage) to look at the available new evidence that runs contrary to their old, ingrained beliefs. Therefore, they may unconsciously or reflexively reject the new information, even if the evidence is overwhelmingly and provably true.”

Not too many people that live in punitive, militarized empires have the courage to do what the whistle-blowing boy did when he saw that his emperor had no clothes on. Not too many people want to be truth-tellers in a nation whose governmental bodies imprison, expel, black-lists or bans truth-tellers and their stories and suppresses every truth that threatens national security and corporate security or profitability.

Hitler got his timid or privileged “Good Germans” – who lived outside the concentration camps – to believe the Big Lie that “Arbeit Macht Frei” (“work makes one free” even inside a concentration camp) and that his dictatorship would last a thousand years. Citizens of supposedly democratic societies like America’s are told that “The Truth Shall Make You Free”, that “The Pen is Mightier Than the Sword” and that “The Arc of History Bends Towards Justice”. Don’t believe it, unless lots of courageous citizen take action and demand justice. Otherwise, those noble thought are just cunning lies to calm the people.

Without a body of dissenters, whistle-blowers and courageous people of conscience (like the multitude of banned 9/11 truth-seekers and antiwar, anti-globalist, anti-fascist activists) that are willing to go up against the conscienceless, the profiteers, the globalists, the fascists, the militarists, the racists, the corporate polluters, the economic exploiters, the bankers and the sociopathic corporations those exploiters will continue to grow in power, wealth and influence – fouling our planetary nest as they go. I would hate to see them succeed.

*

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

The Bin Ladens and the Bushes: On 9/11 George Herbert Walker Bush Meets Osama’s Brother Shafiq bin Laden

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 03, 2023

Lest we forget, one day before the 9/11 attacks [as well as on the morning of 9/11, the dad of the sitting President of the United States of America, George Herbert Walker Bush was meeting none other than Shafiq bin Laden, the brother of the alleged terror mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Space Junk in Earth Orbit and on the Moon Will Increase with Future Missions − But Nobody’s in Charge of Cleaning It Up

By Prof. Chris Impey, September 04, 2023

There’s a lot of trash on the Moon right now – including nearly 100 bags of human waste – and with countries around the globe traveling to the Moon, there’s going to be a lot more, both on the lunar surface and in Earth’s orbit.

Video: Defying State-Driven Medical Censorship

By Dr. Mark Trozzi and RAIR Foundation USA, September 03, 2023

In a defiant stand against the suppression of real science and the subversion of medical ethics, Canadian physician Dr. Mark Trozzi has found himself in the crosshairs of a legal battle with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). Dr. Trozzi, one of the early doctors to challenge prevailing COVID-19 narratives, faces a lengthy and expensive ‘trial’ as he seeks to defend his views grounded in science and genuine concern for patient well-being.

Defriending Canada: Natural Disasters and Facebook’s Information Scrub

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, September 03, 2023

Australia experienced this in February 2021. Facebook had gotten nastily stroppy, wishing to dictate public policy to the Commonwealth government. To teach Canberra mandarins a lesson, it literally unfriended the entire country, scrubbing all news platforms of content and making any posted links through the platform inaccessible.

Russia and BRICS Counter-Terrorism Projects: Moscow Remembers “The Beslan Terrorist Attack” in Northern Ossetia

By Kester Kenn Klomegah, September 03, 2023

On September 3, the Russian Federation is marking a memorable date, specifically, the Day of Solidarity in the Fight against Terrorism that became part of Russian legislation in 2005, a year after a horrendous terrorist attack in Beslan that killed over 300 Russian citizens, including children.

Are Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) and HAARP Experiments Being Ratcheted Up Worldwide?

By Dr. Mathew Maavak, September 03, 2023

I have watched various images and commentary-laced video clips of this strange event and concede that they can be attributed to Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). I was sceptical of DEW capabilities until the Maui incident.

Discredit COVID Vaccine Sceptics as “Mentally Ill”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, September 03, 2023

After it was recently announced that the Digital Service Act (DSA) for very large platforms and search engines has come into force, which is supposed to limit the power of internet monopolists and expand possibilities of political censorship, the well-known German business journalist Dr. Norbert Häring has now reported on his blog that the EU project “Jitsuvax” will be funded with 3.1 million euros over a period of four years to develop psychological methods to combat vaccination scepticism.

