Was the Universe Really Created by a ‘Big Bang’?

September 1st, 2023 by Mark Keenan

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 the article Godless Fake Science and in the book Godless Fake Science I described that much of the scientific narrative we have been taught from our school days onwards, is based on falsehood, and that the institution of ‘science’ itself has in many ways been hijacked by financial interests seeking to advance their own narrative and agenda. Modern science, like economics, banking, and corporate-owned mass media, has become part of a paradigm borne by deceit, and corporate greed; and which paints God out of the picture. The article described fake science in areas including climate science; the fake Covid-19 pandemic; the biopharmaceutical sector; and neo-Darwinian evolution.

In this article, I summarise an investigation of the ‘big bang theory’, with reference to selected books and articles that refer to this contentious subject.

The creation of the universe is explained today in mainstream modern science by the big bang theory, DNA research, and other models. The big bang theory was initially conceived by Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian priest in 1927. The theory proposes that the entire universe exploded from a state of infinite density, temperatures and pressure at extremely high-energy levels and then, expanded (inflated) and cooled.

We are meant to believe that this big bang took place about 13.7 billion years ago, came from nowhere and was caused by nothing, and yet created everything.

This is not only unscientific, it is stupidity, yet, because these ideas are endorsed and promoted by the modern-day institutional orthodoxy of science (the church of godless scientism), and by governments, we are expected to accept them.

The big bang theory has been adopted by mainstream science and has been promoted and taught as fact, as the scientific creation story, in virtually all the schools and universities of the world, and to almost the entire world population via TV programmes and ‘science’ documentaries. The financial and governmental forces behind the promotion of the atheistic ideologies of neo-Darwinian evolution and the ‘big bang’ have tried to convince the masses that these ideologies are scientific facts, but in reality, there is no scientific basis for these atheistic positions.

The ‘big bang theory’ contains untestable assumptions and excludes the existence of God, yet we are asked to accept it on ‘faith’

“Never run after a bus or woman or cosmological theory, because there’ll always be another one along in a few minutes.” – John Wheeler, Theoretical Physicist at Princeton University

Despite all this, many physicists and astrophysicists do not accept the theory and maintain that the big bang simply did not happen.

For example, physicist Eric Lerner published his work on the origin of the universe in his book The Big Bang Never Happened in 1991.

Over 30 significant problems with the big bang hypothesis are analyzed in the book Cult of the Big Bang by William Mitchell. Normally any model with so many problems would be discarded. The Princeton University biologist, Dr Edwin Godwin, has compared the chances of a planet like ours originating from a big bang to the likelihood of a dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop.

A model of the expanding universe opening up from the viewer's left, facing the viewer in a 3/4 pose.

Timeline of the expansion of the universe, where space, including hypothetical non-observable portions of the universe, is represented at each time by the circular sections. On the left, the dramatic expansion occurs in the inflationary epoch; and at the center, the expansion accelerates (artist’s concept; neither time or size are to scale). (Licensed under the Public Domain)

For many people the big-bang ‘singularity’ is highly contentious. Could it simply be a another ‘big lie’?

A big lie being defined as a repeated distortion of the truth on a grand scale, especially for propaganda purposes. The renowned American scientist, mathematician, and author Richard L. Thompson (1947 – 2008), succinctly exposed the ridiculousness of the proposition that the big bang arose from a singularity. He stated:

“The big bang theory does not describe the origin of the universe at all, because the initial singularity is by definition indescribable…. And there is a further difficult. Where did the singularity come from? Here the scientist faces the same difficulty as the religionists they taunt with the question, “Where did God come from?” And just as the religionist responds with the answer that God is the causeless cause of all causes, the scientists are now faced with the prospect of declaring a mathematically indescribable point of infinite density and infinitesimal size, existing before all conceptions of time and space, as the causeless cause of all causes… To say that something happens once by chance is in essence no different from simply saying “it happened” or “there it is”. And these statements do not qualify as scientific explanations. In the end you wind up knowing no more than you did before. In other words, by invoking chance or the anthropic principle the scientists have not actually explained anything about the origin of the universe”” – Richard L. Thompson, Scientist and Mathematician, PhD from Cornell University

The author, Pierre St. Clair, author of the book Cosmology on Trial Cracking the Cosmic Code noted that an increasing number of cosmologists and physicists no longer accept the big bang theory, as evidenced by the following quotations:

“Big Bang cosmology is probably as widely believed as been any theory of the universe in the history of Western civilization. It rests, however, on many untested, and [in] many cases, untestable assumptions. Indeed, the Big Bang cosmology has become a bandwagon of thought that reflects faith a much as objective truth.” – Geoffrey Burbridge, Professor of Physics, University of California.

“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story [of the big bang] ends like a bad dream. For the past three hundred years, scientists have scaled the mountain of ignorance and as they pull themselves over the final rock, they are greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” – Robert Jastrow, Astrophysicist and Author of the book God and the Astronomers

“The theories we have so far (in physics) are both inconsistent and incomplete.” — Stephen Hawking, Astro-physicist

Despite this, the theory is still taught worldwide to billions of children, students and adults as the scientific creation story.  The big bang has evolved into a worldwide belief system – much like a religion! Author, Pierre St. Clair describes the modern big bang creation story that science teaches today as a ‘leap of faith’:

“In the beginning scientists can’t say whether time, space, matter or energy existed. They have various hypotheses… Suddenly, ‘something’ materialized… scientists call that ‘something’ a singularity. It was smaller than atom but it contained all the matter and energy that was to become our universe. Of course, accepting that everything in the cosmos was crushed into a single point smaller than an atom, we admit, requires a huge leap of faith… the singularity didn’t like being crushed. Apparently, it resisted the crunch with a fierce explosion for no reason… We call that massive explosion the Big Bang… The hypothesis of instant expansion, cosmic inflation, defies all known laws of physics… ” – Pierre St. Clair, Author, see Endnote [i].

“Astrophysicists portray their cosmological ideas as scientific (supported by evidence) when they are mostly a cloud of probabilities and caveats. The media presents these explanations as factual science, and the unsuspecting public interprets them as ‘true accounts’” – Pierre St. Clair, Author

Chaitanya Charandas, author of Science and Spirituality makes the following observation:

“Stephen Hawking has stated, “Any theory that predicts a singularity can be said to have broken down.” So, if science necessitates postulating something beyond the realm of science, then an intelligent being is a much more logical candidate for creating the complex world we see around us than a singularity. Both are non-scientific, in the conventional sense of the word ‘scientific’, but we at least have experience of an intelligent being designing something, but we have no experience of a singularity and its explosion leading to design” – Chaitanya Charan das, author

I also note the words of John Horgan, who has written for Scientific American since 1986.

“…I derided inflation as “ironic science,” which can never be proven true or false and hence isn’t really science at all… physicists Anna Ijjas, Paul Steinhardt and Abraham Loeb presented a stinging critique of inflation in Scientific American… The authors assert that inflationary cosmology, as we currently understand it, cannot be evaluated using the scientific method… the expected outcome of inflation can easily change if we vary the initial conditions… these features make inflation so flexible that no experiment can ever disprove it… The persistence of these unfalsifiable and hence unscientific theories is an embarrassment that risks damaging science’s reputation…  Isn’t it time to pull the plug?” – John Horgan, writer, see Endnote [ii].

There is also the dubious concept, or conjuring trick. of ‘dark matter’ upon which the theory rests. John Watson describes the problem with dark matter in an article Top Ten Scientific Flaws In The Big Bang Theory, see Endnote [iii], as follows.

“Dark Matter and Dark Energy have never been proven, or observed in any way whatsoever, yet the Big Bang theory depends on the existence of such potentially mythological substances… The “dark” in “dark matter” and “dark energy” doesn’t mean color. It means, “unknown”. In other words, the proponents of the Big Bang theory couldn’t figure out how it could possibly happen so they said, let’s make up some fictional matter and energy that “made it happen”. It’s kind of like me saying I am the most powerful person in the universe. My power is everywhere and can do everything! You just can’t see my power but it’s there!” – John Watson, writer.

Despite all the problems with the theory, Wikipedia makes the bold assertion that

“The Big Bang is a well-tested scientific theory which is widely accepted within the scientific community… abundant evidence has arisen to further validate the model.”

Pierre St. Clair notes that “from an outsider’s point of view the science creation myth sounds bizarre. But for insiders – cosmologists and physicists – this story is a normal as going to a party.” The reality is that pleading the case for the big bang theory is as much in the realm of faith as the traditional creation stories of ancient scriptures – nothing can be validated by ‘material science’ in either case. The rigorous discipline of scientific observation, experimentation and verification do not apply to the big bang theory – one simply has to accept it on ‘faith’. The big bang theory is, therefore, not science, it is religion without God – it seems to be ‘godless’ fake science.

Modern-day Science Excludes the Divine Consciousness of an Intelligent Designer — God

From this perspective, we can see that a fundamental difference between the science creation story and the stories of creation as told by ancient spiritual traditions is whether a cosmic divine consciousness was involved. Modern-day science excludes that divine consciousness.

Atheistic scientists will tell you that God is not accepted as a cause because God cannot be detected by our technology.

Hypocritically, modern astrophysicists tell us that the universe consists mostly of substances called ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’, yet, I note, these substances cannot be detected by their instruments, so why have these unobservable, unknowable, and hypothetical substances been accepted ‘on faith’ by modern ‘science’?

According to St. Clair, the astrophysicists are using these concepts of dark matter and dark energy in an attempt to save the big bang theory. Yet, as they become more invested in the entanglements of the theory, it is likely they will become unable to extricate themselves from the conclusion they are trying to avoid, i.e., that the science story of creation will resemble the traditional spiritual story of creation – that something had to have been created for the universe to exist, which implies a creator. Note also that the scientific creation story also does not explain how the laws of science and the universe came into existence in the first place. Who originally wrote those laws? Did these laws suddenly appear with a big bang also?

The Christian Bible informs us that the Earth was created by God, and it appears that many Christians are skeptical of the theories of evolution and the big bang.

Yet, it also appears that, today, the Judeo-Christian universities are teaching these theories. The ancient spiritual texts of Vedic Vaishnavism inform us that universe was created by God. The following excerpts from the book Life comes from Life by HDG Srila Prabhupada, renowned spiritual leader in the tradition of Vedic Vaishnavism, highlight the problem with the atheistic creation story of a big bang; and of life originating from random chemical interactions rather than a divine source:

“Modern proponents of Darwinism say that the first living organism was created chemically… If life originated from chemicals, and if your science is so advanced, then why can’t you create life biochemically in your laboratories?… Their claim that they will soon prove a chemical origin is something like paying someone with a postdated check… They cannot even produce a single blade of grass in their laboratories, yet they are claiming, that life is produced from chemical. What is this nonsense?” – Quote from Life come from life’ by HDG Srila Prabhupada

“Dr. Singh: The scientists say that at one point the earth was composed of dust particles floating in some gaseous material. Then, in due course, this colloidal suspension condensed and formed the earth.

Srila Prabhupada: … where did the gas come from?

Dr Singh: They say it just existed!…

Srila Prabhupada: “They say, “This existed, and then all of a sudden, by chance, that occurred.” This not science. Science means to explain the original cause.”” – Extract from the book Life comes from Life by HDG Srila Prabhupada

The reality is that despite so-called advancements, modern-day scientists cannot even do what a cow does, i.e., change grass into milk. Scientists cannot produce grass from chemicals either. Yet they still tell us that they can produce life in a laboratory. Note that what is taking place with In vitro fertilization (IVF) is merely manipulation of the matter that God created.

Another, scientist disseminating godless science was Stephen Hawking. Hawking has written “Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing…”. In the book Krishna, authors Gauranga Premananda dasa and Avadhuta Raya das, counter Hawking’s assertion as follows: “Hawking has said absolutely nothing that proves that “the universe can and will create itself from nothing”. To say that something comes out of nothing, that there is no material cause is simply a statement of faith and doesn’t meet the needs of science and philosophy.”

Furthermore, in contrast, to the science creation story, which tells us there is no meaning whatsoever to the creation of the universe, the traditional spiritual stories are infused with deep meanings and purport for human life; and the reasons why we are here.  Could it be that by excluding the possibility that the Earth has a creator, telling us that the Earth and humans were created by random blind chance, that the Earth is just another unimportant part of a random universe, that there is no intelligent designer or God, the atheistic forces have tried to keep us unaware of our individual uniqueness and spiritual potency as children of God?

The Fine-tuning of the Universe Cannot be Explained Away as Mere Chance

So, modern atheistic science asserts that the universe was ‘created’ by blind random chance – if this is the case should not our universe be completely random, unpredictable and chaotic?

In reality, we see that the universe is precisely ordered and conditions are uncannily fine-tuned for life, not at all as if they were at random. Is it not foolishness to believe such precise structure was created by blind random chance?

The book Rethinking Darwin by Lief A. Jensen details multiple parameters about the universe that are so fine-tuned it shows that the universe would not exist if these parameters were even minutely different.

The astounding level of precision indicates to me that the universe is intelligently designed – it appears to be the arrangement of an incredible intelligence. The fine-tuning of the universe cannot be  explained away as mere chance. As British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle remarked:

“I do not believe that any scientist who examines the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce inside the stars.“ – Sir Fred Hoyle, British astronomer

To account for the creation of the universe by random chance, atheists’ resort to ludicrous postulates, such as the ‘infinite number of monkeys’ theory.

The theory has been detailed as followed: if an infinite number of monkeys that were shown how to type were allowed to type for billions of years, they would at some point type the complete works of Shakespeare by random chance.  Renowned scientist and mathematician, Richard L Thompson, with a PhD from Cornell University, has stated that the ‘infinite number of monkeys’ theory defies probability theory and is mathematically impossible because randomness does not produce order on any appreciable scale, no matter how long you give it. Despite this mathematical impossibility, biological text books worldwide, refer to randomness as the cause for the existence of the complex universe we live in – thereby completely negating the design within it. The experiment referred to below indicates the reality that randomness as an explanation for the creation of the universe leads to nothing special and is just ‘monkey business’.

“In 2003, lecturers and students from the University of Plymouth MediaLab Arts course used a £2,000 grant from the Arts Council to study the literary output of real monkeys. They left a computer keyboard in the enclosure of six Celebes Crested Macaques in Paignton Zoo in Devon I England for month, with a radio link to broadcast the results on a website… Not only did the monkeys produce nothing but 5 pages consisting largely of the letter S, the lead male began by bashing the keyboard with a stone, and the monkeys continued by urinating and defecating on it.” – Chaitanya Charon Das, Author

State-funded “Atheistic Indoctrination”

Many millions, if not billions, of people believe that God, the Creator, exists, yet schools, universities and TV stations worldwide are teaching nonsensical atheistic theories, such as theory of evolution and the big bang theory as proven facts. If there was indeed a type of big bang from which the ordered universe originated, the atheistic scientists should at least acknowledge that there had to be an original cause, an intelligent designer.

Students worldwide are in essence being force fed dubious unproven atheistic doctrine as the only acceptable worldview. Presenting these theories as indisputable truths amounts to indoctrination plain and simple. Note that this is ‘government-funded’ indoctrination. The governments of the world are teaching our children that they have originated from monkeys. Do you really believe your most ancient grandparents were monkeys? If you think your ancestors were monkeys – will you tend to behave like a monkey or like a God-conscious human?

The Spiritual Origins of the Universe

Modern mechanistic science assumes that we can describe the world independently of the existence of God, and negates the concept of the individual soul. The direction of mechanistic science over the past two centuries has been to see how far this approach can take us – to what extent can we explain nature, the world, the universe and everything whilst completely ignoring any reference to God, the soul and spiritual origins of everything. In 1931 Austrian mathematician Kurt Gödel actually proved that humankind will never be able to describe the universe by a final mechanistic theory.

“the stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter… we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.” – Richard Conn Henry, Professor of Physics, John Hopkins University

“I maintain that the human mystery is incredibly demeaned by scientific reductionism, with its claim in promissory materialism to account eventually for all of the spiritual world in terms of patterns of neuronal activity. This belief must be classed as superstition… we have to recognize that we are spiritual beings with souls existing in a spiritual world as well as material beings with bodies and brains”- John Eccles, Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology

To quote a lyric from the song Colonised Mind by the famous American musician Prince (1958 – 2016):

“Without God its just the blind leading the blind”.

In a book by Stephen Rosen, see Endnote [iv], there is a relevant story about the scientist Sir Isaac Newton. Newton had a mechanical model of the universe in his study. A friend of his who did not believe in God came to visit him and admiring the model asked: ‘Who made it?’. Newton answered: ‘Nobody!’ and assured his friend that it had just happened to assure the form it was in. His astonished friend replied ‘You must think I am a fool! Of course, somebody made it, and he is a genius, and I’d like to know who he is.’ Newton laid his hand on his hand on his friend’s shoulder. ‘This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system… I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you profess to believe that the original form which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?”

One of the fundamental laws of the universe is cause and effect. If the big bang theory has any basis in reality, it is simply a pointer to a moment of creation where the cause exists outside of the matter, space and time of the universe. The universe displays a working complexity infinitely greater than a manmade watch or computer. The incredible arrangement of everything in the universe is based on the one truth of God’s spiritual existence in all things.

The original meaning of the English word ‘universe’ is actually “one truth”. Uni meaning ‘one’ and verse meaning “verified truth”. From this perspective we can see that our universities and science institutions have become muddled with multiple dubious truths/ideologies and are no longer uni-versities of the one truth. With the proliferation of mechanistic science, in particular,  over the past 200 years, these centers of education have become de-harmonised from the one truth.  We now need a synthesis of mechanistic science with spiritual science to realise and re-establish the one truth. That one truth is God – our father and the Creator of the universe.

*

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.

Mark Keenan is a former scientist at the UK Government Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, and at the United Nations Environment Division. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

He is author of the following books available on Amazon:

Donate for this article by clicking here. No donation is too big or too small.

Notes

[i] Source: Cosmology on Trial Cracking the Cosmic Code by Pierre St. Clair, pg 17. The book also details that the acceptance of scientific theories such as Stephen Hawkings’ general theory of relativity, and The Grand Design theory, also require a huge leap of faith, see pg 125, which describes “the frailties of Stephen Hawking’s grand design hypothesis.

[ii] Source: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/is-a-popular-theory-of-cosmic-creation-pseudoscience/

[iii] Source: https://techreader.com/top-ten/top-ten-scientific-flaws-in-the-big-bang-theory/

[iv] This story is described in the book Vedic Archaeology and Assorted Essays by Stephen Rosen, on pg 127.

Featured image is from the author


Godless Fake Science

By Mark Keenan

ASIN:B0C9SC6XWQ

Publisher:Independently published (July 2, 2023)

ISBN-13:979-8850715342

Paperback: 304 pages

The author, a former science advisor at the UK government and at the United Nations, evidences the matrix of fake science that has polluted modern society for decades. Including in the areas of manmade climate change, Covid-19, virology, psychiatry, pharmaceuticals, evolution, the big bang, paleontology, particle physics, and cosmology. By excluding the existence of God in the scientific world, the atheistic manipulators have left themselves in a cul-de-sac unable to explain the scientific puzzle of creation, consciousness, and existence. Civilisation has been misdirected by large-scale lies that advance corporate greed and a godless agenda. The author is also a student of the Christian and Vedic scriptures, and calls for a re-establishment of truth and God-consciousness.

Click here to purchase.

Factbox – Recent Coups in Africa

September 1st, 2023 by Anadolu Agency

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.

*** 

Africa has witnessed eight coups in the last three years, with the latest military take-over announced in Gabon, Wednesday, only a month after a military intervention in Niger ousted the president.

Senior military officers in Gabon staged a coup in the Central African country on Wednesday, saying they seized power after President Ali Bongo was declared winner in Saturday’s election for a third term in office.

Appearing on national television, the military cancelled the election results that declared Bongo, who has been in power for over a decade, the winner with 64.27 per cent of the votes.

They also announced that the 64-year-old leader was put under house arrest and one of his sons was arrested for “treason.”

Niger

On 26 July, military officers in Niger, led by Gen. Abdourahamane Tchiani, a former Commander of the presidential guard, carried out a military intervention, ousting President Mohamed Bazoum. The military has since held Bazoum hostage, despite international calls for his release.

Sudan

The military in Sudan ousted President Omar Al-Bashir on 11 April, 2019, after months of protests following increased prices of goods – including fuel and bread. Al-Bashir had ruled Sudan for nearly 30 years.

A power-sharing agreement was reached between the Army and civilians, but they later refused to hand over power.

On 25 October, 2021, Sudan experienced another military takeover when Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan, who headed the power-sharing deal, seized power, citing infighting between military and civilians.

Burkina Faso, Mali, Guinea, Chad

In Burkina Faso, the army ousted and detained President Roch Kabore on 23 January, 2022, leading to two other coups.

In neighbouring Mali, the military overthrew President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, 75, before the country witnessed a second coup on 24 May, 2021, when Col. Assimi Goita dismissed the transitional civilian president and prime minister.

There was also a military coup in Guinea on 5 September, 2021, when the army overthrew President Alpha Conde. In April 2021, the Chadian Army installed Gen. Mahamat Idriss Deby Itno as interim president, after the death of his father, Idriss Deby. The opposition said the move was tantamount to a coup.

Sultan Kakuba, a Political Science professor at Kyambogo University in Uganda, told Anadolu in a recent interview that military coups had been common in Africa for many years after independence, but they became increasingly rare in the past two decades.

He said poor leadership and economic hardships in some countries have influenced military leaders to seize power.

Kakuba opined that Africa has been consolidating democracy, but the coups are pushing it behind.

*

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: Officers from Department of Public Security (DSP) patrol as supporters of the military administration gather on a street after Gabonese army officers enter the national television building following the announcement of the presidential election results and announce that they take over, in Libreville, Gabon on August 30, 2023 [Stringer/Anadolu Agency]

Last Month’s Most Popular Articles

September 1st, 2023 by Global Research News

History: The Federal Reserve Cartel: Freemasons and The House of Rothschild

Dean Henderson, August 21, 2023

Zelensky Buys Luxury Villa in Egypt While His Soldiers Die on Frontlines

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, August 24, 2023

The Criminal Insanity of Climate Change: Direct Energy Weapons (DEW) Create Forest and Bush Fires, Destroying Entire Cities and Igniting Boats in the Sea.

Peter Koenig, August 20, 2023

Multi-Billion Dollar “Directed Energy Weapons (DEW)” Market, For Military and “Civilian Use” (?). Were DEWs Used in Hawaii?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 30, 2023

“Divide and Rule”: Italy’s PM Giorgia Meloni Is Biden’s “Political Asset”. U.S. Behind Niger Coup d’Etat. America’s Hegemonic Wars Against Europe and Africa

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 20, 2023

The Demolition of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. “The Devil’s Trick”

Mark H. Gaffney, August 27, 2023

Bombshell: NATO Says “War Started in 2014”. “Fake Pretext” to Wage War Against Russia? To Invoke Article 5 of Atlantic Treaty?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 29, 2023

Forced Into Taking COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines, Nurses Are Developing Advanced Turbo Cancers

Dr. William Makis, August 18, 2023

Weather Warfare: “Beware the US Military’s Experiments with Climatic Warfare”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 1, 2023

Not a Single Court in the Western World Is Willing to Examine the Covid-19 Evidence. “Crimes Against Humanity” Revealed by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Stephen Karganovic, August 23, 2023

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Injury Treatment: Curcumin (Turmeric) Blocks Spike Protein (Combine It with Bromelain), Treats Myocarditis, Has Anti-inflammatory, Anti-aging and Anti-Cancer Properties!

Dr. William Makis, August 15, 2023

Video: “There is no corona pandemic but only a PCR Test plandemic”. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Reiner Fuellmich, August 3, 2023

Bombshell: Was Nord Stream Nuked?

Peter Koenig, August 11, 2023

Agent Zelensky: Ukraine on Sale

Manlio Dinucci, August 26, 2023

Niger’s Military Junta Is Supported by the Pentagon. Washington’s Unspoken Objective: “Remove France from Africa”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 30, 2023

The Jeffrey Epstein Files: Trove of Never-before-seen Emails and Calendars Gives Unprecedented Insight Into Late Pedophile’s Network of Power and Influence that Includes Chris Rock, Peter Thiel, and Richard Branson

Daniel Bates, August 3, 2023

Turbo Cancer: Social Media Influencers on Youtube, Instagram, TikTok Are Getting Turbo Cancers

Dr. William Makis, August 21, 2023

Video: Evidence of Directed Energy Weapons in the Lāhainā Fire

AGENTJUSTICE4ALL, August 14, 2023

The Covenant of Death: “Pfizer knew that they were killing babies in utero…”

Dr. James A. Thorp, September 1, 2023

Turbo Cancer in Doctors: Top Breast Cancer Surgeon and Top 20 Oncologist Influencers

Dr. William Makis, August 3, 2023

Nation-States as “Business Models”: Ukraine as Another Neoliberal Privatization Exercise

By Dr. T. P. Wilkinson, August 31, 2023

Perhaps the leading two veteran critics of US policy in Ukraine, Colonel Douglas MacGregor USA and Major Scott Ritter USMC, have said loud and clear that at least from a military standpoint the Ukrainian armed forces have lost the war against Russia.

EU Expected to Import Record Volume of LNG from Russia Despite Sanctions

By Ahmed Adel, September 01, 2023

The European Union is expected to import a record volume of liquefied natural gas from Russia this year, despite the bloc’s intention to wean itself off Russian fossil fuels by 2027. This revelation by the Financial Times comes as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said that he warned Ukraine that any attacks on Hungary’s energy supplies from Russia would lead to war.

Is Yevgeny Prigozhin Alive? Russian Analyst Claims Wagner Boss Is ‘Alive, Well and Free’

By The Week, August 31, 2023

Following reports about Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin being killed in a plane crash, a Russian political analyst has alleged that the warlord is still “alive, well and free”, claiming that it was his doppelganger who was actually killed in the accident.

Policy of Deceit: Britain’s Treachery Over Palestine Laid Bare

By Peter Oborne, August 31, 2023

In April, Israeli security forces brutally assaulted Palestinian worshippers inside Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem. In the aftermath of the attack, James Cleverly, Britain’s foreign secretary, called on “all parties to respect the historic status quo arrangements at Jerusalem’s holy sites and cease all provocative action”.

BRICS Summit: Joining Hands to Create Great Future for China and Africa

By Prof. Maurice Okoli, August 31, 2023

From all indications, China has emerged as the greatest beneficiary at the 15th BRICS summit – a platform hosted by South Africa last August with participation of African leaders. The summit turned out be successful with most of the significant questions put under serious discussions and finally ended with a joint declaration which outlines the necessary strategic pathways into the future.

Fallujah Is Not a Presidential Victory Lap. “Governor Ron DeSantis touted his time in Iraq”

By James Bovard, August 31, 2023

Some viewers had the impression that DeSantis was a Seal, but he was actually a Harvard Law School graduate who was a Judge Advocate General Corps (JAG) alongside the Seals. DeSantis was deployed to Iraq in 2007 and 2008, during President George W. Bush’s “surge” (intended to postpone the obvious failure of the war until after Bush’s second term ended).

Documents Show Taiwan Working with FBI to Prosecute Chinese Americans, Intimidate US Politicians

By Alan MacLeod, August 31, 2023

Amid a controversial visit from Vice President William Lai (the front-runner to be his country’s next leader), official documents reviewed by “MintPress News” show that the Taiwanese government is attempting to drum up anti-China hostility, influence and intimidate American politicians and is even working with the FBI and other agencies to spy on and prosecute Chinese American citizens.

Lawrence S. Wittner’s “Spinning Illusions: The Anti-American Left and the Ukraine War” – A New McCarthyism

By Sara Flounders and Joe Lombardo, August 31, 2023

Recently articles have appeared on the front page of the New York Times that try to smear Code Pink, The People’s Forum and TriContinental as Chinese agents. The Times article was followed by a statement from Senator Marco Rubio calling for investigation of the people mentioned in the article. 

First Principles and “Self-Controlled Opposition”. “Lockdowns, distancing, masks and the nefarious Jab”.

By Dr. Emanuel Garcia, August 31, 2023

Being a psychiatrist certainly makes me no specialist in areas of immunology, cardiology, surgery or infectious disease. But having earned a doctorate in medicine I was provided an education in reasoning within this extraordinarily complex discipline from first principles. Therefore as an inquisitive physician throughout the covid operation, I could not help but be baffled by the response of institutional authorities.

India’s Reported Pushback Against US Meddling in Bangladesh Is Driven by Security Concerns

By Andrew Korybko, August 31, 2023

South Asian media recently reported that India has pushed back against US meddling in Bangladesh through diplomatic channels after Washington imposed a new visa policy ahead of next January’s elections that many regard as aimed at pressuring the ruling Awami League (AL) party.

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 European Union is expected to import a record volume of liquefied natural gas from Russia this year, despite the bloc’s intention to wean itself off Russian fossil fuels by 2027. This revelation by the Financial Times comes as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said that he warned Ukraine that any attacks on Hungary’s energy supplies from Russia would lead to war.

According to an analysis of energy industry data by Global Witness, in the first seven months of this year, Belgium and Spain were the second and third most significant buyers of Russian LNG, behind only China, an increase much higher than the global average of 6% from January to July this year. LNG imports by the EU increased by 40% from January to June compared to the same period in 2021, mainly because the European bloc relied on Russian pipeline supplies before the special military operation in Ukraine started.

“It’s shocking that countries in the EU have worked so hard to wean themselves off piped Russian fossil gas only to replace it with the shipped equivalent,” Global Witness senior fossil fuel campaigner Jonathan Noronha-Gant told the FT. “It doesn’t matter if it comes from a pipeline or a boat — it still means European companies are sending billions to [Vladimir] Putin’s war chest.”

According to the outlet, most Russian volumes come from the Yamal LNG joint venture, mainly owned by the Russian company Novatek. Other stakes are held by TotalEnergies of France, CNPC of China and a Chinese state fund. The development is exempt from export taxes but is subject to income tax.

Senior LNG analyst at consultancy ICIS, Alex Froley, told the FT that “long-term buyers in Europe say they will continue to accept contracted volumes unless banned by politicians,” which he said would cause disruptions to shipping as global trade patterns would need to be rearranged.

EU officials have pointed to a global effort to phase out Russian fossil fuels by 2027 but warned that a complete ban on LNG imports risks triggering an energy crisis like 2022 when gas prices hit record highs of more than €300 per megawatt/hour.

A source heard by the FT said that, although European gas storage containers were more than 90% complete before winter, there was still “a lot of nervousness” in case of further supply cuts.

Russian LNG accounted for 21.6 million (16%) of the EU’s total 133.5 million cubic metres of LNG imports between January and July, according to Kepler data, making it the bloc’s second-biggest supplier behind the US, which rose to the position after the start of Western sanctions against Moscow.

Given how the EU is still heavily reliant on Russian energy, it cannot be discounted that Kiev might try to sabotage supplies, just as it did to Germany when it attacked the NordStream 2 pipeline. It is for this reason that in an interview with US journalist Tucker Carlson, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán recalled that he had immediately qualified the damage to the Russian-German Nord Stream gas pipeline as a terrorist act, calling the absence of a strong reaction on the part of Germany a lack of sovereignty. He then recounted how he and Serbian leaders warned Ukraine, without directly naming the country, of war if energy flows were sabotaged.

“On the TurkStream pipeline, bringing gas from Russia via Turkey, Bulgaria and Serbia, he said that together with the Serbian Prime Minister and the Serbian President, they have made it clear that if anyone did to the southern corridor what they did to the northern, it would be considered a cause for war or a terrorist attack and they would react immediately,” Orbán said.

Given that Ukraine already has a history of sabotaging flows of Russian energy to Europe, and following the report by FT that the EU is expected to import a record volume of LNG from Russia this year, it cannot be discounted that Kiev will plan for more terrorist attacks to disrupt flows. Ukrainian soldiers are already conducting terrorist attacks in the Black Sea and Crimea with speedboats, and tankers could very well be the next target.

In addition, the FT report highlights the impossibility of the EU being able to divorce itself from Russian energy. Attempted decoupling has only led to the further decline of the European economy, and as seen, the difference is now being made up with LNG.

*

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

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

Featured image is from OilPrice.com

The New York Times casually acknowledged that it sends major scoops to the US government before publication, to make sure “national security officials” have “no concerns.”

***

First published on June 26, 2019

The New York Times has publicly acknowledged that it sends some of its stories to the US government for approval from “national security officials” before publication.

This confirms what veteran New York Times correspondents like James Risen have said: The American newspaper of record regularly collaborates with the US government, suppressing reporting that top officials don’t want made public.

On June 15, the Times reported that the US government is escalating its cyber attacks on Russia’s power grid. According to the article, “the Trump administration is using new authorities to deploy cybertools more aggressively,” as part of a larger “digital Cold War between Washington and Moscow.”

In response to the report, Donald Trump attacked the Times on Twitter, calling the article “a virtual act of Treason.”

The New York Times PR office replied to Trump from its official Twitter account, defending the story and noting that it had, in fact, been cleared with the US government before being printed.

“Accusing the press of treason is dangerous,” the Times communications team said. “We described the article to the government before publication.”

“As our story notes, President Trump’s own national security officials said there were no concerns,” the Times added.

Indeed, the Times report on the escalating American cyber attacks against Russia is attributed to “current and former [US] government officials.” The scoop in fact came from these apparatchiks, not from a leak or the dogged investigation of an intrepid reporter.

‘Real’ journalists get approval from ‘national security’ officials

The neoliberal self-declared “Resistance” jumped on Trump’s reckless accusation of treason (the Democratic Coalition, which boasts, “We help run #TheResistance,” responded by calling Trump “Putin’s puppet”). The rest of the corporate media went wild.

But what was entirely overlooked was the most revealing thing in the New York Times’ statement: The newspaper of record was essentially admitting that it has a symbiotic relationship with the US government.

In fact, some prominent American pundits have gone so far as to insist that this symbiotic relationship is precisely what makes someone a journalist.

In May, neoconservative Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen — a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush — declared that WikiLeaks publisher and political prisoner Julian Assange is “not a journalist”; rather, he is a “spy” who “deserves prison.” (Thiessen also once called Assange “the devil.”)

What was the Post columnist’s rationale for revoking Assange’s journalistic credentials?

Unlike “reputable news organizations, Assange did not give the U.S. government an opportunity to review the classified information WikiLeaks was planning to release so they could raise national security objections,” Thiessen wrote. “So responsible journalists have nothing to fear.”

In other words, this former US government speechwriter turned corporate media pundit insists that collaborating with the government, and censoring your reporting to protect so-called “national security,” is definitionally what makes you a journalist.

This is the express ideology of the American commentariat.

NY Times editors ‘quite willing to cooperate with the government’

The symbiotic relationship between the US corporate media and the government has been known for some time. American intelligence agencies play the press like a musical instrument, using it it to selectively leak information at opportune moments to push US soft power and advance Washington’s interests.

But rarely is this symbiotic relationship so casually and publicly acknowledged.

In 2018, former New York Times reporter James Risen published a 15,000-word article in The Intercept providing further insight into how this unspoken alliance operates.

Risen detailed how his editors had been “quite willing to cooperate with the government.” In fact, a top CIA official even told Risen that his rule of thumb for approving a covert operation was, “How will this look on the front page of the New York Times?”

There is an “informal arrangement” between the state and the press, Risen explained, where US government officials “regularly engaged in quiet negotiations with the press to try to stop the publication of sensitive national security stories.”

“At the time, I usually went along with these negotiations,” the former New York Times reported said. He recalled an example of a story he was writing on Afghanistan just prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Then-CIA Director George Tenet called Risen personally and asked him to kill the story.

“He told me the disclosure would threaten the safety of the CIA officers in Afghanistan,” Risen said. “I agreed.”

Risen said he later questioned whether or not this was the right decision. “If I had reported the story before 9/11, the CIA would have been angry, but it might have led to a public debate about whether the United States was doing enough to capture or kill bin Laden,” he wrote. “That public debate might have forced the CIA to take the effort to get bin Laden more seriously.”

This dilemma led Risen to reconsider responding to US government requests to censor stories. “And that ultimately set me on a collision course with the editors at the New York Times,” he said.

“After the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration began asking the press to kill stories more frequently,” Risen continued. “They did it so often that I became convinced the administration was invoking national security to quash stories that were merely politically embarrassing.”

In the lead-up to the Iraq War, Risen frequently “clashed” with Times editors because he raised questions about the US government’s lies. But his stories “stories raising questions about the intelligence, particularly the administration’s claims of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, were being cut, buried, or held out of the paper altogether.”

The Times’ executive editor Howell Raines “was believed by many at the paper to prefer stories that supported the case for war,” Risen said.

In another anecdote, the former Times journalist recalled a scoop he had uncovered on a botched CIA plot. The Bush administration got wind of it and called him to the White House, where then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice ordered the Times to bury the story.

Risen said Rice told him “to forget about the story, destroy my notes, and never make another phone call to discuss the matter with anyone.”

“The Bush administration was successfully convincing the press to hold or kill national security stories,” Risen wrote. And the Barack Obama administration subsequently accelerated the “war on the press.”

CIA media infiltration and manufacturing consent

In their renowned study of US media, “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media,” Edward S. Herman and Chomsky articulated a “propaganda model,” showing how “the media serve, and propagandize on behalf of, the powerful societal interests that control and finance them,” through “the selection of right-thinking personnel and by the editors’ and working journalists’ internalization of priorities and definitions of newsworthiness that conform to the institution’s policy.”

But in some cases, the relationship between US intelligence agencies and the corporate media is not just one of mere ideological policing, indirect pressure, or friendship, but rather one of employment.

In the 1950s, the CIA launched a covert operation called Project Mockingbird, in which it surveilled, influenced, and manipulated American journalists and media coverage, explicitly in order to direct public opinion against the Soviet Union, China, and the growing international communist movement.

Legendary journalist Carl Bernstein, a former Washington Post reporter who helped uncover the Watergate scandal, published a major cover story for Rolling Stone in 1977 titled “The CIA and the Media: How America’s Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up.”

Bernstein obtained CIA documents that revealed that more than 400 American journalists in the previous 25 years had “secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency.”

Bernstein wrote:

“Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.”

Virtually all major US media outlets cooperated with the CIA, Bernstein revealed, including ABC, NBC, the AP, UPI, Reuters, Newsweek, Hearst newspapers, the Miami Herald, the Saturday Evening Post, and the New York Herald‑Tribune.

However, he added, “By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.”

These layers of state manipulation, censorship, and even direct crafting of the news media show that, as much as they claim to be independent, The New York Times and other outlets effectively serve as de facto spokespeople for the government — or at least for the US national security state.

*

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.

Ben Norton is a journalist and writer. He is a reporter for The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com, and he tweets at @BenjaminNorton.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website 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.

***

Introduction

Perhaps the leading two veteran critics of US policy in Ukraine, Colonel Douglas MacGregor USA and Major Scott Ritter USMC, have said loud and clear that at least from a military standpoint the Ukrainian armed forces have lost the war against Russia.

There have been numerous voices calling for an end to the conflict, not least because the more than USD 46 billion and counting in military aid alone, has yet to produce any of the results announced as aims of what has finally been admitted is a war against Russia.[i]

If Mr Zelenskyy, the president of the Ukraine’s government in Kiev, is to be taken at face value, then the hostilities can only end when Crimea and the Donbass regions are fully under Kiev’s control and Vladimir Putin has been removed from office as president of the Russian Federation. To date no commentator has adequately explained how those war aims are to be attained. This applies especially after the conservatively estimated 400,000 deaths and uncounted casualties in the ranks of Kiev’s forces since the beginning of the Special Military Operation in February 2022.

Before considering the political and economic issues it is important to reiterate a few military facts, especially for those armchair soldiers who derive their military acumen from TV and Hollywood films.

As MacGregor and Ritter, both of whom have intimate practical knowledge of warfare, have said. Armies on the ground need supplies, i.e. food, weapons, ammunition, medical care for wounded, etc.

These supplies have to be delivered from somewhere.

In ancient times, armies could live off the land. Essentially this was through looting and plunder—stealing their food from the local population as they marched. To prevent the local population from becoming the enemy in the rear and avoid early exhaustion of local supply, generals started paying for what was requisitioned.

To prevent this defending forces would often withdraw the civilian population and destroy what could not be taken. In fact this kind of rough warfare against civilians still occurs although it has been forbidden under the Law of Land Warfare.[ii]

Naturally the soldier in the field can no longer make weaponry and even less plundered from the local inhabitants—unless one comes across some tribe the US has armed with Stingers perhaps.

All the weapons the Ukrainian armed forces deploy have to be imported from countries with factory capacity.

As the two officers among others have said, the capacity is unavailable for the Ukraine.

Obviously it would also be unavailable to NATO forces were they able to deploy in Ukraine in any numbers.

It is illusory to believe that a NATO army can do what the Wehrmacht could not some eighty years ago with three million men under arms and the most modern army of its day.

This was so obvious from the beginning that one has to wonder why this war ever started.

Is it possible that wars are started without any intention of winning them?

If winning the war is not the objective, then what is?

Forgery and Force: Explicit and Implicit

or Latent and Expressed Foreign Policy

Historical documents are essential elements in any attempt to understand the past and the present. However this is not because they are necessarily true or accurate. Forgeries and outright lies are also important parts of the historical record. Perhaps the most notorious forgery in Western history is the so-called Donation of Constantine. This document was used to legitimate papal supremacy and the primacy of the Latin over the Greek Church. Although it did not take long for the forgery to be discovered, the objective was accomplished. Even today most people in the West have learned that the part of the Christian Church called Orthodoxy is schismatic when the reverse is true, namely the Latin Church arose from a coup d’état against Constantinople.

There is now no shortage of evidence that the British Empire forced the German Empire into the Great War and with US help justified the slaughter of some four million men to expel German forces from Belgium.

There is systematically suppressed testimony by commanders in the field and others in a position to know that the Japanese attack on the US colonial base at Pearl Harbor was not only no surprise but a carefully crafted event exploited to justify US designs on Japan and China.

Yet to this day the myth of surprise attack against a neutral country prevails over the historical facts. Even though there is almost popular acceptance that the US invasion of Iraq was based on entirely fabricated evidence and innuendo, the destruction of the country was not stopped and continues as of this writing.