Spike Protein in the Blood of the COVID-19 Vaccinated. New Study: Do 50% of Pfizer and Moderna Vaxxed Produce Spike Protein Forever?

By Dr. William Makis, September 03, 2023

Potentially 50% of COVID-19 mRNA vaccinated people have spike protein in the blood at least 6 months after vaccination or longer, maybe indefinitely! Potentially 60% of Long COVID-19 patients have spike protein in the blood at least 12 months after infection, or longer, maybe indefinitely!

More Banks to Fail? Not in North Dakota

By Ellen Brown, September 03, 2023

U.S. banks are again in the crosshairs. Standard and Poor’s has downgraded five new middle-tier banks and put three others on negative outlook. This follows sweeping downgrades earlier in August by Moody’s, which cut credit ratings on 10 banks and placed four of the 15 largest U.S. banks on review for possible downgrade.

Wikipedia Is an Information Warfare Tool. Hijacked by U.S. Intelligence

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 03, 2023

Wikipedia is the most biased encyclopedia in history, having been hijacked by U.S. intelligence, industry and the political establishment years ago. According to Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger, U.S. intelligence has been manipulating the online encyclopedia since at least 2008, if not longer.

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.

*** 

There’s a lot of trash on the Moon right now – including nearly 100 bags of human waste – and with countries around the globe traveling to the Moon, there’s going to be a lot more, both on the lunar surface and in Earth’s orbit.

In August 2023, Russia’s Luna-25 probe crashed into the Moon’s surface, while India’s Chandrayann-3 mission successfully landed in the southern polar region, making India the fourth country to land on the Moon.

With more countries landing on the Moon, people back on Earth will have to think about what happens to all the landers, waste and miscellaneous debris left on the lunar surface and in orbit.

I’m a professor of astronomy who has written a book about the future of space travel, articles about our future off-Earth, conflict in space, space congestion and the ethics of space exploration. Like many other space experts, I’m concerned about the lack of governance around space debris.

Space Is Getting Crowded

People think of space as vast and empty, but the near-Earth environment is starting to get crowded. As many as 100 lunar missions are planned over the next decade by governments and private companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin.

Near-Earth orbit is even more congested than the space between Earth and the Moon. It’s from 100 to 500 miles straight up, compared with 240,000 miles to the Moon. Currently there are nearly 7,700 satellites within a few hundred miles of the Earth. That number could grow to several hundred thousand by 2027. Many of these satellites will be used to deliver internet to developing countries or to monitor agriculture and climate on Earth. Companies like SpaceX have dramatically lowered launch costs, driving this wave of activity.

“It’s going to be like an interstate highway, at rush hour in a snowstorm, with everyone driving much too fast,” space launch expert Johnathan McDowell told Space.com.

The Problem of Space Junk

All this activity creates hazards and debris. Humans have left a lot of junk on the Moon, including spacecraft remains like rocket boosters from over 50 crashed landings, nearly 100 bags of human waste and miscellaneous objects like a feather, golf balls and boots. It adds up to around 200 tons of our trash.

Since no one owns the Moon, no one is responsible for keeping it clean and tidy.

The clutter in Earth’s orbit includes defunct spacecraft, spent rocket boosters and items discarded by astronauts such as a glove, a wrench and a toothbrush. It also includes tiny pieces of debris like paint flecks.

There are around 23,000 objects larger than 10 cm (4 inches) and about 100 million pieces of debris larger than 1 mm (0.04 inches). Tiny pieces of junk might not seem like a big issue, but that debris is moving at 15,000 mph (24,140 kph), 10 times faster than a bullet. At that speed, even a fleck of paint can puncture a spacesuit or destroy a sensitive piece of electronics.

The amount of debris in orbit has increased dramatically since the 1960s.

In 1978, NASA scientist Donald Kessler described a scenario where collisions between orbiting pieces of debris create more debris, and the amount of debris grows exponentially, potentially rendering near-Earth orbit unusable. Experts call this the “Kessler syndrome.”

Nobody Is in Charge Up There

The United Nations Outer Space Treaty of 1967 says that no country can “own” the Moon or any part of it, and that celestial bodies should only be used for peaceful purposes. But the treaty is mute about companies and individuals, and it says nothing about how space resources can and can’t be used.

The United Nations Moon Agreement of 1979 held that the Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of humanity. However, the United States, Russia and China never signed it, and in 2016 the U.S. Congress created a law that unleashed the American commercial space industry with very few restrictions.

Because of its lack of regulation, space junk is an example of a “tragedy of the commons,” where many interests have access to a common resource, and it may become depleted and unusable to everyone, because no interest can stop another from overexploiting the resource.

Scientists argue that to avoid a tragedy of the commons, the orbital space environment should be seen as a global commons worthy of protection by the United Nations. The lead author of a Nature article arguing for a global commons filed an amicus brief– a type of outside comment offering support or expertise – on a case that went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in late 2021.

The author and his research collaborators argued that U.S. environmental regulations should apply to the licensing of space launches. However, the court declined to rule on the environmental issue because it said the group lacked standing.

The tragedy of the commons asserts that if everyone has unlimited access to a resource, then in the long run it may become depleted and unusable.

National geopolitical and commercial interests will likely take precedence over interplanetary conservation efforts unless the United Nations acts. A new treaty may emerge from the work of the U.N. Office for Outer Space Affairs, which in May 2023 generated a policy document to address the sustainable development of activities in space.

The U.N. can regulate the activities of only its member states, but it has a project to help member states craft national-level policies that advance the goals of sustainable development.

NASA has created and signed the Artemis Accords, broad but nonbinding principles for cooperating peacefully in space. They have been signed by 28 countries, but the list does not include China or Russia. Private companies are not party to the accords either, and some space entrepreneurs have deep pockets and big ambitions.

The lack of regulation and the current gold rush approach to space exploration mean that space junk and waste will continue to accumulate, as will the related problems and dangers.

*

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.

Chris Impey is a University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy, University of Arizona.

Featured image is from InfoRos

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

a

***

(This version contains Robert J Sawyer’s original narration. The previous version (June 17, 2023) was a second take after this version was lost. MW September 4, 2023)

“Should we let machines flood our information channels with propaganda and untruth? Should we automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones? Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? Such decisions must not be delegated to unelected tech leaders…

Therefore, we call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.” – Future of Life Institute (March 22, 2023) [1]

“Wonder is not only a superb conclusion to a tremendous trilogy, but stands alone as one of the best books that Sawyer has ever written.” – Winnipeg Free Press [2]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Imagine a world where you can now take your problems to a computer and found that it is the best therapist you ever had! Where the companion on-line that could well be the love of your life based on your private conversations is in fact not human! Where every professor, every lawyer, every writer, every artist, every detective, physician and architect you ever met cannot match this new program at your finger tips! And how this threatens just about every upper income job in existence!

Ladies and gentlemen, it seems that this moment may finally be upon us…

The Artificial Intelligence research laboratory OpenAI, which ran on a non-profit basis, announced the release of ChatGPT, an AI chatbot on November 30, 2022. Two months later, it was used by 100 million users! And the numbers have continued to expand ever since. [3]

Then in February of 2023, Microsoft announced it was building AI technology on the same foundation as ChatGPT and incorporating it into Microsoft Bing, Edge, and other products. Then in March, the Future of Life Institute has attracted the signatures of several people specializing in Artificial Intelligence in calling for a “ pause for at least 6 months” in the development of post-GPT-4 AI systems. The ability to further inflame our media with mis-information and dis-information, the disruption of the Labour landscape and yes even an attack or subversion against humanity by an artificial system that can out-think us are some of the primary concerns. [4][5]

This episode of the Global Research News Hour takes a deep dive into these various areas and both the opportunities and the perils from which we cannot turn back once we have crossed the first threshold of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

This week’s guests feature individuals fully capable of engaging the host in a fifty minute long conversation: Khal Shariff, head of the Virtual Reality and related Technology company Project Whitecard, and Robert J Sawyer, the acclaimed Canadian Science fiction author and keynote speaker.

Khal Shariff is the founder and CEO of Project Whitecard, a company dedicated to using technology for good. They use game technology for education, and the latest project is all about driver training in BC, where Project Whitecard is using AI extensively during development.