What does that tell us about historical record and official statements of policy?

Former US POTUS and former CIA director, George H.W. Bush expressed the principle that government lies did not matter because the lie appears on page one and the retraction or correction on page 28.

In short, it is the front page that matters.

That is what catches and keeps the public’s attention. Truth and accuracy are immaterial.

***

Let us consider for a moment one of the most durable wonders of published state policy—the Balfour Declaration. This brief letter signed by one Arthur Balfour in 2 November 1917 was addressed to the Lord Rothschild, addressed in his capacity as some kind of conduit for the Zionist Federation.

On the other hand, Carroll Quigley in his The Anglo-American Establishment strongly suggests that Lord Rothschild, also in his capacity as a sponsor of the Milner/ Round Table group, presented the letter for Mr Balfour to sign. As Quigley also convincingly argues the academic and media network created by the Round Table has successfully dominated the writing of British imperial history making it as suspicious as the Vatican’s history of the Latin Church.

This “private” letter to the representative of the West’s leading banking dynasty is then adopted as the working principle for the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine awarded to the British Empire. From this private letter an international law mandate was created under the League of Nations regime to convert a part the conquered Ottoman Empire into a state entity for people organized in Europe who imagined that some thousand(s) of years ago some ancestors once inhabited the area.[iii]

The incongruence of this act ought to have been obvious—and in fact it was. The explicit policy with which the British Empire had sought to undermine Germany and Austria-Hungary was that of ethnic/ linguistic self-determination of peoples. So by right—even if the fiction of a population in diaspora were accepted—this could not pre-empt the right of ethnic/ linguistic self-determination in Palestine where Arabic was the dominant language and even those who adhered to the Jewish religion were not Europeans.

As argued elsewhere there has been a century of propaganda and brute force applied to render the dubious origins and integrity of the legitimation for the settler conquest that was declared the State of Israel in 1948 acceptable no matter how implausible. Like the Donation of Constantine, the Balfour Declaration served its purpose. No amount of rebuttal can reverse the events that followed.

Motors and Motives

However the question remains what is then the policy driving such acts?

What is the motive for such seemingly senseless aggression against ordinary people?

Why does an institution supposedly based on national self-determination deny it so effectively to majorities everywhere whose only fault appears to be living on land others covet?

By the time the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was finally adopted in 1960, there was no question of reversing the de facto colonisation practiced by the mandatory powers under the League. The Declaration was only an act of the UN General Assembly any way, a body wholly dominated by the three permanent imperial members of the Security Council, each with their veto powers.

To understand that and perhaps to better illuminate the principal subject—Ukraine—it is helpful to recall that of the five permanent members of the Security Council, the two most powerful are not nation-states at all. The United Kingdom is a colonial confederation as is the United States.

Russia, France, and China are all states derived from historical ethnic-linguistic determination. They were formed into such unitary states through wars and revolutions.

As de Gaulle famously said “France was made with the sword”.

However there is no question that these three countries are based explicitly on ethnic-linguistic and cultural congruity within continental boundaries, in the sense articulated by the explicit text of the Covenant and the Charter.

On the contrary, Great Britain and the United States are commercial enterprises organised on the basis of piracy and colonial conquest. There is not a square centimetre of the United States that was not seized by the most brutal force of arms from its indigenous inhabitants. “Ethnic-linguistic” among the English-speaking peoples is a commodity characteristic. It is a way to define a market segment.

Great Britain gave the world “free trade” and liberalism and the US added to that the “open door”.

Nothing could be more inimical to the self-determination of peoples than either policy.[iv] How can a people be independent and self-determined when they are denied the right to say “no”?

The Great War and its sequel the war against the Soviet Union and Communism, aka World War 2, were first and foremost wars to establish markets dominated by the Anglo-American free trade – open door doctrine. One will not find this explicitly stated in any of the history books or the celebratory speeches on Remembrance Day (Memorial Day in the US) or the anniversary of D-Day to which properly the Soviet Union and Russia ought not to be invited.

After all D-Day was the beginning of the official war by Anglo-America against the Soviet Union after Hitler failed.

More of Italian, French and German industrial and domestic infrastructure was destroyed by aerial bombardment from the West than by anything the Wehrmacht did—since its job was to destroy Soviet industry.

This will not be reported in schoolbooks and very few official papers will verify this open secret. That is because like the Donation much of what counts as history was simply “written to the file”.

The facts however speak for themselves. When the German High Command signed the terms of unconditional surrender in Berlin-Karlshorst, the domestic industry of the West, except the US, had been virtually destroyed leaving it a practical monopoly not only in finance but manufacturing that would last well into the late 1960s.

Only the excess demand of the war against Korea accelerated German industrial recovery. No one can say for sure how much of German, French, Italian, Belgian, or Netherlands capital was absorbed by Anglo-American holding companies.

Hence those that wonder today about the self-destruction of the German economy have to ask who owns Germany in fact. To do that one will have to hunt through the minefield of secrecy jurisdictions behind which beneficial ownership of much of the West is concealed.

It is necessary to return to the conditions at the beginning of the Great War to understand what is happening now in Ukraine. One has to scratch the paint off the house called “interests” and recall some geography. F. William Engdahl performed this task well in his A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (2011). It would do well to summarise this here before going further.

Geography and Aggrandizement

Continental nation-states need secure land routes. Pirate states need secure sea-lanes. Britain succeeded in seizing control ruling the waves after defeating the Spanish and Portuguese fleets. It reached a commercial entente with the Netherlands, which helped until the Royal Navy was paramount. The control of the seas meant that Britain could dominate shipping as well as maritime insurance needed to cover the risk of sea transport. So it was no accident that Lloyds of London came to control the financing of maritime traffic.

Geography dictated that the alternative for continental nation-states was the railroad. Germany was building a railroad from Berlin to Baghdad which would not only have delivered oil to its industry but allowed it to bypass the Anglo-French Suez Canal and the British controlled Cape route. Centuries before the predecessors to the City of London financed crusades to control the trade routes through the Middle East, propagandistically labelled the Holy Land, whereby this was wholly for commercial reasons.

The Anglo-American led NATO captured Kosovo not out of any special loyalty to Albanians but because of geography.

Camp Bondsteel lies at the end of the easiest route to build pipelines between Central Asia and the Mediterranean.

In short there is not a single war for “self-determination” waged by the Anglo-American special relationship that was not driven by piratical motives, for which ethnic-linguistic commodities are expendable.

In 1917, the “interests”, for whom Lord Rothschild spoke and no doubt provided financial support, coincided with the pre-emptive control over real estate that had been desired by the banking-commercial cult at least since the establishment of the Latin Church. It is no accident that serious investigations have established that the state created from the British Mandate in Palestine was a commercial venture like all other British undertakings.

Moreover it has been able to use its most insidious cover story to veil itself in victimhood and thus immunity for those criminal enterprises, both private and state, that use it as a conduit: money laundering, drug and arms trafficking, training of repressive forces for other countries on contract, etc. all documented and protected by atomic weapons. Moreover this enterprise has been the greatest per capita recipient of US foreign aid for decades.

Its citizens are able to use dual citizenship to hold high office in the sovereign state that funds it, too. Any attempt to criticize or oppose this relationship or its moral justification by a public official or personality with anything to lose can lead to the gravest of consequences. Its official lobby in the US, the AIPAC, is only one instrument by which any act that could interfere with the smooth flow of cash or influence between Washington and Tel Aviv. It draws on an international organisation that does not even have to be organised. The status of ultimate victimhood combined with mass media at all levels committed to protecting “victims” can summon crowds just as Gene Sharp predicted in his works.[v]

A Business Too Innocent to Fail

Now we come to the issues with which this essay began. What is the aim of the war in Ukraine? Will it end when the military operations have failed?

In April 2022, i.e. just over a month after the Russian intervention, Volodymyr Zelenskyy described “the future for his country”.

He used the terms “a big Israel”. In Haaretz it was reported that Zelenskyy wanted Ukraine to become “a big Israel, with its own face”.

Writing for the NATO lobby, the Atlantic Council, Daniel Shapiro elaborated what Zelenskyy might mean: the main points are security first, the whole population plays a role, self-defence is the only way, but maintain active defence partnerships, intelligence dominance, technology as key, build an innovation ecosystem, maintain democratic institutions.[vi] The stories depict this stance for better or worse as the creation of a state under permanent military control, always giving priority to existential threats—presumably from the East.

But is that really what Zelenskyy means?

Or perhaps that is what he may mean.

What about all those who have directed nearly all of NATO armament and so many billions through the hands of the Kiev regime—one notorious even before 2022 as one of the most corrupt in Europe if not anywhere?

Maybe there is another construction to be applied here.

Perhaps Zelenskyy is talking, like some latter day Balfour, on behalf of his sponsors whose Holocaust piety never prevented them from subjecting nearly the entire population to forced medical experiments starting in 2020.

Perhaps he is talking about the extensive participation in all sorts of international trafficking, either as agent or protection for the principals. Perhaps he is talking about the permanent and undebatable foreign aid contributions from the US and the extortion from other countries, e.g. as Norman Finkelstein documented.[vii]

There is no doubt that Ukraine has become a major hub for human trafficking, arms smuggling, and biological-chemical testing. They have atomic reactors and have asked for warheads.[viii]

Add to this the potential of a large and potentially self-righteous diaspora spread throughout the West, heavily subsidised and already equipped with influence in high places.

A “Ukraine Lobby” was already in preparation in 1944 when the British shipped some thousand POWs from the SS Galicia Division (a Ukrainian force) from Italy to Britain without a single war crimes investigation.[ix] From there they were able to spread throughout the Empire as Canada amply indicates.

If Lord Rothschild’s model for Israel has been so successful to this day, one can scarcely blame a patriot like Volodymyr Zelenskyy for seizing the opportunity of a proven model.

It has been so successful that no one in public dare oppose it.

Why not establish another such parasitic machine? Russians or Arabs provide the permanent enemies with which to sell the permanent victim status at the expense of millions of displaced Ukrainians.

Plunder and Pillage

In other words there is a very successful business model to be implemented wholly consistent with free trade and the open door and all those other slogans, which have anointed plunder and pillage by the occasionally alpine commercial cults in their campaign to assure that: 

All of us:

“You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy”.

***

.

“Own Everything”: “Plunder and Pillage” Implemented by BlackRock, JP Morgan, Et. Al.

 

*

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. T.P. Wilkinson writes, teaches History and English, directs theatre and coaches cricket between the cradles of Heine and Saramago. He is also the author of Church Clothes, Land, Mission and the End of Apartheid in South Africa.

Notes

[i] Jonathan Masters and Will Merrow, “How Much as the US Sent to Ukraine Here are Six Charts”, Council on Foreign Relations (10 July 2023). Among those declaring this was Foreign Minister of the German Federal Republic, Annalena Baerbock. Angela Merkel, the former chancellor of the Federal Republic is on record having said that the so-called Minsk Accords were intended to stall the Russian reaction in Donbass until Ukraine could be sufficiently armed to fight against the Russian Federation.

[ii] Principally the Hague (1907) Conventions

[iii] More likely the Eastern Europeans in question were descendent from the Khazar kingdom located far closer to what today is Ukraine. The ruling elite was to have converted to Rabbinic Judaism in the 8th century. The Khazar Khaganate was disbursed by the end of the first millennium CE. This would better explain the hostility toward Russia and myth of a national homeland, displaced in 1917 to Palestine based on contemporary political realities.

[iv] Historian Gerald Horne ascribes “free trade” to the so-called Glorious Revolution, which also abolished the Royal Africa Company, opening “free trade in slaves”, see The Counter-Revolution of 1776 (2014).

[v] Gene Sharp, From Dictatorship to Democracy (1994)

[vi] Daniel B. Shapiro, “Zelenskyy wants Ukraine to be ‘a big Israel’. Here’s a road map”, New Atlanticist (6 April 2022) “By adapting their country’s mindset to mirror aspects of Israel’s approach to security challenges, Ukrainian officials can tackle national security challenges with confidence and build a similarly resilient state”.

[vii] Norman Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry (2000)

[viii] This notorious request by Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference in 2022 for atomic weapons was another reason President Vladimir Putin gave for a military response to Kiev’s attacks on the Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine that Russia had been forced to recognise as two independent republics and grant protection.

[ix] A documentary produced by Julian Hendy (The SS in Britain) contains interviews, e.g. with civil servants who were told by US authorities that no pre-immigration investigations were to be conducted. This film about the 14th Waffen SS Division Galizia division has been effectively scrubbed from the Web. The film, originally to be broadcast by Yorkshire Television (UK) was never shown. Geoffrey Goodman described details after a private viewing in a Guardian article  (12 June 2000).

Featured image is from TheFreeThoughtProject

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.

***

Following reports about Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin being killed in a plane crash, a Russian political analyst has alleged that the warlord is still “alive, well and free”, claiming that it was his doppelganger who was actually killed in the accident.

Alleging that Prigozhin foiled an assassination attempt sanctioned by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Dr Valery Solovey claimed that the Wagner boss is now plotting his revenge. Solovey is a former professor at Moscow’s Institute of International Relations, which trains spies and diplomats.

“First, the plane in which Yevgeny Prigozhin was supposed to fly was downed by a Russian air defence system,” Daily Mail quoted Solovey as saying. “There was no explosion on board. It was downed from the outside.”

“How did he end up alive while his close people died? This is the choice he [Prigozhin] was faced with. I’m not talking about the moral side of this choice. God forbid any of us face such a choice. He intends to take revenge for having been faced with such a choice. He intends to take revenge on people who were intending to destroy him, and destroyed people close to him,” he added.

Wagner military commander Dmitry Utkin, 53, and flight attendant Kristina Raspopova, 39, were among other who were killed in the crash.

Solovey said Prigozhin who has access to £1.6 billion in bitcoin will use it to strike back.

“That is more than enough for revenge. As for ambition, energy, and courage, he has plenty of that,” he added.

Reports also claimed that the supposed wife of Prigozhin seen at his funeral on Tuesday was actually the spouse of his doppelganger. The woman who was earlier claimed to be Prigozhin’s wife Lyubov Prigozhina, 52, was later identified by Russian media as Irina Krasavina, the spouse of his main body double Leonid Krasavin.

Another video released by the Telegram channel linked to the Wagner Group showed Prigozhin in Africa days before his death. In the clip, Prigozhin is heard talking about his threats to his life. Dressed in camouflage, he says,

“”For those who are discussing whether I’m alive or not, how I’m doing – right now it’s the weekend, second half of August 2023, I’m in Africa.”

THE WEEK cannot independently verify claims made by the analyst or the location and date of the video.

*

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

Featured image: Yevgeny Prigozhin | Reuters

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.

***

From all indications, China has emerged as the greatest beneficiary at the 15th BRICS summit – a platform hosted by South Africa last August with participation of African leaders. The summit turned out be successful with most of the significant questions put under serious discussions and finally ended with a joint declaration which outlines the necessary strategic pathways into the future. In practical context, BRICS is increasingly becoming the beacon of hope for the new multipolar world.

At the most obvious level, there were some genuine adverse criticisms, but one main advantage was and still exists now is the emphasis on preparing for a new multipolar world order. It is a distinctive impetus to the divergence between the world represented by the West and the world represented by the BRICS. This is the fundamental driving interest, the reason twisting potential members mostly developing nations in the south towards joining BRICS.

Results emerging from Johannesburg indicate that BRICS will expand to have a total of three African states – South African Egypt and Ethiopia. For China, who has swiftly moved into the continent in 90s after Russia abandoned and exited after the collapse of the Soviet era, has designed a comprehensive plan to strengthen its economic foothold. China keep its distance, far away from empty geopolitical rhetoric. China, the key driver of BRICS, interprets active participation by African leaders at the summit which further gives the continent an opportunity to take a more active position in world politics and economics.

President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, during the China-Africa Leaders’ Dialogue held on August 24, 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.” 

Over the past 20 years, China has stayed committed to this basic principle of together with Africa and drawing strength from the spirit of China-Africa friendship and cooperation. Aiming to China-Africa relations to new heights and build a shared common future, China shows absolute readiness to work with Africa to implement new vision of common connectivity with new strategic action plan to be implemented right away, starting September 2023.

To chart the course for practical cooperation in the next stage and partner with Africa to bring its integration and modernization into a fast track, on the sideline meeting with African leaders, Xi Jinping made three concrete proposals which are as follows:

(i) China will launch the Initiative on Supporting Africa’s Industrialization. China will better harness its resources for cooperation with Africa and the initiative of businesses to support Africa in growing its manufacturing sector and realizing industrialization and economic diversification. In implementing the nine programs under the FOCAC framework, China will channel more resources of assistance, investment and financing toward programs for industrialization.

(ii) China will launch the Plan for China Supporting Africa’s Agricultural Modernization. China will partner with Africa to expand grain plantation, encourage Chinese companies to increase agricultural investment in Africa, and enhance cooperation with Africa on seed and other areas of agro-technology, to support Africa in transforming and upgrading its agricultural sector. China will host the second Forum on China-Africa Cooperation in Agriculture in Hainan this November. 

It also plans to partner with Africa in tackling the current food crisis, China will provide additional emergency food assistance to African countries in need. More importantly, China has confidence that Africa will attain food self-sufficiency through its own efforts.

(iii) China will launch the Plan for China-Africa Cooperation on Talent Development. China plans to train 500 principals and high-caliber teachers of vocational colleges every year, and 10,000 technical personnel with both Chinese language and vocational skills for Africa. China will invite 20,000 government officials and technicians of African countries to participate in workshops and seminars. To support Africa in strengthening education and innovation, it will launch the China-Africa Universities 100 Cooperation Plan and 10 pilot exchange programs of China-Africa partner institutes.

China sees the world undergoing rapid transformation and unpredictable turmoil, and the changes unseen in a century are unfolding at a faster pace. At this point of history, it becomes to address the deficit in development, overcome security challenges and enhance mutual learning between civilizations. 

In view of this, Chinese leader Xi Jinping has put forward the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative, called for peace, development, cooperation and mutual benefit, and advocated building a community with a shared future for mankind. These proposals have received the extensive support of African countries. China and Africa, through the creative explorations for modernization, are giving answers to the questions of the times, and making joint efforts to advance the great endeavors of win-win cooperation, harmonious coexistence and shared prosperity of civilizations. 

undefined

The BRICS leaders and Sergei Lavrov (representing Vladimir Putin). (Licensed under Creative Commons Public Domain Mark 1.0)

At the BRICS-Africa Outreach and BRICS Plus Dialogue, Xi Jinping reported a number of notable achievements the previous years as following:

The Global Development Initiative (GDI), precisely for the purpose of calling on the world to stay focused on development and lending impetus to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Last year, China held the first High-Level Dialogue on Global Development where a host of measures for development cooperation were unveiled. Encouraging progress has been made since then.

China has put development first and allocated more resources. China has set up a Global Development and South-South Cooperation Fund with a total funding of US$4 billion, and Chinese financial institutions will soon set up a special fund of US$10 billion dedicated to the implementation of the GDI.

China has taken results-oriented actions and deepened practical cooperation. From Asia to Africa, from Pacific island countries to the Caribbean, over 200 cooperation projects have come to fruition, and cooperation mechanisms are growing in areas such as poverty reduction, education and health. 

China has unleashed the power of innovation and built up momentum for development. Under the GDI, it has prioritized green development, new-type industrialization, the digital economy and some other key areas, and pursued a Partnership on New Industrial Revolution to boost high-quality development. 

China has tided over difficulties together and made development more resilient. Food and energy security bear on the economy of a country and the well-being of its people. It has launched a China-FAO South-South Cooperation Trust Fund, implemented the Food Production Enhancement Action, and provided food assistance to and shared agricultural technology with many countries. It has also initiated a Global Clean Energy Cooperation Partnership with a view to achieving energy security.  

China is a friend that Africa can count on. Over the past decade, China has provided a large amount of development assistance to Africa and partnered in building more than 6,000 kilometers of railway, over 6,000 kilometers of highway, and 80-plus large power facilities on the continent. Going forward, China will carry out more cooperation with African countries to support Africa in enhancing its own capacity for development. Specific measures will be taken, such as providing satellite mapping data products, implementing a Smart Customs cooperation partnership, and launching with UNESCO a “GDI for Africa’s Future” action plan, to support sustainable development in Africa.

It’s often-stated that like-minded friends inseparable move and work together. China and Africa demonstrate and/or testify to this popular rhetoric. As Africa faces formidable challenges during this time of complex geopolitical processes, China upholds true friendship and solidarity, displays optimum readiness to ensure high-quality comprehensive strategic partnership. The vigorous nature of the China-Africa cooperation meets the development needs of Africa and has been implemented efficiently, which has supported the economic and social development of African countries.

We can, at this juncture, say that the 15th BRICS meeting is a turn-key that brings along its fold substantial, if not additional changes for economic landscape across Africa. We have already witnessed, to an appreciable level, how China has partnered with Africa in building a large amount of connectivity infrastructure, carried out extensive cooperation with the AU and sub-regional organizations, and assisted the construction of several signature Pan-African projects, including the new AU Conference Center and the Africa Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Judging from above, we can conveniently conclude that advancing the African agenda is a strategic priority for China as it used the opportunity to portray its assertiveness during the BRICS summit. Understandably Africans hold high perceptions over China’s consistent engagement, dynamism in its collaborative partnership and strong attachment to achieve their development goals per the United Nations SGDs.

According the official documents, China will next year (2024) host the FOCAC meeting, where it will again draw up new plans for development in Africa. It is quite clear that China and Africa have eternal hope to carry forward the traditional friendship, enhance solidarity and coordination, and bolster cooperation across the board, both further desire to deliver a better future for the Chinese and African people, and set a fine example in the building of a community with a shared future for mankind. 

*

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.

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 the first 2024 Republican presidential debate last week, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis touted his time in Iraq.

“I learned in the military, I was assigned with U.S. Navy SEALs in Iraq, that you focus on the mission above all else, you can’t get distracted,” he declared.

Later in the debate he stated,

“I’m somebody that volunteered to serve, inspired by September 11 and I deployed to Iraq alongside U.S. Navy SEALs in places like Fallujah, Ramadi…”

Some viewers had the impression that DeSantis was a Seal, but he was actually a Harvard Law School graduate who was a Judge Advocate General Corps (JAG) alongside the Seals. DeSantis was deployed to Iraq in 2007 and 2008, during President George W. Bush’s “surge” (intended to postpone the obvious failure of the war until after Bush’s second term ended).

The American troops that Bush sent to Iraq were injected into a conflict where it was often nearly impossible to distinguish friend from foe—what author Robert Jay Lifton labeled “atrocity-producing situations.” Invoking his time in Fallujah, DeSantis may be confident that few Americans recall the carnage that preceded his time there.

Fallujah was hammered by two U.S. assaults in 2004. The first attack was launched in April 2004 in retaliation for the killings of four contractors for Blackwater, a company that became renowned for killing innocent Iraqis. After their corpses were dragged through the street, the Bush administration demanded vengeance.

President Bush reportedly gave the order: “I want heads to roll.” He raved at Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez during a video conference,

“If somebody tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them! We must be tougher than hell!…Stay strong! Stay the course! Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out!”

U.S. forces quickly placed the entire city under siege. The British Guardian reported:

“The U.S. soldiers were going around telling people to leave by dusk or they would be killed, but then when people fled with whatever they could carry, they were stopped at the U.S. military checkpoint on the edge of town and not let out, trapped, watching the sun go down.”

The city was blasted by artillery barrages, F–16 jets, and AC–130 Spectre planes which pumped 4,000 rounds a minute into selected targets. Adam Kokesh, who was present in Fallujah as a Marine Corps sergeant, later commented:

“During the siege of Fallujah, we changed rules of engagement more often than we changed our underwear. At one point, we imposed a curfew on the city, and were told to fire at anything that moved in the dark.”

The Bush administration decided to crush the city—but not until after Bush was safely reelected. In the weeks after Election Day, U.S. Army soldiers and Marines smashed the city of Fallujah, Iraq, killing an unknown number of civilians and leaving the city a burnt-out ruin. Marine Col. Gary Brandl explained the U.S. holy mission: “The enemy has got a face. He’s called Satan. He’s in Fallujah and we’re going to destroy him.”

Up to 50,000 civilians remained in Fallujah at the time of the second U.S. assault. At a November 8, 2004 press conference, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared that “Innocent civilians in that city have all the guidance they need as to how they can avoid getting into trouble.” Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Richard B. Myers said three days later that Fallujah “looks like a ghost town [because] the Iraqi government gave instructions to the citizens of Fallujah to stay indoors.”

Supposedly, Iraqi civilians would be safe even if when American troops went house to house “clearing” insurgents out. However, three years later, during the trials for killings elsewhere in Iraq, Marines continually invoked the Fallujah Rules of Engagement to justify their actions. Marine Corporal Justin Sharratt, who was indicted for murdering three civilians in Haditha (the charges were later dropped), explained in a 2007 interview with PBS:

“For the push of Fallujah, there [were no civilians]. We were told before we went in that if it moved, it dies…About a month before we went into the city of Fallujah, we sent out flyers…We let the population know that we were coming in on this date, and if you were left in the city, you were going to die.”

The interviewer asked, “Was the procedure for clearing a house in Fallujah different from other house clearing in Iraq?” Sharratt replied,

“Yes. The difference between clearing houses in Fallujah was that the entire city was deemed hostile. So every house we went into, we prepped with frags and we went in shooting.”

Thus, the Marines were preemptively justified in killing everyone inside—no questions asked. Former Congressman Duncan Hunter admitted in 2019,

“I was an artillery officer, and we fired hundreds of rounds into Fallujah, killed probably hundreds of civilians…probably killed women and children.”

The U.S. attack left much of Fallujah looking like a lunar landscape, with near-total destruction as far as the eye could see. Yet, regardless of how many rows of houses the United States flattened in the city, accusations that the United States killed noncombatants were false by definition. Because the U.S. government refused to count civilian casualties, they did not exist. And anyone who claimed to count them was slandering the United States and aiding the terrorists.

The carnage the U.S. forces inflicting on Fallujah was supposedly not massive retaliation but the well-disguised triumph of hope and freedom. Bush announced on December 1, “In Fallujah and elsewhere, our coalition and Iraqi forces are on the offensive, and we are delivering a message: Freedom, not oppression, is the future of Iraq…A long night of terror and tyranny in that region is ending, and a new day of freedom and hope and self-government is on the way.” But it is tricky for corpses to be hopeful.

During DeSantis’ first campaign to become Florida’s governor in 2018, his first words in his first televised advertisement were, “Ron DeSantis, Iraq War veteran.” The St. Augustine Record noted in 2018, “DeSantis was responsible for helping ensure that the missions of Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets in that wide swath of the Western Euphrates River Valley were planned according to the rule of law and that captured detainees were humanely treated.”

Most of the details of DeSantis’ time in Iraq have not been disclosed. But he was deployed into an area where stunning detainee abuses by the U.S. Army had previously been reported. In September 2005, Americans learned that three 82nd Airborne Division soldiers complained about Army cooks and other off-duty troops, for amusement and sport, routinely physically beating Iraqi detainees being held near Fallujah. One sergeant explained, “We would give [detainees] blows to the head, chest, legs and stomach, and pull them down, kick dirt on them. This happened every day.” The sergeant said that there were no problems as long as no detainees “came up dead…We kept it to broken arms and legs.” Captain Ian Fishback of the 82nd Airborne repeatedly sought to get guidance from superiors on the standards for lawful and humane treatment of detainees. He, like other officers, never received clear guidelines. Fishback publicly complained, “I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder, exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion, hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading treatment.”

It would be most helpful to American voters to learn more about what exactly Ron DeSantis did during his time in Iraq. Prior to his time in Iraq, he volunteered to be a legal advisor at Guantanamo Bay detention camp. In a 2018 interview for CBS Miami, he stated that one of his tasks was to clarify “the rules for force feeding detainees.” He also stated, “What I learned from [Gitmo] and I took to Iraq—they are using things like [false charges of] detainee abuse offensively against usit was a tactic, technique, and procedure.”  A Vice documentary that covered DeSantis’ role at Gitmo was scheduled for broadcast on Showtime but the May 28 air date was canceled on the day after DeSantis announced his presidential campaign.

The Pentagon’s records on DeSantis’ years as a JAG could help voters judge his candidacy for the presidency. But Americans would be damn fools to expect transparency from the feds or from most political candidates.

*

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.

Jim Bovard is the Senior Fellow for The Libertarian Institute. He is the author of Public Policy Hooligan (2012), Attention Deficit Democracy (2006), Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994), and 7 other books. He is a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors and has also written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Playboy, Washington Post, and other publications. His articles have been publicly denounced by the chief of the FBI, the Postmaster General, the Secretary of HUD, and the heads of the DEA, FEMA, and EEOC and numerous federal agencies.

Featured image: Des Moines, Iowa, USA – August 12, 2023: Florida Republican Governor and presidential candidate Ron DeSantis greets supporters at the Iowa State Fair fair side chats in Des Moines, Iowa. (Source: TLI)

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.

***

Amid a controversial visit from Vice President William Lai (the front-runner to be his country’s next leader), official documents reviewed by “MintPress News” show that the Taiwanese government is attempting to drum up anti-China hostility, influence and intimidate American politicians and is even working with the FBI and other agencies to spy on and prosecute Chinese American citizens.

Key points of this investigation

  • Taiwanese officials are monitoring Chinese Americans and passing intelligence to the FBI in attempts to have them prosecuted.
  • Taiwan is working with “friends” in media and politics to create a culture of fear towards China and Chinese people in the US
  • Taiwanese officials claim they are “directing” and “guiding” certain US politicians.
  • Taiwan is monitoring and helping to intimidate U.S. politicians they deem to be too pro-China.
  • The island is spending millions funding US think tanks that inject pro-Taiwan and anti-China talking points into American politics.

Working with the Feds to Prosecute Chinese Americans

Vice President Lai’s journey to the United States is, officially, only a stopover on his way to Paraguay (the U.S. does not formally recognize Taiwan as an independent state). He is scheduled to make appearances in both New York and San Francisco.

Lai himself is an outspoken leader of the growing movement for Taiwanese independence. Many nationalists see Taiwan as culturally different from the mainland and argue it would be better off as a fully independent state. To achieve this goal, they are attempting to gain American backing and influence American public opinion. China, however, sees the matter as purely internal, and American attempts to wrest Taiwan out of its orbit as a potential trigger for World War Three.

Part of the effort to influence American politics, the cables reveal, is waging a silent war against pro-Chinese groups and directly working and sharing intelligence with the FBI and other agencies.

“We should grasp the opportunity to counteract and further weaken China’s grassroots influence activities in the U.S. through adopting more offensive and lethal measures,” a cable from Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) reads.

The same document instructs all offices of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO or TECO) – Taiwan’s de facto U.S. embassy and consulates – to cooperate with local law enforcement.

“We are happy to witness that some local offices have already started exchanging intelligence related to China with U.S. federal staff. All offices are mandated to keep track of China’s activities and enhance the frequency of sharing information with U.S. officials,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs notes.

The exchanges between the different Taiwanese agencies make clear that Taiwan sees Chinese Americans as suspect and all pro-China or anti-Taiwanese sentiment expressed by Chinese Americans as possibly directed by Beijing itself.

“Chinese Americans have already adapted to the mainstream society, serving as the major channel for Chinese consulates to influence local politics, economics, culture, education and community groups. Their presence and activities pose great threats for Taiwan,” the New York TECO office wrote, which also noted that it had infiltrated some of these groups.

Earlier this year, Chinese American groups protested Taiwanese President Tsai-Ing Wen’s visit to the United States, upstaging the event. The demonstrations, TECO New York alleged, were led by the United Chinese Association of Brooklyn and the Chinese American Community Affairs Council.

Angered by this, it appears that Taiwan attempted to have these groups arrested and prosecuted as foreign agents, despite lamenting that they could find no evidence they broke any U.S. laws. As one cable noted:

The U.S. government is acutely aware that protesting and freedom of speech are guaranteed by the Constitution. Although it knows that Chinese Americans keep in constant contact with the Chinese Consulate in New York, it is quite difficult to charge them in ways that the FBI sued Chinese Americans.”

The plan, it seemed, was to continue to monitor pro-China groups in the hopes that they could find something actionable. As TECO New York wrote:

If we can collect clear and concrete evidence that Chinese Americans and community groups are directed by Chinese government, they will likely be prosecuted by the U.S. We are supposed to maintain the communication with U.S. law enforcement continuously, and share updated intelligence about Chinese Americans and community groups in our jurisdiction, in order to assist the U.S. to get hold of potential illegal actions by pro-China individuals and community groups.”

“MintPress” approached both TECO New York and the United Chinese Association of Brooklyn for comment but did not receive a response.

The FBI has already helped create a culture of fear among Chinese Americans. For example, the agency falsely accused Professor Xiaoxing Xi of Temple University of spying for Beijing. During their investigation, the FBI unlawfully searched his house and held his family at gunpoint. Xi is currently suing the government. A survey taken earlier this year found that 72% of Chinese researchers in the U.S. felt unsafe, and most were looking into pursuing job opportunities elsewhere.

Monitoring, Intimidating, “Directing,” and “Guiding” US Politicians

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also directs TECO staff to investigate and pressure American politicians who they deem too friendly with China, attempting to create a climate of fear and suspicion in the process.

Two prominent U.S. politicians the cables highlight are Governor of New York Kathy Hochul and Mayor of New York City Eric Adams. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote that they should help “our allies in politics, academia and the media” to investigate their relations to China. As MOFA stated:

We should encourage our allies to probe and expose the relations between Chinese American community groups and local politicians, and employ the current backdrop skeptical of China in U.S. society, which will make U.S. citizens stay alert with pro-China politicians, and warn them to show restraint and spontaneously distance themselves from China under the backdrop.”

While it is not explicitly stated how much – if any – influence Taiwan had in its publication, the documents also reference a series of hit pieces in “The National Review,” painting Hochul and Adams as suspiciously close to Communist China. One noted that Hochul enjoyed a “long-standing collaboration” with a genocide-denying Communist official who supports China’s “baseless claims to sovereignty over Taiwan.” Another article, which featured considerable FBI input, reported that both Hochul and Adams had received donations from Chinese Americans alleged to be secret police officers for Beijing.

The state of Utah has also turned into an unlikely battleground between China and Taiwan. In March, an “Associated Press” report headlined, “Amid strained U.S. ties, China finds unlikely friend in Utah” smeared a number of local politicians from the Beehive State, dubiously presenting them as in Beijing’s pocket. One legislator was questioned by the FBI after he introduced a resolution expressing solidarity with China in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, while a professor advocating for closer U.S./China relations was questioned twice.

China Utah Influence

This letter from Chinese President Xi Jinping to a Utah Elementary School in early 2020 was presented as evidence of China’s malign influence in the state. Jon Elswick | AP

Again, it is not clear whether Taiwan had any role in the story’s publication, although we do see the FBI/media/Taiwan nexus once again appearing. What is certain, however, is that they took full advantage of it. Another legislator highlighted in the AP report quickly rushed out a statement strongly supporting Taiwan and made a number of promises to the island. Fearing being smeared as pro-China, many Utah state representatives have since joined the Utah-Taiwan Friendship Caucus. Utah has also passed a number of pieces of pro-Taiwan or anti-China legislation.

Many of these bills have been promulgated by Candice Pierucci, a Republican legislator that the San Francisco TECO office describes as a “pro-Taiwan and promising political figure.” The wording of the TECO cables suggests Taiwan might consider Pierucci as under their control or direction. “Our office has directed Pierruci to follow the trend and lobby more lawmakers to join the Utah-Taiwan friendship caucus,” TECO San Francisco wrote. “We also guided Candice to take advantage of the AP reports to enhance her media exposure on ‘AP’ and ‘Fox News’ in order to shape her as a pro-Taiwan advocate,” it added (emphasis added).

MintPress approached TECO San Francisco and Pierucci for comment but has not received a response.

Information War

Anti-China hostility, both among elites and in the general population, has been rapidly rising in America. A recent Gallup poll found that only 15% of respondents viewed China in a positive light – an all-time low. As recently as 2018, a majority of Americans (53%) viewed the country favorably. However, increased hostility from Washington and a barrage of negative sentiment from politicians and media outlets has seen this figure fall. Hate crimes against Asian Americans have skyrocketed.

Conversely, support for Taiwan has been rising for decades, with the same Gallup poll finding a record-high 77% of Americans view Taiwan positively. Nearly nine in ten consider the conflict between China and Taiwan – a struggle between a state and an island the U.S. officially recognizes as part of China – as an “important” or “critical” threat to U.S. vital interests. Only 10% of Americans think it is relatively unimportant to U.S. national interests.

Part of this dramatic shift in outlook is down to Taiwanese efforts to bankroll a plethora of top U.S. think tanks. A 2021 “MintPress News” study found that TECRO had given millions of dollars to many of the most influential think tanks in the United States, including the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, The German Marshall Fund, the Center for a New American Security, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Hudson Institute, the Atlantic Council and the Center for American Progress.

These think tanks, in turn, pumped out papers, reports and other content supportive of Taiwan, highly critical of Beijing, and arguing that the U.S. needs to defend the former from the latter. For example, in 2019, TECRO donated between $250,000 and $500,000 to the Brookings Institute. Brookings, in turn, championed the island and routinely condemn Beijing’s attempts to bring it closer into its orbit.

However, while Taiwanese efforts might have played some role in it, most of the U.S. hostility towards China is entirely homegrown. China’s rapid economic rise has many in Washington worried that the U.S. is no longer the global hegemon. The country has turned itself into a manufacturing powerhouse and the top trading partner of more than 120 nations. China’s economy is expected to overtake the United States relatively soon. Worse still, in Washington’s eyes, is Beijing’s appetite for gigantic infrastructure projects all over the world, bringing countries closer to China and further from the United States.

China has become a world leader in a myriad of cutting-edge technologies, including 5G communications, high-speed rail, semiconductors, electric vehicles and solar energy. Unable to compete, the U.S. has pressured other nations to ban Chinese tech (and rely on America). Yet, its sanctions regime on Beijing appears to have done little to stymie China’s continued rise.

Instead, Washington’s goal appears to be to shift the conflict from the economic field towards a military one. Since President Obama’s “Pivot to Asia,” successive administrations have pulled military resources away from the Middle East and towards the Pacific. Today, the U.S. has an estimated 400 military bases surrounding China, and it has attempted to foster an “Asian NATO” of states willing to counter China’s rise.

Information warfare is also a critical component of the new struggle to halt Chinese growth. The U.S. banned sales of Huawei and ZTE electronic products and considered blocking the popular video app TikTok due to its connections with China. Other war planners have suggested “kicking China under the table” through psychological warfare, including commissioning “Taiwanese Tom Clancy” novels intended to demonize China and demoralize its citizens.

History Lesson

The triangular relationship between the U.S., China and Taiwan goes back to the Second World War when Chinese resistance to the Japanese invasion centered around two poles. One was nationalist in character and led by Chiang Kai-shek of the Kuomintang Party. The other was the Communist resistance led by Mao Zedong.

Despite a lack of resources, the Communists proved more capable of repelling the Japanese invaders and fought the U.S.-backed Kuomintang off the mainland. The U.S. actually invaded and occupied parts of China with a force of 50,000 troops for four years between 1945 and 1949. But it soon became clear that the Communists were too powerful. The U.S. retreated, and Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang fled to Taiwan, an island around 130 km (80 miles) off the mainland. There, they established a one-party state that ruled the country under martial law between 1949 and 1987. After decades of political terror and repression, the country had its first democratic presidential elections in 1996.

Chiang Kai-shek, left, and U.S. Navy officials salute the U.S. carrier Bonhomme Richard off Northern Taiwan on Nov. 11, 1957. Photo | US Navy

For decades, the United States refused to recognize Mao’s Communist government, instead viewing the government in Taiwan as the rightful ruler of all of China. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, there were many recriminations in Washington about the “loss” of China. Nevertheless, by the 1970s, it became clear that the Communists were going nowhere, and President Nixon began to pursue better relations. In 1979, the U.S. formally recognized Beijing as the sole legitimate government (thereby abandoning their Taiwanese allies). To this day, the official U.S. position is that Taiwan is not an independent state. Indeed, only a handful of countries recognize Taiwan as independent, the largest of which is Paraguay.

In the late 20th and early 21st century, China became a manufacturing hub for U.S. industry, its cheap and pliant workforce generating gigantic profits for corporate America. However, as China has become strong enough to pose a threat to U.S. dominance, attitudes to it in Washington have begun to sour. Today, in an attempt to weaken their rival, the U.S. is supporting a number of separatist movements, including in Tibet, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Taiwan.

Taiwan’s Future

Regardless of what the major powers want, support for independence in Taiwan itself has been growing. A recent poll found that 21% of Taiwanese people want the country to gradually move towards independence, while 4.5% favored an immediate break with China. The large majority, however, favored keeping the status quo situation continuing. Few advocated for unification with China.

China, however, sees Taiwanese independence as a red line, meaning increased Western attempts as pulling the island away from Beijing could result in it becoming the Ukraine of Asia. A recent poll found that most mainland Chinese would back a full-scale invasion of Taiwan. Given China’s position, then, Taiwanese politicians will have to tread carefully and deploy masterful diplomacy.

Lai, who has previously referred to himself as a “practical worker for Taiwan independence,” has attempted to encourage the U.S. to get more involved in the debate. “If Taiwan is safe, the world is safe, if the Taiwan Strait is peaceful, then the world is peaceful…We are already on the right track. Don’t be afraid and turn back because of the increased threat from authoritarianism. We must be brave and strong,” he said on Sunday.

Clearly, then, Lai sees the United States as key to the future prospects of a more independent Taiwan. The documents seen by “MintPress” clearly underscore this, though few would guess the extent to which Taiwan is meddling in U.S. affairs in its attempt to drum up support for this goal.

*

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.

Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.orgThe GuardianSalonThe GrayzoneJacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

Featured image: Taiwan’s Vice President William Lai, left, chats with Ingrid D. Larson, managing director of the American Institute in Taiwan/Washington Office upon arrival in New York, Aug. 13, 2023. Photo | Taiwan Presidential Office | Editing by MintPress News

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 April, Israeli security forces brutally assaulted Palestinian worshippers inside Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem.

In the aftermath of the attack, James Cleverly, Britain’s foreign secretary, called on “all parties to respect the historic status quo arrangements at Jerusalem’s holy sites and cease all provocative action”.

Cleverly would have known that there had been only one aggressor at Al-Aqsa – Israel. He would also have known that the status quo agreement places responsibility for internal security at Al-Aqsa with Jordan’s King Abdullah II.

And that the status quo agreement gives no role to Israeli forces inside the Al-Aqsa compound. Yet Cleverly went ahead and cheerfully made his false statement.

A magnificent new book by Middle East historian Peter Shambrook places Cleverly’s casual deceit in its tragic historical context.

Policy of Deceit: Britain and Palestine, 1914-1939: Shambrook, Peter:  9780861546329: Amazon.com: Books

In Policy of Deceit, Britain and Palestine, 1914-1939, Shambrook shows that Cleverly’s cynically misleading account of events inside Al-Aqsa – as well as countless other false and unbalanced statements by British officials – are part of a pattern of British dishonesty over Palestine that dates back more than a century.

In an admirable display of clear thinking and meticulous scholarship, Shambrook shows that Britain has lied about its intentions concerning Palestine from the start.

Britain and the Ottomans

At the heart of his forensic investigation is the deal struck between the British empire and the sharif of Mecca after the outbreak of the First World War.

Britain was then the greatest power in the world but became fearful that she would lose overseas “possessions” after the Ottomans sided with Germany.

Matters turned desperate when, against most expectations, the Ottoman empire repulsed the British invasion of Turkey in 1915.

In the wake of this disaster, the British concluded that they had no choice but to strike a deal with Hussein Ibn Ali, sharif of Mecca, a member of the Hashemite family who could trace his lineage back 41 generations to the Prophet Mohammed – and was chief religious authority for Islam’s holy shrines.

The deal was simple: the sharif would lead an Arab revolt against the Ottomans. In return, Britain promised to grant an extensive Arab state after the Ottomans were defeated.

Sir Henry McMahon, high commissioner in Egypt, was given the task of entering into correspondence with the sharif.

In this eye-opening book, Shambrook tells the story of the sharif/McMahon correspondence. This means entering a minefield, because the British state has never accepted that Palestine was included in the area promised to the sharif.

The British position has been supported by serious scholars. Professor Isaiah Friedman, in Palestine: A Twice Promised Land? (published 23 years ago) buttressed the British government’s position. So does Elie Kedourie’s In the Anglo-Arab Labyrinth (1976).

Shambrook, through research in private papers and public records, refutes both Kedourie and Friedman’s findings, in the process dismantling the official account of events, concluding that the British government did indeed promise Palestine to the sharif.

What’s more, he shows that the British lied about this from the start. Among the long list of British decision-makers who made misleading comments are David Lloyd George, Arthur Balfour, George Curzon, Winston Churchill – and numerous Foreign Office officials.

Cynically Exploited

At the heart of the British deception was a wilful misinterpretation of the word “districts”, which was rendered by the Arab word wilayat in the letters sent by McMahon to the sharif.

A very similar word – vilayet – was used by Turkish administrators. It had a subtly different meaning. This difference was cynically exploited by the Foreign Office to exclude all of Palestine from the area assigned to the sharif.

How this happened is a case study in British perfidy. In 1920 the Foreign Office invented an Ottoman “Vilayet of Damascus”, the boundary of which stretched 300 miles south to the Gulf of Aqaba. No such province had ever existed.

Ottoman administrative districts were very precise geographically. The province included in the fictitious Vilayet invented by Britain was actually called – as any cursory look at an Ottoman map would have established – the Vilayet of Syria.

This essential fact was well-known, not just to the Ottomans but among all the great powers, and was clear as day on the detailed map used by British generals in the War Office back in London during their strategic planning to defeat the Ottomans.

Furthermore, Shambrook establishes that McMahon was not making an innocent mistake when he used the term wilayat in his correspondence. The Egyptian high commissioner knew perfectly what the word meant in Arabic, and what vilayet meant in Turkish. We can be certain of this because alongside wilayat he also used the term vilayet in the correct sense in other parts of the correspondence.

Had McMahon specified in his letter that he reserved the whole region to the west of the Vilayet of Syria, then indeed all of Palestine would have been excluded from the deal he struck with the sharif.

But he did not. 

Broken Promise

Significantly, McMahon set out these facts in an explanatory letter despatched two days later to the Foreign Office. He told his masters back in London that he had excluded the northern coasts of Syria (modern-day Lebanon) from his offer to the sharif, which by no stretch of the imagination could include the Palestine region.

Shambrook goes on to prove that this was the accepted view of British military and diplomatic decision-makers right up to 1920. It was only then that the Foreign Office invented the Vilayet of Damascus. Even at this stage, the Foreign Office was clear there had been no ambiguity in the McMahon correspondence as far as Palestine was concerned. 

But it needed to adjust to the new political reality of a Lloyd George government that was determined to implement a new pro-Zionist political machinery for Palestine.

Over the next 20 years the British government – on 24 separate occasions! –  refused to publish the sharif/McMahon correspondence in the face of Arab and other demands.

The reason, as revealed in the records, is simple. Officials knew that it would be impossible to defend the broken promise to the sharif over Palestine in parliament.

This refusal, as Shambrook shows, soured Anglo-Arab relations throughout the inter-war period. Shambrook also shows that the only reason the British eventually published the correspondence in 1939 was to keep the Arab world close as another world war loomed.

No wonder that the great historian Arnold Toynbee, who was a Foreign Office official during the First World War, later wrote that

“Palestine was not excepted from the area in which the British government promised in 1915 to recognise and uphold Arab independence, and that the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was, therefore, incompatible with a previous commitment”.

Toynbee added that this deceit “is almost the worst crime of which a professional diplomatist is capable, for it compromises that country’s reputation for straight-dealing”.

Festering Wounds

Shambrook’s book is a major historical achievement. He has solved the mystery of the sharif/McMahon agreement. He has overturned the century-long British narrative that Palestine was excluded from the agreement with the sharif. He has also disposed of the notion, promoted by scholars from Albert Hourani to Martin Gilbert, that the truth about the agreement was mysterious or elusive.

More than that, he has shown that the sharif/McMahon correspondence may have contained greater legal weight than the famous promise to the global Jewish community two years later in the shape of the Balfour Declaration, which was a statement of intent and not (officially at any rate) an agreement between two parties.

We should remember today that the sharif fulfilled his part of the agreement, leading a revolt against Ottoman rule in the Hijaz. 

The British did not.

The Palestinian people have been obliged to live with the consequences ever since. 

Shambrook concludes his book with a call for Britain to acknowledge her broken promise.

“To heal the wounds of history anywhere requires acknowledgment of error and the willingness of all parties to be held to account for the policies they pursued,” he wrote.

“In the Middle East, where such wounds have festered for so long, a British government’s acknowledgment, however late in the day, of the truth concerning the pledge given by a predecessor to the sharif of Mecca in 1915 would surely be welcomed.”

*

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

Peter Oborne won best commentary/blogging in both 2022 and 2017, and was also named freelancer of the year in 2016 at the Drum Online Media Awards for articles he wrote for Middle East Eye. He was also named as British Press Awards Columnist of the Year in 2013. He resigned as chief political columnist of the Daily Telegraph in 2015. His latest book is The Fate of Abraham: Why the West is Wrong about Islam, published in May by Simon & Schuster. His previous books include The Triumph of the Political Class, The Rise of Political Lying, Why the West is Wrong about Nuclear Iran and The Assault on Truth: Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and the Emergence of a New Moral Barbarism.

Featured image: Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir visits Al-Aqsa, 3 January (Social Media)

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.

***

Recently articles have appeared on the front page of the New York Times that try to smear Code Pink, The People’s Forum and TriContinental as Chinese agents. The Times article was followed by a statement from Senator Marco Rubio calling for investigation of the people mentioned in the article. 

Another article using similar McCarthyite tactics, by Lawrence S. Wittner, appeared in CounterPunch, Foreign Policy in Focus and The Daily Kos. Each are considered “progressive” publications. This attack uses the exact terminology of HUAC – the House on Un-American Activities Committee. Wittner’s attack is titled: “Spinning Illusions: The Anti-American Left and the Ukraine War” 

The article targeted the United Antiwar Coalition – UNAC, International Action Center, Code Pink, The Peace in Ukraine Coalition. UNAC and IAC are called “campists” and “anti-American.”

RESPONSE TO: Lawrence S. Wittner’s “Spinning Illusions: The Anti-American Left and the Ukraine War” – a new McCarthyism

These attacks are designed to silence critics of the U.S. at a time that we are seeing an escalating U.S. / NATO war in Ukraine and as the U.S. continues its aggression towards another nuclear power, China.  

We must stop this new Cold War and this move back to McCarthyism. We must not be silent.

These attacks are designed to silence critics of the U.S. at a time that we are seeing an escalating U.S. / NATO war in Ukraine and as the U.S. continues its aggression towards another nuclear power, China.  

We must stop this new Cold War and this move back to McCarthyism. We must not be silent.

Lawrence S. Wittner’s article, “Spinning Illusions: The Anti-American Left and the Ukraine War” is a throwback to McCarthyism, replacing analysis with name-calling. It attacks the United National Antiwar Coalition (UNAC), naming Sara Flounders, an organizer of UNAC and the International Action Center. Also attacked was Code Pink, accusing all of us as being “Campists.” This is an old term, a slur, against those who dare to take sides in the international class struggle.

The article’s title accuses those named as being “The Anti-American Left.”  Sounds like Wittner is resurrecting HUAC – the House Un-American Activities Committee, that destroyed peoples’ lives in the 1950s and early 1960s simply for what they thought and said.

Other evidence that the U.S. government is headed toward McCarthyism are the indictments of leaders of the Black is Back Coalition for their opposition to NATO’s role in Ukraine −− charging them with “distributing Russian propaganda.”

The New York Times, a media conglomerate that gives propaganda support to each U.S. war  −− remember Judith Miller’s hack job on Iraq building up to the 2003 invasion −− published a front-page article insinuating that Code Pink, The People’s Forum and Tricontinental are agents of China. Why? Because these groups campaign to say: “No to a New Cold War.” This article’s signers support this campaign – 100%.  Senator Marco Rubio has called for the Department of Justice to investigate these antiwar activists. Wittner’s article comes across as another desperate effort to silence opposition as the U.S. and NATO march closer to war with Russia and China.

Wittner wrote, “Sara Flounders, a leader of the International Action Center and the United National Antiwar Coalition, two of the largest campist organizations in the United States, lovingly depicted a recent BRICS summit as devoted to ‘building an open world economy that . . . promotes cooperation.’ She contrasted this with a summit of the Group of Seven (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Britain, and the United States)― ‘the countries responsible for the looting and colonization of Asia, Africa, and the Americas. They owe reparations for the genocide of Indigenous peoples, the enslavement of African people, and the devastating world wars of the 20th century.’ Naturally, ‘this summit of the most powerful and wealthiest imperialist powers was focused on how to intensify sanctions on Russia and how to continue the war in Ukraine.’ Behind them stood NATO, ‘the U.S. commanded military alliance that serves as a global enforcer of U.S. corporate power.’”

Flounders stands behind what she wrote. Completely.

Wittner uses polls, Congressional votes and U.N. votes −− all promoted by U.S. power −− to claim support for the current U.S./NATO war in Ukraine. Similar “evidence” was utilized to justify U.S. wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia and Libya. Support evaporated as the wars dragged on. Already a CNN poll (Aug. 4) confirms the majority of the U.S. population is opposed to additional funding to Ukraine. But Biden is demanding another $24 billion for the Kiev government.

Wittner writes that we “focused criticism on the U.S. government, NATO and Ukraine.” Yes! We in UNAC do focus our work on stopping U.S. wars. For example, we explain that NATO is a U.S.-commanded, U.S.-equipped military alliance. NATO trainers, advisors and equipment have been deployed in Ukraine since a U.S.-supported coup in Kiev in 2014 overthrew the elected Ukrainian government.

Through NATO, Washington built up the small Ukrainian military to be bigger than nearly any of the NATO member countries. It is Washington that pushed NATO expansion to the borders of Russia, after the fall of the Soviet Union. For what purpose? According to numerous official U.S. statements and articles, it was to destroy Russia.  But if we say this, we are falsely accused of being controlled by Russia or China.

What we are. What we need.

UNAC is an antiwar coalition based in the U.S, and it is the U.S. that has been responsible for most of the military aggressions since WWII. This is still the only country to use nuclear weapons and still threatens to use them.

Millions of lives were lost in past U.S. wars. Trillions of dollars, with bipartisan support, goes directly to U.S. military contractors, a steady stream of guaranteed profits. When those who want social services observe that the United States is the only industrialized country without free medical care, free university education, crumbling infrastructure and with millions of people who are unhoused and desperate, they should consider this waste of wealth. Shouldn’t we address these burning issues?

The world needs an antiwar movement willing to consistently speak out and mobilize opposition among poor and working people when it is most difficult and unpopular to resist the endless U.S. wars. In the U.S., we need to oppose the devastating impact of 800 U.S. military bases around the world and a military budget 40% of the world’s total.  We need to address the illegal and inhuman U.S. sanctions on 40 countries, comprising a third of the world population.

But most important is that we need an antiwar movement that always links these endless U.S. wars to the war here at home. The racist repression, the world’s largest prison population and three police killings a day, every day, widening attacks on migrants, LGBTQ+ and others, are the outgrowth of U.S. wars.

We are determined to continue to oppose U.S. wars and demand that the hundreds of billions of dollars of the military budget that benefits corporate power in the U.S. be spent on people’s needs.

We are actively building, with many others, for nationally coordinated days of opposition to the U.S./NATO war in Ukraine – Sept 30 to Oct. 7 in more than 100 U.S. cities.

Contact UNACpeace.org for information on past and upcoming antiwar actions.

*

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.

Joe Lombardo – Coordinator of United National Antiwar Coalition – UNACpeace.org, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, [email protected]

Sara Flounders – Administrative Committee of UNAC, Co-Director of International Action Center, Contributing Editor of Workers World [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.

***

Mere days before Yevgeny Prigozhin supposedly died, he posted a video announcing that the “Wagner” PMC (private military company) will be returning to “its roots” by refocusing on Africa. And while the address was supposed to mark this shift, in reality, the Russian PMC never stopped operating in Africa. What’s more, it never even stopped expanding the scope of its activities, as many African nations and their militaries are looking to intensify cooperation with “Wagner”. And although it may seem unclear who will replace Prigozhin (provided he’s really out of the picture), the actual leadership behind the PMC doesn’t even need to reveal itself.

It’s important to note that the video Prigozhin posted was just one of the few since the so-called “mutiny” in late June, serving as a farewell of sorts. It’s clear that even in the case Prigozhin actually died, the idea that “Wagner” will cease operations is pure nonsense. Its members are personally invested to serve their country and they’ve proven it time and again, regardless if they need to protect Russia’s interest in Ukraine, Africa, Latin America or elsewhere. All this is coordinated with Moscow’s extensive global intelligence network, in “Wagner’s” case, the GRU (Russian military intelligence) in particular, but also the SVR (dealing with external operations).

Apart from the long-running presence in the Central African Republic (CAR), “Wagner” is also operating in Libya, both Congo and DR Congo, Mozambique, Zimbabwe and likely Somalia. Western sources are claiming that the PMC is also present (at least covertly) in Burkina Faso, Mali, Guinea, Niger, Chad and Sudan, all of which have seen the military take power from corrupt civilian officials and governments. It’s important to note that “Wagner” is working specifically with security forces, so it’s safe to assume they’ve exerted at least some influence on the decision-making. The mainstream propaganda machine is going out of its way to present this as supposedly “bad”.

However, the peoples of these long-exploited African countries would beg to differ. The popularity of the Russian PMC is growing exponentially and by the day, as hundreds of millions of Africans are desperate to finally get rid of the (neo)colonial yoke that has been ravaging their continent for centuries. Finding common ground with Russia on this matter is only logical. The political West is trying to present the events unfolding in much (if not most) of Africa as some sort of Moscow’s “evil design”. And yet, Russia is simply providing tools for what African nations themselves want – actual freedom. The example of Niger illustrates this perfectly.

What’s more, Niger is not alone. Its neighbors, specifically Mali and Burkina Faso, have offered direct support, both military and humanitarian. Other African powers, such as Algeria, are also taking part in this effort. Even if they didn’t have much in common, the threat posed by the political West is more than enough to have these countries unite their efforts. Interestingly, wherever “Wagner” appeared, the suppression of various terrorist insurgencies and organizations was almost instantaneous. This is in stark contrast to NATO-backed “humanitarian interventions” that usually result in scores of dead civilians, destruction of infrastructure and overall instability.

This usually involves constant American drone strikes with unclear objectives that further cause nothing but the exacerbation of terrorism in African countries hosting Western military presence. With “Wagner’s” successful operations, these issues cease, leading to the restoration of normal economic activities, which further contributes to stability. The framework of the Russian PMC’s operations is also rather self-sustainable. Namely, in exchange for their services, many African governments simply lease their own enterprises to “Wagner”, which the PMC then uses to finance its activities. The mainstream propaganda machine is trying to present this as supposed “exploitation”.

However, the logic of many African countries is rather sound – it’s better to give “Wagner” a single mine (or even several) than have the political West perpetually exploit them while maintaining a semblance of “independence”. Corrupt officials are the lifeline of neocolonialism in Africa (and not just Africa, obviously), which perfectly explains why the militaries are bearers of this long overdue change. Transitioning to an actual democratic civilian government is a process that will take time, but these countries have to start from somewhere. Precisely their militaries provide the springboard for the process, while “Wagner” provides the necessary tools, training and direct combat support when needed.

In the meantime, the United States and its vassals keep complaining about the “hampering of the fight against terrorism due to military takeovers” across Africa. Obviously, this is just a pretext to keep Western presence in these countries, which is increasingly unpopular among young Africans. Namely, the latest example of this is Gabon, another African country where France has a military base. Western sources are already speculating that “Wagner” supposedly had a hand in the military takeover, although the Russian PMC is not even present there. This only reinforces the notion that Moscow doesn’t need to do anything to damage Western interests in Africa. The political West has been doing that by itself for approximately half a millennium now.

*

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.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

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.

***

Being a psychiatrist certainly makes me no specialist in areas of immunology, cardiology, surgery or infectious disease. But having earned a doctorate in medicine I was provided an education in reasoning within this extraordinarily complex discipline from first principles. Therefore as an inquisitive physician throughout the covid operation, I could not help but be baffled by the response of institutional authorities.

Forgive me for repeating myself, but a ‘first principles’ approach would never have led to lockdowns, distancing, masks or the nefarious Jab. It would never have led to mandates or apartheid. And it would never have led to the promulgation of mRNA agents and the relentless push not only to inject all of humanity but, alas, all of the animal kingdom upon which humanity relies for food.

I repeat myself because with the whiff of yet another novel ‘variant’ restrictive measures are again in the news in America, whose so-called president has promised a yet more effective jab.

Effective at what, one may ask? At creating even more disastrous adverse effects and excess death? At degrading one’s natural immune system so as to render one more susceptible to infections and cancers?

Leaving aside the fact that I never believed a vaccine of any kind was necessary to manage the covid threat, for reasons I have laid out in many essays already, the description of the emergency-use instrument was proof enough for me that it would be a disaster. Flooding a body with millions upon millions of coronavirus spike protein antigens manufactured by the body itself, thanks to the integration of messenger RNA into cell machinery, did not seem like a very good idea — unless one wished to wreak havoc.

Even a psychiatrist like me could see that the potential for spike protein/antibody complexes in tremendous numbers could create autoimmune catastrophe via myriad mechanisms, and even a psychiatrist would suspect that somehow those pesky things would cross the blood-brain barrier despite assurances to the contrary. In short, I figured that they would go everywhere.

And so they have.

The greater looming question, a question that continues to vex me to this day, is why or how so many medical specialists — some of whom have now come to have changed their tune — initially insisted that the Jab would be advisable for the elderly and medically compromised, if not for all. And indeed I wonder how some of these specialists, prominent in the current opposition to the Jab, came themselves to have received it.

You see, to argue from another set of first principles — principles of psychological rationality — it simply made no sense then, nor does it make sense now. Nor does it make any conceivable sense that the astonishingly predominant majority of physicians could have touted the Jab, forgotten about informed consent and early treatment, and cheered the imprisonment of healthy people against all hitherto formulated pandemic guidelines.

That we have been betrayed by our institutional medical authorities, trans-nationally and intra-nationally — and here I am thinking not only of the infamously corrupt World Health Organisation and Federation of State Medical Boards but of entities such as the Medical Council of New Zealand and the American Board of Internal Medicine and many others — is no longer a surprise. We can see them for what they are, for the despicable agenda they have imposed, and for the scientific and ethical foundation they, by their actions, have destroyed.

That we have been betrayed by our governments also is no surprise, given their dismissal and oppression of the very citizenry from whom these governments are supposed to derive their power.

The fight against these powers is not easy, as we know; and as we also know these powers delight in confusing and dividing any concerted opposition, which they accomplish in many ways, so as to weaken us.

During ‘conventional’ wartime it is commonplace for adversaries to send out spies, to infiltrate each other, to play the game of double and even triple agents, and to mislead each other in every possible way. In this war — in this war of the Globalist Few against the Populist Many — the massive communications agency masquerading as ‘news’ and ‘trusted media sources’ has hammered away without pause. It’s an irregular and really unfair war, and a thoroughly unique one given its scale, even though the techniques themselves of artful deception and purposeful division and the combination of soft and hard force have been around forever.

That our enemy — the enemy of real science and human autonomy, the proponent of censorship and the persecution of dissent — will seek to control us is obvious. However, the notion of ‘controlled opposition’ is in vogue and proceeds too trippingly from the tongue. Strictly speaking it is only one of the various means and devices used to disrupt our clamoring.

I’ve never liked this designation because it can become another of those irrefutable assertions whenever a disagreement arises and can be made to cover so many scenarios that it loses usefulness. Surely there can be spies and traitors and infiltrators and the like, and there always will. That’s life.

I worry more about ‘self-controlled opposition’ — about people who need no higher official to pull their strings but who have an uncanny knack for knowing how to curry favor and when to keep from going ‘too far’.

A realist is compelled to acknowledge that within any group of people, on whatever side, personalities will arise whose fealty is more to themselves than to the common mission. These are the folks with the kind of pull that can bend a movement astray.

Vaccines have become a kind of black hole, sucking so much of our discursive energy into endless debate. I have learned over these past three and a half years that no vaccine can be trusted — just as no medication can be. It is sound and rational to demand to know about the ingredients and adjuvants of every vaccine, just as it is sound and rational to what to know how fluoxetine is supposed to work and how it might go wrong. But we are left with the choice to partake and receive, or not. A choice that is non-negotiable, no matter what our governments may say while brandishing their scepter of fear.

Which brings me back to first principles. When the rebellious crew of fifty-six Americans signed the Declaration of Independence, they made preeminently clear the principles of human autonomy, rights that were inborn rather then conferred. They were, naturally, creatures of their time, molded by its social and cultural and racial constraints. The first principles, however, that they espoused and enshrined, held with them the key to overcoming these constraints. It took a while for their reasoning to be extended to its logical end to include all men and women, regardless of color — but it got there thanks to the enunciation of these foundational principles.

Same for psychoanalysis. Whatever one thinks or knows or thinks he or she knows about Freud and analysis and the mores of fin de siècle Vienna, the principle of free association as a portal to the unconscious mind transcends the societal and cultural milieu of the age in which it was discovered.

As we fight this fight of our lives the surest sign of corruption within our midst is whether our leaders adhere to or stray from principle.

So, going forward, if I start hearing about a better mRNA vaccine or an improved method of masking or a friendlier way to limit our freedom to assemble; if I start to read about how the harsh measures imposed and the rationale for a lightning-quick jab had some merit, all in the name of the greater good of course, I’ll know whom I’m up against.

*

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.


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.

*** 

Since Bangladesh’s upcoming elections are poised to become the US’ next “trigger event” for geostrategically reshaping South Asia, it’s imperative that India offsets these cascading scenarios or preemptively mitigates the damage to its interests if that isn’t possible. India has no problem with the US per se and wants to strengthen their strategic ties, but it isn’t going to stand aside as the liberal-globalists provoke a regional security crisis. If the situation worsens, then so too might US-Indian ties.

South Asian media recently reported that India has pushed back against US meddling in Bangladesh through diplomatic channels after Washington imposed a new visa policy ahead of next January’s elections that many regard as aimed at pressuring the ruling Awami League (AL) party. AL General Secretary Obaidul Quader said that India could have done this because it’s in its own interests, not due to any malicious or partisan intent like his Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) rivals had earlier implied.

The Hindu published a detailed analysis about the geostrategic stakes at play in Bangladesh’s upcoming elections that can be read here, which draws attention to the consequences for Indian security if the BNP replaces the AL. In brief, the US might advance its stalled military agenda there that could see its armed forces playing a greater role in the Bay of Bengal. Pakistani influence might also return and risk leading to Bangladesh once again hosting anti-Indian forces. Here are some additional analyses:

These last three argue that America’s liberalglobalist policymaking faction wants to punish India for defying their demands to condemn and sanction Russia. They’re also motivated to undermine their pragmatic rivals’ recent policy success in getting the US to finally treat India as an equal in spite of the aforesaid and Delhi’s refusal to become Washington’s anti-Chinese proxy. For these reasons, the liberal-globalists are meddling in Bangladesh and India’s Manipur in order to provoke a regional security crisis.

Their goals are severalfold:

1) exacerbate preexisting ethno-political fault lines to show India that they can create serious difficulties for it in the neighborhood;

2) signal that these problems could be alleviated if India complies with their policy demands;

3) further pressure the ruling BJP and embolden the opposition ahead of next spring’s elections by worsening regional tensions if India doesn’t relent;

4) spark a post-election Bangladeshi crisis that spills over the border; and 5) wage a full-blown Hybrid War.

Manipur’s unrest is unlikely to ever spiral completely out of control since that state is part of India so its troubles can therefore always be dealt with by Delhi however its policymakers deem fit, but Bangladesh is an independent country where Indian influence is naturally much more limited. The US’ visa policy suggests that Washington wants to embolden the BNP to protest more ahead of the polls so as to improve the odds that it ousts the AL, which is being targeted for ideological reasons just like the BJP:

Both ruling parties prioritize relations with Russia, correspondingly defied US pressure upon them to dump their shared decades-long strategic partner, and are expanding the use of national currencies. These three policies are unacceptable to America’s liberal-globalists, thus explaining why they decided to target those two on superficial “democratic” bases to disguise their ideological motives. India is concerned that this faction might soon destabilize Bangladesh, hence why it’s reportedly pushing back.

If the BNP feels emboldened by the US’ new visa policy to riot with the expectation that the AL might either be reluctant to respond or have its leading officials heavily sanctioned if they do, then it could set into motion a self-sustaining cycle of political violence that quickly spirals out of control. It goes without saying that unrest in this country of nearly 170 million could easily spill across the border into Northeast India and catalyze a chain reaction of crises due to this region’s complex preexisting fault lines.

As was earlier mentioned, India’s options for averting a regional security crisis or adequately addressing one if it proves impossible to prevent are much more limited in Bangladesh than in Manipur or elsewhere in its Northeast, but therein lies the reason why it’s reportedly pushing back against the US. This is the fullest extent to which India can realistically go right now in trying to get America’s pragmatic policymaking faction to rein in their subversive liberal-globalist rivals before it’s too late.

Under no circumstances will India capitulate to the pressure put upon it through this incipient Hybrid War campaign to ditch Russia and then go to war against China at the US’ behest, nor is Bangladesh likely to ditch Russia either before abandoning its de-dollarization plans with India and Russia. Accordingly, it’s therefore expected that the liberal-globalists will continue with their destabilization campaign aimed at punishing both, including through a full-blown Hybrid War in the region if need be.

Even in the unlikely event that the AL buckles under pressure, the US would probably still push for it to be replaced by the BNP since their return to power could be a quid pro quo for the Pakistani Establishment removing former Prime Minister Imran Khan in April 2022’s post-modern coup. Islamabad is also suspected of arming Kiev despite denying it and officially abstaining from anti-Russian UNGA Resolutions, and it might have been promised a geopolitical reward for this by the US in Bangladesh.

After all, the US’ support of the semi-Islamist BNP and by association its indisputably Islamist allies from the Jamaat-e-Islami is a conspicuous change from its policy in recent years of no longer backing political Islamic parties, which de facto entered into effect after the US’ earlier falling out with Qatar and Turkiye. Though ties with those two have since been patched up, there hadn’t been any prior indications before its tacit support of the BNP a few months back that it was considering supporting such groups again.

Since there’s no evidence to suggest that this represents a larger change in policy, or rather a reversion to the previous one, it thus compellingly appears to be the case that this exception is part of a quid pro quo with Pakistan to return the BNP to power in exchange for all that its regime has done since last year. This also serves US interests too since it: 1) keeps Pakistan from flirting with another “Pivot to China”; 2) intensifies retributive pressure on India; and 3) thus optimizes the US’ regional divide-and-rule policy.

Since Bangladesh’s upcoming elections are poised to become the US’ next “trigger event” for geostrategically reshaping South Asia, it’s imperative that India offsets these cascading scenarios or preemptively mitigates the damage to its interests if that isn’t possible. India has no problem with the US per se and wants to strengthen their strategic ties, but it isn’t going to stand aside as the liberal-globalists provoke a regional security crisis. If the situation worsens, then so too might US-Indian ties.   

*

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 Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India walk along the Colonnade of the White House, Thursday, June 22, 2023, to the Oval Office following the State Arrival Ceremony on the South Lawn. (Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith)

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.

***

“But yet mathematical certainty is after all, something insufferable. Twice two makes four seems to me simply a piece of insolence. Twice two makes four is a pert coxcomb who stands with arms akimbo barring your path and spitting. I admit that twice two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, twice two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too.” Fyodor Dostoevsky, Notes from the Underground

Everybody knows that 2 + 2 = 4 since 4 = 2 + 2. They know that excellent thing with certainty but generally fail to appreciate the charming nature of 2 + 2 = 5. Tautologies are usually preferred to choices that seem to contradict the “laws of nature.” Mind-forged manacles are popular because freedom from the laws of nature, while desired, is feared. It suggests that liberty is a fundamental existential truth.

Don’t get me wrong, I can count. I am drinking my second cup of coffee. Number one has disappeared down my throat, but the second coffee tastes fine. It is real and still exists. The first is just an abstraction now – number 1 – a simple vertical line on the page.

We are pissing our lives away on abstractions, forgetting that notation is a system of symbols that direct us to what they intend. The key is to grasp what is intended. The cognitive construction of the number system is a useful tool, but when it is pushed as the essential tool to grasp the meaning of life it has become a tool of control. That is the case today.

The Internet and digital media are the greatest propaganda tools ever invented. They have come to us on the wings of numbers.  They are insidious in the extreme, as the etymology of “insidious” tells us – Latin, insidere, to sit on, occupy – for over the last few decades they have acted as an invading army occupying our minds with numbers in a cunning attempt to mathematize our lives for techno-scientific, financialized neo-liberal capitalist purposes. To prepare us for the Great Reset when people and machines will be indistinguishable, Artificial Intelligence (AI), 5-G ultra microwaves, and Agenda 2030 will be fully established, and when human life has become part of The Internet of Things.

That, at least, is what the builders of the new Crystal Palace intend. At the moment, their Digital Palace seems like a stone wall that is here to stay, but as Fyodor has said, people are strange creatures and will sometimes refuse to be reconciled to the impossibility of “stone walls if it disgusts you to be reconciled to it.” I am disgusted.

Propaganda (Vintage): The Formation of Men's Attitudes: Amazon.co.uk: Jacques Ellul: 9780394718743: Books

The construction of the Digital Palace is the long goal that has been underway for decades. To erase lived time and space, flesh and blood humans, and by transfixing people with numbers, to create an abstract and ephemeral reality through a constantly evoked sense of emergency. Living the machine/Internet life would never be acceptable if people had not been subjected to an onslaught of numbers/statistics/data that has accustomed them to think like computers. The great Jacques Ellul made it clear in his classic work, Propaganda, that propaganda is much more than the waving of a magic wand and lying, although it is that. It is a long process. He writes:

It is based on slow, constant impregnation. It creates convictions and compliance through imperceptible influences that are effective only by continuous repetition. It must create a complete environment for the individual, one from which he never emerges. And to prevent him from finding external points of reference, it protects him by censoring everything that might come in from the outside. The slow building up of reflexes and myths, of psychological environment and prejudices, is not a stimulus that disappears quickly. . .  [my emphasis]

The mathematization of our thinking has been the essential first step in addicting people to the internet complex where mind-control is so effective. I say first step, yet it has been concomitantly accompanied by daily litanies of lies about world events through what Ray McGovern aptly terms the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT).  In his usually masterful way, the great journalist John Pilger has recently pointed out so many of those grotesque lies about U.S. wars of aggression around the world. Their numbers are legion, but not the kind of numbers you will find in the mainstream media. We are drowning in lies and numbers produced by a nihilistic elite in love with power, money, mayhem, and murder.

Twenty or so years ago a massive push was organized to give prime emphasis throughout the educational system to what is termed STEM subjects – science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. This has been implemented at the expense of subjects that have traditionally been associated with the liberal arts – philosophy, history, literature, art, music, etc., subjects that introduce students to thinking in the widest and deepest ways. It is no accident that instrumental logic has replaced deep thought for so many people and the poets have been replaced by intellectual pimps. The emphasis on STEM subjects has paralleled the rise of the Internet with its drumbeat of numbers, statistics, and data. Let me offer just a few examples, which may seem innocuous unless seen in their larger context.

  • The switch from analog to digital clocks and watches and their omnipresence.
  • Referring to the week as 24/7 and the writing of dates as numbers such as 08/30/2023.
  • The use-by-date numbers on all products, soon to be applied to commoditized people.
  • The use of the term 9/11 to refer to the events of September 11, 2001.
  • The listing by numbers of the best colleges, mascara, underwear, corkscrews, etc.
  • The hilarious dating of the earth’s age to the current 4.4 billion as if that meant anything to anyone.
  • The computer generated weather forecasts with their 10 and 30 day forecasts with precise numerical percentages for rain, snow, etc.
  • The analytics that dominate the world of sports, the posting of numbers for everything from the speed a ball leaves a baseball bat, a tennis ball a racket, and in golf the speed, height, curve, apex, carry, and launch angle when a ball is driven – all these numbers changing as a computer measures the ball in flight.
  • The “helpful” messages on restaurant receipts where the tips are recorded in descending order and exactitude from 18% to 20% to 25%.
  • Manipulated statistics for everything under the sun, such as Covid cases and deaths, Ukrainian military casualties, unemployment numbers, etc.
  • 6 feet social distancing and 15 days to flatten the curve – real science

It is easy for one to add to this small list of the use of numbers. They are everywhere and are intended to be – in people’s heads, as the saying goes. They are intended to induce mass production of thought and behavior that is numb and that tranquilizes real thought and oppositional action. The more this is so, the more the schooling institutions will loudly announce how well they are teaching “critical thinking” skills. All our institutions have become complicit in 24/7 capitalism and the mind-control of deep-state forces.

In his brilliant new book, Scorched Earth: Beyond the Digital Age to a Post-Capitalist World, Jonathan Crary, sums it up nicely:

“One of the foremost achievements of the so-called knowledge economy is the mass production of ignorance, stupidity, and hatefulness. . . . programmed unintelligibility and duplicity.”

The reality of everyday life used to revolve around our bodies in place and time. Now that time and place have been jumbled, it revolves for so many around the cell phones in which people live a weird disembodied existence. Sensory life is being annihilated. This is the era of virtual people, shadows of shadows, abstractions upon screens. Our connections to nature, to the seasons, to the sacred ways of our ancestors are being discarded for the machine life in the Digital Palace.

Dostoevsky’s underground man wasn’t playing a silly game when he suggested that 2 + 2 = 5. He was saying that free will is more important than reason which just satisfies the rational side of our nature.

Without it we are sub-human, machines in a vast prison of our own making.

His words are more important today than when he wrote them in 1864, the time of The Crystal Palace with its promotion of the Industrial Revolution’s technological marvels. Today’s Digital Palace marks a far greater threat to our humanity, and so his words are worth attending to:

. . . man everywhere and at all times, whoever he may be, has preferred to act as he chose and not in the least as his reason and advantage dictated. And one may choose what is contrary to one’s interests, and sometimes one positively ought (that is my idea). One’s own free unfettered choice, one’s own caprice, however wild it may be, one’s own fancy worked up at times to frenzy – that is that ‘most advantageous advantage” which we have overlooked, which comes under no classification and against which all systems and theories are continually being shattered to atoms. And how do these wiseacres know that man wants a normal, virtuous choice? What man wants is simply independentchoice, whatever that independence may cost and wherever it may lead. And choice, of course, the devil only knows what choice.

And if you are apt to raise a finger in warning about such wild advice about existential freedom, let Dostoevsky ask you this rhetorical question about the reasonable and logical ones:

“Have you noticed that it is the most civilized gentlemen who have been the subtlest slaughterers, to whom the Attilas and Stenka Razins could not hold a candle, and if they are not so conspicuous as the Attilas and Stenka Razins it is because they are so often met with, are so ordinary and have become so familiar to us.”

As familiar as numbers.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

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

Featured image is from TheFreeThoughtProject

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 enlargement of the five member BRICS bloc amounts to a challenge to US hegemony, especially in this region. The grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa last week accepted the applications of Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates as well as of Ethiopia from Africa and Argentina from South America. The entry on January 1, 2004, of the new members, more than doubling the bloc, should change the character of BRICS and provide impetus for BRICS Plus efforts to provide multi-polarity in international affairs.

Sanusha Naidu, of the South African Institute for Global Dialogue told Al Jazeera, “This [development] has geo-economic, geostrategic and geopolitical implications. These additions will compel some BRICS governments to pay more attention to their Middle East policies, and for China and India to strengthen the existing policies.

BRICS was formed in 2009 by Brazil, Russia, India and China and admitted South Africa in 2010. On its own, BRICS has been seen as the main rival of the G-7 bloc of advanced industrial nations. Pre-enlargement, BRICS covered 26.7 per cent of the world’s surface while its members were home to 41.5 per cent of the planet’s population. BRICS launched a development bank with $50 billion in a bid to provide an alternative to the US-dominated World Bank and proposed a payment system to reduce the financial transaction monopoly of the Western powers. When in place, BRICS Pay could promote trade between sanctioned (Russia and China and now Iran) and unsanctioned members. BRICS has consistently opposed the dominance of the US dollar in world trade and encouraged payment in local currencies. BRICS has also rejected the use of unilateral sanctions which isolate targeted countries, shrink their economies and discourage potential trading partners.

From this region, Bahrain, Palestine, Kuwait and Algeria had also applied to join in this enlargement round while Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey have expressed interest in membership.

Why are countries in region so eager to associate with BRICS? The bloc can grant them some freedom from US and Western meddling. West Asia’s strategic geographic importance has made the region an area of East-West conflict for millennia while its location and energy resources have intensified Western interference and intervention since the early 20th century.

Having only one oil and gas exporter, Russia, BRICS Plus has added three: Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates which will give the bloc greater leverage on the volume and pricing of energy exports. Some commentators have quipped that the new name for the grouping should be “BRICS Plus OPEC” as the bloc has recruited heavy weights in Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

China’s mediation of the March reconciliation agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran has reduced regional tensions and regional rivalries and made it possible for them to cooperate within BRICS Plus. Both longstanding US allies, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have recently sought to balance their options and adopt policies which are in their national interests rather than follow the US diktat.

Egypt, another erstwhile US ally, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have seen the US pivot East to challenge China while repositioning and reducing its commitments in the region. Meanwhile, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi are assured by China and Russia that they do not demand fealty as the price of cooperation and collaboration while the US says, “My way or the highway.”

New recruits Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have demonstrated independence by refusing to take sides and sanction Russia over the Russo-Ukraine war, which they agree was precipitated by NATO’s post-Soviet eastward expansion which prompted Russia to warn repeatedly over 20 years that Ukraine was a “red line”.

Iran sees membership in BRICS Plus as a means to ease the iron grip of US sanctions which have contributed considerably, along with mismanagement and corruption, to that country’s economic meltdown. Having reestablished relations with the Arabs after reconciling with Riyadh, Tehran also regards BRICS Plus as an opportunity to boost ties with India, Russia, China, Africa via Ethiopia (which hosts the African Union) and South America via Argentina.

Naidu said that “having Iran in the BRICS sends a massive powerful message to the G-7, to the Global North, to Washington” which have ostracised and sanctioned Iran for four decades. By granting Iran membership, BRICS has sent a message to the Global North: The message says, “Your problems are not our problems.” This also goes for the North’s problems with Russia and China, BRICS’s prime movers.

BRICS Plus cannot replace non-alignment which emerged after World War II during the Cold War when Soviet Russia and China opposed the West and Western colonised countries were striving for independence. Highly respected independence leaders were the founding fathers of non-alignment: Jawaharlal Nehru, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Kwame Nkrumah and Tito. This was an era of great men and great expectations. Expectations which have not been realised. This region has been beset by war while Africa has been laid low by poor governance and conflict. Non-alignment waned and failed.

BRICS and BRICS Plus have to cope with an era of toil and trouble caused by post-colonial meddling and bullying, double standards, multiple conflicts, mismanagement, corruption, collapsed economies, millions of refugees and migrants, and climate change. BRICS Plus has to confront low expectations in order to make progress for the half of the world’s people dwelling in BRICS Plus lands.

*

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.

***

This August 30, the United States should reflect on its own violence, so there can finally be some semblance of accountability—including acknowledging wrongdoing, repairing the harm to the victims, and putting mechanisms in place that prevent this violence from recurring.

Despite the fact that the United States has routinely and openly violated the human rights of its own citizens as well as communities across the globe, the government rarely has any qualms about condemning the violations of other countries. These condemnations, almost always hypocritical, however, often do more to shine light on its own abuses and the lack of accountability.

Like clockwork each year, the United States issues statements commemorating various human rights days highlighting particular abuses. Last year, for example, Secretary of State Antony Blinken released a statement through the State Department on the occasion of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances. The statement reads in part that “the United States renews its commitment to addressing enforced disappearance and calls on governments around the world to put an end to this practice, hold those responsible to account, reveal the whereabouts or fate of loved ones who have been disappeared, and respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all persons.”