Robert J Sawyer is, according to multiple press organizations, the leading science fiction author in Canada. The only Canadian to receive all 3 of the world’s top science fiction awards for best novel of the year, he is also the first writer to receive the Lifetime Achievement Aurora Award. His now fourteen year old series, Wake, Watch and Wonder (WWW), was his in-depth look at Artificial Intelligence and received the Hugo Award and three Aurora Awards.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 395)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

1. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/
2. https://sfwriter.com/exw3.htm
3. https://www.globalresearch.ca/ai-fastest-growing-application-ever/5819668
4. Tom Dotan (February 10, 2023)’Microsoft Adds ChatGPT AI Technology to Bing Search Engine’, Wall Street Journal; https://www.wsj.com/articles/microsoft-adds-chatgpt-ai-technology-to-bing-search-engine-11675793525
5. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/ 

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.

*** 

The RAIR Foundation Wrote:

Dr. Mark Trozzi’s haunting words, ‘People are being processed as animals with no rights, and when you consider the chilling predictability and the mounting data, it’s a grim reality—hospitals turning into places of harm instead of healing,’

In a defiant stand against the suppression of real science and the subversion of medical ethics, Canadian physician Dr. Mark Trozzi has found himself in the crosshairs of a legal battle with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).

Dr. Trozzi, one of the early doctors to challenge prevailing COVID-19 narratives, faces a lengthy and expensive ‘trial’ as he seeks to defend his views grounded in science and genuine concern for patient well-being.

Dr. Trozzi’s ordeal symbolizes the larger struggle within the medical community, where divergent perspectives on COVID-19 and vaccine-related issues have led to clashes between medical professionals and regulatory bodies. The CPSO’s tribunal against Dr. Trozzi, rather than focusing on patient safety and the pursuit of medical truth, appears to be driven by a need to protect political authority and state ideology.

Unveiling Insights Through Exclusive Interview

Amidst his legal battle, RAIR Foundation USA had the privilege of conducting an exclusive interview with Dr. Mark Trozzi. In this enlightening conversation, Dr. Trozzi shares his remarkable journey through the pandemic landscape. He candidly discusses the formidable challenges he encountered as a physician, navigating through a landscape where hospitals appeared to exaggerate their strain, narratives were manipulated to shape public opinion, and the pervasive influence of global health organizations cast a shadow over medical decision-making.

In the interview, Dr. Trozzi delves into the significance of treatments like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin in the battle against COVID-19. He provides critical insights into his departure from the mainstream narrative, driven by research indicating a higher mortality rate among recipients of experimental COVID-19 shots compared to other vaccines. Dr. Trozzi also addresses concerns about the rate of miscarriages observed during Pfizer’s COVID “vaccine” trials.

Dr. Trozzi’s Trial

Central to this conflict is Dr. Trozzi’s steadfast dedication to articulating perspectives that challenge unscientific state mandates, fortified by his reliance on scientific evidence. He is a vocal critic of the mainstream COVID-19 narrative, particularly in relation to “vaccine” mandates. According to Dr. Trozzi, the CPSO’s actions indicate an attempt to silence honest scientific discourse and stifle freedom of speech.

The latest phase of Dr. Trozzi’s trial, which unfolded on July 10, 2023, marked a significant turn of events. Proceedings resumed before the CPSO, but not without a protracted battle over expert witnesses. The CPSO made multiple attempts to disqualify Dr. Peter McCullough, a prominent figure in the medical community, from testifying as an expert witness. Despite their efforts, Dr. McCullough eventually took the stand and provided a compelling defense.

Additionally, Deanna McLeod, a seasoned clinical trials expert with over 20 years of professional experience and a lead investigator at the Canadian Covid Care Alliance (CCCA), was scheduled to testify as an expert witness. She intended to present evidence related to Pfizer’s initial clinical trial data, which can be found here: link. However, the CPSO engaged in lengthy questioning and ultimately disqualified her as an expert witness, a decision that raised questions given her extensive expertise.

Dr. Paul Alexander was also scheduled to testify in Dr. Trozzi’s defense, but circumstances prevented him from doing so. Dr. Alexander, who would have faced rigorous questioning from the CPSO, had to withdraw due to a family emergency, leaving Dr. McCullough as the sole expert witness to testify. The CPSO’s persistent attempts to disqualify expert witnesses, including the abuse endured by Deanna McCLeod, shed light on the contentious nature of the trial and raised concerns about the transparency of the proceedings.

While Dr. McCullough did testify briefly, he effectively demonstrated that there were no issues with Dr. Trozzi’s actions or words, affirming the validity of his position. For a detailed look at the CPSO trial proceedings, including the challenges faced by Deanna McCLeod and the CPSO’s handling of objections from Dr. Trozzi’s legal team, you can view the available recordings on the What’s Up Canada channel. These recordings encompass the entire trial and offer valuable insights into the events that transpired.

Ethical Dilemmas and Upholding Medical Standards

The interview offers a unique perspective on the ethical dilemmas faced by medical professionals who challenge prevailing narratives. Dr. Trozzi reveals the suspension of some of the best doctors, whose commitment to their Hippocratic Oath led them to provide alternative treatments. This commitment eventually led to the suppression of honest medical opinions and the revocation of licenses.

Dr. Trozzi’s insights extend to the shifting dynamics of medical practice, where the role of doctors has transformed from patient-centered care to enforcing state-driven narratives. The interview provides an intimate glimpse into Dr. Trozzi’s unwavering dedication to the pursuit of medical truth and his belief in the power of science to shape a just future.

As the CPSO’s decision looms, the legal battle led by Dr. Trozzi resonates as a reminder of the delicate balance between medical authority, scientific inquiry, and individual rights. The outcome holds far-reaching implications not only for Dr. Trozzi and his colleagues but for the broader landscape of medical discourse and patient care in Ontario. Dr. Trozzi’s steadfast faith in science and the collective conscience shines as a beacon of hope in a polarized medical landscape.

Further Resources for Deeper Understanding

For those seeking to delve further into Dr. Mark Trozzi’s perspectives and insights, here is a collection of essential resources that shed light on the issues he passionately addresses:

• Inaugural Publication (January 2021): Dr. Trozzi’s first article and video, published in January 2021, offers a foundational understanding of his concerns. Access it here.
• Synergistic Bioweapons (December 2021): In this article, dated December 14, 2021, Dr. Trozzi delves into the concept of synergistic bioweapons. Explore it here.
• The Immune System Series (May and August 2023): Dr. Trozzi expands on the intricacies of how the COVID vaccines impact the immune system. Watch the enlightening video series here and here.
• Canada’s Cover-up Exposed (July 2022): Dr. Trozzi uncovers a disturbing cover-up within Canada. Read about it here.
• The Fertility Crisis (2022-2023): Dr. Trozzi delves into the crucial topic of fertility and its relation to the bioweapons narrative. Explore his insights through articles such as this and this.
• Autopsies for Gathering Evidence (December 2022): Dr. Trozzi provides valuable information about autopsies as a means to gather evidence. Read about it here.
• Comprehensive Website: Dr. Trozzi’s official website, www.drtrozzi.org, hosts over 700 posts available in 23 languages. The content is fully searchable and offers a wealth of knowledge.
• Newsletter Subscription: Stay updated with Dr. Trozzi’s latest insights by subscribing to his newsletter here.
• Supporting the Cause: Donations to Dr. Trozzi’s cause are greatly appreciated. The battle against establishment pressures requires continued dedication and support. Contribute here.
• Prophetic Warning (June 2021): In June 2021, Dr. Trozzi released a video and article that eerily predicted the dangers of the COVID vaccines, now proven accurate over two years later. Dive into the details here.
• World Council for Health: Dr. Trozzi is an integral part of the World Council for Health, an organization dedicated to fostering global health awareness.

These resources provide an opportunity for readers to explore Dr. Mark Trozzi’s extensive body of work, insights, and advocacy for medical ethics and informed decision-making.

*

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 Dr. Mark Trozzi

---

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.”

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.

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.

*** 

Australia experienced this in February 2021. Facebook had gotten nastily stroppy, wishing to dictate public policy to the Commonwealth government. To teach Canberra mandarins a lesson, it literally unfriended the entire country, scrubbing all news platforms of content and making any posted links through the platform inaccessible. It mattered not that the content involved the tawdry details of celebrity love affairs gone wrong or advice on how to respond to a cyclone. The users of an entire country had been cancelled. For a time, a blissful blackhole had appeared at the centre of Australia’s information scape.