This year, the U.S. government will almost certainly release yet another statement to commemorate the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances on August 30, once again erasing its own crimes. Although disappearances have less typically been associated with the United States, the U.S. has long deployed this abuse in the War on Terror—often disguising the practice through euphemisms and denials. After two decades plus of the War on Terror, however, it is imperative to shed light on the unresolved issue of Guantánamo prisoners’ disappearances and the CIA’s disturbing rendition, detention, and interrogation program that operated in the earlier days of the war.

Obscured Realities: Rendition and Disappearances

In the early days of the War on Terror, the CIA was given the licence to render and detain people in countries across the globe who were willing to host black sites. The program operated from 2002-2009, with at least 119 individuals enduring the violence of the CIA. Some never returned home; others were sent to Guantánamo Bay. Although the U.S. government has continued to use the term “render” as in render to justice, in practice, many of those subjected to this violence have effectively disappeared—leaving their families in an abyss of uncertainty, all while the U.S. government refuses to reckon with this legacy.

On the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, the United States should reflect on its own violence, so there can finally be some semblance of accountability—including acknowledging wrongdoing, repairing the harm to the victims, and putting mechanisms in place that prevent this violence from recurring.

Activists in orange jumpsuits protest in front of the White House.

Activists holding signs with the names of 35 men still imprisoned at the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, protest outside the White House in Washington, D.C. on January 11, 2023, the 21st anniversary of the notorious facility. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Enforced disappearances are a particularly brutal form of state violence. Not only do the victims fear never being found, the families of the victims live in perpetual uncertainty with constant denials of information from the government about their loved ones’ fates. The pain of not knowing whether a family member is alive or deceased, free or imprisoned, makes closure impossible.

Disappearing War on Terror Prisoners

The post-9/11 and the War on Terror waged by the United States transformed many parts of the world into war zones, cemeteries, and prisons. Lives were forever lost or shrouded in obscurity, while entire families were erased. Gul Rahman, an Afghan citizen, is just one name among the countless individuals whose fate became tragically entwined with the secret operations of the Central Intelligence Agency, vanishing into CIA black sites, never to emerge alive. Among the torture Rahman endured was being handcuffed to the ground, put in a diaper, and placed in a cell with freezing temperatures—which lead to his untimely death by hypothermia. Rahman’s family was never formally informed of his death, and, despite their fighting to have his body returned for a proper burial, the United States has denied their request.

Detention by the CIA was not the only way War on Terror prisoners have been effectively disappeared. When the first Muslim men were taken to Guantánamo in January 2002, only the nationalities of prisoners were disclosed. Not only because the U.S. didn’t actually know the identities of many of the men, but because they were so dehumanized, that the U.S. government didn’t prioritize sharing the names with the International Committee of the Red Cross or any other agency or institution—especially any that would hold them accountable. It wasn’t until 2004 that the names of the men detained were finally revealed—although many with incomplete names documented, leaving their families in prolonged darkness about their whereabouts. Names were only disclosed by monitoring websites like Alasra and the Britain-based CagePrisoners.

Guantánamo became synonymous with secrecy, human rights abuses, and the plight of countless detainees. Many were held there for years, unaccounted for, like ghosts in the system. Families were left in a perpetual state of uncertainty, not knowing whether their loved ones were dead or alive. In addition, nine prisoners died while at Guantánamo—a harrowing and violent conclusion to their detention—especially since the deaths occurred years after many of the men last saw their families.

As a Guantánamo survivor myself, I spent around six agonizing years at Guantánamo before my family knew anything about my whereabouts. Another family came to know about their son in 2016; a lawyer contacted the family and let them know.

Continuing Injustice: Recent Cases

The injustices extended beyond the walls of Guantánamo. In many cases, after being transferred, detainees vanished for months, disappearing into solitary confinement in their home countries in Saudi Arabia or in third-party nations like the United Arab Emirates. Constituting a violent ebb and flow of being lost and found, War on Terror prisoners have been forced to endure the possibility of being disappeared again and again.

Ghassan al-Sharbi’s case represents a more recent chapter in this ongoing tragedy. Forcibly repatriated to Saudi Arabia, he vanished into obscurity. Despite attempts to locate him, his whereabouts remain unknown. The lack of response from both the Saudi government and the State Department exemplifies the prevailing indifference to the plight of former detainees.

Another former prisoner, Asim al-khalaqi, was released to Kazakhstan in 2015, but died tragically four months later due to mistreatment and medical negligence. The Kazakh government failed to inform Asim’s family of his death, denying them the chance to retrieve his body or hold a proper burial—thus constituting a symbolic disappearance. He was buried in an unknown cemetery and an unknown grave.

In solidarity with victims and their families, we must reaffirm our collective determination to create a world where no one vanishes, justice prevails, and human dignity is inviolable.

The stories of Gul Rahman, Asim al-khalaqi, Ghassan al-Sharbi, and countless others stand as painful reminders of the enduring impact of CIA rendition, Guantánamo Bay, and the “War on Terror.” While the black sites and detention camps have garnered international criticism, their legacy continues to cast a long shadow over the lives of those affected. Families have been denied closure, and the cycle of suffering perpetuates even after release. The world must remember these names, demand accountability, and work toward a future where such gross violations of human rights are truly left in the past. Until then, the War on Terror will endure as a haunting testament to the cost of sacrificing justice for security.

On this international day, let us demand an end to enforced disappearances and the practices that perpetuate them. Let us hold nations accountable for their actions and demand transparency. In solidarity with victims and their families, we must reaffirm our collective determination to create a world where no one vanishes, justice prevails, and human dignity is inviolable. By doing so, we honor the disappeared, restore justice, and ensure that no one is condemned to obscurity or denied their humanity.

[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]

*

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

Mansoor Adayfi, a Yemen national formerly imprisoned–without charge or trial–at the U.S. offshore prison in Guantanamo Bay, currently lives in Serbia.

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.

***

Apparently, the Ukrainian government wants to disguise the dictatorial aspect of the regime by pretending to be a democracy. According to information reported by Western media, Kiev plans to organize elections next year. The news is surprising, as the country has been under martial law since February 2022, which would legitimize the postponement of the elections. However, the aim is believed to be to increase Zelensky’s popularity and improve his public image.

The information was published by the Spanish newspaper El Pais on August 28th. Anonymous sources familiar with the matter were consulted by journalists and said that elections will strengthen Zelensky, thus motivating a circumvention of the norms imposed by martial law.

Until recently, Zelensky ruled out elections, but now there are signs that he and his team are changing the strategy. In an interview with local TV a few days ago, Zelensky said: “The logic is that if you are protecting democracy, you must also protect it during the war. And one way to protect it is elections”. In the same vein, Ruslan Stefanchuk, the head of the Ukrainian parliament, stated in July that updates to Ukrainian martial law “would take place soon” as “democracy cannot stop”. Some analysts believe he was commenting on the possibility of calling elections even in times of war.

There are some additional reasons why Kiev is planning these measures. First, it is necessary to remember that the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime is not sovereign, and all its decisions are taken under the direct influence of foreign agents. And recently there has been pressure from some Americans for Ukraine to implement “more democratic” policies to justify Western support. American politicians have already expressed, including in a personal meeting with Zelensky, their desire to see elections in Ukraine next year, which explains Ukraine’s readiness to revise its martial law.

“After a meeting with Zelenskiy in Kyiv on Wednesday, two senators from the Democratic Party, Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal, as well as Republican Lindsey Graham, stressed that they considered it necessary for Ukrainian democracy to hold elections despite the country being at war. The Democratic position has a lot to do with the upcoming presidential election in the United States, which will be held in November 2024. The Republican Party has numerous prominent members (including former President Donald Trump) who have criticized military support for Kyiv, and who, since last spring, have used the argument that Ukraine is not so different from Russia, since the country has suspended democracy under the pretext of war”, El Pais’ article reads.

However, some sources also believe that the main reason for Kiev to take this action is a matter of domestic politics. Zelensky’s popularity has fallen recently, not just because of the conflict, but also because the Ukrainian president has failed to fulfill his main promise during the previous election campaign: to fight corruption. So, instead of thinking about concrete solutions to the corruption problem, Zelensky apparently plans to regain his popularity through new elections. The Ukrainian political scenario does not allow for the existence of a solid opposition coalition, given that many parties were banned and opposing politicians arrested, so it could be “easy” for Zelensky to achieve victory.

In this regard, Mark Savchuk, a political commentator and adviser to the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Office, told journalists:

“Zelenskiy is a great public relations man, especially with the international community, and we are lucky for that, but if there is now talk of going to the polls it is because of Ukrainian internal issues that he does not want to be aired abroad (…) Only in the judiciary have there been improvements, but neither Zelenskiy nor his team are prepared [to fight corruption]. Ordinary Ukrainians see that this is still a corrupt country, they experience it on a daily basis and there are always new stories about it in the news (…) Their team is inept and corrupt. We have a serious corruption problem and they believe that their popularity will slip, so they want to take advantage of their charisma now electorally.”

However, it will not be so easy to organize elections in the midst of the conflict. There are many difficulties to be faced by Ukrainian citizens in an election scenario. In all regions affected by the hostilities it will be virtually impossible for citizens to vote, as the possibility of moving around is severely limited due to the intensity of the fighting. This will restrict the voting area to only some western regions of Ukraine, where the population is more influenced by pro-NATO media and tends to support the regime – despite growing criticism of Zelensky’s administrative ability.

In practice, there are two risks for Zelensky with the plan to hold a new election. One of them is Zelensky losing the dispute. Although the Ukrainian opposition has been practically neutralized by the regime’s dictatorial policies, it has become increasingly clear that Western sponsors plan to replace Zelensky, which makes it possible for Washington to create the necessary conditions for another candidate to win. The other risk is that, even if he wins, Zelensky remains unpopular, with his victory looking like a mere bureaucratic procedure, given the absence of relevant opponents. In this scenario, the plan to make Ukraine look “more democratic” would fail.

However, in either case, Ukraine’s real problem will not be solved: the country will continue to work as a proxy for the US and fight an unwinnable war against a much stronger enemy, causing unnecessary suffering for the Ukrainian population.

*

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: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky delivers an address in Kiev, Ukraine, April 15, 2022. (Credit: Ukrainian Presidency)

Alle Artikel von Global Research können in 51 Sprachen gelesen werden, indem Sie die Schaltfläche Website übersetzen unterhalb des Namens des Autors aktivieren.

Um den täglichen Newsletter von Global Research (ausgewählte Artikel) zu erhalten, klicken Sie hier.

Klicken Sie auf die Schaltfläche “Teilen”, um diesen Artikel per E-Mail an Ihre Freunde und Kollegen weiterzuleiten. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Sie können die Artikel von Global Research gerne weiterveröffentlichen und mit anderen teilen.

***

Einleitung

Während ich an einem neuen Artikel arbeitete, wurde ich durch eine serbische Fernsehsendung auf das EU-Gesetz über digitale Dienste (GdD) aufmerksam. Da diese Verordnung eine Gefahr für die Meinungsfreiheit der Bürger und die Rechtsstaatlichkeit sein könnte, möchte ich die Information gerne weitergeben, die genaue Auswertung und Beurteilung jedoch juristischen Experten überlassen.

Um den Zusammenhang zwischen meinem begonnenen Artikel und der Verordnung der EU zu verstehen, will ich das Thema und die Einleitung des Artikels kurz wiedergeben:

Wir wissen, dass wir am Rande des Vulkans leben, wiegen uns aber in der Hoffnung, dass es zu keinem Ausbruch kommen werde.

Immer wieder wird beklagt, dass nur wenige Menschen sich unabhängige Gedanken machen über die Zukunft der Welt. Die beruhigende Selbsttäuschung scheint angenehmer zu sein als der Gedanke an die Gefahr. Die Mehrheit der Menschen würde nicht aufwachen, weiterhin den Staatsmedien vertrauen und vor den anstehenden Problemen ausweichen. Doch die Realität will erkannt und verstanden sein: wer zu ihr in Widerspruch gerät, wird entweder geschädigt oder vernichtet.

Tatsache ist, dass wir auch im Zeitalter der Aufklärung und Vernunft noch im alten konservativen Denken des Mittelalters befangen sind, wo man geglaubt hat, dass sich alles oben im Himmel abspielt. Deshalb meinten die Menschen, sich nicht selbst erforschen zu können, nicht ihre seelische Natur, ihre unbewussten Gefühlsregungen und ihre Reaktionsweisen. Aus diesem Grund haben sie die Psychologie nicht erfasst. Sie wollen weiterhin brave Staatsbürger bleiben, die die Anordnungen der Obrigkeit nicht in Frage stellen, sondern bedingungslos gehorchen und nicht „aus der Reihe tanzen“. Einiges, was man als älterer Bürger seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg erlebt hat, scheint sich zu wiederholen.

Da es sich beim althergebrachten konservativen Denken um einen unbewussten Prozess handelt, können wir diese Menschen beziehungsweise uns alle nicht verurteilen. Wir sollten mutig an unser Gefühlsleben herantreten und uns wie auch unsere Mitmenschen kennen lernen, um aufzuwachen, aktiv zu werden und gegen die bestehenden unmenschlichen Bedingungen der Gesellschaft zu revoltieren (Albert Camus).

Gesetz über digitale Dienste (GdD)  

Das Gesetz über digitale Dienste heißt auf Englisch „Digitale Services Act (DSA)“ und auf Französisch „Règlement sur les Services Numériques (RSN). Es soll unter anderem die Haftungs- und Sicherheitsvorschriften für digitale Plattformen, Dienste und Produkte schaffen und den digitalen Binnenmarkt vollenden.

Da ich die Beurteilung des europäischen Regelwerks juristischen Experten überlassen möchte, hier nur einige Anmerkungen gemäß Wikipedia (1):

„Die Verordnung aktualisiert den 2000 beschlossenen rechtlichen Rahmen für Online-Plattformen der Europäischen Union und passt ihn an die Gegebenheiten des Plattformkapitalismus an. Dabei sollen die Grundsätze des freien Internets jedoch berücksichtigt werden. Die Verordnung wurde am 27. Oktober 2022 im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union bekannt gemacht. Kernvorschiften werden bereits ab dem 16. November 2022 anwendbar sein, der überwiegende Teil wird am 17. Februar 2024 anwendbar sein. (…). 

Die EU-Kommission verfolgt mit dem Vorschlag nach eigenen Angaben primär drei Ziele:

  • Besserer Schutz der Verbraucher und ihrer Grundrechte im Internet.
  • Schaffung eines leistungsfähigen bzw. klaren Transparenz- und Rechenschaftsrahmens für Online-Plattformen.
  • Förderung von Innovation, Wachstum und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit im Binnenmarkt. (…).

Sehr große Online-Plattformen werden strengere Verpflichtungen erfüllen müssen, die in einem angemessenen Verhältnis zu den erheblichen gesellschaftlichen Risiken stehen, die von ihnen ausgehen, wenn sie illegale und „schädliche“ (‚harmful content‘) Inhalte, einschließlich Desinformationen, verbreiten. (…).

Die Bürgerrechtsbewegung European Digital Rights meldete in einer Pressemitteilung substanzielle Bedenken an und beurteilte den Vorschlag als Gefahr für die Meinungsfreiheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit.“

*

Hinweis an die Leser: Bitte klicken Sie auf die obigen Schaltflächen zum Teilen. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Fühlen Sie sich frei, Artikel von Global Research erneut zu veröffentlichen und zu teilen.

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Schul-Rektor, Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe. Nach seinen Universitätsstudien wurde er wissenschaftlicher Lehrer in der Erwachsenenbildung. Als Pensionär arbeitete er als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung sowie eine Erziehung zu Gemeinsinn und Frieden. Für seine Verdienste um Serbien bekam er 2021 von den Universitäten Belgrad und Novi Sad den Republik-Preis „Kapitän Misa Anastasijevic“ verliehen.

Er schreibt regelmäßig für Global Research.   

Note

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesetz_über_digitale_Dienste 

Ausgewähltes Bild Electronic Frontier Foundation

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.

***

Introduction

While I was working on a new article, I became aware of the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) through a Serbian television programme. Since this regulation could be a threat to citizens’ freedom of expression and the rule of law, I would like to pass on the information, but leave the exact evaluation and assessment to legal experts.

In order to understand the connection between the article I have started and the EU regulation, I will briefly recapitulate the topic and the introduction of the article:

We know that we live on the edge of the volcano, but we lull ourselves into the hope that it will not erupt.

Time and again, people complain that few people give independent thought to the future of the world. The comforting self-delusion seems more pleasant than the thought of danger. The majority of people would not wake up, continue to trust the state media and evade the problems at hand. But reality wants to be recognised and understood: anyone who contradicts it will either be harmed or destroyed.

The fact is that even in the age of enlightenment and reason, we are still caught up in the old conservative thinking of the Middle Ages, where people believed that everything happened up in heaven. That is why people thought they could not explore themselves, not their psychic nature, their unconscious emotions and their ways of reacting. For this reason they have not grasped psychology. They want to remain good citizens who do not question the orders of the authorities, but obey unconditionally and do not “step out of line”. Some of the things that older citizens have experienced since the Second World War seem to be repeating themselves.

Since traditional conservative thinking is an unconscious process, we cannot condemn these people or any of us. We should courageously approach our emotional life and get to know ourselves as well as our fellow human beings in order to wake up, become active and revolt against the existing inhuman conditions of society (Albert Camus).

Digital Services Act (DSA)

The Digital Services Act (DSA) is called in French “Règlement sur les Services Numériques (RSN)”. Among other things, it aims to create liability and security rules for digital platforms, services and products and to complete the digital single market.

Since I would like to leave the assessment of the European regulatory framework to legal experts, here are just a few comments according to Wikipedia (1):

“The regulation updates the legal framework for online platforms of the European Union adopted in 2000 and adapts it to the realities of platform capitalism. However, the principles of the free internet are to be taken into account. The regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 27 October 2022. Core provisions will already be applicable from 16 November 2022, the majority will be applicable on 17 February 2024. (…).

According to the EU Commission, the proposal primarily pursues three goals:

  • Better protection of consumers and their fundamental rights on the internet
  • Creation of an efficient and clear transparency and accountability framework for online platforms.
  • Promoting innovation, growth and competitiveness in the internal market. (…).

Very large online platforms will have to comply with stricter obligations proportionate to the significant societal risks they pose when disseminating illegal and ‘harmful content’, including disinformation. (…).

The civil rights movement European Digital Rights raised substantial concerns in a press release, judging the proposal a threat to freedom of expression and the rule of law.”

*

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 Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a school rector, educational scientist and qualified psychologist. After his university studies, he became an academic teacher in adult education. As a retiree, he worked as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and professional articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral education in values as well as an education for public spirit and peace. For his services to Serbia, he was awarded the Republic Prize “Captain Misa Anastasijevic” by the Universities of Belgrade and Novi Sad in 2021.

Note

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesetz_über_digitale_Dienste

Featured image is from Electronic Frontier Foundation

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.

***

Healthy COVID-19 mRNA vaccinated children are dying of infections they should not be dying from: influenza, strep A, meningitis, sepsis. Not just in Australia either.

All highly COVID-19 vaccinated countries. Here are some examples:

July 6, 2023 – Noosa, Australia – 11 year old Emma Schwab died suddenly from “influenza B” one day after being released from the hospital. “Cases surge in Australia.”

Feb. 23, 2023 – IL – 7 year old Rose Tylor Kunkes died suddenly from Strep Throat.

Feb. 17, 2023 – UK – 6 year old Milly-Rose Stirrup suddenly fell ill on Feb. 14 with pain in her stomach and her heart. Within a few days she was dead. Doctors suspect sepsis.

Dec. 20, 2022 – Utah – 17 year old student in a boarding school for troubled teens, Taylor Goodridge, died of peritonitis and sepsis which caused her organs to fail. She started having symptoms on Dec. 9, back pain, difficulty breathing, vomiting.

Dec. 13, 2022 – 18 year old Maria Alexandra Gaynor was a healthy student at Dalhousie University, which mandated COVID-19 mRNA vaccines on all students. She died suddenly of Meningitis.

Nov. 29, 2022 – 9 year old West Kelowna, British Columbia girl Ayla Loseth, died from sepsis from Strep A. “At least 3 kids die from Strep A as infections on the rise among children in Canada”.

Ayla Grace Loseth was taken to hospital by her parents Chrissy and Brad on Nov. 26, 2022 with dehydration, nausea and fever. They were told it was the flu but, three days later, she died from sepsis from Strep A. (Click here)

Sep. 10, 2022 – Italy – 18 year old Lorenzo Squillace, who was a lifeguard from San Benedetto del Tronto, died suddenly on Sep. 10, 2022 after feeling ill at home. He died of sepsis.

Aug. 23, 2022 – Naples, Italy – 19 year old Greek female navy cadet Talia who was on board Prometheus ship died 48hr after feeling unwell on Aug. 23, 2022. She had hemorrhagic rash, then sepsis.

*

Australian researchers publish study proving COVID-19 mRNA vaccines damage the immune systems of children!

Published on Aug. 25, 2023, the paper is called: “BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous pathogens and Toll-like receptor agonists”

Study looked at 29 kids ages 5-11 and found that:

  • “BNT162b2 vaccination is associated with a decrease in bacterial and viral stimulant-induced cytokine responses one month after vaccination”
  • “BNT162b2 vaccination is associated with a sustained decrease in cytokine responses to viral, but not bacterial, stimulants six months after vaccination”
  • “These data show that a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccine alters heterologous immunity in children and that these effects can persist up to six months after vaccination”

Translated, this means that Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine suppresses the immune systems of children ages 5-11 for at least 6 months, leaving them susceptible to viral and bacterial infections 

It only took researchers 1.5 years to catch up to my warnings against mRNA vaccinating children ages 5-11.

On March 5, 2022 at 12:51pm, I posted a Tweet: “Pfizer Covid vaccine was just 12% effective against Omicron in kids 5 to 11, study finds – CNBC. The results are actually far, far worse. By week 6, there is negative efficacy of -41%. This mRNA product should be pulled off the market. Now.”

By 5:11pm my Twitter account was locked, suspended and stayed suspended for 11 months.

Twitter would go on to suspend and terminate every doctor and scientist who raised concerns about safety of mRNA vaccines in children. 

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were rolled out in Canadian and US children 5-11 years old from Dec. 2021 to May 2022.

What happened 6 months later? Nov-Dec 2022: USA had worst flu season in 2 decades!

Canada also had worst flu season in years: “10 kids dead amid pediatric flu surge”. “Pediatric hospitalizations were 20x higher than usual for the time of year.”

My Take… 

An Australian team has just proven that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine suppresses or damages the immune systems of children ages 5-11 for at least 6 months, leaving them susceptible to viral and bacterial infections.

Millions of children took the Pfizer mRNA jab because their parents trusted the corrupt officials who approved those jabs without any safety studies!

Once the jabs were rolled out in children ages 5-11 in the first quarter of 2022, the following happened approximately 6 months later:

  • US had worst flu season in 2 decades in late 2022 (source)
  • Canada was in a “flu epidemic” in late 2022, with pediatric hospitalizations up 2000%
  • Australia had 360% increase in strep A infections in 2022 (source)
  • Australia is having an “intense flu season” in June-Oct 2023 where children are “being hit the hardest” (source1) (source2)
  • UK had “worst flu season in a decade” in late 2022 (source)
  • New Zealand is in for another large and early flu season (source)

I believe hundreds of children have died from immune system suppression caused by taking the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, and the record flu seasons seen in US, Canada, Australia and UK in 2022 and 2023 are the direct result of immune damage caused by Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

*

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. 


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

Safe and Secure? Or Stressed and Scared?

August 31st, 2023 by Barbara Nimri Aziz

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.

***

“Why don’t you just report it to the town council, with a photo of that cluttered yard,” I suggested to a neighbor complaining of piles of junk abandoned on an incomplete construction site beside her house.

“Oh, I wouldn’t do that”, she swiftly counters; “They might become angry.”

I’ve encountered this kind of fear repeatedly – fear of any personal confrontation.

Neighbors prefer to put up with excessive noise, disrespect and other aggravations rather than approach a neighbor, or report their concern to the municipality. It speaks to lack of confidence between neighbors and to misgivings about elected officials.

I wonder if, like me, you detect a wariness and unease – fear, actually­– not known here 15, 25, 50 years ago.

We all know our region is undergoing a huge amount of change. Transformation, really. Yet, The Catskills has never been a static, forgotten part of New York. Here’s not unlike many semi-rural areas experiencing surges and slumps.

People are more apprehensive than in the past, it seems. Our schools, hospitals and clinics need more guards, as if businesses and public places are not already engulfed by cameras. If you’re nervous about your home the answer comes back: “Install cameras; activate it while away and you can get alerts anywhere, through your phone.” Is this really a solution? We end up anxiously checking our phones for warnings.

Certainly, in my village, the number of surveillance cameras through the woods and along country roads is unprecedented. Earlier we had only tree-mounted cameras in nearby woods to view baby bears in season, or check the clattering in our refuse bins for bothersome raccoons and porcupines. Now, innocent walkers, perhaps, new homeowners, are caught unaware, like a one couple on a stroll in the woods above their property. They were filmed! And the property owner, far away in another state, filed a trespassing suit that cost the couple several hundred dollars, another villager reports. That can certainly curb one’s enthusiasm for hiking on our abundant green hills.

One homeowner, who visits her riverside house once a year, if that often, has cameras all around her place—to ensure that her teenage grandchildren don’t use the house without her supervision. Her own grandchildren! At a hardly-used residence! When I pass the place during my evening walk, a spotlight flashes on me, alerting her on her phone, somewhere. I wave cynically at the light, mumbling something unrepeatable.

‘No Trespassing’ signs now mark the landscape in all directions. I wonder, should we leave behind our bird-watching binoculars for fear of being suspected of peeping?

Notwithstanding surveillance technology available to homeowners, something else– something discomforting– is going on.

There’s rising fear and unease about our surroundings, our neighborhoods.

Yes, a lot of changes. New people moving in do not feel like real neighbors. Appearing on weekends only, they rush out of their $500,000+ homes to socialize at one of the new upscale restaurants. Regulars can’t even accidentally meet them at our local eateries. Then there’s the Airbnb crowd. They may walk past our house – with their indispensable dog – pausing to peer at our flowerbed. Anyway, they’re soon gone. Can’t make a neighborhood from that.

I’m thankful my house is not near the town’s craft-beer circus, or the extended vodka bar that’s usurped an entire village street.
That raises another issue—more drinking holes. Most new businesses are high-end eateries and bars. Frankly, I’d rather have our recently shuttered pharmacy or a handy late-night Chinese takeout.

It’s not change; it’s not newcomers. For more than two centuries, people arrived here from elsewhere and became part of today’s solid social fabric. This change underway today is aggravated by something beyond the Catskills; bad news and threats are descending from all sides. Frightening news used to be confined abroad. Now it’s homemade –within our borders. If it’s not fires, its fentanyl; if it’s not floods, it’s scamming seniors’ savings; if it’s not fights about books, it’s new laws over gender identity; if it’s not the roar of trucks up Highway 17, it’s the price of bread. Shootings and economizing on food had belonged in distant places; now, they are around the corner and up the road.

*

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.

Barbara Nimri Aziz whose anthropological research has focused on the peoples of the Himalayas is the author of the newly published “Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”, available on Amazon

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.


“Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”

By Barbara Nimri Aziz

A century ago Yogmaya and Durga Devi, two women champions of justice, emerged from a remote corner of rural Nepal to offer solutions to their nation’s social and political ills. Then they were forgotten.

Years after their demise, in 1980 veteran anthropologist Barbara Nimri Aziz first uncovered their suppressed histories in her comprehensive and accessible biographies. Revelations from her decade of research led to the resurrection of these women and their entry into contemporary Nepali consciousness.

This book captures the daring political campaigns of these rebel women; at the same time it asks us to acknowledge their impact on contemporary feminist thinking. Like many revolutionaries who were vilified in their lifetimes, we learn about the true nature of these leaders’ intelligence, sacrifices, and vision during an era of social and economic oppression in this part of Asia.

After Nepal moved from absolute monarchy to a fledgling democracy and history re-evaluated these pioneers, Dr. Aziz explores their legacies in this book.

Psychologically provocative and astonishingly moving, “Yogmaya and Durga Devi” is a seminal contribution to women’s history.

Click here to order.

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 US history of creating coups and dictatorships is not over. US President Obama presided over the coup in Honduras in 2009.

The US backed the Turkish military in trying to topple the democratically elected Erdogan in 2016.

In 2014, US president Obama and now-president Biden used Nazi groups to topple the democratically elected president Yanukovych of Ukraine.

The US has also tried to topple the democratically elected president Maduro in Venezuela.

The atrocities which the US inflicted on Chile with the coup in 1973 are still a deep pain for Chile.

It clearly illustrates the size and depth of the pain inflicted by the USA, that even today, 50 years after the US-coup in Chile, enormous efforts are made by Chile’s society to bring justice to the results of US atrocities. This includes looking for the thousands of “disappeared”.

Reporting from Chile’s capital Santiago, Al Jazeera’s Lucia Newman said successive Chilean governments have failed to seriously search for the disappeared people since Pinochet left power in 1990.

Newman noted that mass graves have been previously discovered in Chile near former interrogation centres, but not all the human remains found have been properly examined or identified.

“The forensic science has advanced quite a lot, so there is hope that at least some of the disappeared will be identified, even if it’s just a bone,” she said.

“A lot of people here told me, even if it’s just a little piece of the person that went missing that [they] can bury, that will help a lot to put their pain to rest.” 

Al Jazeera, August 30, 2023

The ”disappeared” were executed – sometimes cast from helicopters into the ocean.

The US inflicted similar atrocities on Argentina, Nicaragua, Panamá, El Salvador, and many other Latin American, African, Asian, Middle East, and European countries.

The pain of US atrocities lives – and is not forgotten all over the World.

*

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.

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.

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.

***

In 2022, the US Army selected Bell Textron’s tiltrotor V280 as its Black Hawk replacement. This caused more than a few eyebrows to rise in consternation. The V-22 Osprey tiltrotor, flown by the Marine Corps and Special Operations Command, has had what can only be euphemistically regarded as a patchy record. It has been singularly odd in terms of the procurement and acquisition process, topped off by a tendency for killing its users while continuing to maintain a keen following. To date, no one has been held to account for what would, in any other policy context, be deemed criminally negligent.

The V-22 platform was the first tiltrotor deployed by the military, a strange creature combining the characteristics of fixed-wing planes, helicopters and vertical take-off and landing craft. It was originally inspired by a Pentagon request to Bell and Boeing after the failure of the hostage rescue effort dubbed Operation Eagle Claw. The April 1980 attempt by the Carter administration, intended to rescue US citizens being held by Iranian authorities, resulted in the deaths of five air force personnel and three marines.

The platform is slated for flying till 2055 yet sports a very blood-spattered resume. Prior to 2007, it had had four crashes, resulting in 30 deaths. Two of the first five prototypes suffered a number of fatal crashes in the early 1990s resulting in 30 deaths, though it formally came into the service of the Marines in 2007. After 2007, a further 24 deaths were caused in a further 10 crashes.

The Marine Corps has persisted indulging its use, seeing it as central in fighting the new lighter version of conflict the US imperium envisages, one characterised by manoeuvrability and speed as marked out by the “Force Design 2030” strategy.  “Proponents of Force Design 2030 argue,” writes ground forces specialist Andrew Feickert, “that current Marine Corps design is outdated and that new forces and operational concepts are required to prevail against China.”

One such appealing operational concept is EABO, otherwise known as Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations. It is a concept that has been embraced by the de-facto colonial Marine force located at the top end in Australia, cutely called by publicists worried about that fact the Marine Rotational Force – Darwin.Occupying forces, the belief goes, do not rotate.The unit, comprising 2,500 soldiers, has been based in the Northern Territory from April to October every year since 2012.

On the morning of August 27, a V-22B Osprey with 23 US marines crashed on Melville Island just north of Darwin. Three marines were killed. Several others were left injured with varying degrees of severity. The episode brought back memories of another Osprey crash on Australian soil, which saw a failed effort on the part of the Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 265 to land on the flight deck of USS Green Bay on August 5, 2017. On that occasion, there were also three fatalities, along with 23 injuries.

Those with claimed military or aviation expertise flock to the defence of this beast of moron and myth, admiring its “revolutionary design”, “a kind of plane-helicopter hybrid,” writes Peter Layton, involving wings tilting upwards “for take-off and landing and back down again for level flight.” It is appealing to its users, most notably the Marine Corps, for having greater range than helicopters, with higher speed and formidable carrying capacity.

Layton goes on to sing the praises of this lethal hybrid. “The Osprey is at the leading edge of aviation technology, with nothing else in operational service like it.” There are marvellous, evident reasons for that, but he prefers to note its essential role in the US strategy of prosecuting EABO operations against China from Australian bases rather than its hazards.

The literature about the V-22 Osprey notes the thorny history of this supposed “dream machine” and the problems of the Major Defense Acquisition Program that brought it into existence. To follow its development and deployment was an act akin to faith and its accompanying delusions. Richard Whittle, writing on the problem-plagued machine, found that, no matter what he penned, he “could usually count on being chastised by someone, for the Osprey was as close as a defense issue gets to being a religious question. There were believers and nonbelievers, and neither had much use for those who gave credence to the other side.”

Certainly, believers can come up with the sort of waffle asserting that each “Osprey flight is a learning event for the pilots, the maintenance personnel and the aircraft’s manufacturer.” This begs the question as to whether such equipment should ever see the light of day, especially given how often it snuffs out the lives of its users.

Other reasons for such an unfathomably dangerous record are also offered to distract from this deeply flawed craft. The National Commission on Military Aviation Safety, for instance, noted the baleful safety record of the US military in toto in a 2020 study conducted at the behest of Congress. The audit found that between 2013 and 2018, US forces suffered a remarkable 6,000 aviation safety “mishaps” during training and routine operations, resulting in 198 deaths and 157 lost aircraft. The bill for this dubious achievement had been $9.41 billion. The Osprey, it would seem, found itself in good, perishable company.

As with other religious questions, usually touching on doctrine and belief in some invisible, all-powerful tormentor, those saddled with it have paid the highest price. As US military policy continues its inexorable march to the next war, this time shamelessly using Australian strategic real estate for the purpose, it will also happily place its own personnel in machines as deadly to them as to any intended adversary.

*

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

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected] 

Featured image: Bell V-280 Valor demonstrating high speed cruise configuration at the 2019 Alliance Air Show, Fort Worth, TX. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

What We Know About Depleted Uranium in Ukraine So Far?

August 31st, 2023 by International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons

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 the recent months there have been multiple reports containing different information about the use of depleted uranium weapons in Ukraine. Due to the rapidly changing events and partly contradictory statements by different officials and media, it is hard to tell with certainty, what party of the conflict has already used weapons containing depleted uranium. Further problems arise from the fact, that DU issue is being further instrumentalized by different actors with e.g., Russian officials claiming that DU projectiles are nuclear weapons.

All of this led to uncertainty and to the necessity of updating our initial assessment.

ICBUW position on the issue is unchanged:

Regardless of which belligerent uses DU weapons, that use will result in widespread environmental and public health damage and is extremely problematic under international (humanitarian) law.

DU Use by Ukrainian Forces

According to our research, Ukraine does not have its own depleted uranium rounds. The United Kingdom has confirmed that Ukraine will receive depleted uranium shells, also the United States are planning to supply this type of weapons. Even more alarming are the news regarding the new contract awarded recently to Rocketdyne, which concerns the production of of DU rounds for M1 Abrams tanks. In light of this information, it seems that the US is not planning on phasing out DU ammunition after all.

Our position regarding this news has not changed either:

ICBUW regrets and condemns the decision of the British government to supply depleted uranium ammunition and urges the United States to refrain from supplying this type of ammunition to Ukraine and to rely on less toxic alternatives instead. 

The topic of the supply of UK-made depleted uranium ammunition seems to be surrounded by fake news as well. One example is the report, that a warehouse storing British-supplied depleted uranium ammunition was destroyed in Khmelnitsky, claiming that radiation levels were rising in the aftermath of the strike. There is zero evidence, that the warehouse was a “depleted uranium storage facility”, the reports on radiation levels have also been dismissed as false by the IAEA.

DU Use by Russian Forces

Russia has a significant number of different DU rounds in its arsenals. There were multiple reports regarding the use of DU round by the Russian forces, however, we were unable to independently verify that this type of ammunition was already used in Ukraine. The initial reports by GICHD suggested that Russian-made depleted uranium ammunition was already found in Ukraine, but after further clarification, we received information, that the 3BM-32 round was included in the Explosive Ordnance Guide as a precautionary measure.

Due to secrecy, there is also some degree of uncertainty regarding the types of ammunitions in service with the Russian army, which have depleted uranium sabots. According to our research, 3BM-60 (“Svinets-2”) contains a depleted uranium-tungsten alloy penetrator. This information finds it’s confirmation in various sources, including Kommersant newspaper (see their recent article), TASS (see this report from 2018) and Zvezda (see this article). Based on this information, articles speaking of the “tungsten” core of the Svinets-2 appear to be misleading, i.e., telling half-truths regarding this type of ammunition.

Even though there is still no independent confirmation of the use of DU weapons by the Russian army, threats of DU use coming from Moscow are alarming. In June, Russian president Vladimir Putin stated that depleted uranium ammunition was not used so far in the conflict by Russia, but Russia reserves the right to use it if the Armed Forces of Ukraine use the US-/UK-supplied DU rounds. In this regard, ICBUW reminds, that the use of a weapon illegal under international law by one party of conflict does not justify the use of the same weapon by other belligerents. Such use only amplifies the adverse effects on the local population, contributing heavily to the environmental catastrophe.

We continue to follow reports of shipments or use of military equipment with depleted uranium components or DU ammunition and invite everyone with relevant information to share it with us.

*

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

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

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

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

***

A tantalising new video appears to show slain Russian warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin commenting on his ‘elimination’ in the days before he was reportedly killed.

It comes amid a wave of conspiracy theories that the Wagner boss may have cheated death by putting a body double on his doomed business jet which crashed in Russia on 23 August.

Many in the West believe he was assassinated at the behest of Vladimir Putin in revenge for the coup he led in June against the dictator’s regime.

In the footage, Prigozhin, 62, is seen wearing military fatigues in a car, and says:

‘For those discussing whether or not I am alive.

‘How am I doing? It’s the weekend, the second half of August [20]23. I am in Africa,’ he says, speaking to camera. ‘So fans of discussing my elimination, intimate life, earnings or whatever, as a matter of fact, everything is fine.’

Click here to read the full article on Daily Mail Online.

*

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 Seymour Hersh

Twenty-two years ago: 9/11 was  a criminal undertaking based on countless lies and fabrications. On September 11, 2023, we commemorate 9/11. In the following weeks, Global Research will be publishing several important articles pertaining to 9/11 and its immediate aftermath, leading to the illegal US-NATO bombing and occupation of Afghanistan.

This carefully documented article by Larry Chin was first published almost ten year after 9/11 documents how President Obama in May 2011 officially announced that Osama bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks had been killed.

***

On the evening of May 1, 2011, President Barack Obama declared that the CIA, on his personal order, successfully killed Al-Qaeda “mastermind” Osama bin Laden. In a conveniently scheduled Sunday evening telecast, Obama shamelessly wielded tired lies and 9/11 propaganda, while congratulating himself and the CIA. In classic lying George W. Bush fashion, Obama announced “mission accomplished”.

Obama has pronounced Osama bin Laden to be dead. But according to historical facts and extensive documented evidence, he may never have been alive in the way that the official propaganda has portrayed him. Or alive at all.

Osama bin Laden has been a CIA asset in reality, and a propaganda boogeyman in official fiction.

The official Osama bin Laden narrative, along with “Islamic terrorism” and Al-Qaeda, is a  CIA military-intelligence fabrication designed to provide a pretext for an eternal global war agenda, and to provide an ongoing propaganda pretext for the “war on terrorism”.

The “Militant Islamic Network”, including bin Laden himself, has been, since the Cold War a intelligence network that has been “run” on behalf of Anglo-American interests.

The attack of 9/11 was a false flag operation, planned and carried out by Anglo-American intelligence assets, blamed on “Al-Qaeda”, despite no credible supporting evidence.

On the other hand, evidence abounds concerning the manipulation of terror assets, including bin Laden, by the CIA. This milieu was thoroughly examined by Mike Ruppert in Crossing the Rubicon, in which he concluded:

“Given the degree of documented intelligence penetration of  al Qaeda; the fact that Osama bin Laden had been a CIA asset during the first Afghan conflict against the Soviets; the fact that a number of the so-called hijackers and/or al Qaeda members had been trained in CIA training camps in Chechnya; had fought in CIA/US-sponsored guerrilla conflicts (e.g. in Kosovo with the KLA in 2000), or had received military training at US installations; given all that, it is reasonable to assume that one or more top al Qaeda officials were in fact double or triple agents…”

“Based upon what is known about successful intelligence penetrations for years prior to the attacks of 9/11, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda could not have sneezed without the CIA or the NSA knowing about it.”

The assertion that bin Laden’s whereabouts have been unknown, that he could have eluded detection for a decade (including the “he’s hiding in caves along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border” and other such fables) was debunked years ago. According to a November 2003 Reuters report, bin Laden had received kidney dialysis in a US military hospital in Dubai two months before the 9/11 attacks, and again on September 10, 2001, according to Pakistani intelligence. These and other reports support the conclusion that Osama bin Laden was not only a CIA asset (one whose whereabouts were more than known), but one who was deathly ill. Other reports over the years suggest that the “mastermind” may have certainly died at some point, even while his image continued to be used incessantly to keep the “war on terrorism” alive.

President Obama’s lying before the cameras was as shameless as the clumsiness of the mainstream corporate media dance surrounding it. At the same time Obama stated in his speech that the killing of bin Laden had taken place “tonight” in a mountain hideout in Pakistan, various reporters on competing networks, citing multiple sources, contradicted Obama, stating that bin Laden was killed a week ago in a firefight near Islamabad, and that bin Laden’s body had been tested for DNA ever since. This conflict alone raises enough doubt to throw this new official story into the question. In the coming days, there will undoubtedly be more holes revealed.

Seasoned observers have said for years that Osama bin Laden—the mythic figure— would elude capture as long as the Anglo-American elites needed to continue the current course of war in the Middle East and Central Asia. He would never be captured, absolutely never be put on trial, and would not be “killed” unless political expediency demanded it. The elites, for various reasons, have chosen this hour to end this tired and overused trump card.

The “successful kill” of bin Laden comes at a convenient time. Obama’s popularity has plummeted. His political opponents are threatening to unseat him in 2012. The continued US presence in the Middle East and support for the “war on terrorism” is fragile, weakened by popular protests, and ambivalence among Americans.

The “war on terrorism” narrative, the continuing world war done in its name, will never end. It is clear, however, that some change in course is in the works; at the very least, a tactical shift.

In the meantime,  Barack Obama can now claim to have “finished the job” in Afghanistan, just as he promised to do when elected, and declare himself to be a champion anti-terrorist, a “take-charge” military leader and bastion of justice who has avenged 9/11. Obama will ride this hard for his re-election campaign.

In response to Obama’s victory speech, crowds (of unknown origin) gathered outside the White House chanting “U.S.A.”. Whether this spectacle was staged or genuine is not known. What is known is that the vast majority of the American public remains oblivious to the fact that their own government, Bush/Cheney and Obama administrations alike, have never stopped lying to them about 9/11, the “war on terrorism”, or Osama bin Laden.

On this night, Obama repeated The Big Lie, the biggest one of all.

NATOstan Robots Versus the Heavenly Horses of Multipolarity

By Pepe Escobar, August 30, 2023

We will all need plenty of time and introspection to analyze the full range of game-changing vectors unleashed by the unveiling of BRICS 11 last week in South Africa. Yet time waits for no one. The Empire will (italics mine) strike back in full force; in fact its multi-hydra Hybrid War tentacles are already on display.

U.S. Sponsored Neo-Nazi Ukraine 2014 EuroMaidan. The Hiring of Snipers

By Katya Gorchinskaya, August 30, 2023

Former State Security Head of Ukraine Oleksandr Yakimenko blames Ukraine’s current government for hiring snipers on Feb. 20, 2014 when dozens of people were killed and hundreds more wounded. The victims were mainly EuroMaidan Revolution demonstrations, but some police officers were also killed. This was the deadliest day during the EuroMaidan Revolution, a three-month uprising that claimed 100 lives.

French Ambassador Defies Order to Vacate Niger

By Abayomi Azikiwe, August 30, 2023

President Emmanuel Macron of France has publicly stated that the National Council for the Safeguarding of Our Homeland (CNSP) government in Niger has no right to withdraw the diplomatic credentials from Paris’ ambassador to the West African state.

Pfizer’s COVID Vaccine Causes Marked Decrease in Immunity in Children: Study

By Igor Chudov, August 30, 2023

Many of us shared anecdotes of loved ones vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines – and suffering from all sorts of unrelated illnesses afterward. I know a young individual who, after mandated COVID vaccination, had all sorts of bacterial illnesses that he never had before. (This story was a major impetus to my opening and growing this substack).

Multiple Family Members or Couples Suffering COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries or Sudden Deaths.

By Dr. William Makis, August 30, 2023

Danny Norman and Stacey Singles lost their baby boy Cooper at 2 weeks old on May 23, 2023. Just 2 months later, on August 13, 2023, while on vacation in Bali, Stacey Singles collapsed and died suddenly. This is a truly heartbreaking family tragedy.

Border Massacres: The Saudi Ethiopian Migrant Killings

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, August 30, 2023

We know what the regime is like. Starving a country, bombing its hospitals and strafing its schools has been minor fare for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The population of Yemen has found this out to their colossal cost.

Brutal EU Censorship Regime Takes Hold, ‘Free Speech’ Advocate Elon Musk Folds, YouTube Adopts WHO ‘Misinformation’ Policy

By Ben Bartee, August 30, 2023

Nation-states under EU jurisdiction can no longer be rationally said to be “free,” to the extent that they ever truly were to begin with. They are now part of a wholly integrated slave colony of the multinational technocracy, headed by the World Economic Forum and similar organizations outside of the reach of any democratic control.

BRICS Establishes a New International Order

By Manlio Dinucci, August 29, 2023

The BRICS association-formed by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa-expands to include 6 more countries, which will become full members as of January 1, 2024: the Argentine Republic, the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

Who Controls the World and War in Ukraine?

By Irwin Jerome, August 29, 2023

The Deep State is simply a metaphor for what happens when the enormously destructive, evil powers of obscenely-massive amounts of money, wealth and power, are amassed in the hands of the few or many immoral, conscienceless individuals or groups of individuals, who care little to nothing about what happens to any one person, nation or state other than themselves.

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? A History of Institutional Corruption

By Helen Buyniski, Richard Gale, and Dr. Gary Null, August 29, 2023

If you actually “follow the science,” Wikipedia’s description of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “anti-vaccine advocacy” might elicit indifference or unequivocal support for Wikipedia’s position.

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.

***

Introduction

There were several military coups in West Africa lately. Mostly in former French colonies, and in many ways “neo-colonies” of France, that do arguably more harm to the Sahel countries than the more than 300 years of French “on-the-ground” colonies, or enslavement. Though, this latter crime is not to be discarded at all. It has been an across-Africa genocide of unimaginable proportions, that, so far went unpunished.

But the new crime, the financial and military strategic econo-political colonization, needs to be brought to the fore now.

Among the coup countries are Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Niger, but also Nigeria – a former British colony.

Of all these “coups”, Niger gets by far the most attention, and seems to be at the center of the controversy.

At the outset it looked like the military staged a coup to get the France-friendly President Mohamed Bazoum (image right with President Macron), out of the way and to move away from French monetary hegemony, the Franc CFA (Communauté Financière Africaine, or African Financial Community). See also this and this.

On second thought, however, another image emerged, especially after Madame Victoria Nuland’s, US Deputy Secretary of State (August 7, 2023) personal visit to Niamey, Niger, where she was purportedly denied access to the deposed President, and was apparently snubbed by the new military leader, General Abdourahmane Tchiani.

The latter is not very plausible, but is once more a “media coup” against the truth. Ever more evidence emerges that Niger’s coup was supported by the US. Washington has two military bases in Niger and at least between 3,000 and 4,000 military personnel stationed in Niger.

One of the US bases is a strategically important drone base, in the Agadez region, known as Niger Air Base 201. Following its permanent base in Djibouti, Niger Air Base 201 (image left ) stands as the second-largest US base in Africa. See this.  

The 201 Air Base is owned by the Nigerien military, built and financed for by the United States. It is operated by the U.S. military as a drone base. 

France still has at least 1,500 military stationed in Niger. This, even though French President Macron had promised to withdraw them, as soon as General Tchiani “requested” him to do so. Everything must be questioned now. Did Tchiani really request a withdrawal of French troops?

What appears (almost) sure is that the US were supporting the military coup, if not helping General Tchiani – who served as the chief of the Nigerien presidential guard (2011-2023) – to the military take-over. See also this important analysis by Professor Chossudovsky.

What’s at Stake?

The deposed President Mohamed Bazoum had Macron’s support, not only because he allowed France’s shameless exploitation of Niger through the CFA Franc (for more details see this), but also because France exploits Niger’s rich uranium and high-purity petrol – and has access to Niger’s other mineral riches. See this and this).

Besides, and maybe most importantly, Niger is a landlocked Sahel country, strategically located in the center of North Africa, between Algeria, Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin, Nigeria, Chad and Libya (see map).

Being in control of Niger, (population  25 million), is in a way like being in control of Kosovo, the US-NATO  engineered cut-out piece of land from Serbia (with the largest U.S. military base in Europe), in the middle of former Yugoslavia, bombed to rubble in 1999 by President Clinton, to divide and conquer – conquer the area. 

That is what Niger may become, if the US has its say. Washington does not want France involved anymore. Being in control of Niger, is like being in control of at least northern West Africa, a resources-rich, but an extreme poverty-stricken territory – which Washington suspects may also interest Russia and possibly China. 

The Role of the Wagner Private Army 

It is not a well-kept secret that the private Russian Wagner army has had a foothold in this part of Africa with several thousand mercenaries for at least a couple of years, maybe longer – in Chad, Central African Republic, Mali, Burkina Faso, and maybe even Nigeria.

Hypothetically, purely speculatively, let us assume the leader of the Wagner private army, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who was supposedly killed in a plane crash on 23 August 2023, between Moscow and St. Petersburg, is still alive, never was on that plane. Therefore, he may have escaped the crash.

This according to all official news, including by the Kremlin (2 days ago) was denied. Apparently Russian examinations by genetic tests, indicated that Yevgeny Prigozhin was killed in the crash.

President Putin himself has confirmed that the remains of Yevgeny Prigozhin had been DNA-examined, and confirmed that he is dead.

OK, Prigozhin is no longer among the living.

For example, Dr. Joanna Szostek, Sr. Lecturer in Political Communication, University of Glasgow, expressed some doubts. She said, “It is very likely we will never exactly know what happened … “, as quoted here.

Rumors say, Prigozhin had been seen after the plane “accident”, in the Central African Republic, where he has his African headquarters, and where he is a hero.

It is worth noting that Prigozhin allegedly posted a video on August 21, 2023 from Africa. Was this two days before the plane crash or was it a video corresponding to an earlier date:  

See the recent video released by the Daily Mail

 


Still some doubts remain, one being Prigozhin’s firm habit not to get on the same plane with his top brass, for precisely the reason of a wanton or accidental crash.

Prigozhin had been “killed” before in the past couple of years, and reappeared.

So, who knows, this may be his final death.

See also the interview with an Ex-KGB agent: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7LyfITOJVE 

Just for argument’s sake, though very unlikely, a Russian mercenary army in Northern Central Africa that may still be fighting for Russia, would be most uncomfortable for Madame Nuland and her hegemonic ilk in Washington. 

Or, is it possible Wagner could be bought by Washington? After all, mercenaries are killers for money.

What to Do About It? 

The US attempt is to make sure that Niger, the country of strategy, a member of the US / NATO France supported ECOWAS, will not slip out into liberty from “independence” some 60 years ago.

Shortly after the Niger military coup, Mr. Putin has cautioned not to interfere in Niger’s internal affairs. He was referring precisely to ECOWAS which has “warned” of an ECOWAS military intervention, if the French aligned deposed President Bazoum, would not be returned immediately to the Presidency. In hindsight, and knowing what we know now, the ECOWAS warning too, was a media manufactured untruth by “design”.

ECOWAS is The Economic Community of West African States. It is one of 8 African regional political and economic unions. ECOWAS has 15 member countries located in Central and West Africa. But ECOWAS is divided within. Without the support of the US / NATO and France, it may fall apart. Therefore, a warning from ECOWAS has only meaning when an “arrangement” has been reached before.

Le Conseil National pour la Sauvegarde de la Patrie (CNSP), roughly translated as “National Movement for the Defense of the Homeland”, headed by the Military Junta’s General Tchiani, is supported by the Pentagon. At least five members of the military coup (July 26, 2023) received their military training in the U.S. 

This means the US is well-established within Niger, and by association within central and West Africa – and they do not want to lose out on this highly strategic – and resources-rich – African position; not to the French, not to the Russians – and not to China.

But, then there is still the unconfirmed suspicion of a mercenary army roaming in Western Africa – and who knows – just in case – what their plans might be, and for whom they might 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.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

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

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 important Kiev Post article by Katya Gorchinskaya (originally published on March 13, 2014) in the immediate wake of the EuroMaidan, quotes Ukraine’s Head of State Security of Ukraine Oleksandr Yakimenko (under the Yanukovych government) pointing to the hiring of snipers on February 20, 2014.

Yakimenko also reviews how the U.S. provided financial support to the Protest Movement. 

***

Former State Security Head of Ukraine Oleksandr Yakimenko blames Ukraine’s current government for hiring snipers on Feb. 20, 2014 when dozens of people were killed and hundreds more wounded.

The victims were mainly EuroMaidan Revolution demonstrations, but some police officers were also killed. This was the deadliest day during the EuroMaidan Revolution, a three-month uprising that claimed 100 lives.

Yakimenko also blamed the United States for organizing and financing the revolution by bringing illegal cash in using diplomatic mail.

The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine dismissed the charges as ludicrous, while another official with the current government called the accusations “cynical” propaganda with no factual basis.

The former SBU chief is now wanted in Ukraine for his alleged role in organizing mass murders in Ukraine, along with numerous other former top officials of deposed President Viktor Yanukovych’s administration, including the ex-president himself, former Prosecutor General Viktor Pshonka, former Interior Minister Vitaliy Zahkharchenko and former presidential chief of staff Andriy Klyuyev.

Yakimenko made these and other accusations in a 10-minute exclusive interview to Russia’s Vesti channel in an undisclosed location. 

“The shots sounded from the building of Philharmonics,” Yakimenko told Vesti. “This was the building supervised by (now National Security Council Chief Andriy) Parubiy.”

He said the snipers were shooting in the back of the running police, as well as at protesters. He said there were two groups of “well-dressed” snipers, each composed of 10 people, operating in the building. Yakimenko said their exit was witnessed by both SBU operatives and protesters themselves.

He said one of the groups of snipers disappeared, but the other one relocated to Hotel Ukraina and continued to kill the protesters at a slower pace. Yakimenko said at that point representatives of Svoboda and Right Sector appealed to him to deploy SBU’s special unit Alfa to destroy the snipers. 

Yakimenko claims that he was ready to do it, but did not get the permission of Parubiy, who supervised the self-defense forces.

“To get inside EuroMaidan I needed Parubiy’s permission because the forces of self-defense would hit me in the back,” Yakimenko said. “But Parubiy did not give me such a permission.”

“Not a single weapon could get onto Maidan without Parubiy’s permission,” he said, adding that EuroMaidan protesters used mercenaries from former defense ministry’s special units, as well as foreign mercenaries, including those  from former Yugoslavia.

“This is typical Russian-style propaganda,” says Viktoria Siumar, deputy head of the National Security and Defense Council and Parubiy’s deputy. She said these “cynical” lies that are circulating in the Russian media, have not and cannot be backed by a single fact.

Yankimenko says that Parubiy, as well as a number of other organizers of EuroMaidan, received direct orders from the U.S. government. Among those people he named former and current intelligence chiefs Mykola Malomuzh and Viktor Gvozd, former Defense Minister Anatoliy Hrytsenko and leader of the opposition Petro Poroshenko.

“These are the forces that were doing everything they were told by the leaders and representatives of the United States,” he says. “They, in essence lived in the U.S. embassy. There wasn’t a day when they did not visit the embassy.”

SBU chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko is also accused of playing to the tune of the Americans. The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine commented on these accusations in just one word: “ludicrous.”

All orders were given either by the U.S. or EU ambassador Jan Tombinski, “who in essence is a Polish citizen.” 

“The role of Poland cannot be evaluated,” Yakimenko said. “It dreams about restoring its old wish, Rzeczpospolita.” 

The EU Delegation had no comment about the accusations.

The former SBU chief also talked at length about the financing of EuroMaidan protests, saying much of it came directly from the U.S., and that some Ukrainian oligarchs, including Poroshenko, Dmytro Firtash and Viktor Pinchuk.

“From the beginning of Maidan we as a special service noticed a significant increase of diplomatic cargo to various embassies, western embassies located in Ukraine,” says Yakimenko. “It was tens of times greater than usual diplomatic cargo supplies.” He says that right after such shipments crisp, new U.S. dollar bills were spotted on Maidan. 

He said Ukraine’s oligarchs were also financing Maidan because they were “hostages of the situation and had no choice” because most of their assets are located in the west.

*

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.

Kyiv Post deputy chief editor Katya Gorchinskaya can be reached at [email protected].

Featured image: Oleksandr Yakimenko blames Ukraine’s current government for hiring snipers on Feb. 20. Photo by UKRAINIAN NEWS

French Ambassador Defies Order to Vacate Niger

August 30th, 2023 by Abayomi Azikiwe

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.

***

President Emmanuel Macron of France has publicly stated that the National Council for the Safeguarding of Our Homeland (CNSP) government in Niger has no right to withdraw the diplomatic credentials from Paris’ ambassador to the West African state.

Since the order to leave within 48 hours was issued, the stakes have grown higher in the month-long struggle between the new government in Niamey and several western imperialist countries and their allies in the region.

After the July 26 seizure of power by the presidential guard and the conventional forces, there were immediate calls from France and the United States for a military intervention by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) aimed at the reinstallation of ousted President Mohamed Bazoum. The former leader was said to have been elected democratically by the people of Niger and therefore the CNSP ruling council should not be recognized as the legitimate government.

However, since the change in government in Niger, neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali have pledged their support to the CNSP. Both governments which also came to power through military coups [supported by the Pentagon], have stated that any attack on Niger would be viewed as a declaration of war against Burkina Faso and Mali.

At the same time several African states such as Algeria, which shares a long border with Niger, are opposing military intervention by ECOWAS. Even within the ECOWAS states such as the Federal Republic of Nigeria, there is broad opposition to sending troops into Niger. The Nigerian Senate controlled by President Bola Tinubu’s own political party, the All-Progressive Congress (APC), refused to authorize the deployment of troops to neighboring Niger.

In fact, throughout the entire region diverse voices have spoken loudly against the French scheme to reimpose Bazoum. A recent session of the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) failed to reach an agreement on endorsing an invasion into Niger.

Therefore, the rationale being used by Macron to stage a diplomatic incident has no basis in the reality now permeating the West and North Africa regions in particular and the continent as a whole. Since the CNSP administration does not have the blessing of France, Macron claims that their diplomatic personnel, military units along with strategic economic interests must continue to operate in Niger despite the widespread sentiment against the neo-colonial status-quo.

In a speech to French ambassadors on August 25, Macron reiterated that he would support an ECOWAS military invasion into Niger. Ambassador Sylvain Itte of France has refused to meet with the new leadership in Niamey. Consequently, the CNSP believes that the ongoing presence of Itte would be a threat to the security and well-being of the country.

Macron told his foreign service personnel that:

“France and its diplomats have faced particularly difficult situations in some countries in recent months, from Sudan, where France has been exemplary, to Niger at this very moment and I applaud your colleague and your colleagues who are listening from their posts. I think our policy is the right one. It’s based on the courage of President Bazoum, and on the commitments of our ambassador on the ground who is remaining despite all the pressure, despite all the declarations made by the illegitimate authorities.” 

This response to the existing crisis of legitimacy for France in West Africa illustrates the imperialist posture of Macron. In his discourse, he asserts that Paris has acted in an exemplary manner in the region. Judging from the recent political events many are disputing this perceived notion of benevolence from a former colonial power.

Tens of thousands of Nigeriens have taken to the streets since July 26 to demonstrate their support for the CNSP and its policies. This atmosphere is a direct result of the interference by Paris and Washington in the internal affairs of the uranium-rich state.

The U.S. has at least 1,100 Africa Command (AFRICOM) troops on the ground along with a military base and drone stations. France reportedly maintains a troops contingent of 1,800 aimed at guarding its dominant economic interests in the uranium industry.

People in Niger and throughout the region are incensed over the ongoing exploitation of natural resources. These resources belong to the citizens of these states, and they have a right to determine the political and economic direction of their countries.

Diplomatic Hostility and Military Threats Based on Distortions

The western propaganda saying that the former Bazoum government in Niger was the “last hope for democracy in West Africa” is a pure farce. Bazoum represented the interests of international finance capital and the NATO states.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Niger earlier in the year to praise Bazoum for his willingness to extend the military and intelligence presence of the U.S. In actuality, the circumstances surrounding the ascendancy and administrative tenure of Bazoum are far from the glowing rhetoric about the purported virtues of the political leader.

An article published by Foreign Affairs on August 29 reflects a simmering debate inside the ruling circles in the U.S. over what approach to take towards the CNSP government [which is in liaison with the Pentagon]. Judging from the tone of the report, some analysts are urging that the administration of President Joe Biden distance itself from the policy orientation of France.

The Foreign Affairs report emphasizes:

“The United States, however, has broken from France to advocate for a more pacifist response. Washington’s stance has come as a surprise. The United States has generally been content to follow France’s lead in the Sahel in exchange for support for U.S. endeavors in the Middle East….

Washington’s current course is correct, and U.S. policymakers must resist calls to back an intervention. It is by no means inevitable that a proxy war between Russia and the West will break out in the Sahel. In fact, a military intervention would only increase the likelihood of more extensive meddling in the region by Russia. The junta appears interested in partnering with Moscow, but to date, Moscow has remained equivocal. In the event of a challenge to the junta by foreign militaries, however, Russia could be obliged to make good on promises to protect its African partners.” 

Whether or not the Biden administration will maintain this position is largely dependent upon the direction of the CNSP government along with the burgeoning anti-imperialist movement in Niger and throughout West Africa. Although there is competition between the interests of France and the U.S., overall, the two imperialist powers have the same objectives.

Both Washington and Paris want to utilize their military and economic presence in Niger to serve as a bulwark against the growing influence of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China. If France is given no sanctuary in the Sahel region to pursue its neo-colonial ambitions, it appears inevitable that AFRICOM, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and State Department will seek to fill this vacuum.

By taking on even greater responsibility for ensuring the ability of imperialism to thrive unhindered in West Africa, a clash between AFRICOM, NATO and their client regimes against the popular forces and progressive governments will occur. The emergence of a clearly demarcated military conflict in West Africa involving the interests of the imperialists and those of the people would require a major expansion in defense spending and deployment of Pentagon personnel.

Washington and its NATO cohorts are already committed to military conflicts and antagonisms in Ukraine (Eastern Europe), West Asia and the Asia-Pacific. A significant expansion of this military involvement in West Africa will be paid for by the working people of the U.S. and Western Europe who are already suffering from rising prices and deteriorating living conditions.

Although it is not stated openly in the capitalist countries by the dominant political parties, the escalating imperialist war budgets are responsible to a significant degree for the impoverishment and consequent discontent of the working class and oppressed. This righteous discontent can be transformed into a political outlook which challenges ideologically the entire concept of western hegemony in favor of domestic and foreign policies which serve the majority of people within society.

*

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.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. 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.

***

Many of us shared anecdotes of loved ones vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines – and suffering from all sorts of unrelated illnesses afterward. I know a young individual who, after mandated COVID vaccination, had all sorts of bacterial illnesses that he never had before. (This story was a major impetus to my opening and growing this substack).

Finally, we have scientific confirmation that vaccination against COVID-19 causes a marked decrease in immunity to heterologous pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, and fungi. This decreased immunity to other pathogens (acquired immune deficit) is what people colloquially refer to as “VAIDS.” (VAIDS stands for Vaccine-Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome)

The study titled BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous pathogens and Toll-like receptor agonists, set out to measure the quality of general immune responses in children vaccinated with the Pfizer COVID vaccine.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1242380/full

Blood samples from 29 children, aged 5-11 years old, were taken before the FIRST dose of COVID vaccination and subsequently retaken on the 28th day after the second dose.

Methods: A whole blood stimulation assay was used to investigate in vitrocytokine responses to heterologous stimulants (killed pathogens, Toll-like receptor ligands) and SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Samples from 29 children, aged 5-11 years, before and 28 days after a second BNT162b2 vaccination were analysed (V2 + 28). Samples from eight children were analysed six months after BNT162b2 vaccination.

In the introduction, scientists coyly said that vaccination “altered cytokine responses”. As we will discover, the jabs altered immune responses for the worse, not better!

Conclusions: BNT162b2 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous stimulants, particularly one month after vaccination. This study is the first to report the immunological heterologous effects of COVID-19 vaccination in children.

What the Scientists Did 

Sample collection 

Participants were requested to provide blood samples at two core visits, and one optional visit. The first blood sample was taken immediately before, and on the same day as, the first BNT162b2 vaccination (V1), the second blood sample was taken 28 days after the second BNT162b2 vaccination (V2 + 28) and the optional third blood sample was taken 6 months after the second BNT162b2 vaccination (V2 + 182) (Supplementary Figure S1). Up to 23 mL venous blood was collected into sodium heparin-containing and serum separator tubes (Becton Dickinson, NJ, USA).

Then, collected blood was tested for the immune response to various pathogens, including various commonly encountered bacteria, staphylococcus aureus, and pathogenic yeast Candida Albicans:

In vitro whole blood stimulation

In vitro whole blood stimulation assays were done as previously described (16, 23). [lab work details omitted – I.C.] … Other stimulants have previously been described (16) and included: bacterial stimulants (heat-killed Haemophilus influenzae type B, HK Listeria monocytogenes, BCG-Denmark , HK Staphylococcus aureus and HK Escherichia coli, and viral/other stimulants (hepatitis B virus surface antigen, …, HK Candida albicans

Many of the above are pathogens that we encounter often, and they are the reason why we have God-given immune systems to keep them away, which healthy children typically do.

Unfortunately, the 29 COVID-vaccinated children aged 5-11, had markedly decreased immune responses 28 days after the second dose of Pfizer. Many specific immune reactions declined by a factor of over ten times:

(the charts in the figure above are using logarithmic scale)

The authors state:

Following heterologous bacterial, fungal and viral/TLR agonists stimulation, there was a general decrease in cytokine and chemokine responses in children between V1 and V2 + 28. The largest decreases were seen for IFN-γ and MCP-1 (Figures 2, 3A-C). IL-6, IL-15, IL-17 also decreased between V1 and V2 + 28 following stimulation with BCG, H. influenzae, S. aureus, hepatitis B antigen, poly(I:C), and R848 (Figure 3B). L. monocytogenes stimulation induced IL-15, TNF-α and IP-10 decreases between V1 and V2 + 28 (Figure 3C). IL-8 responses also decreased between V1 and V2 + 28 following H. influenzae and S. aureus stimulation.

Reduced responses to Staphylococcus aureus are very serious: this illness is difficult to treat and causes untold harm. I will skip the worst pictures to not upset my readers too much.

In any case, a decrease in immune responses happens across the board.

In the ideal world, careful scientists, cautious public health authorities, and principled medical doctors would investigate COVID vaccines’ effects before vaccinating tens of millions of children and billions of adults. Had they investigated and done the basic science (such as the study above) before mandating and injecting COVID vaccines, such dangerous injections would never have been given to children and young adults!

Instead, in the mad rush to “vaccinate the world” with vaccines that do not even work, we ruined the immune responses of millions of children and likely all other vaccinated people.

Headlines about the “unexplained rise in children infected” with the above-mentioned bacteria abound:

Instead of careful consideration, science and health authorities denied everything and refused to debate. Now that the truth is coming out, the ill effects of Covid vaccines can no longer be reversed. Very unfortunate!

Do you know any affected people? Please share your stories, while BEING MINDFUL ABOUT PRIVACY!

*

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 author


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.

***

Aug. 14, 2023 – Melbourne, Australia – Danny Norman and Stacey Singles lost their baby boy Cooper at 2 weeks old on May 23, 2023. Just 2 months later, on August 13, 2023, while on vacation in Bali, Stacey Singles collapsed and died suddenly. This is a truly heartbreaking family tragedy.

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

Aug. 12, 2023 – Darlington, UK – 41 year old Mike Clinton died unexpectedly in his sleep just 3 months after his wife Shelly Clinton also died unexpectedly, leaving behind two orphan boys ages 12 & 14.

Aug. 9, 2023 – Dartmouth, NS – 55 yo Brian Scott Sutherland died unexpectedly on Aug. 9, 2023 at home. His partner, 59 yo Robert Bobby Barkhouse died unexpectedly in his sleep on Mar. 22, 2022.

Aug. 4, 2023 – Albertson, NY – Jill Silverstein “suffered a medical event” and died unexpectedly on Aug. 4, 2023. Her 45 year old husband, Craig Silverstein, had died suddenly on April 29, 2021 from a cardiac arrest. Their kids are now orphans.

Aug. 4, 2023 – Whitman, MA – Michelle/Lexi Kowalski suffered a hemorrhagic stroke on Aug. 1, 2023 which left her unable to speak or swallow. Two days later, her husband Joe Kowalski suffered a heart attack.

July 29, 2023 – Deer Lake, NL, Husband and wife dead within a week of each other. 58 year old Sandra May Pearce died suddenly on July 29, 2023, a week after her husband Selby Arthur Pearce died suddenly on July 21, 2023.

July 18, 2023 – New Milford, CT – 24 year old Hope Smith died unexpectedly at home on July 18, 2023. Her father, 59 year old Timothy J. Smith died unexpectedly at home on Nov. 2, 2022.

July 6, 2023 – Fort Hamer, FL – 11 year old Andrew Amber had breathing problems, ended up intubated, coded and died briefly before being revived by Hospital staff. He was diagnosed with myocarditis. His father, Barnabas Amber had a massive heart attack just 5 months ago and needed 6 AED shocks to be revived.

May 5, 2023 – Magnolia, TX – Physician Darrick Wells had a brain bleed from a micro aneurysm in 2021 after his COVID-19 vaccine. Recently, he had another stroke. His wife has been diagnosed with Transverse Myelitis, also COVID-19 vaccine induced.

July 2021 – Bremerton, WA – Robert Phinney and her husband both developed skin problems after taking COVID-19 vaccines. Her husband’s injury appears to be an autoimmune vasculitis caused by COVID-19 vaccine.

June 1, 2021 – Husband and wife have major heart surgeries 3 weeks apart. Erin Gallagher had chest pain on June 1 and needed open heart surgery. 3 weeks later her husband Chris Gallagher, who had chest pains after COVID-19 vaccine, had to have open heart surgery as well!

My Take… 

This is why I started my substack.

I wanted to report information that would not be reported anywhere else.

These stories are almost impossible to find.

Special thanks to two Twitter users: Nashville Angela and Janiesaysyay for locating a few of these cases and alerting people to them.

Big pharma and the Vaccine Cartel don’t want people to know about these stories.

Multiple family members coming down with injuries has only a few possible explanations (beyond coincidence):

  1. Genetic predisposition shared by family members (doesn’t explain couples) – no one is studying this anywhere in the world;
  2. Took a COVID-19 vaccine from the same bad batch or bad vial that has high incidence of severe adverse events and sudden deaths – possible cause in some of these cases;
  3. The overall incidence of COVID-19 vaccine injuries is now so high, that it is statistically inevitable that some families will have more than one person coming down with vaccine injuries.

I believe the last scenario is now in play. There are simply so many people being injured by COVID-19 vaccines that it is inevitable now that there will be families where two or three members are injured or die suddenly.

*

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. 


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.

*** 

More than twenty years ago I published a study in which I argued that South Africa’s apartheid system was created by mission and land appropriation.[i] This obviously implicated the Christian churches, including those that had claimed to be opposed to the British policy enshrined in the National Party programme when it came to power in 1947. This study received one review which confirmed the experience I had defending it as a dissertation—namely that my thesis was not understood. The problem was not the clarity or evidence. That was clear from the review and the committee’s reactions. Rather it was a fundamental and paradigmatic issue. Neither the Church nor the land question was taken seriously as central to the policy of apartheid.

In the years following the demise of South Africa’s National Party regime, I watched and waited to see what would happen to the social and economic order that the Anglo-Afrikaner elite had created since the end of the 19th century. As I predicted none of the grand land reform measures, not even those stated in the new constitution or the ANC’s Reconstruction and Development Plan were implemented in more than token ways. One of the reasons for this was the victory of neo-liberalism in 1989 over every other form of economic programme. Another was and remains the absence of any social-political-economic praxis aimed at social transformation to counter the neo-liberal paradigm. Finally the nature of the NP’s withdrawal was to surrender form without surrendering power.

Actually my interest in these problems goes back to 1986, when by accident I was on a study trip to Brazil. It was the year after the formal end of the military dictatorship instigated by the US in 1962 and executed in 1964. During that trip I was able to interview numerous people involved in the drafting of a new civilian constitution to replace the Atos Institucionais that had formed the basis of military rule for two decades. It was by coincidence that I found myself in a similar position in 1991 when I arrived in Johannesburg.

All that said: I have been studying social engineering for more than thirty years. In the West—to apply a thoroughly worn and yet useful cliché—the DNA of social engineering is the Latin Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church. (The Vatican)

Since the 18th century but even more in the 20th century there has been a largely successful effort to conceal the extent to which the Latin Church remains the model for effective conquest. Wishful thinking, mendacity, and propaganda have obscured the mechanisms by which the West’s oldest transnational corporation shaped what is today often called the “globalized world”—a euphemism for the planet’s susceptibility to the central ecclesiastical technology—missionary conquest.

In The Art of War (5 BCE), Chinese general, Sun Tzu, explained, “to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.” The method of mission is to break the enemy’s resistance.

Colonialism and imperialism over the past four centuries were not merely the extension of high lethality belligerence and larceny by Western barbarians. Numerically the population of the Western peninsula, aka Europe, was always far too small to fight and conquer the world that came to embody the British and now Anglo-American Empire.

In fact this inability of Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, English, French and later Belgian forces to conquer and fully occupy all the territories they claimed is often used to explain the failures of imperialism and the ultimate victory ascribed to independence movements after 1945.

In today’s comparison between empires supposed to have waned or atrophied, like the British or French, and the imperial quality ascribed to the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, invidious and fallacious distinctions are made. The persistence of the multi-ethnic quality of both great continental states is treated as evidence that they are imperial in nature—for which they are regularly condemned in popular and scholarly venues.

These states whose alleged empires comprise immediately contiguous territory in which culture and populations have integrated over centuries are compared with the occupation of India, Africa, Indonesia and the Americas by small tribal kingdoms, like Spain, Portugal, France or the Netherlands, Belgium or Great Britain. These kingdoms and republics have supposedly withdrawn to their core principalities and liberated once subjugated peoples. Thus these states, which now constitute the EU, the Commonwealth and the USA, have attained the moral status entitling them to condemn other states for sins they committed and meanwhile allege to have confessed.

This is the general political context in which the empire of the West constitutes itself as the “international community” and the promulgator of “rules” those who are not part of this “community” are obliged to follow. Certainly there is a tiny, barely audible voice in that community that tries to assert the primacy of international law or the Law of Nations, as it was once known. Both the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China make every effort to remind the world that the Law of Nations, as opposed to the “rules-based” order is the genuine foundation of human civilization and commerce between states.

There are several clear reasons why these efforts have failed to date. First, the historic balance of political-economic forces, including military, had remained for the better part of the 20th century and into the 21st century in the hands of the barbarian West. (For readers who may wonder why I consistently use the term “barbarian”, let me say that it has been these countries, the collective West, that have constituted the most warlike and destructive forces on the planet for the past five hundred years, including the only state to have deployed atomic weapons.) Second, the control of nearly two thirds of the world’s land mass and the inhabitants of those areas has magnified the impact of the barbarian tribes reinforced by naval and air power developed to dominate those territories. This has had the effect of isolating the two huge Asian nations of Russia and China. Third, and probably most importantly, the West developed the most powerful psychic technology for conquest of hearts and minds throughout the planet. This technology is cultural, proprietary and above all religious.

Image: In this handout picture released by the U.S. Army, a mushroom cloud billows about one hour after a nuclear bomb was detonated above Hiroshima, Japan on Aug. 6, 1945. Japanese officials say a 93-year-old Japanese man has become the first person certified as a survivor of both U.S. atomic bombings at the end of World War II. City officials said Tsutomu Yamaguchi had already been a certified “hibakusha,” or radiation survivor, of the Aug. 9, 1945, atomic bombing in Nagasaki, but has now been confirmed as surviving the attack on Hiroshima three days earlier as well. (AP Photo/U.S. Army via Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, HO) 

It is on this last aspect of Western barbarism that I will focus.

The Latin Church bequeathed to its semi-secular partners in conquest the technology of mission. Previously religion was based either on geography or ethnicity. There were no universal gods and monotheism was a rarity at best. Sigmund Freud offered an explanation for the latter in a late and brief essay called Moses and Monotheism (1939). However it is not his thesis that concerns me here. In the course of recorded history, to the extent we can rely on it, deities were confined to places and peoples. Travellers, even armies, brought their religions with them while paying due respect even homage to the deities they met on their travels and campaigns. Of course what this meant was that the sacred places of others were generally treated respectfully even if they did not coincide with one’s own religious worship. When people moved they either brought their own deities or adopted the ones they found in their new homes.

The establishment of cults based on a universal deity was the product of global imperial expansion. However it first only supported the imperial conquerors by granting that the local god now was free to accompany the soldiers of a marauding army far from its own cultural and ethnic community. The next stage of development was for the universal deity to be adopted by soldiers recruited from territories that had been invaded and conquered. This left the peoples dominated by military conquest possessed of their local and ethnic deities while integrating the foreign troops into an ideologically (religiously) uniform command structure.

When the Latin Church was founded by what was essentially a coup against Hellenistic Christianity based in the Balkans, Black Sea basin and Asia Minor, monotheism acquired a virulence inconsistent with what we know about original Christian praxis and aggressiveness which arguably triggered the militancy of Islam, too. That virulence and aggressiveness was disproportionate to the numbers actually following the Latin deviation. Yet within less than a thousand years this Christian deviation led to the global dominance of the business corporation and the missionary propaganda technology as means of psychological conquest independent of territorial occupation.

How Does Mission Really Work?

If one reads any of the standard histories describing the expansion of Christianity in the Western peninsula of Eurasia, the Americas or Africa, great attention is given to the preachers of the Gospel. In some narratives they travelled alone preaching—i.e. orally transmitting—from Scripture and working miracles—i.e. performing acts deemed supernatural or divinely supported. Then there were the preachers accompanying invading armies who not only preached to the soldiers but also construed the results of battle either as divine victories or punishing defeats. Hagiography, the stories of saints, is replete with accounts of wonders that led to conversion of princes and nations to the Holy Church. The precise mechanics of these conversions is generally omitted because it is expected that the readers already accept the divine attributes of the Church and the will of god to increase his flock.

However the core of the technology of conversion is already recognisable in the myth of Christ itself. In fact the true intent of this myth has been marvellously characterised by Jose Saramago in his scandalous novel The Gospel according to Jesus Christ (1991). In a dialogue between the god in question and Jesus of Nazareth, Saramago recounts how this god, aware of all the other competing gods and determined to be the top god, needs people to fight for him against the other gods. He explains to Jesus that people would not fight just for a god—but they would fight for him. Jesus is furious at this revelation and refuses to participate in the god’s plan for domination. The god replies that Jesus is powerless to resist. He can refuse to perform miracles but he will be unable to prove that he did not perform the miracles god stages.

Saramago uses this fable or interpretation of the Gospel to explain the dynamics of “victimhood”. The god sets up Jesus as an ordinary man who suddenly can perform miracles, which draw a following. Then he creates the conditions by which Jesus is persecuted and killed by the State. This galvanizes the cult around Jesus the miracle-worker. The cult angered by the murder of its divine leader seeks revenge. This it can only do by the threat of or use of armed force. To exact revenge it must align with those who have the necessary force and win them over to the cult. As members of the vengeful cult they are now in a position to exact revenge or alternatively conversion to the cult. It is this basic materialistic contradiction that fuels the cult’s expansion.

As a rule, and this can be found throughout the missionary activity of Western churches (the Latin Church and its reformed derivatives), local cults and their deities are not easily abandoned. First of all, under the conditions of ethnic or geographic religion there is no reason for an established ethnic group or the traditional inhabitants of a region to “change gods”. Sedentary peoples who remain together as tribes or occupy agricultural and pastoral regions for centuries do not “evolve” their religious beliefs into monotheism. This notion of monotheism as an evolutionary product is part of the 19thcentury myth of progress many associate with Charles Darwin and sociological followers of his historical interpretations.

As said before military expansion or nomadic barbarism are the social formations from which monotheism emerges as soon as territorial and population conquest require.

The expanding Latin Church overcame this inertia by the refinement of the “victimhood” and its transformation into a method of psychological warfare. The invading Church, let us call it the Church militant, sought and isolated minorities in the targets of conquest. These minorities had little or no power in the communities to which they were attached. Thus they were amenable to preaching—if for no other reason than the allied power to which they were then joined. The adoption of the cult by these minorities endowed them with “purity” compared to the complex majority communities with their geographic and ethnic deities, now viewed as corrupted and sullied by mundane practices. The pure status insinuated virtues proclaimed to be absent among the majority. Naturally in any established community there are various sources of discontent. No system functions perfectly. The longer any system has been in place the more incoherence is certain to have appeared. Hence the first tactic of the new “pure” is to find and recruit the discontented among the majority. It is not necessary that these discontents join the cult of the pure. In fact it may be detrimental to the overall strategy if they do.

What is important is the capacity of the discontents to be sacrificed for purity. They must be sufficiently dissatisfied that they will act in concert with the pure, wittingly or unwittingly. Here a number of options are possible but to keep it simple we will stick to the “Jesus model”. The potential “Jesus” has to be perceived as a member of the community as a whole. Then he has to articulate grievances that all but the most hard-core defenders of the status quo will admit—even if this admission has no immediate consequences. Then this “Jesus” has to be sacrificed. That means the “Jesus” has to conspicuously suffer and perhaps even die at the hands of the supporters of the status quo. This does not by itself trigger a revolt or overthrow of the prevailing system. In fact that is not the aim of this strategy. Instead it creates a breach in the perceived legitimation of the extant religion. That breach arises from the fear that the insignificant “Jesus” becomes more than exemplary of the threat to everyone else who harbours the doubts or critiques for which this “Jesus” was persecuted. A latent choice is introduced into an inertial system: align with the pure or risk punishment.

It is important to say that this only works when the pure already enjoy a preponderance of force, even if that force has not yet been applied. Therein lies the difference between missionary conversion and revolutionary mobilisation. For example it is also the fundamental difference between Maoism and “Sharpism”.

The Christianisation of the western hemisphere and Africa relied on this model. Sometimes this was simplified by the mass extermination of Western barbarian conquest, like in the Americas. Another argument used to explain the effect of missionary conquest is that the defeat of the besieged population on the battlefield discredited the extant religion and deities, leaving the survivors to convert to the “winning god”. However this argument is insufficient to explain conversion where no such massive battlefield annihilation occurred. Nor does it explain the continued success of the “Jesus” model without explicit armed force.