Facebook’s parent company Meta had one fundamental problem. The Australian government had proposed a bargaining code that would distribute income from news shared on digital platforms with its providers. The measure was designed to rescue an ailing sector from demise, and ironically served to aid the likes of Rupert Murdoch and such media moguls struggling to keep dying empires afloat. Digital giants such as Facebook and Google were told to swallow a regulatory regime that would force them into income sharing agreements that they deemed illogical and much against the spirit of the internet.

Meta eventually came over to the view that “refriending” Australia was in its best interests. The then treasurer Josh Frydenberg had convinced them that the much detested code could work. In truth, Frydenberg had merely caved in, more or less easing off on most of the demands, such as a full disclosure of algorithms on sharing material. Independent agreements with news outlets were rapidly reached. Everyone came out of it a villain, except small, independent news outlets deemed irrelevant in the negotiations. They were the true victims.

Canada’s Online News Act proposed something similar in regulating “digital news intermediaries to enhance fairness in the Canadian digital news marketplace and contribute to sustainability.” Mimicking the Australian model, digital platforms and news businesses could “enter into agreements respecting news content that is made available by digital news intermediaries.”

In reaching such agreements, factors such as the “significant bargaining power imbalance between [the digital news intermediary] operator and news businesses” would be taken into account. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission was also vested with powers to “impose, for contraventions of the enactment, administrative monetary penalties on certain individuals and entities and conditions on the participation of news businesses in the bargaining process.”

The digital platforms, in turn, took issue: why should they have to pay media outlets for doing their job, having offered them a gratis platform in the first place? Arguments from the Australian example were re-run. Meta, as it outlined in a statement, had “made it clear to the Canadian government that the legislation misrepresents the value news outlets receive when choosing to use our platforms. The legislation is based on the incorrect premise that Meta benefits unfairly from news content shared on our platforms, when the reverse is true.”

In June, Meta announced that it had “begun the process of ending news availability in Canada” as part of its moves to comply with the Act. It was a statement of general smug finality, indicative of the company’s own self-belief as an exclusive platform for news. For media outlets, this meant that links and content posted by news publishers and broadcasters in the country would no longer be available for those in Canada. Content posted by international news publishers and broadcasters outside Canada would also not be viewable by those within the country.

It did not take long for the consequences of such a policy to bear bitter fruit. As summer fires raged in Canada, forcing tens of thousands from their homes and threatening cities such as Yellowknife, the capital of the Northwest Territories, information was meagre on measures and responses from the authorities. “Right now, in an emergency situation where up to date local information is more important than ever, Facebook is putting corporate profits ahead of peoples safety,” the indignant Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau huffed at a news conference in Cornwall, Prince Edward Island.

Trudeau thought it “inconceivable that a company like Facebook is choosing to put corporate profits of insuring that local news organizations can get up to date information to Canadians.” British Columbia Premier David Eby also found it “astonishing that we are at this stage of the crisis and the owners of Facebook and Instagram have not come forward and said ‘We’re trying to make a point with the federal government, but it’s more important that people are safe’.” These men obviously know little about the workings of this dark entity.

Meta, in response, claimed that those in Canada could still use Instagram and Facebook “to connect with their communities and access reputable information, including content from official government agencies, emergency services and non-governmental organizations.”

The obvious question here was why Trudeau was placing such astonishing reliance on a private corporation’s information sharing services, one with no allegiance to the Canadian government, let alone the citizenry, to do so. The onus should have been on national and local broadcasting outlets to inform the population of the disasters. As always, governments gravitate in low fashion for the cheapest alternative. The payment of peanuts results in a monkey return.

In Australia, for instance, the initial ban imposed by Facebook led to an upsurge of interest in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which has its own set of digital sharing tools. It became clear that an information environment without Facebook offered healthier alternatives – without the creepy world of surveillance capitalism.

The Australian and Canadian examples serve as salient lessons to those in government who forget their duties to the public. If you get into the bed of a sociopathic, petulant founder who could only conceive of dating girls through digital networks, using such skin-crawling argot as “the poke”, you are asking for trouble. Even more to the point, you are asking for some share of the blame in forfeiting your duties. Surely it would be more prudent for governments to establish their own information channels in times of crisis, invest in public broadcasters and improve their services to areas of a country, however remote?

*

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]