In this brief essay I would like to apply the “victimhood” or “Jesus” model and by implication its 20th century adaptation in the wake of the “second thirty years war” that was interrupted in 1945.[ii] For more than 30 years—to keep it simple starting in 1989—the world has been subject to an accelerated conversion or social engineering process, euphemistically called “globalisation”. The acceleration or metastasis was made possible by the defeat of the Soviet Union. Every history book one can find today will recount that the Soviet Union failed due to what might be called the errors of its underlying religion, i.e. Marxism-Leninism. Those with less antagonism toward that body of theory will argue that the Soviet Union was bankrupted into collapse. Then ridiculously sentimental will say that “communism failed because even communists realised it was wrong”.

An objective examination of the economic conditions of the two superpowers in 1989 would demonstrate that the Soviet Union did not collapse because it was bankrupt and its economy no longer able to function. The Soviet Union and its antagonist the United States were both in demonstrably ruinous economic condition. In fact the economic condition of the US never improved after 1989—only the FIRE sector did[iii]. Moreover there was no military defeat of the Soviet Union. The war started under President Jimmy Carter in Afghanistan was far shorter (for the Russians) than the thirty some years that the US waged war throughout Indochina. The Soviet Union had none of the debt the US accumulated carpet-bombing and murdering millions in Korea between 1950-53.

Three factors led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The first was the accumulated damage done by a century of economic and armed war against the country.

US “experts” like George Kennan wrote accurately that it would take the Soviet Union at least twenty years to recover the lost population and economic capacity destroyed by the West’s German-led war against it. [iv] That was with all things being equal—which they were not. Despite the non-stop war against the Soviet Union the country was able to reach nearly its full pre-war capacity by the mid-1960s.

Scarcely a common source in the West explains that the occupation of Europe east of the rivers Elbe and Danube was conceded by the West to the Soviet Union in Yalta as an alternative to reparations from Germany. To the extent this is mentioned at all the excuse given was to prevent a situation arising like the one when the West drained Germany like a vampire after the 1918 armistice. The conditions at the end of World War 2 were quite different. Namely the Western “allies”, mainly the Americans, had encouraged the destruction or theft of every useful capital asset in what became the Soviet zone of occupation and the transfer of anything of future economic value to the West.

The subsequent, at first secret, re-arming of Germany under command of American and Nazi general officers and continued brain drain led to the erection of the fortified border between the Soviet zone and the rest of the Western peninsula. Thus the Soviet Union had to fortify and subsidize the countries ruined by the Wehrmacht campaigns while trying to reconstruct its own economy and restore the 20 million plus killed during World War 2. While the Soviet Union was working to recover a relatively weak status quo ante, the United States was able to expand its markets and power over the rest of the globe. Thus from 1945 until 1989 the United States economy was fuelled by the elimination of every other meaningful competitor whether it was for sales or purchases. It is worth noting—given the recent release of an atomic bomb hagiography called Oppenheim—that this weapon was devised under the leadership of rabid anti-communists/ anti-Soviets for use in wiping the Soviet Union off the face of the Earth after it was clear that the Wehrmacht had failed. At no time during World War 2 was Anglo-American aerial bombardment directed to support the Soviet Union’s self-defence. It was explicitly waged to destroy economic competitors to the British and American Empires.

The third factor was the missionary strategy. I have always found it bitterly amusing when Americans or the natives of the Western peninsula complain about Soviet (or Chinese) propaganda. The first thing I ask them is how much Russian or Chinese they have learned? Then I ask if they can name a Russian or Chinese pop musician or film star or what Chinese or Russian clothing items they most prefer? The only food and drink they can associate with Russia are vodka and caviar. How effective could their propaganda be?

Which US Restaurants Serve Coke or Pepsi

Coca Cola and Pepsi (thanks to negotiations by Richard Nixon on behalf of his friends) are known throughout the world and were imported or bottled in the Soviet Union. Denim trousers (Levis) were coveted goods from Magdeburg to Vladivostok. Despite technical countermeasures there was little that could be done to suppress the vast global propaganda machine combining films, music, and consumer goods of every kind. This all served to amplify the ideology of consumerism as a pure form of economic and social well being. This pure form—available only to the “middle class” countries on any scale—was presented and seen everywhere as the virtue which a struggling economy and political system was expected to produce for young people. There was no question of converting the heroes of the Soviet Union, the survivors of the civil war and non-stop foreign invasions since 1918.

However the young, the desperately needed replacements to rebuild the Soviet Union, could not simply be inculcated in the moral sacrifices of their parents and grandparents. There had to be space and a future for these people. The capacity to compete for the hearts and minds of the generations that by 1989 had no immediate recollection of the Great Patriotic War was not only challenged within the Soviet Union but throughout the countries it had occupied since 1945. These countries, especially the GDR, Hungary and Poland, were able to benefit from overt and covert support from the West. Moreover there had been an intensive and to date still largely unacknowledged level of penetration and sabotage under the guise of technology transfer agreements that in the final years weakened the system considerably. Defective control technology for industrial infrastructure led to serious destruction of pipelines.[v] It takes no fantasy to imagine that intentionally defective control components—merely improperly calibrated meters would have done the trick—led to the Chernobyl meltdown.

The Helsinki Accords (1975), still considered naively as an important step toward peace, were a major propaganda victory for the West. Despite the creation of NGOs in the West, the only governments consistently subjected to its conditions were those in the “Soviet bloc”. By treating the conflict between the US and the USSR as competition when in fact it was covert aggression by the United States, every international treaty presented the US as the generous human rights and peace defender and the Soviet Union as conceding its power both domestically and abroad. To this day there is no general admission in the West that no later than 1945, it was the US that waged non-stop war against the Soviet Union, making all these treaties essentially acts of extortion against the country and its people all of whom were aware of the US first strike and second strike atomic warfare strategy and what it would mean for any reconstruction and development.

By the time a wholly compromised Mikhail Gorbachev gave his country to the US raiders under Yeltsin, the moral legitimacy of the Soviet Union had been so seriously undermined that no party or military effort could rescue it from the locust swarms that devastated the country after 1990. With the borders open, the government in disgrace, and the youth able to join what they thought would be the saving purity of the cult held back for seventy years, the potential for converts was enormous. The cost was immeasurable. Only with the election of Vladimir Putin did the bleeding stop.

The conversion of the Soviet Union into the neo-liberal Russian Federation was made possible not by some catastrophic failure of Marxism – Leninism or even the inadequacy of the CPSU government. It was accomplished by 44 continuous years of covert war against a country struggling to recover from the previous decades of war waged against it. It may be added that Russia has always had a conflict between its Russian (Slavic Orthodox) and its Francophile/ Anglophile partisans.[vi] The October Revolution did not overcome this contradiction. Before 1917 there were also factions that believed that the Russian economy should rely on Germany, France and Britain for its industrial products and export its raw materials (like any third world country). Lenin’s vision for the October Revolution was to transform Russia into a self-sufficient industrialised nation capable of using its own resources for development. As a result the conflicts in revolutionary Russia were very much like those that persisted in the so-called Third World where leaders like Nkrumah wanted national electrification to make the country capable of producing and exporting aluminium for hard cash instead of just cheap bauxite for peanuts. The Generalplan Ost was not just an expression of Hitler’s attitude toward the Soviet Union but also the West’s plans that had been frustrated by Stalin’s “socialism in one country”, so poorly understood by ultraorthodox Marxists in the West. Altogether then the constant war, covert, diplomatic and economic waged against the Soviet Union, directly and through the Comecon states, combined with the global propaganda campaign directed at the vulnerable youth to undermine the last pillars of an independent Soviet Union. And for the Russian Federation the war is far from over.

The Woke and the Dead

Just as the war against Russia did not end with the destruction of the Soviet Union, the war against humanism, whether liberal or Marxist, has continued.  No one doubts that the end of the Soviet Union also meant that the independence struggles that began in earnest and seemed promising until 1975 were going to be reversed wherever possible. Absent the military or diplomatic challenge from Moscow or Beijing, every liberation movement that was not subdued was forced to reach a neo-liberal compromise to avoid being neutralised. While the US economy was just as much in tatters as that of the Soviet Union, the US could use the IMF, World Bank, and UN (also NATO) to transfer the costs to Rest of World. That was an option always unavailable to Moscow.

However the unimaginable concentration of wealth that has continued since 1989 would have to consume what was left of the US economy too. The Chinese strategy for accelerated industrialisation using what was essentially a modified treaty port system permitted the Anglo-American financial oligarchy to relocate all its meaningful industrial capacity—whatever had not already been moved to Indonesia or some other client state—to China.[vii] This deindustrialisation—following the British model—left the US with only one industry of any size: weapons systems.[viii] The steady impoverishment of the US since the 1970s has always been concealed behind a wall of credit cards and second mortgages. Thus the illusory American standard of living is maintained by charging the difference between 1973 salaries and 2023 prices. Already by the time the Bush-Clinton dynasty obtained control over the presidency and the electoral machinery to deliver congressional majorities, popular resistance was growing. Initially deceived by the Reagan-Thatcher shell games, the inability to continue debt payments and the rising cost of everything, aggravated by massive privatization in a system already dominated by business corporations, were pushing increasing numbers of conservative, church-going, Americans into opposition to what they identified as the status quo.

This presented a serious problem for the country’s ruling oligarchy. It was the Christian, moral majority that had put Ronald Reagan in the White House. Despite wars initiated by both Bush presidents and Clinton to stir that majority’s patriotic fervour, both the wars’ failures and the fallout in terms of major wealth transfers and obvious corruption were threatening to alienate that core upon which the nation’s owners depend for consent. A revolt in the Republican rank and file, also known as the Tea Party, not only articulated some of this resentment but also led to upsets in the previously comfortable GOP election machinery. Attempts were made to stigmatise the Tea Party as a fanatical right-wing minority. In fact it looked for a while like some self-appointed Tea Party leaders in the Establishment would perform some rhetorical moves and vent the steam that threatened to dislodge the mainline Republican Party.

This appeared to work until out of the “red”, the New York City real estate mogul, Donald Trump won the Republican nomination for the 2016 general elections.[ix] Worst of all, Donald Trump won the election, soundly defeating the anointed successor from the Bush-Clinton gang. It should be remembered this implosion was delayed by the CIA’s invention of Barack Obama as a candidate to defuse all the opposition to George W Bush. Obama had dutifully served/ saved the financial oligarchy when its massive financial derivatives scam collapsed in 2008. Together with Hillary Clinton, Obama kept the US at war for eight years so that the patriotic majority had to swallow its antipathy to the polyester POTUS.

The panic that ensued among the Establishment was clearly not really aimed at Trump, since his personality and ignorance of the bureaucratic system he was entering posed no immediate threat. Rather it was the conservative, populist core that his election empowered which the Establishment had to check. For the better part of a century this majority of the population could be relied upon to support the Establishment in the cause of anti-communism. However after 1989 this cry was inconsistent with the proclamation that the West had won and communism along with the evil Soviet Union had been destroyed. A new strategy was needed.

Until the Six Day War (1967) not much attention had been paid to Israel and certainly nothing significant to the forced labour, slave labour and mass murder perpetuated in Germany and those territories it had occupied during the Second World War.[x]Obvious reasons included the need to avoid shining the light on perpetrators the US had installed in West Germany or in cushy jobs stateside; the need to focus attention on the evils of the Soviet Union, and more subtly because the massive death toll of the Soviet Union alone would have tarnished the on-going campaigns to destroy it. With the Israel attack of Egypt, a relatively benign public opinion was at risk of turning into outright hostility toward the Euro-Zionist colony under British administration in Palestine that had declared itself the State of Israel in 1948. Israel not only launched surprise attacks but also occupied territory in every direction more than doubling the area under its control.

In the wake of this public relations disaster, a campaign, which became massive in scope and continues to this day, resurrected the stories and history of the Second World War and retold it as the war by Germany to exterminate world Jewry and the centre of this war, “the holocaust” was the mass murder of an estimated six million Jews in concentration camps run by the German Nazi regime. Since the Second World War had been fought to defend Jews from extermination, Israel could not be blamed even for pre-emptive measures since these all served to prevent another “holocaust”. The fact that even were one certain of the numbers of deaths and could be convinced by data, the figure of six million pales in comparison to the twenty plus million killed in the Soviet Union alone and another twenty million that died in China during the war. So without diminishing any deaths whether due to slave labour or mass murder, the re-writing of the history of World War 2 as the prologue to the foundation of Israel required heavy-duty propaganda and convincing political force. All of this was brought to bear. The scope of distortion and outright mendacity needed to establish the state of Israel as the “Victim” par excellence and its Jewish citizens, living and dead, as the ultimate victims, have been treated extensively elsewhere. The point here is that this is probably the greatest example of the “victim” strategy for social engineering since the “Jesus” strategy as deployed by the Latin Church.

The structural analogy I propose is as follows: It is not sufficient that there is a victim, this victim must be chosen; must be the ultimate victim. This victimhood also means that the victim is the embodiment of purity in comparison to which all other victims are imperfect or not victims at all. A veritable hierarchy of victims follows with the chosen victim at the top. This victim is entitled to reverence, even adoration, and the victims purity must be defended absolutely. The cult of this victim endows the true believers with the charisma of purity—even if they are not in fact pure in any meaningful sense. The cult then reaches into the majority of the impure from which it recruits or implicates those either aspirant to purity or touched by the guilt of the “impure”. Together these two elements when combined with material force, whether political, economic, military or combinations thereof, create a minority of the pure positioned to defend purity and the victimhood even from imputed threats by the majority who are by definition impure or victims of lower status. The aim of this strategy is to subjugate an indigenous majority by creation of a morally pure and hence powerful minority. This minority cannot show the physical force upon which its attack relies without creating a majority reaction that could repel it. The moral-psychological power is expressed through the implication of guilt or sympathy among unorganised members of the majority who in dispersion seek confirmation of their moral position. Thus latent outliers may work to strengthen the minority assault or undermine any emerging consensus to defend the indigenous culture.

This is essentially pre-emptive counter-insurgency. That is why Gene Sharp was so interested in dissecting national liberation movements. He wanted to know how to re-engineer them to oppose mass movements. Before he published his infamous From Dictatorship to Democracy he published a study for the US Department of Defense on how to create popular forces that would effectively combat national liberation struggles by imitating them.[xi]

By 1975 the national liberation movements in all of the countries in the Western Empire had been either subdued or compromised. Their radical leaders, including those in the US, were murdered or driven underground. In their place came the civilian defence organisations Sharp had conceived now in the form of NGOs.[xii] These became the seeds for so-called astro-turf grassroots movements, collectively called “civil society”. Civil society replaced the mass movements with qualified experts able to promote agendas in the system. What that meant in fact was that mass politics and struggle were replaced by political management conducted by cadres modelled on Sharp’s understanding of the political commissar. Key positions were filled with the members of movements who could be rewarded after their unfortunate leaders had been eliminated. With time civil society became a career path for academically trained managers in social engineering. The financial support of the oligarchy either directly or through various conduits compounded with access to all the Establishment media outlets, not least of which are the educational institutions, would raise civil society to the supreme force for articulating purity and victimhood. Civil society became the cover for the merger of missionary technology and brute economic, political and military force in a world where the ecclesiastical model had become a vehicle for the popular movements, e,g, in the 80s liberation theology and in the 90s Christian revivalism. The papacy had succeeded in crushing the mass movements’ efforts to use the Church for the liberation struggle.[xiii] However there was no such central force capable of subduing the Protestant denominations. Although Pentecostalism had been very effective in Latin America for neutralising the popular church, the US was a far more complicated terrain than the Catholic countries.[xiv] Scandals had decimated the most reliable agents in the Fundamentalist movement already in the late 1980s.[xv]

This was the challenge that gave rise to the Fourth Awakening—or Woke, a tasteless appropriation of an expression from Black American dialect meaning “aware”.

The term awakening is more appropriate because Woke is really another crusade.

Awakenings were the Protestant equivalents of the Catholic Crusades, usually in someway also just as fanatical and bloody as well as profitable for the promoters.[xvi] Following the model applied after the Six Day War and working from the basis of Gene Sharp’s NGO-based counter-insurgency strategy, the Establishment through its extensive control over all mass media and educational institutions accelerated the moral campaign to create a movement of purity and victimhood to be directed against the core working class population of the United States and other middle class countries in the empire. By appropriating the academically modified liberation jargon developed in the university and NGO labs, armed propaganda units like BLM and Antifa could be deployed in ways that thirty years ago would have been prosecuted as communist terrorism. This use of reconstituted liberation jargon was calculated to antagonise the majority as well as trigger reactions which moderately critical or liberal members of the majority would find difficult to defend.

This counter-insurgency campaign is being waged by the civil society cadre organisations and the kind of armed propaganda units conceived in the CIA’s Phoenix Program for Southeast Asia during the wars against Vietnam and subsequent wars in Central America.[xvii] The difference is that since the target is the conservative, patriotic majority, the language has to be that of the movements they had been indoctrinated to oppose since 1945. Combined with the very real corporate power behind this “moral minority” or pure (vicarious) victims and the effective use of legislation and police power (or its absence), the Woke Crusade aims to divide the majority of the American population, not only whites since conservative Christianity is foundational among Blacks and Latinos too. The Woke crusade is a carefully synthesised missionary project to completely re-engineer the conditions under which the vast majority of American citizens live in the mistaken (and insincere) belief that this serves social justice. This war against popular majorities is not limited to the United States. It is being waged throughout what was once called Christendom. In fact that is why it is so effective thus far—it is derived from the modus operandi of the institution upon which all Christendom was based.

*

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

Notes

[i] Church Clothes: Land, Mission and the End of Apartheid in South Africa (2004)

[ii] The comparison of the wars between 1914 and 1945 with the Thirty Years War (ended with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648) was made by Sigmund Neumann, The Future in Perspective (1946)

[iii] FIRE = Finance, Insurance and Real Estate

[iv] George Kennan’s assessments also formed the basis of the NSC 68, adopted as the framework for the massive post-war rearmament prior to the US invasion of Korea. For a detailed discussion see Bruce Cumings The Origins of the Korean War, especially Vol. II.

[v] In the documentary Deception – Reagan’s Method (2014) Dirk Pohlman interviewed at least one retired US official who stated defective technology was deliberately delivered to the Soviet Union resulting in major industrial sabotage. This was only one aspect of the covert war leading to the collapse of the GDR and the Soviet Union.

[vi] This conflict is an important theme in the works of Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky.

[vii] For discussions of these policies under Deng Xiaoping, see among others, William Hinton, The Great Reversal: The Privatization of China 1978-1989 (1989), Michel Chossudovsky, China: Towards Capitalist Restoration? (1986).

[viii] Adam Curtis graphically describes the British post-war deindustrialisation and privatisation of foreign policy (weapons sales) in his BBC documentary The Mayfair Set (1999)

[ix] The US states that supported Republicans, especially Trump have been called „red states“ as opposed to the „blue states“ that vote Democratic.

[x] This and related aspects of the „holocaust industry“ are the subjects of research by Normal Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (2000). No claim is made here that he would share my assessment.

[xi] National Security through Civilian-Based Defense (1970)

[xii] The term „non-governmental organisations“, NGOs, is deceptively ambiguous. Literally these are organisations that are not „governmental“. That suggests that such an organisation is private and independent of government. However what constitutes „governmental“ is in fact ambiguous. If such an organisation was created by a government; its key officers are appointed by a government and the core funding comes from such government, then the mere fact that the entity is created under private law is spurious ground for calling it non-governmental. In fact the term is intended to distract from the substance of these organisations and create the impression of independence needed to maintain the fiction of „civil society“. Here it is more appropriate to call this a special case of the “corporate veil”, a concept to conceal liability.

[xiii] Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict VI, led these attacks against Catholic clerics and theologians, like the Boffs in Brazil and anyone identified with the Sandinistas in Nicaragua or with other popular church movements, in his capacity as head of the Holy Office (the successor to the Inquisition). During his war against heresy Salvadoran bishop Oscar Romero was murdered while saying mass. The assassins were not even threatened with excommunication.

[xiv] Gerard Colby and Charlotte Dennett, Thy Will Be Done: The Conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil (1996).

[xv] The names Falwell, Baker and Robertson were among the most prominent among the so-called televangalists.

[xvi] The first Great Awakening began in the 1730s. The second is dated from the end of the 18th century into the early 19th. The third led into the American Civil War. Depending on whether one counts the religious movement that roughly coincided with the Second Vatican Council (late 1960s) as the fourth, the Woke crusade can also be counted as the Fifth Awakening.

[xvii] Douglas Valentine, The Phoenix Program (1990), the definitive elaboration of the program based on Valentine’s in-depth interviews with the key players and independent research.

Featured image is from TruePublica

Border Massacres: The Saudi Ethiopian Migrant Killings

August 30th, 2023 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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.

***

We know what the regime is like. Starving a country, bombing its hospitals and strafing its schools has been minor fare for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The population of Yemen has found this out to their colossal cost. Add to this the killing of dissident journalists, the enthusiastic employment of capital punishment, and an assortment of other merry brutalities, the House of Saud comes across as a fine specimen of barbaric endeavour. At least, as many of their supporters will say, they like international sporting events, and are willing to throw money at, if not completely purchase, full events.

The killing of hundreds of Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers attempting to cross the Yemen-Saudi border between March 2022 and June 2023 on what is sometimes termed the “Eastern Route” or “Yemeni Route”, adds another notch to the belt of bloodstained achievements for Riyadh. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW),

“Saudi officials are killing hundreds of women and children out of view of the rest of the world while they spend billions on sports-washing to try to improve their image.”

This is all the more galling for the fact that such human travellers must already encounter the dangers of the sea route from the Horn of Africa to Yemen, where they transit through to Saudi Arabia.

HRW’s “They Fired Upon Us Like Rain”: Saudi Arabian Mass Killings of Ethiopian Migrants at the Yemen-Saudi Border, is a self-explanatory document of brutal recounting by the human rights organisation, based on the interviews of 42 Ethiopian and asylum seekers. In addition to the interviews, HRW also based its report on findings drawn from an examination of 350 videos and photographs which were posted on social media platforms.

The examination had been conducted by members of the Independent Forensic Expert Group (IFEG) of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims. In terms of injuries, IFEG members reached the conclusion that some exhibited “clear patterns consistent with the explosion of munitions with capacity to produce heat and fragmentation”; others had “characteristics consistent with gunshot wounds”.

The 2023 report by the organisation notes some staggering instances of violence against those seeking refuge.

“People travelling in groups, from four to five people to up to several hundred describe being attacked by mortar projectiles and other explosive weapons by Saudi border guards once they had crossed the border from Yemen into Saudi Arabia.”

The allegations are biting in their cruelty, and bring to mind the fact that killings of this sort have happened before along this notorious route. Saudi border guards, it would seem, went so far as to deploy an array of weapons against such migrants, showing a keen interest targeting Ethiopians. Some 750,000 live and work in the kingdom. Movement through the borders is based on the less than scrupulous calculations and account keeping of smugglers.

Those interviewed in the camp of Saada, base for tens of thousands awaiting their chance to enter Saudi Arabia, note how Saudi border guards tended to patrol the border equipped with “large vehicles” that could have been rocket launchers.

“Many migrants,” the report also notes, “said they saw cameras tracking their movements mounted on what looked like ‘street lamps’ on the Saudi side of the border.”

Some of the brutalities are calculatingly perverse. According to HRW, some Saudi border guards dared to discriminate, bothering to first ask “survivors in which limb of their body they preferred to be shot, before shooting them at close range.” Such viciousness sounds boardroom, spreadsheet and planned, which is exactly the sort of matter that should leave a trail right to the Kingdom’s central authorities. But it could also be burgeoning sadism at work, an instant where the powerful can determine what bit of maiming might excite them.

3D model of likely Saudi border guard posts and patrol roads near fences

3D model of likely Saudi border guard posts and patrol roads near fences identified with satellite imagery near the migration route from the migrant camp of Al Thabit in Saada Governorate, Yemen, into Saudi Arabia. Graphic © Human Rights Watch

For Ethiopians moving through the precarious route, the circumstances of misery have been frequent. While Riyadh engages in its own complement of viciousness, the Yemeni guards have also had a hand in raping and torturing asylum seekers from the Horn of Africa. Houthi forces have not been averse to targeting immigration centres in Sana’a.

The spectacle recounted by HRW is grotesque. But so are acts involving the turning back of refugee-laden boats or repulsing migrant vessels in the Mediterranean, and conspiring to frustrate the international right to asylum which has been in print since 1951. Little wonder that little mention was made of the killings when they were made aware to envoys from France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden and the European Union, not to mention the Biden administration. (The US State Department insists that it “quickly engaged senior Saudi officials to express our concern” on receiving news on the gruesome details.)

In August 2001, the Australian government, a most eminent practitioner in the field of subverting international refugee law, did not deploy rocket launchers against those seeking asylum off Christmas Island on the Norwegian vessel, the MV Tampa. But they did deploy fully armed members of the Special Air Services regiment, an elite force that would go on to, some years later, inflict atrocities upon Afghans in an unwinnable war.

This HRW Report adds another bloodied entry to the chronicles of the Kingdom’s brutality. The organisation claims that the killings continue. The sanguinary story is a telling one for those who continue to conduct relations with Riyadh without murmur or concern, delighted by the riches of its Sovereign Wealth Fund. Its officials know all too well that cash and the expediency of security softens a prickly conscience.

*

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

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

Featured image: A video published on TikTok on December 4, 2022 shows a group of roughly 47 migrants, 37 of whom appear to be women, walking along a steep slope inside Saudia Arabia on the trail used to cross from the migrant camp of Al Thabit.

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.

*** 

What follows is an unholy trinity of highly incestuous stories that I’ve covered on an individual basis elsewhere and that I’ll try to briefly synthesize here:

1) Medieval EU Censorship Regime Goes Into Full Effect

2) Elon Musk Folds Like a Lawn Chair to EU Censorship Regime

3) YouTube Adopts WHO ‘Medical Misinformation’ Censorship Regime

On the first score, Via Reuters:

“More than a dozen of the world’s biggest tech companies face unprecedented legal scrutiny, as the European Union’s sweeping Digital Services Act (DSA) imposes new rules on content moderation, user privacy and transparency.

From Friday, a host of internet giants – including Meta’s (META.O) Facebook and Instagram platforms, Apple’s online App Store, and a handful of Google (GOOGL.O) services – will face new obligations in the EU, including preventing harmful content from spreading, banning or limiting certain user-targeting practices, and sharing some internal data with regulators and associated researchers…

The EU is seen as the global leader in tech regulation, with more wide-ranging pieces of legislation – such as the Digital Markets Act and the AI Act – on the way. The bloc’s success in implementing such laws will influence the introduction of similar rules around the world.”

“Content moderation” = censorship

“Tech regulation” = censorship

“Preventing harmful content from spreading” = censorship.

These euphemisms are out of control. At least the totalitarians of the 20th century had the honesty to tout their totalitarianism for what it was, rather than hiding behind technocratic, pseudo-humanitarian jargon.

Via Cyber Risk GmbH:

The Digital Services Act is the most important and most ambitious regulation in the world in the field of the protection of the digital space against the spread of illegal content, and the protection of users’ fundamental rights. There is no other legislative act in the world having this level of ambition to regulate social media, online marketplaces, very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs). The rules are designed asymmetrically: Larger intermediary services with significant societal impact (VLOPs and VLOSEs) are subject to stricter rules.

After the Digital Services Act, platforms will not only have to be more transparent, but will also be held accountable for their role in disseminating illegal and harmful content

More diligent content moderation, less disinformation:

– Platforms and search engines need to take measures to address risks linked to the dissemination of illegal content online and to negative effects on freedom of expression and information;

– Platforms need to have clear terms and conditions and enforce them diligently and non-arbitrarily;

– Platforms need to have a mechanism for users to flag illegal content and act upon notifications expeditiously;

– Platforms need to analyse their specific risks, and put in place mitigation measures – for instance, to address the spread of disinformation and inauthentic use of their service.”

On the second score, via Associated Press:

“European Commissioner Thierry Breton said late Thursday that he noted the’“strong commitment of Twitter to comply’ with the Digital Services Act, sweeping new standards that the world’s biggest online platforms all must obey…

Breton, who oversees digital policy, is also meeting other tech bosses in California. He’s the EU’s point person working to get Big Tech ready for the new rules, which will force companies to crack down on hate speech, disinformation and other harmful and illegal material on their sites. The law takes effect Aug. 25 for the biggest platforms.”

So much for Musk’s professed commitment to “free speech.”

On the third score, via Reclaim the Net:

YouTube, the titan of online video content, has expanded its Covid misinformation policy to cover what it calls all forms of medical misinformation.

YouTube has also declared its plan to delist videos promoting “cancer treatments proven to be harmful or ineffective,” effectively disallowing content creators from encouraging natural cures.

The platform pledges to implement its medical misinformation policies when a topic exhibits high public health risks, is supposedly prone to misinformation, and when official guidance from health authorities is accessible to the public.”

Via YouTube:

“As medical information – and misinformation – continuously evolves, YouTube needs a policy framework that holds up in the long term, and preserves the important balance of removing egregiously harmful content while ensuring space for debate and discussion.

Moving forward, YouTube will streamline dozens of our existing medical misinformation guidelines to fall under three categories – Prevention, Treatment, and Denial. These policies will apply to specific health conditions, treatments, and substances where content contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO)

We will remove content that contradicts health authority guidance on treatments for specific health conditions, including promoting specific harmful substances or practices.”

By “harmful substances,” YouTube presumably means it will censor content regarding actual safe and effective medications such as ivermectin, once universally demonized in corporate state media and now recognized by the US FDA (probably under threat of legal consequences) as a treatment for COVID-19.

Nation-states under EU jurisdiction can no longer be rationally said to be “free,” to the extent that they ever truly were to begin with. They are now part of a wholly integrated slave colony of the multinational technocracy, headed by the World Economic Forum and similar organizations outside of the reach of any democratic control.

The national governments within the EU are, in the words of Klaus Schwab, “penetrated,” with strong overtones of rape. That is what this is – the rape of formerly sovereign nations at economic and political gunpoint.

*

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 Rappler

Whitewashing Down Under: The Vietnam War Fifty Years On

August 30th, 2023 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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 Vietnam War tormented and tore the societies who saw fit to participate in it. It defined a generation culturally and politically in terms creative and fractious. And it showed up the rulers to be ignorant rather than bright; blundering fools rather than sages secure in their preaching. Five decades on, the political classes in the United States and Australia are still seeking to find reasons for intervening in a country they scant understood, with a fanatic’s persuasion, and ideologue’s conviction, a moralist’s certainty. Old errors die hard.

Leaders are left the legacy of having to re-scent the candle, hoping that no one notices the malodorous stench left by history. Errors can be ignored in the aromatic haze. Broadcasters and producers of celluloid scutter about to provide softening programs explaining why soldiers who had no valid reason fighting a conflict, could find themselves in it. The ABC in Australia, for instance, released their series called Our Vietnam War, narrated by Kate Mulvany, whose bridge to the war was via her father. The very title is personal, exclusive, and seemingly excludes the Vietnamese who found themselves pawns, rebels, collaborators and insurgents.

The production also received the approval of the Australian Department of Veterans’ Affairs. “The series provides a unique opportunity for viewers to gain insights into the personal stories of veterans and the broader impact of conflict on Australia’s history and identity.”

The Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, has made 2023 a calendar year for reminding Australians about the Vietnam experience, albeit in a most slanted way. On March 29, he acknowledged veterans visiting Canberra in an address to parliament. The words “courage”, “sacrifice” and “bonds of camaraderie forged under fire, and cruel realities of loss”, were noted. Adversaries are not mentioned, nor was, curiously enough, opposition to the war that was expressed at the time from a number of brave Labor Party stalwarts, Arthur Calwell being foremost among them.

The speech continued in a more plangent tone.

“Let us stand in this place, in this Parliament, and speak – loudly and clearly – about those who were sent to war in our name, who did their duty in our name, but whose names we did not hold up as proudly as we should have.”

On Vietnam Veterans’ Day (August 18), Albanese gave another speech, this time in Ipswich, Queensland, where he again apologised to the veterans.  “We should have acknowledged you better as a nation then. But the truth is, as a nation we didn’t.” The platitudes are piled up, and merely serve to blunt the nature of Australia’s involvement in a brutal, rapacious conflict. “You upheld Australia’s name. You showed the Australian character at its finest.”

This distraction serves to cover the tracks of those who erred and bungled, not merely in committing the troops, but in ignoring the consequences of that deployment. The mistreatment dished out to the returnees was as much a product of civilian protest as it was a conscious effort on the part of veterans from previous conflicts to ignore it. It was a war never formally declared, conducted in conditions of gross deception.

A half-century on, it is striking to see the apologetics gather at the podium. The New South Wales branch of the Returned and Services League of Australia (RSL), for instance, went out of its way to issue one for the way thousands of defence personnel were treated in the aftermath of the conflict. “RSL NSW acknowledges a generation of veterans who are still healing and we publicly recognise our charity’s past mistakes this Vietnam Veterans Day,” came the statement the organisation’s president Ray James.

In the making of war, those behind the policies for waging it tend to escape culpability. The Australians in this affair were, to put it politely, compliant, featherbrained creatures upset by the Yellow Peril north of Papua New Guinea and easily won over through invocations of the “Red Under the Bed”.

Canberra went out of its way to send material and aid to South Vietnam not merely to fight Asiatic atheists of a red hue, but to impress their increasingly bogged-down US allies. To aid the enterprise, the Menzies government introduced national service conscription in November 1964, a policy that became the source of much parliamentary acrimony, notably from the Labor Party.

In July 1966, on an official visit to Washington, Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt emetically appropriated the Democratic Party’s own campaign slogan by declaring that Australia was “All the way with LBJ”. At the National Press Gallery that same month, Holt declared that, “When it comes to American participation and resolution to see the war in south Vietnam through, Australia is undoubtedly all the way”. Spinelessness and crawling in a military alliance became political virtues, or what Albanese might like to call “values”.

Australia’s commitment was marred by problems of strategic worth, something which officials were well aware of as early as April 1967. As a government paper titled “Australia’s military commitment to Vietnam” documents, requests for a larger Australian commitment by US military sources in Saigon and Washington were made despite the open-ended nature of the conflict. The planners lacked certitude on basic objectives, not least on the issue of victory itself. The views of US Defence Secretary Robert S. McNamara, as expressed in meetings with his Australian counterparts, are expressly mentioned in all their obliqueness. The secretary “had no doubt that America could no longer lose the war, but they still had the problem of winning and that could be long and hard and there was no easy way which could point directly to victory.”

Add to this the fantastic delusion that the Vietnamese communist movement was a Peking-directed affair rather than an indigenous movement keen to remove foreign influence, and we have a conflict not merely futile on the part of Canberra and Washington, but wasteful and criminal. Fifty years later, and officials from both countries have the chance to make another round of potentially graver, more calamitous decisions.

*

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]

History of American Hegemony: USA as “Global Greatest Power”. From Alaska (1867) to Europe (1917)

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović, August 28, 2023

Such a new type of US global imperialism practically started in the 1898 war against Spain (in fact, Spanish colonies). Many experts in US history and global politics will say that the year 1898 was, actually, a turning point year in US foreign policy when Washington started to push toward the creation of the global empire of the USA.

What Is Taught in Schools of Journalism?

By Prof. Bill Willers, August 29, 2023

The big lie perpetrated about journalism is that it has an adversarial relationship with power. There may have been some truth to that at some point in history, but within living memory the precise opposite has been the truth. And why be surprised? One would expect that controlling the Narrative and the flow of information would be a prime goal of government.

We the Targeted: How the Government Weaponizes Surveillance to Silence Its Critics

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, August 30, 2023

Ever since Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his groundbreaking “I Have a Dream” speech during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on Aug. 28, 1963, the Deep State has been hard at work turning King’s dream into a living nightmare. The end result of the government’s efforts over the past 60 years is a country where nothing ever really changes, and everyone lives in fear.

De-globalization: How Much and at What Cost?

By Karsten Riise, August 30, 2023

Biden’s China trade policy is ridiculous. An article in New York Times (NYT) today 28 August 2023 puts serious question marks on the policy of US President Biden and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to “de-risk” (in fact, decouple) their western economies from China.

The US Deepens the Lebanese Suffering

By Steven Sahiounie, August 30, 2023

Lebanon’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abdallah Bou Habib, shocked the UN on August 25 in New York by rejecting the proposal that is being forced upon Lebanon by the United States Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield. In a surprise act of national defiance, and rejection at being dictated to by Washington, Bou Habib would not acquiesce to moving to Chapter VII. Chapter VI calls for “the peaceful resolution of conflicts,” while Chapter VII “calls for the imposition of Resolution 1701 by force.”

New Documentary Coming this September: ‘Peace, War and 9/11’

By International Center for 9/11 Justice, August 29, 2023

In a wide-ranging interview filmed six months before his passing, eminent scholar and lifelong peace activist Graeme MacQueen shares his final words on 9/11 and the 2001 anthrax attacks. Drawing from his depth of knowledge as a professor of peace studies, MacQueen illuminates the concept of war as an all-encompassing parasitic system that depends on triggering events — sometimes natural but often managed or even manufactured — to move from a cold to a hot phase.

How BRICS+ Ensures Global Peace. “Rules-based World Order” in the Dustbin of History?

By Drago Bosnic, August 29, 2023

The world has truly never seen anything like BRICS, an organization that unites the most diverse group of not only nation-states, but actual civilization states. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa don’t really seem to have much in common, and yet, their ties within this framework are growing stronger by the day at this point.

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? A History of Institutional Corruption

By Helen Buyniski, Richard Gale, and Dr. Gary Null, August 29, 2023

Given that vaccines are mandatory for most children in public schools, it makes sense that they should be scientifically proven to be safe. However, in a careful analysis of thousands of articles in the peer-reviewed literature on toxicology and immunology, nowhere can we find evidence for these claims on vaccine safety are based upon a gold standard of clinical research: long-term, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

BRICS Summit Expands by Six Members. De-Dollarization and the New Cold War

By Abayomi Azikiwe, August 29, 2023

President Cyril Ramaphosa of the Republic of South Africa served as the host of the recently held 15th BRICS Summit which turned out to be one of the most significant gatherings in the nearly decade-and-one-half existence of the alliance.

America’s Domestic Party Politics Fuel the Ukraine Catastrophe

By Philip Giraldi, August 29, 2023

I am surely not the only one who has noticed that the defensive propaganda lines that are flowing out the Democratic Administration have become more than ordinarily ridiculous of late. One is astonished at the melding of fact and fiction to create narratives that depict the White House and all that pertains to it as forging a new and more wonderful country. Wasn’t “Build Back Better” the battle cry, whatever that is supposed to mean?

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 a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” — President Harry S. Truman

Ever since Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his groundbreaking “I Have a Dream” speech during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on Aug. 28, 1963, the Deep State has been hard at work turning King’s dream into a living nightmare.

The end result of the government’s efforts over the past 60 years is a country where nothing ever really changes, and everyone lives in fear.

Race wars are still being stoked by both the Right and the Left; the military-industrial complex is still waging profit-driven wars at taxpayer expense; the oligarchy is still calling the shots in the seats of government power; and the government is still weaponizing surveillance in order to muzzle anti-government sentiment, harass activists, and terrorize Americans into compliance.

This last point is particularly disturbing.

Starting in the 1950s, the government relied on COINTELPRO, its domestic intelligence program, to neutralize domestic political dissidents. Those targeted by the FBI under COINTELPRO for its intimidation, surveillance and smear campaigns included: Martin Luther King Jr., Malcom X, the Black Panther Party, John Lennon, Billie Holiday, Emma Goldman, Aretha Franklin, Charlie Chaplin, Ernest Hemingway, Felix Frankfurter, and hundreds more.

In more recent decades, the powers-that-be have expanded their reach to target anyone who opposes the police state, regardless of their political leanings.

Advances in technology have enabled the government to deploy a veritable arsenal of surveillance weapons in order to “expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize” perceived threats to the government’s power.

Surveillance cameras mounted on utility poles, traffic lights, businesses, and homes. License plate readers. Ring doorbells. GPS devices. Dash cameras. Drones. Store security cameras. Geofencing and geotracking. FitBits. Alexa. Internet-connected devices. Geofencing dragnets. Fusion centers. Smart devices. Behavioral threat assessments. Terror watch lists. Facial recognition. Snitch tip lines. Biometric scanners. Pre-crime. DNA databases. Data mining. Precognitive technology. Contact tracing apps.

What these add up to is a world in which, on any given day, the average person is now monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways by both government and corporate eyes and ears.

Consider just a small sampling of the ways in which the government is weaponizing its 360 degree surveillance technologies to flag you as a threat to national security, whether or not you’ve done anything wrong.

Flagging you as a danger based on your feelings. Customs and Border Protection is reportedly using an artificial intelligence surveillance program that can detect “sentiment and emotion” in social media posts in order to identify travelers who may be “a threat to public safety, national security, or lawful trade and travel.”

Flagging you as a danger based on your phone and movements. Cell phones have become de facto snitches, offering up a steady stream of digital location data on users’ movements and travels. For instance, the FBI was able to use geofence data to identify more than 5,000 mobile devices (and their owners) in a 4-acre area around the Capitol on January 6. This latest surveillance tactic could land you in jail for being in the “wrong place and time.” Police are also using cell-site simulators to carry out mass surveillance of protests without the need for a warrant. Moreover, federal agents can now employ a number of hacking methods in order to gain access to your computer activities and “see” whatever you’re seeing on your monitor. Malicious hacking software can also be used to remotely activate cameras and microphones, offering another means of glimpsing into the personal business of a target.

Flagging you as a danger based on your DNA. DNA technology in the hands of government officials completes our transition to a Surveillance State. If you have the misfortune to leave your DNA traces anywhere a crime has been committed, you’ve already got a file somewhere in some state or federal database—albeit it may be a file without a name. By accessing your DNA, the government will soon know everything else about you that they don’t already know: your family chart, your ancestry, what you look like, your health history, your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course, etc. After all, a DNA print reveals everything about “who we are, where we come from, and who we will be.” It can also be used to predict the physical appearance of potential suspects. It’s only a matter of time before the police state’s pursuit of criminals expands into genetic profiling and a preemptive hunt for criminals of the future.

Flagging you as a danger based on your face. Facial recognition software aims to create a society in which every individual who steps out into public is tracked and recorded as they go about their daily business. Coupled with surveillance cameras that blanket the country, facial recognition technology allows the government and its corporate partners to identify and track someone’s movements in real-time. One particularly controversial software program created by Clearview AI has been used by police, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security to collect photos on social media sites for inclusion in a massive facial recognition database. Similarly, biometric software, which relies on one’s unique identifiers (fingerprints, irises, voice prints), is becoming the standard for navigating security lines, as well as bypassing digital locks and gaining access to phones, computers, office buildings, etc. In fact, greater numbers of travelers are opting into programs that rely on their biometrics in order to avoid long waits at airport security. Scientists are also developing lasers that can identify and surveil individuals based on their heartbeats, scent and microbiome.

Flagging you as a danger based on your behavior. Rapid advances in behavioral surveillance are not only making it possible for individuals to be monitored and tracked based on their patterns of movement or behavior, including gait recognition (the way one walks), but have given rise to whole industries that revolve around predicting one’s behavior based on data and surveillance patterns and are also shaping the behaviors of whole populations. One smart “anti-riot” surveillance system purports to predict mass riots and unauthorized public events by using artificial intelligence to analyze social media, news sources, surveillance video feeds and public transportation data.

Flagging you as a danger based on your spending and consumer activities. With every smartphone we buy, every GPS device we install, every Twitter, Facebook, and Google account we open, every frequent buyer card we use for purchases—whether at the grocer’s, the yogurt shop, the airlines or the department store—and every credit and debit card we use to pay for our transactions, we’re helping Corporate America build a dossier for its government counterparts on who we know, what we think, how we spend our money, and how we spend our time. Consumer surveillance, by which your activities and data in the physical and online realms are tracked and shared with advertisers, has become a $300 billion industry that routinely harvests your data for profit. Corporations such as Target have not only been tracking and assessing the behavior of their customers, particularly their purchasing patterns, for years, but the retailer has also funded major surveillance in cities across the country and developed behavioral surveillance algorithms that can determine whether someone’s mannerisms might fit the profile of a thief.

Flagging you as a danger based on your public activities. Private corporations in conjunction with police agencies throughout the country have created a web of surveillance that encompasses all major cities in order to monitor large groups of people seamlessly, as in the case of protests and rallies. They are also engaging in extensive online surveillance, looking for any hints of “large public events, social unrest, gang communications, and criminally predicated individuals.” Defense contractors have been at the forefront of this lucrative market. Fusion centers, $330 million-a-year, information-sharing hubs for federal, state and law enforcement agencies, monitor and report such “suspicious” behavior as people buying pallets of bottled water, photographing government buildings, and applying for a pilot’s license as “suspicious activity.”

Flagging you as a danger based on your social media activities. Every move you make, especially on social media, is monitored, mined for data, crunched, and tabulated in order to form a picture of who you are, what makes you tick, and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line. As The Intercept reported, the FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies are increasingly investing in and relying on corporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior. This obsession with social media as a form of surveillance will have some frightening consequences in coming years. As Helen A.S. Popkin, writing for NBC News, observed, “We may very well face a future where algorithms bust people en masse for referencing illegal ‘Game of Thrones’ downloads… the new software has the potential to roll, Terminator-style, targeting every social media user with a shameful confession or questionable sense of humor.”

Flagging you as a danger based on your social network. Not content to merely spy on individuals through their online activity, government agencies are now using surveillance technology to track one’s social network, the people you might connect with by phone, text message, email or through social message, in order to ferret out possible criminals. An FBI document obtained by Rolling Stone speaks to the ease with which agents are able to access address book data from Facebook’s WhatsApp and Apple’s iMessage services from the accounts of targeted individuals and individuals not under investigation who might have a targeted individual within their network. What this creates is a “guilt by association” society in which we are all as guilty as the most culpable person in our address book.

Flagging you as a danger based on your car. License plate readers are mass surveillance tools that can photograph over 1,800 license tag numbers per minute, take a picture of every passing license tag number and store the tag number and the date, time, and location of the picture in a searchable database, then share the data with law enforcement, fusion centers and private companies to track the movements of persons in their cars. With tens of thousands of these license plate readers now in operation throughout the country, affixed to overpasses, cop cars and throughout business sectors and residential neighborhoods, it allows police to track vehicles and run the plates through law enforcement databases for abducted children, stolen cars, missing people and wanted fugitives. Of course, the technology is not infallible: there have been numerous incidents in which police have mistakenly relied on license plate data to capture out suspects only to end up detaining innocent people at gunpoint.

Flagging you as a danger based on your political views. The Church Committee, the Senate task force charged with investigating COINTELPRO abuses in 1975, concluded that the government had carried out “secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power.” The report continued: “Groups and individuals have been harassed and disrupted because of their political views and their lifestyles… Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials.” Nothing has changed since then.

Flagging you as a danger based on your correspondence. Just about every branch of the government—from the Postal Service to the Treasury Department and every agency in between—now has its own surveillance sector, authorized to spy on the American people. For instance, the U.S. Postal Service, which has been photographing the exterior of every piece of paper mail for the past 20 years, is also spying on Americans’ texts, emails and social media posts. Headed up by the Postal Service’s law enforcement division, the Internet Covert Operations Program (iCOP) is reportedly using facial recognition technology, combined with fake online identities, to ferret out potential troublemakers with “inflammatory” posts. The agency claims the online surveillance, which falls outside its conventional job scope of processing and delivering paper mail, is necessary to help postal workers avoid “potentially volatile situations.”

Now the government wants us to believe that we have nothing to fear from these mass spying programs as long as we’ve done nothing wrong.

Don’t believe it.

As Matthew Feeney warns in the New York Times, “In the past, Communists, civil rights leaders, feminists, Quakers, folk singers, war protesters and others have been on the receiving end of law enforcement surveillance. No one knows who the next target will be.

The government’s definition of a “bad” guy is extraordinarily broad, and it results in the warrantless surveillance of innocent, law-abiding Americans on a staggering scale.

Moreover, there is a repressive, suppressive effect to surveillance that not only acts as a potentially small deterrent on crime but serves to monitor and chill lawful First Amendment activity, and that is the whole point.

Weaponized surveillance is re-engineering a society structured around the aesthetic of fear.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the police state wants us silent, servile and compliant.

They definitely do not want us to engage in First Amendment activities that challenge the government’s power, reveal the government’s corruption, expose the government’s lies, and encourage the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.

And they certainly do not want us to remember that we have rights, let alone attempting to exercise those rights peaceably and lawfully, whether it’s protesting police brutality and racism, challenging COVID-19 mandates, questioning election outcomes, or listening to alternate viewpoints—even conspiratorial ones—in order to form our own opinions about the true nature of government.

*

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

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.

De-globalization: How Much and at What Cost?

August 30th, 2023 by Karsten Riise

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.

*** 

Biden’s China trade policy is ridiculous. An article in New York Times (NYT) today 28 August 2023 puts serious question marks on the policy of US President Biden and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to “de-risk” (in fact, decouple) their western economies from China.

Yes, US imports from China have fallen significantly the past year, but US imports from countries like Vietnam and Mexico have filled out the gaps left by China and supplied the US with exactly the same products as China used to deliver to the US. But even worse for Biden’s policy: these countries, like Vietnam and Mexico, are themselves importing more from China of exactly the same stuff, which they are now exporting more to the US. In other words, China’s exports to US are not diminishing nearly as much as the trade statistics show. Instead of exporting to the US directly, China is just exporting via other countries like Vietnam and Mexico, often through Chinese owned companies there. See this.

Not only is Biden missing his target of actually decoupling the US economy from China. Worse, the costs to US consumers are increasing through Biden’s anti-China trade practices. The EU better take notice too. No strategic improvement for the West of “decoupling”, only higher costs for Western consumers.

The anti-globalization agenda of Biden and von der Leyen is still being executed as best as they can. But it will take more time and have considerably more costs for the US and the EU. Meanwhile, we see that Western jobs which moved to China are NOT coming back to the US or the EU. Export-related jobs just move from China to other countries in the Global South.

*

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.

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The US Deepens the Lebanese Suffering

August 30th, 2023 by Steven Sahiounie

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

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.

*** 

Lebanon’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abdallah Bou Habib, shocked the UN on August 25 in New York by rejecting the proposal that is being forced upon Lebanon by the United States Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield.

In a surprise act of national defiance, and rejection at being dictated to by Washington, Bou Habib would not acquiesce to moving to Chapter VII. Chapter VI calls for “the peaceful resolution of conflicts,” while Chapter VII “calls for the imposition of Resolution 1701 by force.”

At question is the yearly renewal of a UN mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), set to expire August 31, which had been voluntary and mutually agreed upon by Lebanon and the UN.  But the UN, primarily under the command of the US, has decided if Lebanon will not agree to the terms of the mandate, it will be forced upon them. 

Bou Habib was in New York attending meeting concerning the UN mandated UNIFIL forces, and it was after meeting with the United States Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield that Lebanon’s decision was made to reject the imposition of the mandate upon Lebanon by force, emanating from the heavy-handed treatment by Washington.

Thomas-Greenfield stressed the

“U.S. support for securing a strong Security Council mandate to extend the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, so it can fulfill its duties.” She also called for “addressing the activities of the organization ‘Green Without Borders,’ which the United States recently imposed sanctions on, for providing support and cover for Hezbollah’s operations in southern Lebanon along the Blue Line.”

The US imposed sanctions Wednesday on the Lebanese environmental organization, ‘Green Without Borders’, a NGO established in 2013 which is protecting the Lebanese environment, and planting trees in devastated areas. According to the US Treasury Department the NGO and its leader, Zouher Nahli, are linked to Hezbollah. 

“We are not an arm for anyone,” Nahli told The Associated Press in January. “We as an environmental association work for all the people and we are not politicized.”

The US is opposed to the Lebanese resistance group who are providing border protection on the southern border of Lebanon, against frequent Israeli provocations. The US views the group as a terrorist group supported by Iran. In the view of the Lebanese people, the group is the only guarantee of security from invasion and occupation.

The South of Lebanon

UNIFIL was created by the Security Council in March 1978 after the first Israeli invasion of Lebanon; however, since then Israel has made repeated incursions into Lebanon, and brutally occupied the entire southern portion for 18 years ending in 2000.  While the Israeli military withdrew from the south, they remain occupying a very strategic agricultural section in the south called Shebaa Farms, and the UN has never recognized Shebaa Farms as an occupied area in Lebanon.

The 18 years of occupation of Lebanon by the Israeli military demonstrates the ineffectiveness of UNIFIL and the UN. Many in Lebanon accuse UNIFIL of acting to suppress resistance in southern Lebanon on behalf of Israel.

The dispute between Lebanon and the UN over Shebaa Farms centers on the UN falsely identifying the area as Syrian territory, when Syria and Lebanon jointly recognize the area as Lebanese territory clearly demarcated on older maps.

“Recognizing the land borders contributes to putting an end to the ongoing tensions,” Bou Habib added in a statement issued by the foreign ministry on 25 August. 

In summer of 2006, Israel attempted a massive invasion of Lebanon, and while the Israeli ground troops were not able to take even on inch of territory, the Israeli air force bombed the country from north to south causing thousands of deaths and injuries and massive infrastructure damages.

Resolution 1701 was approved in 2006 after the Israeli army was defeated by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and calls for “a full cessation of hostilities” and “authorizes UNIFIL to take all necessary action in areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind.”

UNIFIL peacekeeping troops and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) have a working relationship and conduct joint exercises, and Bou Habib referred to the necessity and importance of coordinating UNIFIL’s operations with the Lebanese government, represented by the Lebanese army, as stipulated in the UNIFIL’s known Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).

Elias Al-Baysari, Lebanon’s Director General of General Security, said on Friday that the two suspects were arrested as they attempted to leave the country through Beirut’s Rafik Hariri International Airport. Initial investigation found they had been Mossad operatives, assigned to carry out operations inside Lebanon. Mossad is the Israeli secret spy agency working around the world. Lebanese security officials will reveal more details later about the Russian man and his wife after been tipped off by the Lebanese resistance.

The Lebanese economy has collapsed, but there is a chance to generate money from energy resources which have been discovered off-shore. Prime Minster Nijib Mikati, and Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri flew in a helicopter recently over Block 9 in the Mediterranean Sea to see for themselves the beginning of energy exploration for the financially failed country. 

While Lebanon is drowning in financial collapse, there is the hope that the sea will give up its resources to save the country. There is the constant threat from Israel, and their supporter, the US. The question is whether the US will allow Lebanon to save their economy while using their own resources.

*

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

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

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

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

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

*** 

A German court has sentenced one of its own judges to prison for ruling against the government’s mask mandates.

In 2021, Judge Christian Dettmar struck down a local government ordinance that required schoolchildren to wear masks in the German state of Thuringia. The case made headlines across Germany.

Judge Dettmar is now set to lose his legal career and pension and receive a two-year suspended prison sentence for allegedly “perverting the law.”

During the pandemic-era lockdowns, the Thuringian state government ruled that all children were to wear masks while at school, stay a minimum distance from each other, and take virus tests.

The judge ruled that masks shouldn’t be mandatory for children at two schools in Weimar, Thuringia, after the mother of two children, aged 8 and 14, complained that the masks were giving them insomnia, nausea, and headaches.

‘I Saw Danger in Delay’

Judge Dettmar told the schools in Weimar that they could no longer enforce the order, as the mandates weren’t compatible with the welfare of the children involved.

His decision immediately sparked outrage in the state government, which called for his punishment and removal.

The judge’s ruling was overturned by the Higher Regional Court in Erfurt, following a complaint by the state’s education department, which forced students to once again wear masks in schools.

The district court in Erfurt stated that only an administrative court held the jurisdiction to make such a ruling and that Judge Dettmar’s decision didn’t fall under the scope of his court.

“The good cause of protecting children, which they may have had in the back of their minds, does not justify the way,” the district court judge said in his ruling.

Judge Dettmar defended his decision on the matter, arguing that he had merely consulted certified university experts.

“I still don’t know why I’m sitting here. I have three grown-up children myself. At that time, I was driven by the everyday life of the schoolchildren. I saw danger in delay. The reports I use come from experienced university professors,” he said.

The high court decision also led to Judge Dettmar’s suspension from the bench after a disciplinary hearing was conducted by the Judicial Service Court.

State prosecutors then took action against the judge, charging him with “perverting the law” and ruling on a matter he had no authority over.

According to German public broadcasting channel MDR, the court heard arguments from prosecutors that Judge Dettmar had made his ruling as a political statement against lockdowns, not out of genuine concern for the children involved.

He was also accused of deleting emails and files from his computers to cover up the reason for his ruling.

A police raid on his home and his office, conducted only weeks after his ruling was overturned, seized his electronic devices, including his mobile phone, which contained private correspondence that allegedly revealed his bias against lockdown measures.

Prosecutors further accused the judge of being biased toward experts who were critical of lockdown rules before giving his verdict, according to the German tabloid Bild.

They said he met with them before hearing from the official experts who were consulted in the case when making his original decision.

Judge Dettmar said he did consult with scientists who were skeptical of the measures enacted by the government at the time.

State Prosecutors Want Harsher Sentence

Judge Dettmar had been suspended on probation pending the investigation’s results.

His legal team is considering an appeal in the case as he faces possible dismissal from his duties as a judge in addition to his two-year suspended sentence.

According to German law, a civil servant who’s sentenced to a custodial sentence of more than 12 months is deprived of both position and pension.

The prosecutors, who had originally asked for a three-year sentence, are also appealing the sentence, according to MDR, which has been following the story since it broke in 2021.

The defense has argued that the trial was politically motivated and was intended to silence dissenters.

Before his sentence, Judge Dettmar said he had no regrets about his decision and that he would make the same ruling again “out of deep inner conviction.”

“I have considerable doubts about the usefulness of masks. If you want to wear them voluntarily to school, you can do so, but we don’t have to patronize parents,” he said.

COVID Lockdown Rules, Revisited

Germany instituted some of the harshest restrictions in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic. The German government eased most mandates in March 2022, but many German politicians were eager to reinstitute them, and stricter mask rules were issued the following winter.

While most of the world dropped mask travel requirements in 2022, the German government, under left-wing Social Democratic Party (SPD) Chancellor Olaf Scholz, waited until February to finally end the mandates on long-distance trains and buses.

SPD Health Minister Karl Lauterbach, who was known for his enthusiastic lockdown policies, claimed in February 2022 that the world would be dealing with COVID-19 for another 10 years, Der Spiegel reported, implying that Germany would also be dealing with pandemic measures to some degree for several years.

But Mr. Lauterbach told the German publication in January that “the population has built up high immunity, and the experts who advise us no longer believe there will be another big, serious winter wave.”

“At this point, we also don’t foresee particularly dangerous variants reaching us in the coming weeks and months,” he said.

Nonetheless, he appealed to the public to continue wearing masks voluntarily indoors and on trains.

In the United States, some schools and businesses are reintroducing mask requirements because of concerns about new variants of the virus.

*

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.

Bryan S. Jung is a native and resident of New York City with a background in politics and the legal industry. He graduated from Binghamton University.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

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.

***

First published on August 24, 2023, revised and updated on August 29, 2023

Introduction 

According to reports, “An Anti-imperialist People’s Movement” has unfolded spontaneously across francophone West Africa in support of Niger’s Conseil National pour la sauvegarde de la Patrie (CNSP) (National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland) which came to power on July 26, 2023 in a military Coup d’Etat against the elected government of President Mohamed Bazoum who is supported by France’s President Emmanuel MacronBazoum was among the founders in 1990 of the “Parti Nigerien pour la Democratie et le Socialisme”. 

Demonstrations in Niger by supporters of the CNSP government have largely targeted France calling for the withdrawal of French troops:

“Protesters attempted to storm the French embassy to express their outrage at the decades of colonial and neo-colonial domination their country has suffered.” (Liberation News)

Pressured by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) (led by the president of Nigeria Bola Ahmed Tinubu) as well as by the African Union and the UN, Niger’s military junta has “refused to reinstall the ousted president” (August 8, 2023).

“Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu, … who is now the chair of the 15-member Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), had threatened just days after the ascendancy to power of the CNSP to lead a military intervention to reimpose Bazoum. (Black Agenda Report, emphasis added)

In recent developments, thousands of young people have gathered in Niamey’s stadium, to sign up as volunteers in defense of their country.

ECOWAS threats have contributed to “building greater animosity against France and the U.S.”

Is This “Anti-Imperialist Movement” a Reality? Or is it Fake?

Whereas ECOWAS is portrayed as an organization which (unofficially) serves the neocolonial interests of both France and the U.S., people across West Africa are unaware of the role of Niger’s Conseil National pour la Sauvegarde de la Patrie (CNSP). 

The so-called “Anti-imperialism People’s Movement” (integrated by anti-war progressives, trade unions, etc) has been deliberately misled. Niger’s CNSP military junta is not committed to combating US sponsored neocolonialism in sub-Saharan Africa. Quite the opposite: The CNSP military leadership is (indirectly) controlled by the Pentagon.

At least five senior members of the Niger military Junta received their training in the U.S.

General Abdourahamane Tiani who led the coup d’Etat and who is currently head of the CNSP military Junta received his military training at the National Defense University’s (NDU) College of International Security Affairs (CISA). CISA is the U.S. Department of Defense’s  “flagship for education and building of partner capacity in combating terrorism, irregular warfare, and integrated deterrence at the strategic level” (emphasis added)

Brig. General Barmou who currently represents the military junta undertook his military training in the U.S. at Fort Moore, Columbus, Georgia and at the National Defense University (ND)

Brig. General Barmou and his team are categorized by The Wall Street Journal as “the good guys”: 

“At Center of Niger’s Coup Is One of America’s Favorite Generals…[General Barmou]”. In the words of Victoria Nuland (August 7, 2023):

“... General Barmou, former Colonel Barmou, is somebody who has worked very closely with U.S. Special Forces over many, many years.” 

Tacitly acknowledged by US Deputy Secretary of State Nuland, both General A. Tiani and Brig. General Barmou in terms of their military profile and background are “friends of America”.

Would these “good guys” –who have the “NeoCon blessing” of  Victoria Nuland— lead a genuine grassroots movement against U.S. imperialism? The answer is obvious!

What should be understood, is that Paris exerts its neo-colonial influence within ECOWAS, whereas Washington controls both sides. i.e. ECOWAS as well as Niger’s CNSP Military Junta. It also controls numerous African governments throughout the continent.

Visibly there is a clash between the U.S. and France, barely acknowledged by media reports. What is unfolding is the creation of political divisions within West Africa, which could potentially lead to Armed Conflict.

Most analysts have failed to acknowledge that the CNSP military Junta has a close relationship with the Pentagon. The Biden administration has  casually refused to describe the ouster of President M. Barmou as a “coup d’Etat” or a “regime change”. 

Remember The 2013 Protest Movement in Egypt which was also characterized by a mass protest movement (which was the object of manipulation): 

“The media has portrayed the Egyptian armed forces as broadly “supportive” of  the protest movement, without addressing the close relationship between the leaders behind the military coup and their US counterparts.

Let us be under no illusions.  While there are important divisions within the military, Egypt’s top brass ultimately take their orders from the Pentagon.

Defense Minister General Abdul Fatah Al-Sisi, who instigated the Coup d’Etat directed against President Morsi is a graduate of the US War College, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.

General Al Sisi was in permanent liaison by telephone with US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel  from the very outset of the protest movement. (Michel Chossudovsky, July 4, 2013)

Washington’s Unspoken Objective is to “Remove France from Africa”

The deposed president Mohamed Bazoum has the support of France’s President Emmanuel Macron. Bazoum has been removed by a military Junta which is directly supported by the Pentagon.

The unspoken objective of Victoria Nuland’s mission [August 7, 2023] was to ultimately  “negotiate”,  of course unofficially Niamey’s “alignment” with Washington against Paris”. This objective has in substance been achieved. 

Moreover “USAFRICOM has a military base in Niger. The US military has been routinely collaborating with their Nigerien counterparts who are now operating under the auspices of the CNSP Military Junta. 

In 2022, Mali and Burkina Faso Had Already “Set the Stage”. Cut Ties with France 


Chronology of Military Coups. All of which have direct or indirect links to the Pentagon

Mali: May 24, 2021, Colonel Assimi Goita 

Guinea Conakry, September 5, 2021, Commander Mamady Doumbouya

Burkina Faso: September 30, 2022. Captain Ibrahim Traoré

Niger: July 26, 2023, General Abdourahamane Tiani


Mali

Despite his anti-colonial rhetoric largely directed against France, Mali’s (Interim) Head of State Colonel Assimi Goita is also a faithful instrument of the Pentagon. He received his military training in the US, while also actively collaborating with the U.S. Army Special Forces (“Green Berets”). Confirmed by the WP, Colonel Assimi Goita participated in a USAFRICOM training program known as Flintstock. He has also studied at the Joint Special Operations University at the MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.

It is worth noting that in late January 2022, The Republic of Mali led by Colonel Assimi Goita –who is a “friend of America” as well as an instrument of the Pentagon– had already in  set the stage for “Removing France from Africa”.

Colonel Assimi Goita (image above: second from Left) issued a directive to “end diplomatic, military and economic ties with France”. He also confirmed an end of Mali’s ECOWAS membership.

Concurrently, he announced that French was to be abolished as Mali’s official language.

That reminds me of Rwanda under Paul Kagame which –starting in the late 1990s– became an English speaking “US Protectorate” in Central Africa. 

Guinea’s Military Junta led by Colonel Mamady Doumbouya (who led the Coup d’Etat in September 2021) welcomed the Rwanda’s president Paul Kagame (April 2023) in Conakry stating that he is inspired by Paul Kagame’s “Rwandan model”.

Burkina Faso 

In Burkina Faso, Captain Ibrahim Traoré (left) came to power in a military coup (September 30, 2022). Upon his confirmation as Head of the Military Junta on October 5, 2022, he ordered the withdrawal of French forces.

A similar pattern seems to be unfolding in Niger?  

In recent developments, the CNSP military Junta requested the French Ambassador Sylvain Itte to leave Niger within 48 hours. 

In turn, both Mali and Burkina Faso have confirmed their commitment to sending troops to Niger if required. They have fully endorsed Niger’s CNSP Military Junta. 

The Role of Victoria Nuland

Victoria Nuland acting on behalf of the Biden Administration has played a key role. She was in Niamey on August 7-8, 2023 for meetings with the Military Junta (see above) as well as on an earlier “interagency delegation” last year to Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania, and Niger. (October 16-23, 2022).

Ironically, the Burkina Faso military coup led by Captain Ibrahim Traoré occurred less than 3 weeks prior to Victoria Nuland’s mission to The Sahel:

“We went to the region in force. We were looking, in particular, at how the U.S. strategy towards the Sahel is working. This is a strategy that we put in place about a year ago to try to bring more coherence to our efforts to support increased security,  …

In Burkina, in Niger, and in Mauritania, we are working very closely with those militaries, with their gendarmerie, with their counterterrorist forces to support them in their effort to push back and protect their populations from this poison in Mali.” (Victoria Nuland, quoted in Rollingstone, February 2023)

To the People of Africa. In Solidarity

In a bitter irony, the process of “French Decolonization” (i.e “Paris out of Africa”) does not ensure the instatement of democratic forms of government. Quite the opposite, it tends to favor the hegemonic development of U.S. neocolonialism and the militarization of the African continent, which must be forcefully opposed.

A pattern of US militarization (coupled with the imposition of neoliberal “shock treatment” macro-economic policies), has unfolded in several francophone countries of sub-Saharan Africa.

Related article:

“Divide and Rule”: Italy’s PM Giorgia Meloni Is Biden’s “Political Asset”. U.S. Behind Niger Coup d’Etat. America’s Hegemonic Wars Against Europe and Africa

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 20, 2023

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This incisive and carefully researched article by Larry Chin was originally published by Global Research in March 2002 under the title: Unocal and the Afghanistan Pipeline

October 7, 2023 marks the commemoration of the US – NATO invasion of  Afghanistan on October 7, 2001.

Twenty-two Years of War and Atrocities have been spearheaded by

  1. the geopolitics of the strategic trans-Afghan pipeline, which is the object of this article,
  2. the Taliban’s decision (2000) to drastically curtail opium production with a view to cancelling outright the  multibillion Afghan drug trade.

September 11, 2001 provided the justification to wage war on Afghanistan. A war cabinet was created at 11 o’clock at night on September 11, 2001. On the following day, NATO’s North Atlantic Council met in Brussels.

An unnamed foreign power had attacked America allowing the nation under attack, to strike back in the name of “self-defense”.

“if it is determined that the [September 11, 2001] attack against the United States was directed from abroad [Afghanistan] against “The North Atlantic area“, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty”. (emphasis added)

The bombing and invasion of Afghanistan which commenced on October 7, 2001 was described as a “campaign” against “Islamic terrorists”, rather than a war.

America’s “War on Terrorism” was born on September 11, 2001.

Michel Chossudovsky, August 30, 2023

***

After the fall of the Soviet Union, Argentine oil company Bridas, led by its ambitious chairman, Carlos Bulgheroni, became the first company to exploit the oil fields of Turkmenistan and propose a pipeline through neighboring Afghanistan. A powerful US-backed consortium intent on building its own pipeline through the same Afghan corridor would oppose Bridas’ project.

The Coveted Trans-Afghan Route

Upon successfully negotiating leases to explore in Turkmenistan, Bridas was awarded exploration contracts for the Keimar block near the Caspian Sea, and the Yashlar block near the Afghanistan border. By March 1995, Bulgheroni had accords with Turkmenistan and Pakistan granting Bridas construction rights for a pipeline into Afghanistan, pending negotiations with the civil war-torn country.

The following year, after extensive meetings with warlords throughout Afghanistan, Bridas had a 30-year agreement with the Rabbani regime to build and operate an 875-mile gas pipeline across Afghanistan.

Bulgheroni believed that his pipeline would promote peace as well as material wealth in the region. He approached other companies, including Unocal and its then-CEO, Roger Beach, to join an international consortium.

But Unocal was not interested in a partnership. The United States government, its affiliated transnational oil and construction companies, and the ruling elite of the West had coveted the same oil and gas transit route for years.

A trans-Afghanistan pipeline was not simply a business matter, but a key component of a broader geo-strategic agenda: total military and economic control of Eurasia (the Middle East and former Soviet Central Asian republics). Zbigniew Brezezinski describes this region in his book “The Grand Chessboard-American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives” as “the center of world power.” Capturing the region’s oil wealth, and carving out territory in order to build a network of transit routes, was a primary objective of US military interventions throughout the 1990s in the Balkans, the Caucasus and Caspian Sea.

As of 1992, 11 western oil companies controlled more than 50 percent of all oil investments in the Caspian Basin, including Unocal, Amoco, Atlantic Richfield, Chevron, Exxon-Mobil, Pennzoil, Texaco, Phillips and British Petroleum.

In “Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia” (a definitive work that is a primary source for this report), Ahmed Rashid wrote,

“US oil companies who had spearheaded the first US forays into the region wanted a greater say in US policy making.”

Business and policy planning groups active in Central Asia, such as the Foreign Oil Companies Group operated with the full support of the US State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA and the Department of Energy and Commerce.

Among the most active operatives for US efforts: Brzezinski (a consultant to Amoco, and architect of the Afghan-Soviet war of the 1970s), Henry Kissinger (advisor to Unocal), and Alexander Haig (a lobbyist for Turkmenistan), and Dick Cheney (Halliburton, US-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce).

Unocal’s Central Asia envoys consisted of former US defense and intelligence officials. Robert Oakley, the former US ambassador to Pakistan, was a “counter-terrorism” specialist for the Reagan administration who armed and trained the mujahadeen during the war against the Soviets in the 1980s. He was an Iran-Contra conspirator charged by Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh as a key figure involved in arms shipments to Iran.

Richard Armitage, the current Deputy Defense Secretary, was another Iran-Contra player in Unocal’s employ. A former Navy SEAL, covert operative in Laos, director with the Carlyle Group, Armitage is allegedly deeply linked to terrorist and criminal networks in the Middle East, and the new independent states of the former Soviet Union (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrghistan).

Armitage was no stranger to pipelines. As a member of the Burma/Myanmar Forum, a group that received major funding from Unocal, Armitage was implicated in a lawsuit filed by Burmese villagers who suffered human rights abuses during the construction of a Unocal pipeline. (Halliburton, under Dick Cheney, performed contract work on the same Burmese project.)

Bridas Versus the New World Order

Much to Bridas’ dismay, Unocal went directly to regional leaders with its own proposal. Unocal formed its own competing US-led, Washington-sponsored consortium that included Saudi Arabia’s Delta Oil, aligned with Saudi Prince Abdullah and King Fahd. Other partners included Russia’s Gazprom and Turkmenistan’s state-owned Turkmenrozgas.

John Imle, president of Unocal (and member of the US-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce with Armitage, Cheney, Brezezinski and other ubiquitous figures), lobbied Turkmenistan’s president Niyazov and prime minister Bhutto of Pakistan, offering a Unocal pipeline following the same route as Bridas.’

Dazzled by the prospect of an alliance with the US, Niyazov asked Bridas to renegotiate its past contract and blocked Bridas’ exports from Keimar field. Bridas responded by filing three cases with the International Chamber of Commerce against Turkmenistan for breach of contract. (Bridas won.) Bridas also filed a lawsuit in Texas charging Unocal with civil conspiracy and “tortuous interference with business relations.” While its officers were negotiating with Pakistani and Turkmen oil and gas officials, Bridas claimed that Unocal had stolen its idea, and coerced the Turkmen government into blocking Bridas from Keimir field. (The suit was dismissed in 1998 by Judge Brady G. Elliott, a Republican, who claimed that any dispute between Unocal and Bridas was governed by the laws of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, rather than Texas law.)

In October 1995, with neither company in a winning position, Bulgheroni and Imle accompanied Niyazov to the opening of the UN General Assembly. There, Niyazov awarded Unocal with a contract for a 918-mile natural gas pipeline. Bulgheroni was shocked. At the announcement ceremony, Unocal consultant Henry Kissinger said that the deal looked like “the triumph of hope over experience.”

Later, Unocal’s consortium, CentGas, would secure another contract for a companion 1,050-mile oil pipeline from Dauletabad through Afghanistan that would connect to a tanker loading port in Pakistan on the coast of the Arabian Sea.

Although Unocal had agreements with the governments on either end of the proposed route, Bridas still had the contract with Afghanistan.

The problem was resolved via the CIA and Pakistani ISI-backed Taliban. Following a visit to Kandahar by US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Robin Raphael in the fall of 1996, the Taliban entered Kabul and sent the Rabbani government packing.

Bridas’ agreement with Rabbani would have to be renegotiated.

Wooing the Taliban

According to Ahmed Rashid, “Unocal’s real influence with the Taliban was that their project carried the possibility of US recognition, which the Taliban were desperately anxious to secure.”

Unocal wasted no time greasing the palms of the Taliban. It offered humanitarian aid to Afghan warlords who would form a council to supervise the pipeline project. It provided a new mobile phone network between Kabul and Kandahar. Unocal also promised to help rebuild Kandahar, and donated $9,000 to the University of Nebraska’s Center for Afghan Studies. The US State Department, through its aid organization USAID, contributed significant education funding for Taliban. In the spring of 1996, Unocal executives flew Uzbek leader General Abdul Rashid Dostum to Dallas to discuss pipeline passage through his northern (Northern Alliance-controlled) territories.

Bridas countered by forming an alliance with Ningarcho, a Saudi company closely aligned with Prince Turki el-Faisal, the Saudi intelligence chief. Turki was a mentor to Osama bin Laden, the ally of the Taliban who was publicly feuding with the Saudi royal family. As a gesture for Bridas, Prince Turki provided the Taliban with communications equipment and a fleet of pickup trucks. Now Bridas proposed two consortiums, one to build the Afghanistan portion, and another to take care of both ends of the line. By November 1996, Bridas claimed that it had an agreement signed by the Taliban and Dostum—trumping Unocal.

The competition between Unocal and Bridas, as described by Rashid, “began to reflect the competition within the Saudi Royal family.”

In 1997, Taliban officials traveled twice to Washington, D.C. and Buenos Aires to be wined and dined by Unocal and Bridas. No agreements were signed.

It appeared to Unocal that the Taliban was balking. In addition to royalties, the Taliban demanded funding for infrastructure projects, including roads and power plants. The Taliban also announced plans to revive the Afghan National Oil Company, which had been abolished by the Soviet regime in the late 1970s.

Osama bin Laden (who issued his fatwa against the West in 1998) advised the Taliban to sign with Bridas. In addition to offering the Taliban a higher bid, Bridas proposed an open pipeline accessible to warlords and local users. Unocal’s pipeline was closed—for export purposes only. Bridas’ plan also did not require outside financing, while Unocal’s required a loan from the western financial institutions (the World Bank), which in turn would leave Afghanistan vulnerable to demands from western governments.

Bridas’ approach to business was more to the Taliban’s liking. Where Bulgheroni and Bridas’ engineers would take the time to “sip tea with Afghan tribesmen,” Unocal’s American executives issued top-down edicts from corporate headquarters and the US Embassy (including a demand to open talks with the CIA-backed Northern Alliance).

While seemingly well received within Afghanistan, Bridas’ problems with Turkmenistan (which they blamed on Unocal and US interference) had left them cash-strapped and without a supply.

In 1997, they went searching for a major partner with the clout to break the deadlock with Turkmenistan. They found one in Amoco. Bridas sold 60 percent of its Latin American assets to Amoco. Carlos Bulgheroni and his contingent retained the remaining minority 40 percent. Facilitating the merger were other icons of transnational finance, Chase Manhattan (representing Bridas), Morgan Stanley (handling Amoco) and Arthur Andersen (facilitator of post-merger integration). Zbigniew Brezezinski was a consultant for Amoco.

(Amoco would merge with British Petroleum a year later. BP is represented by the law firm of Baker & Botts, whose principal attorney is James Baker, lifelong Bush friend, former secretary of state, and a member of the Carlyle Group.)

Recognizing the significance of the merger, a Pakistani oil company executive hinted, “If these (Central Asian) countries want a big US company involved, Amoco is far bigger than Unocal.”

Clearing the Chessboard Again

By 1998, while the Argentine contingent made slow progress, Unocal faced a number of new problems.

Gazprom pulled out of CentGas when Russia complained about the anti-Russian agenda of the US. This forced Unocal to expand CentGas to include Japanese and South Korean gas companies, while maintaining the dominant share with Delta.

Human rights groups began protesting Unocal’s dealings with the brutal Taliban. Still riding years of Clinton bashing and scandal mongering, conservative Republicans in the US attacked the Clinton administration’s Central Asia policy for its lack of clarity and “leadership.”

Once again, violence would change the dynamic.

In response to the bombing of US embassies in Nairobi and Tanzania (attributed to bin Laden), President Bill Clinton sent cruise missiles into Afghanistan and Sudan. The administration broke off diplomatic contact with the Taliban, and UN sanctions were imposed.

Unocal withdrew from CentGas, and informed the State Department “the gas pipeline would not proceed until an internationally recognized government was in place in Afghanistan.” Although Unocal continued on and off negotiations on the oil pipeline (a separate project), the lack of support from Washington hampered efforts.

Meanwhile, Bridas declared that it would not need to wait for resolution of political issues, and repeated its intention of moving forward with the Afghan gas pipeline project on its own. Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan tried to push Saudi Arabia to proceed with CentGas (Delta of Saudi Arabia was now the leader). But war and US-Taliban tension made business impossible.

For the remainder of the Clinton presidency, there would be no official US or UN recognition of Afghanistan. And no progress on the pipeline.

Then George Walker Bush took the White House.

*

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

Featured image is from Fabius Maximus Website

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 alarming discovery by scientist Kevin McKernan, of DNA contamination in vials of Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines has raised significant concern in the scientific community. Meanwhile, the reported finding has attracted criticism from those quick to ‘demonise’ anyone questioning the safety, efficacy, and sanctity of the ‘vaccines.’

McKernan’s detractors – and there have been plenty of them – have criticised everything from lack of peer-reviewed publication to speculation about the viability of the anonymously sent vials. 

Now, don’t get me wrong. Criticism and open debate in scientific enquiry are good things. After the three years of censorship and stifled debate in science and medicine one thing is patently clear: freedom of speech is paramount to truth. 

Let’s be clear on another thing. The peer-review system is essentially broken. The same players with vested interests in the pharmaceutical industry curiously have the same influence on the research and publication industry. As McKernan rightly points out, ‘[t]he market will validate this finding long before traditional peer review even puts its boots on. Independent wet lab reproduction trumps 3 anonymous readers every time.’ This, then was the motivation behind publishing the results online with a call-to-action for scientists in the field to independently verify the results. 

Answer the call they did. McKernan’s results – for the Pfizer product (BNT162b2) – have now been independently verified by a number of internationally recognised laboratories confirming both the presence and levels of DNA contamination across different vials and batches. 

So, in asking the question ‘Is the result reproducible?’ the answer (for the Pfizer product BNT162b2 at least) is ‘Yes.’ The contamination is real. These results now lead us to ask some other questions which hang heavily in the air. 

Questions like, ‘How bad is the contamination,’ ‘What are the regulatory authorities doing about it,’ and – the question on everyone’s lips – ‘What does this mean for the billions who took the jab?’ 

These questions deserve answers.

So, how bad is the contamination? There are two things to consider here.

Firstly, what are the levels of contamination and secondly what are the components of the contamination.

As previously reported, levels of DNA contamination in the Pfizer BNT162b2 product came in around 18-70 times over the limits set by regulatory authorities. These levels of contamination have also been confirmed independently.

To put some perspective on these numbers McKernan explains in terms of PCR testing for Covid.

‘You were probably swabbed with one of those nasal swabs to get a Covid PCR. You would be called positive of a CT (cycle threshold) under 40. We’re getting CTs under 20 with the contamination of the vaccine. That’s a million-fold more contamination than you would be called positive for having a virus. Now, the virus they’re swabbing is outside of your mucosal membrane in your nose. We’re talking about a contaminant that’s getting injected, bypassing your mucosal defences at a million-fold higher concentrations…There’s an enormous difference here in terms of the amount of material it’s in there.’ 

The manufacturing process, as discussed in a recent BMJ article, points to how the DNA contamination may’ve occurred.

The clinical trials were run using ‘Process 1’ which involved in vitro transcription off synthetic DNA – essentially a ‘clean’ process. However, this process is not viable for mass production, so the manufacturers switched to ‘Process 2’ to dial things up. Process 2 involves using E. coli bacteria to replicate the plasmids.

Getting the plasmids out of the E coli. can be challenging and result in residual plasmids in the vaccines. But there’s another concern. When plasmid contamination is found, there is a potential for bacterial endotoxin to also be present. This endotoxin can produce serious side effects if injected including anaphylaxis and septic shock. Australian Professor Geoff Pain remains most vocal providing extensive details on these endotoxins.

Sequencing of the plasmids from the Pfizer vials resulted in another ‘accidental’ discovery. Something was found that wasn’t in the sequence map disclosed by Pfizer to the EMA. This something is called a SV40 promoter. The SV40 promoter is a sequence that turns on gene expression, like a switch. It is also a potent nuclear localisation signal, meaning it makes a beeline for the nucleus. The entire SV40 genetic sequence came to infamous prominence in the 1960s having been found to have polluted the Salk polio vaccine, causing a subsequent surge in cancers. We’ll return to the concerning significance of the SV40 promoter sequence in a moment.

Subsequent experiments suggest that most of the DNA contamination is fragmented, which is by no means benign. McKernan states, ‘(Much of) the DNA is actually linear because they do go through a step trying to fragment this and (linear DNA) has a higher propensity for integration than circular plasmid DNA.’ It seems that a significant amount of the DNA is in this form and presents a greater risk to humans in terms of risk for integration into the genome, than the circular DNA. 

To make matters worse – as if things could get any worse – it appears that much of the DNA is packaged in the lipid nano particles (LNP).

‘If the DNA is actually in the LNPs, we have different risks, as… this will then transfect the mammalian cells and become a genetic alteration. Now, whether it integrates with the genome is secondary, the fact that you’re getting foreign DNA into the cell is a risk in and of itself, because it could partially get expressed, or it could muddle around with other transcription, translation machinery that’s in there,’ McKernan explains.

Let’s recap. We have DNA, which is mostly packaged in LNP designed to travel all over the body and enter cells, delivering it’s genetic cargo like a trojan horse. Some of this DNA may contain the SV40 promoter sequence – the one known to make a beeline to the nucleus and turn on gene expression. McKernan states an obvious concern, ‘If (the SV40 promoter) becomes integrated into the genome it will turn on gene expression wherever it lands. If this happens to be an oncogene (a cancer-causing gene), you’ve got problems.”

This, dear reader, is only one of the many possible adverse effects from injecting synthetic DNA into humans. 

The scientific literature acknowledges the potential for foreign/synthetic DNA alone to be oncogenic (cancer-causing), infectious, and prothrombotic. In addition, genomic integration of a viral promoter like SV40 can contribute to cancer and is well known to cause leukemia in gene therapy trials.

You can see why scientists are alarmed. These concerns were presented to the FDA on the June 16, 2023. What have they done with this information you ask? Probably filed it in a box somewhere in a deep dark warehouse between the words ‘conspicuous’ and ‘conspire’ is my guess.

When we consider the above it is clear why strict legal rules exist in the field of genetic science especially where humans are involved. Rules designed to (actually) keep people safe from the potential known and unknown consequences of messing with the genetic integrity of human life. Which brings us to the next question: 

‘What are the regulatory authorities doing about it?’ From what we can tell, nothing. 

The independently verified contamination alone heralds a serious quality control issue which behooves immediate attention from the likes of the FDA, TGA and EMA. Combined with significant adverse event data and climbing excess mortality rates around the world these shots should have been pulled over two years ago. Indeed, we would postulate they should never have been approved. 

This unfolding story is by no means over. Serious questions have been raised asking whether these products, which have been injected into billions around the world, were approved illegally.

The disturbing revelation was raised in a recent landmark publication by one of the authors. It appears that even without the DNA contamination ‘the so-called “vaccines,” from the beginning fulfilled the legal definitions for being categorized as genetically modified organisms.’ They therefore required GMO licences. It would appear those licences are missing.

The Australian Federal Court is being asked to consider this issue in proceedings recently filed under the Gene Technology Act against Pfizer and Moderna.

Australia’s TGA and the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator were thoroughly informed of the GMO and synthetic DNA contamination by the lawyers responsible, but neither office has bothered to reply nor comment.

In a statement to the press, instructing solicitor Katie Ashby-Koppens says, ‘We took this case on because neither of the appropriate regulators were doing anything about it. The Therapeutic Goods Administration and Office of the Gene Technology Regulator were both put on notice in 2022 that these products contain GMOs and they have failed to act. It has been left to citizens to do what the Australian Government won’t do.”

“Every single person who has been injected with these products has received a GMO that has not been through the expert regulatory process in this country. The human genome could be changed permanently, and no one was informed.”

If all this bares out, at best the regulatory bodies have failed in their duty to protect the people. At worst they have been complicit in a crime with consequences for the world’s population and generations to come.

To answer the final question the question on everyone’s lips: ‘What does this mean for the billions who took the jab?’ We may soon start answering this question more precisely, with the development of qPCR kits to differentiate between Long Covid and Long Vax, and determine whether vaccine sequences are present in human tissue samples.

*

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 Julie Sladden is a medical doctor and freelance writer with a passion for transparency in healthcare. Her op-eds have been published in both The Spectator Australia and The Daily Declaration. In 2022, she was elected as a Local Government Councillor for West Tamar in Tasmania.

Julian Gillespie is a lawyer and former barrister in Australia, known for his Covid-19 research and advocacy. His work includes seeking to have the provisional approval of Covid-19 vaccines declared legally invalid due to failures to meet regulatory standards. Julian is also a director of Children’s Health Defense, Australia.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

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

What Is Taught in Schools of Journalism?

August 29th, 2023 by Prof. Bill Willers

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.

*** 

 

“Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government.” Edward Bernays, Propaganda

“I truly do not understand what has happened to journalism.” Alex Berenson

The big lie perpetrated about journalism is that it has an adversarial relationship with power. There may have been some truth to that at some point in history, but within living memory the precise opposite has been the truth. And why be surprised? One would expect that controlling the Narrative and the flow of information would be a prime goal of government.

Governments ultimately become tyrannical, as history teaches. Where a vacuum exists, nature fills it, and if that vacuum is one of political power, those least contained by moral restraint have the greatest advantage in filling the void. Over time, restraints diminish within government itself, as its influences within mainstream media (MSM) become increasingly dominant. And if you doubt that this level of tyranny has hit home, consider this report of two months ago from the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

Governments have interests separate from those of the governed, and for them to function with minimal interference they influence to the extent possible mainstream media, both print and electronic. Those connecting government and the public call themselves journalists, and for the most part they get their training in college-level schools of journalism.

Journalism at the University of Wisconsin

Now, get this: In 2021, the University of Wisconsin’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication (its formal title) was given a $750,000 grant by a subdivision of the National Science Foundation (NSF) known as “Convergence Accelerator”. The grant is based on governmental concern of public skepticism regarding the official narratives of the Covid19 Pandemic and the integrity of the 2020 Presidential election, two of the most contentious issues in US history, both in crying need of open discussion and debate, both actively censored by MSM. The focus of the grant is to develop methods for overcoming skepticism of official accounts —  specifically of these two issues —  as found in social media. According to the Grant Abstract, the project is funded to “deliver” a 3-step method:

1. Identify social media sources circulating “misinformation” and online communities susceptible to such “misinformation”.

2. Working with fact-checking organizations, develop “correction” and “intervention messages” to counter vaccine hesitancy and electoral skepticism.

3. Dissemiate “corrections” (e.g. via ads, automated bots, “influencers”) and evaluate their effectiveness.

Think hard about that. It is in no way “journalism” as normally (and wishfully) understood, or as claimed, but naked, in-your-face propagandizing in the service of governmental power, in this case using the services of a publicly funded institution of “higher learning”. It makes one wonder what on earth journalism students at the UW are being taught. Just the fact that faculty would be involved in such a project would, in itself, be a message louder than any course students might take. In any event, the results of this project should be available at the NSF website in December, 2023.

The premise of the UW grant is that governmental narratives regarding Covid19 and 2020 Presidential election are ipso facto absolutely accurate, and that competing information, opinion or interpretation must therefore be understood as misinformation to be refuted or censored. Why? Well, apparently because it’s the Government. As for those who accept the official drumbeat that the election was honest, it might be worth a few minutes spent here, here, here, here, here, here. There’s more, of course. In addition, valid medical information countering governmental “public health” messaging, and the endless repetition of “safe and effective” re the Covid19 vaccine, can be found here, here, hereherehere, here.

Journalism at the University of Washington

The Center For An Informed Public at the University of Washington’s Information School also received — and also in 2021 — an NSF grant of $2.25 million to “develop and evaluate ‘rapid response’ methods for studying and communicating about disinformation at a sophistication and pace on par with the dynamic and interdisciplinary nature of the challenge” (Grant details here). The goal of this grant corresponds to that of the U of WI grant (above) and, likewise, the spotlighted issues are the 2020 Election and Covid19.

While the grant does not terminate until 2026, in 2022 an article appeared in Nature Human Behavior, “Combining interventions to reduce the spread of viral misinformation”, in which three of the authors are funded by this NSF grant, the article indicating the direction of their research: “We reveal that commonly proposed interventions [eg ‘outright removal’] are unlikely to be effective in isolation. However, our framework demonstrates that a combined approach can achieve a substantial reduction in the prevalence of misinformation.”

Among the combined approaches they study, in addition to account removal, are “nudges” [messaging/warning to influence decisions of users of social media], interruption of “sharing behavior”, and what they term “virality circuit breakers”, an elaborate system that identifies and “disrupts” sources of “misinformation”, particularly from those they identify as repeat spreaders. Details consider various time spans between identification of “misinformation” and response time, because speed of response is for them a significant factor in obstructing the spread of unwanted information and opinion. Admitting that outright censorship has “public relation challenges”, what they devise is a multi-pronged system of information interference and slowdown that amounts to piecemeal censorship. It’s rather like the principle of ‘death by a thousand cuts’.

The Center For An Informed Public was a founder in 2020 of the Election Integrity Partnership [oh the irony!], the Stanford Internet Observatory being the other founder. The Partnership’s stated purpose is to counter “… attempts to suppress voting, reduce participation, confuse voters, or delegitimize election results without evidence”, but obviously their major concern is the last of these, i.e. “The metanarrative of a ’stolen election’, which later propelled the January 6 insurrection.” 

Election Integrity Partnership boldly clarifies its status as servant to governmental authority in listing factors influencing the capacity for “virality of misinformation” online: ” Another factor that mediates the spread of rumors is the availability of timely, quality information from trusted sources — e.g., media and government officials”. One wonders at the fact that people in such positions could be so ignorant of the present level of public distrust of both mainstream media and government. The first recommendation in their 2021 Final Report is “Federal Government: Establish clear authorities and roles for identifying election-related mis- and disinformation.”

In all of this, there seems little inclination to explore who exactly within government enjoys the right to determine what is or isn’t mis- or disinformation, how they came by this authority, or what might be their motives. There is no apparent awareness that the popular theory regarding journalism is that it’s fundamentally about reporting information to a public that, on its own, can then discuss and debate openly to determine what truth there is in it all. And certainly there is no appreciation of the free speech rights of those who have been labeled as spreaders of unwanted information and opinion. 

These are just the tip of an immense iceberg, and should you make an effort to research this issue, taking it to wherever the facts lead, what you find should make your blood boil regardless of where you are on any political spectrum. The First Amendment is being trashed on multiple fronts. There is wide understanding that something is rotten in the state of journalism, and schools of journalism are a key part of that rot.

*

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.

Bill Willers is an emeritus professor of biology, University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh. He is founder of the Superior Wilderness Action Network and editor of Learning to Listen to the Land, and Unmanaged Landscapes, both from Island Press. He can be contacted at [email protected]

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

New Documentary Coming this September: ‘Peace, War and 9/11’

August 29th, 2023 by International Center for 9/11 Justice

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.

***

We at the International Center for 9/11 Justice are thrilled to announce the imminent release of Peace, War and 9/11, a feature documentary narrated by the late Graeme MacQueen and directed by Ted Walter and Richard Heap.

Graeme MacQueen was a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

To consult the archive of his writings on 9/11, extending over a period of more than 10 years, click Graeme MacQueen.

His Legacy will live forever. 

World Premiere in Hamilton

The film will have its worldwide premiere on Wednesday, Sept. 6, 2023, at 7:00 PM at the Westdale in Hamilton, Ontario — the city where MacQueen lived and taught as a professor for much of his life.

There will be a suggested donation of $10 to $20 at the door. However, if you prefer to pay online and wish to guarantee yourself a seat, you can also donate and reserve your seat online.


Reserve seats for the world premiere


The premiere will be followed by a reception at the Nannaa Persian Eatery, next door to the theater.

Online Release and NYC/Oakland Screenings

The film will then be released worldwide on YouTube, Amazon, and Tubi on Friday, Sept. 8, followed by screenings in New York City and Oakland, California.

The NYC screening will be held on Sunday, Sept. 10, at 6:00 PM at Cinema Village in the heart of Greenwich Village. Tickets are $20. Seating is limited, so be sure to buy your tickets as soon as possible.


Buy tickets for the NYC premiere now


Earlier on September 10th — at 2:00 PM Eastern — there will be an online symposium dedicated to MacQueen, presented by the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry. The International Center for 9/11 Justice is proud to co-sponsor this event, and we warmly invite you to attend.

The Oakland screening will take place on Monday, Sept. 11, as part of the 19thAnnual 9/11 Truth Film Festival, presented by the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance.

This year’s festival is dedicated to honoring the legacies of MacQueen and fellow 9/11 scholar David Ray Griffin, who passed away last November.

The festival will begin at 3:00 PM with a recording of a talk MacQueen gave in 2016, called “War on Democracy.” It will end with Peace, War and 9/11, which will start at around 7:00 PM.

A $20 donation is suggested, but no one will be turned away!

Film Synopsis

In a wide-ranging interview filmed six months before his passing, eminent scholar and lifelong peace activist Graeme MacQueen shares his final words on 9/11 and the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Drawing from his depth of knowledge as a professor of peace studies, MacQueen illuminates the concept of war as an all-encompassing parasitic system that depends on triggering events — sometimes natural but often managed or even manufactured — to move from a cold to a hot phase.

Within this framework, MacQueen presents his analysis of the back-to-back 9/11 and anthrax attacks.

He argues that both attacks were deceptions perpetrated by the same group of actors for the purpose of launching the global war on terror and breathing new life into the war system — a path we are still on and living the consequences of today.

*

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

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

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 world has truly never seen anything like BRICS, an organization that unites the most diverse group of not only nation-states, but actual civilization states. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa don’t really seem to have much in common, and yet, their ties within this framework are growing stronger by the day at this point. What’s more, BRICS is rapidly turning into a BRICS+ concept that brings in even more new members. Namely, during a recent summit in South Africa, the organization announced that Argentina, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates will become full members in just a bit more than four months.

The importance of BRICS+ is perhaps best seen in the joint diplomatic effort of its members to deescalate tensions in various parts of the world, even turning decades-old (or even centuries-old) rivalries and enmity into solid partnerships. A recent example of this is the thawing of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, two Middle Eastern countries that have been at each other’s throats for nearly half a century. This also includes proxy wars, such as the one in Yemen. Joint efforts of Russian and Chinese diplomacy have been particularly significant in this regard and most importantly, it worked. Both Middle Eastern countries will join BRICS on January 1, 2024.

An important side effect of this could be the end of the aforementioned war in Yemen, where US complicity in aggression against the unfortunate country has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, near-constant hunger, extreme poverty and overall destruction.

In addition, BRICS+ is also expanding its footprint in Africa, a particularly vulnerable part of the world that has been subjected to brutal oppression and colonialism by the political West. This process has been ongoing for approximately half a millennium now and continues to this very day, albeit in a more sinister form of neocolonialism. The recent example of Niger illustrates this perfectly. BRICS+ will inevitably accelerate the dismantling of this exploitative system.

South Africa is already a founding member, but with Ethiopia and Egypt joining, BRICS+ will get two more African nations on board, both with a millennia-old history. This is a particularly alarming prospect for the political West, primarily the United States. Namely, they’re trying to save what’s left of Western power projection in Africa, but with BRICS+ strengthening the sovereignty of its members, this US-led effort will be in vain. In addition, Algeria and Senegal have also officially applied for membership, while Angola, DR Congo, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Sudan, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe also either announced their application or have expressed strong interest in doing so.

This refers to African nations only. However, the list is much longer when considering the fact that Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Thailand, Venezuela and Vietnam have also applied, while Afghanistan, Mexico, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey and Uruguay have all announced their own applications. Once again, this is an extremely diverse group of countries that seemingly have very little in common. However, they’re all united in a quest to ensure their sovereignty and prosperity. Truth be told, this will be a handful for BRICS+ diplomacy, but the process is irreversible at this point.

This isn’t to say that BRICS is without its problems already, but these are being tackled. Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a meeting last week, seeking to deescalate tensions on their long-disputed border. A joint statement released after the meeting described the discussion as “positive, constructive and in-depth” and that “India and China had agreed to maintain the momentum of dialogue and negotiations through military and diplomatic channels”. Rapprochement between the two Asian giants isn’t only important within the BRICS framework, but also for global security, as both countries are heavily armed, including with thermonuclear weapons.

In Latin America, BRICS+ is bound to include most of the continent, a particularly important prospect, as it’s now faced with a resurgent Monroe Doctrine.

Namely, the US is doubling down on its neocolonialist policies in Latin America to prevent or at the very least slow down the advent of multipolarity. Most alarmingly for the belligerent thalassocracy, BRICS+ not only ensures (geo)political sovereignty, but also a cultural one, because it allows the development of different civilizational models, as no member of the organization, no matter how powerful, aims to impose its system of societal values and development on any other country.

As previously mentioned, this is a truly terrifying concept for the political West, as it aims to do the complete opposite. By imposing its (at this point extremist and simply degenerate) neoliberal policies, the political West is prolonging the effects of neocolonialism and its dominance over entire continents. These extremely damaging policies can only be prevented through the strengthening of national sovereignty and precisely BRICS+ is the only way to achieve it. Needless to say, the prospect of having 30 or more countries join such an organization is a complete disaster for the US-led political West, as it nullifies the concept of sanctions and/or direct aggression.

Needless to say, this is a net positive for the (actual) world, as the current “rules-based world order” benefits only one center of global power. Worse yet, this comes at the expense of everyone else, costing them peace and normal development. That’s why Washington DC will continue to pursue neocolonialism everywhere it can. Precisely BRICS+ ensures that it can’t.

*

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.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

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.

***

This important study on “Do Vaccines Cause Autism” consists of a three series which are slated to be published by Global Research

PART I

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? A History of Institutional Corruption

PART II

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? The Evidence Against Vaccine Safety

PART III

Do Vaccines Cause Autism? Vaccine Safety Continued and Profits Over Health

***

If you actually “follow the science,” Wikipedia’s description of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “anti-vaccine advocacy” might elicit indifference or unequivocal support for Wikipedia’s position.

“Kennedy is the chairman of Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine advocacy group he joined in 2015 formerly known as the World Mercury Project. The group alleges a large proportion of American children are suffering from conditions as diverse as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, food allergies, cancer, and autoimmune diseases due to exposure to certain chemicals and radiation. Children’s Health Defense has blamed and campaigned against vaccines, fluoridation of drinking water, paracetamol (acetaminophen), aluminum, wireless communications, among others.”

Screenshot from Wikipedia

With no sense of irony, the author(s) write as if these things were not demonstrably toxic.[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17] Are the authors and editors of this article just poor, misguided, or biased researchers?

Did they really fail to unearth even one of the thousands of peer-reviewed articles demonstrating a connection between the exposures mentioned and harms to health?

One would hope that it is a scientist or experienced and well-read science journalist who is charged with writing the entry on the highly contentious and consequential vaccine-autism debate appearing in the most widely read “encyclopedia.”

As a scientist or science journalist, you daily read at least the abstracts of scientific studies. Many thousands of these state clearly that indeed a connection has been found between a litany of health problems and these toxins, which people can scarcely avoid in the modern world. So, for such people, the propagandistic drivel appearing on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Wikipedia page would read as so absurd as to be laughable.

Certainly studies are open to interpretation; they may be the subject of debate; they may be subject to the scrutiny of the public and the scientific community; by all means, try to replicate them.

But to write as if there is no debate, as if these studies simply do not exist; as if the association between these exposures and harms to health is some ludicrous and easily refutable “allegation,” this is not scientific. It appears as ignorance at best. It does not represent values of critical thinking, intellectual rigor and a spirit of openness to evidence, all hallmarks of science. Are these descriptions of Kennedy’s stance on vaccines and autism just ignorance or stupidity, or are they something else?

What anyone who reads Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Wikipedia page who is familiar with the science, and who does not have a conflict of interest, is likely to feel next is disquiet.

It is disturbing to read these bald assertions of denial, clearly intended to maim Kennedy’s reputation, and know that the vast majority of Wikipedia’s viewers are not reading the science, and will have no protective mental buffer of skepticism about what they read there. They will instead most likely accept these spurious statements — these bold lies — as truth. Most people are looking to Wikipedia for answers because they do not read the science. Somehow, with no formal debate, Wikipedia has been lofted up as if it were the Archbishop of science, the mouthpiece of official scientific opinion, and all its pronouncements, no matter how patently propagandistic, are accepted as mindlessly accepted as infallible.

Wikipedia has dwarfed the traditional encyclopedias in popularity and readership with 6.1 billion monthly visitors in 2021.[18] But Wikipedia is not a wisp as trustworthy or scholarly. In fact, you do not need to have a degree in the sciences, or a research specialty, or verifiable understanding of the subject on which you write, to participate in editing a page. Anyone can do it.[19] As a writer or editor, you remain nameless and faceless, and may be difficult to trace. Indeed,

Wikipedia’s co-founder, Larry Sanger, told journalist Glenn Greenwald that the CIA, FBI and other intelligence agencies use “Wikipedia [as] one of many tools… to wage “information warfare.’ He said,

“We do have evidence that, as early as 2008, that CIA and FBI computers were used to edit Wikipedia…. Do you think that they stopped doing that back then?”[20]

Unlike the scientific studies RFK Jr’s Wikipedia page in its strange amnesia has failed to mention, there is no process of formal expert peer review before an article is published or edits approved on Wikipedia. The “open encyclopedia” is thus a perfect tool in the hands of would-be totalitarians, corporate propagandists and social engineers with their inexhaustible ill-gotten funds.

Indeed, you need not look far, in spite of the sophisticated algorithmic maneuvers made by Google to wipe such artifacts from its search results,[21] to find ample evidence that there is precisely what you might call a “question” about whether vaccines are “associated” with autism. This “question,” this rather undeniable association can — and should — be openly debated, live on national television, on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and the rest of the legacy media outlets. RFK Jr. might just be willing to participate, unlike some of his opponents.[22]

“Vaccine expert” Peter Hotez’s claim that science isn’t up for debate is empty rhetoric. If there is peer-reviewed science that is being covered up by health authorities, a debate is as good a forum as any to expose both sides to the light of day. A debate is also an accessible forum for the public to observe, unlike jargon-laden peer-reviewed journals and elite science and medical conferences which are the only forums, Hotez claims, in which science is honed. As if science is some hermetically sealed snow-globe in which everyone on the inside agrees with everyone else. Frighteningly, this is what “science,” with people like Hotez at its helm, is becoming. When ordinary people’s lives are now more and more subject to top-down requirements “based on the science,” the public has a right to observe and hear it debated in plain language. This is urgently needed. It is truly a question of life and death.

But just how debatable is the assertion that vaccines cause autism?

In fact, though it should be held in public, the debate is over. All the evidence is there; but no one is brave enough to say it, and with reason, as anyone who does is publicly tarred and feathered. The issue is so highly pressurized, anyone with anything to lose is rightly afraid to light the match and say the simple words “Vaccines cause autism,” knowing they’ll watch their reputation and maybe their career burst into flames. Lots of semantic acrobatics are performed that effectively communicate the causal connection without actually stating it in so many words. Really speaking vaccines have been scientifically and legally documented to cause autism. Not just once. Not just twice. Many times.

Here is the evidence. First we will provide some historical context, looking at some of the scandalous revelations made in the last 30 years that reveal a cover-up about the vaccine-autism connection. Then we will report the scientific studies that examine the connection between autism or neurological and developmental injury and vaccines, with a focus on the heavy metals used in vaccine adjuvants. Third, we will cover the history and purpose of the vaccine court, which has paid out billions to injured victims in its thirty-five year lifetime. This court has compensated a number of cases which were described in court proceedings to be autism; disorders classified as autism spectrum disorder; or seizure disorders and neurodevelopmental or encephalopathic injuries which present as similar or identical to autism.

California's Autism Explosion: An Eyewitness Perspective — NCSA

In 1983, the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) recommended a total of 10 vaccines for our children up to the age of 5. In 2007, the CDC recommended 36, an increase of 260%, or 3.6x. You can see the slope change at both those dates in the graph. (Source: Steve Kirsch)

Given that vaccines are mandatory for most children in public schools, it makes sense that they should be scientifically proven to be safe. However, in a careful analysis of thousands of articles in the peer-reviewed literature on toxicology and immunology, nowhere can we find evidence for these claims on vaccine safety are based upon a gold standard of clinical research: long-term, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

What is glaringly absent is research examining the cumulative toxicological impact of the CDC vaccine schedule over a long period of time. Never has a concise epidemiological study been published that compares the long-term health outcomes of a group of infants and children given the recommended CDC immunization schedule and a cohort of unvaccinated children.

Why? Several smaller studies indicate that neurological disorders are associated with vaccination, when vaccinated children are compared with the unvaccinated.[23, 24, 25, 26] Since such gold-standard research has never been carried out, our medical officials are relying on inconclusive research that is not science-based in order to create public health policy. American parents, meanwhile, are conditioned by our medical officials to bring their children in for regular vaccinations, confusing pure propaganda with scientific proof.

All humans possess a unique biochemistry that makes them more or less susceptible to various types of toxins. Whereas one child may be left with a compromised immune system after exposure to an environmental toxin, another child may experience learning problems or mild brain defects. Vaccine safety is not proved by stating the obvious – that not every child who receives the standard CDC vaccine schedule has autism. As we witness a rapidly increasing number of vaccinated children being afflicted by conditions such as autism, food allergies, encephalitis, type 1 diabetes, ADHD and Crohn’s disease, it’s critical that we investigate further the role played by environmental toxins to better understand their pathology.  And when we look into the independent science on the safety of vaccines, it’s readily apparent that many of the ingredients found in vaccines are toxic, even in small amounts, and may contribute to a range of illnesses, including autism.

History and Context: Whistleblowers, Corrupt Health Officials, and Cover-ups

Research indicates that conflicts of interest abound in the vaccine industry, making it difficult to have faith in our health authorities.[27] Worse still, evidence points to pervasive corruption among high profile individuals and institutions in the medical-industrial complex. Here we will look at some of the most alarming examples.

Simpsonwood

In 2003, while researching the controversial link between vaccines and autism – which despite repeated dismissal by all public health authorities continued to persist among parents and in-the-know doctors as autism rates skyrocketed, public health advocate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. stumbled upon a massive coverup that had taken place in June 2000 in Norcross, Georgia. The Simpsonwood conference – officially the Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information – included top scientists and health officials from the FDA, the CDC, the British health ministry, and pharmaceutical industry execs, all gathered to discuss the results of a major study evaluating the negative effects of thimerosal, a commonly-used mercury-based preservative used in vaccines. CDC epidemiologist Dr. Tom Verstraeten presented his findings to the assembled luminaries, concluding, “the screening analysis suggests a possible association between certain neurologic developmental disorders. Namely tics, attention deficit disorder, speech and language disorders and exposure to mercury from Thimerosal containing vaccines before the age of six months.”[28]

The transcript Kennedy unearthed through a Freedom of Information Act request bears witness to the mild panic that set in among the audience after Dr. Verstraeten dropped that bomb – they speak over one another with questions, try to minimize the results, and WHO director John Clements even expresses doubt that the study should have been conducted at all – since “the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted…I know how we handle it from here is extremely problematic.” While the doctors agree the matter merits further investigation, and even admit it raises some perhaps disquieting possibilities,” they agree to “embargo” the information until a meeting scheduled for later that month – and then never released it at all. Verstraeten’s study wasn’t even published until 2003, after the conclusion had been rewritten from

“This analysis suggests that high exposure to ethyl mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines in the first month of life increases the risk of subsequent development of neurologic development impairment, but not of neurologic degenerative or renal impairment. Further confirmatory studies are needed.”[29]

“No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.”[30]

This was Verstraeten’s fourth attempt to conduct the study to produce the desired data after the first three had stubbornly showed the correlation he was trying to disprove. After firing off a despairing email to a colleague (“I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was harmful, but at least I feel we should use sound scientific argumentation and not let our standards be dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory”), Verstraeten was able to tweak the results by adding patient data from an HMO with younger patients, different diagnosis codes, and dubious record-keeping thanks to a recent state takeover. It was enough to obfuscate the damning results of the first three “phases” and render the original study meaningless (and therefore publication-worthy). Problem solved! If only it weren’t for that meddling Kennedy…[31]

It’s worth noting that Dr. Johnson expresses reservations at having his newborn grandson vaccinated with a thimerosal-containing vaccine, but has no such concern for the rest of the country, whose children were injected with toxic mercury for a full two years after he learned of the connection between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders. Worse, while the drug companies that manufactured the thimerosal-containing vaccines offered to remove the offending substance in September 1999, the CDC declined their offer,[32] instead waiting until all thimerosal-containing vaccine lots expired in 2002 to officially end its use – lest they lose a few dollars by having to throw away already-purchased doses.[33]

Gerberding: The Vaccine Insider

Image: Julie Gerberding (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

undefined

There is a revolving door between the vaccine manufacturers and those in government who are responsible for overseeing these manufacturers. A prime example is former CDC director Dr. Julie Gerberding, who left the agency in 2010 to take a position with pharmaceutical giant Merck as the President of the company’s vaccine division. Gerberding stated in an interview that she is “very bullish on vaccines.”[34] Her admission is especially disconcerting given her long history of siding with vaccine makers. While in her position at the CDC, the organization was found to be massively exaggerating the threat of the H1N1 swine flu, and pushing largely unproven vaccines on the American public with dangerous side effects.[35]

Despite her clear alliance with Big Pharma, Dr. Julie Gerberding strongly implied a vaccine-autism link during a 2008 interview with CNN’s Sanjay Gupta while serving as the CDC’s director. Gerberding stated:

“Well, you know, I don’t have all the facts because I still haven’t been able to review the case files myself. But my understanding is that the child has a — what we think is a rare mitochondrial disorder. And children that have this disease, anything that stresses them creates a situation where their cells just can’t make enough energy to keep their brains functioning normally. Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you’re predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism.”[36]

Thorsen: A Case of Corruption

A prime example of the corruption within the CDC around vaccine safety is the case of Dr. Poul Thorsen, a Danish researcher who coauthored 36 CDC studies, two of which are widely cited studies claiming to disprove an autism-vaccine link. From 2004 to 2010 Thorsen allegedly laundered more than $1 million in grant money allocated for research and used the funds to make personal purchases, including a home in Atlanta.[37] Thorsen is currently in Denmark awaiting extradition to the United States.

In a recent editorial, Robert F. Kennedy called into question the slow nature of US authorities in apprehending Thorsen stating that:

“The fact that he is roaming free and is easy to find, despite the US Federal indictment, does not imply Thorsen’s innocence… Rather it suggests a lack of enthusiasm by HHS and CDC to press for his capture and extradition. The agency undoubtedly fears that a public trial would expose the pervasive corruption throughout CDC’s vaccine division and the fragility of the science supporting CDC’s claims about Thimerosal safety.”[38]

The two autism-vaccine studies undertaken by Thorsen and his team have been decried by critics as scientific fraud. According to leaked CDC documents, the data from one of the studies, which monitored rates of autism in Denmark after a country-wide phase out of Thimerosal, were heavily manipulated to make it appear that autism rates increased after its removal from vaccines, when in fact rates decreased. The research’s methodology was so unscientific that journals such as The Lancet and The Journal of the American Medical Association rejected publishing the study, and it wasn’t until a CDC director wrote a strongly-worded letter to staff at the journal Pediatrics, that the research was actually published.[39]

The other autism-vaccine study coauthored by Thorsen, which seemingly debunked an autism link to the MMR vaccine was published in 2002. In his aforementioned editorial, Robert Kennedy Jr. wrote about the study’s questionable methodology:

“That study employed CDC’s trademark ruse of including many children who were too young to receive the autism diagnosis, which at that point usually occurred at age four. CDC epidemiologists have consistently used this ploy in their phony autism studies to dampen the autism signal and exonerate the vaccine.The 2002 Madsen et al. MMR study also included a substantial number of unvaccinated children and employed a suite of other statistical gimmicks to mask the association with the MMR vaccine.”[40]

The Thompson Revelation

Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe (2016) - IMDb

Thanks to the widely-seen film Vaxxed, the most well-known (and perhaps controversial) whistleblower remains Dr. William Thompson.

In 2014, a senior scientist at the CDC, Dr. William Thompson, went public with claims that he and his colleagues willfully omitted data from a study that supported a link between vaccines and autism. After discovering a connection between the MMR vaccine and an increased risk of autism among African American males under 36 months of age, Thompson claims that he and his fellow authors chose to exclude these data and effectively perpetrated scientific fraud by publishing research which contradicted their actual research conclusions.[41] Commenting on how he and his colleagues misrepresented their findings, Thompson stated that:

…we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.[42]

Thompson leaked thousands of pages of internal documents to Rep. Bill Posey suggesting that the agency lied about links between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders and links between the MMR vaccine and autism – particularly in black males. The latter link – discovered in November 2001 – was memory-holed, according to a conversation between Thompson and researcher Brian Hooker, with evidential data destroyed the following year, facts Thompson confirmed via affidavit to Posey.

In 2015, Representative Bill Posey entered a statement by Thompson about the cover-up into the Congressional record.[43]

In an interview last year, Congressman Posey commented on the “intentionally evasive” behavior of CDC spokesperson on vaccines and autism, Dr. Colleen Boyle while he questioned saying:

I asked her a very direct question. ‘Have you done a study comparing autism rates in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children?…’  She started telling us about everything she’s done …After she wasted three minutes, I cut her off and I demanded that she answer the question. And then, only then, did she admit that the federal government has never done that very simple, fundamental, basic study.[44]

In light of the growing evidence of corruption and fraud within the CDC, Representative Bill Posey has called for an investigation of the CDC on the issue of vaccine science.[45]

When Thompson tried to alert then-CDC director Dr. Julie Geberding of the unpublished findings in 2004, he was replaced with Dr. Frank DeStefano and threatened with termination for “insubordination.” When he tried to leave before they could fire him, they instead paid him a “retention bonus,” which he saw as an attempt to purchase his silence. Two papers Thompson subsequently published connecting thimerosal in vaccines to “tics” in boys were eviscerated before publication, with a 2012 study withheld from publication until he removed the tic data – even though that was the study’s only conclusive result.[46] His conversation with Hooker has been attacked by pharmaceutical advocates who claim he didn’t actually expose any wrongdoing but fail to explain why he would have felt it necessary to leak thousands of pages of documents to a sympathetic congressman if he was just discussing business as usual at the CDC.

DeStefano himself acknowledged the possibility that vaccines might play a role in triggering some children’s autism in 2014, choosing his words very carefully in an interview with Sharyl Attkisson. “It’s hard to predict who those children might be, but certainly, individual cases can be studied…” he said, the absence of a blanket denial speaking volumes.[47] To conduct such a study would be professional suicide, of course, which is probably why none have been attempted,

Sharyl Attkisson Digs for the Truth

In the ongoing debate over the link between vaccines and autism, pediatric neurologist Andrew Zimmerman is a pro-vaccine figure who publicly defected, allowing the release of 12-year-old court proceedings in which he testified that vaccines can, in fact, cause autism. In the sworn affidavit, Zimmerman told Department of Justice lawyers with whom he was working to defend vaccines against thousands of claims that he’d “discovered exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.”

Citing his own experiences with vaccine-damaged and autistic patients, as well as “scientific advances,” Zimmerman told the court that “in a subset of children, vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation did cause regressive brain disease with features of autism spectrum disorder.”

His timing couldn’t have been more disastrous for the vaccine-industrial complex. Not only did it throw a monkeywrench into the case in which he was serving as an expert witness – cases, to be more accurate, as a cluster of 5,000 vaccine-autism cases were being heard in the Autism Omnibus proceedings of the vaccine court, discussed in detail later in this article, on June 15, 2007 – but as the CDC’s expert witness, his word carried serious gravity and would have opened a Pandora’s box of legal action.

It’s not surprising, then, that Zimmerman’s testimony was covered up for almost 12 years, finally released in 2019. He was promptly fired, and DoJ attorneys spoke for him in court, describing his position in terms he calls “highly misleading” by claiming there was zero evidence of a link between vaccines and autism.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. certainly thought it was more than misleading, calling the substitution “one of the most consequential frauds, arguably in human history” and filing a fraud complaint with the DoJ’s Inspector General against the attorneys who covered up his explosive admission.[48] But the DoJ attorney who lied to the court is no longer with the department, and to look at the CDC’s website, Zimmerman may as well not have existed – nor anyone like him, or like the children he has studied. His testimony and work have been memory holed, and the CDC categorically denies any and all allegations that vaccines could influence or contribute to – let alone trigger or cause – the development of autism.

Had investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson not surfaced his testimony in her powerful report on the “vaccine debate” published in The HIll in 2019, weaving another scrap of evidence into what has become a very convincing tapestry, perhaps no one would have heard of it at all. Attkisson has doggedly pursued the vaccine-autism story for over a decade, speaking to whistleblowers, activists, parents, and others affected by the autism epidemic and refusing to shy away from the topic despite personal repercussions that would dissuade many lesser reporters. Hacked by the government, smeared on Wikipedia, and demonized in anti-“antivaxxer” blogs, she persists in illuminating the dark corners of power.

It is almost a truism at this point to say that the pharmaceutical lobby has Congress and the CDC in its pockets, but congressional lawmakers and their staffers interviewed on the program agree. Rep. Dan Burton, who attempted to investigate vaccines in the early 2000s, and his staffers told Attkisson about the coordinated bullying and intimidation they faced by pharmaceutical lobbyists who “put money everywhere” to ensure no obstacles stood in their profit path, while former Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon confirms that “if you as an individual member [of Congress] want to take on the pharmaceutical industry, it’s ‘forget it.’” The institutional stonewalling has not shaken his faith in the need for an investigation into vaccine safety, and he is certain that “some children can get an autism spectrum disorder from a vaccine.”

Perhaps weighed down by troubled consciences, or merely encouraged by the rising tide of similar revelations, many formerly pro-vaccine insiders have gone on the record to admit that decades of parental suspicions have been justified. Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former director of the National Institutes of Health who died in 2011, admitted in 2008 that she thought the government was “too quick” to dismiss the concerns of the families of vaccine-injured children “without sufficient studies of causation.” Healy told Attkisson about a 2004 Institute of Medicine report that “basically said, ‘Do not pursue susceptibility groups, don’t look for those patients whose children who may be vulnerable.” Confirming the suspicions of every vaccine choice advocate, Healy admitted “the reason why they didn’t want to look for those susceptibility groups is because they are afraid is that if they found them, however big or small they were, that that would scare the public away.” As for the link between vaccines and autism, she said, “the question has not been answered.”[49]

Vaccine Court

A discussion of the special, separate, jury-free, no fault “vaccine court” will be discussed more in depth later in this article. But it is important to mention, in looking at the history of corruption and cover-up, that the records of the vaccine court itself has paid over $4.4 billion[50] since its launch in 1988 to indemnify vaccine producers against the inevitable lawsuits from parents whose kids went to the doctor healthy and came home irreversibly damaged.[51] These speak for themselves. Using the less-radioactive term “encephalopathy,” vaccine court records show some children whose autism onset immediately followed vaccination had preexisting conditions that could render them susceptible to negative effects, including mitochondrial disorders and Tuberous Sclerosis, and the connection between vaccines, these conditions, and autism has been officially referred to in multiple cases.

When the government settled the historic case of Hannah Poling in 2010, paying out $1.5 million plus yearly payments that could amount to $20 million over the course of her life after Poling became autistic following a nine-shot vaccination visit, they qualified their seeming admission of guilt by stating that Poling had an underlying mitochondrial disorder that made her vulnerable to vaccine damage and “resulted” in her autism. Hers was the first courtroom admission of any vaccine role in the development of autism, and opened the door to the 4,800 autism cases then awaiting deposition in vaccine court.[52] So – of course – they sealed the case. It leaked out anyway, complete with diagnosis of vaccine-related “autistic encephalopathy,” and complete with Zimmerman’s opinion: he had “personally witnessed [Poling’s] developmental regression” after “vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation.” They may not have “caused” her autism – he wouldn’t go that far – but they certainly “triggered” it.[53]

It wasn’t the first financial award to the family of an autistic child that admitted some culpability – that was paid out in the first year of the vaccine court’s existence. In 1986, the court ruled a child’s seizures – a result of Tuberous Sclerosis – were triggered by the DPT vaccine, resulting in his mental retardation and autism. They did not admit the vaccine was entirely to blame, but acknowledged that it was a triggering factor in worsening his prognosis, since the age of seizure onset is directly related to quality of life for individuals with TS.[54] These cases have quietly piled up among the millions, many likely saddled with gag orders that prevent parents from speaking up about their experience.

Even Pharma Admits

Image: The hexavalent vaccine Infanrix hexa, which protects against hepatitis B in addition to diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

undefined

One damning case of government-industry knowledge about a vaccine-autism connection is a leaked December 16, 2011 document from GlaxoSmithKline, one of the world’s largest vaccine manufacturers. The text admits the corporation has been aware of the autism risk associated with its Infanrix vaccine, which combines diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, hepatitis B, inactivated polio and haemophilus influenza viruses. The report details adverse effects associated with autism, including encephalitis, developmental delays, altered states of consciousness, speech delays and other adverse reactions.[55]

While these revelations might be considered criminal cover-ups that directly threaten public health, they have had little effect on changing national policy over vaccine safety. Rather, the official denial of any possible association between vaccines and autism has hardened into an absolute dogma. And to date, there is not a single gold standard publication to refute with any certainty a vaccine-autism connection. Indeed, research from around the world proving a relationship increases, but almost none of it is coming from within American medical institutions.

Unlike the US, the UK and Australia, the majority of the governmental health ministries in the modern industrialized world do not take an official national stance on the vaccine-autism controversy and other serious vaccine-related injuries. Only nineteen countries, including the US, have no-fault policies regarding the pharmaceutical industry for vaccine injury compensation programs. This is partially due to the American and British health agencies being heavily compromised by private vaccine business interests. The revolving doors and conflict of interests between these federal agencies and the pharmaceutical industry have been well documented. In the US, members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory community are deep in the pockets of pharmaceutical firms.

The vaccine market is one of the most toxic cash cow scams in operation. In 2016, Market Watch reported that the technological advisory firm Technavio released its Global Human Vaccines Market 2016-2020 analysis estimating that the vaccine market would reach $61 billion by 2020. At the start of 2016, it was worth $24 billion. The enormous projection increase is due to global initiatives to push vaccination compliance upon other nations and over 270 new vaccines, for both old and new indications, in development. The report also predicted that American pharmaceutical companies, notably Merck, Pfizer and Abbott, have the most to gain. The industry also benefits from the $10 billion pledged by Bill and Melinda Gates to increase vaccination rates and compliance worldwide.[56]

Unlike the US and UK, in most nations independent and scientific integrity rules, and compensation for vaccine adverse events is the norm. In 2014, French authorities ruled there was a direct relationship between the Hepatitis B vaccine and a sudden rise in multiple sclerosis.[57] In 2012, after a long investigative trial, an Italian court ruled that the MMR vaccine caused brain injury leading to autism in the case of Valentino Bocca.[58] This ruling was intentionally blacked out by the American media.

Japan discontinued the MMR vaccine in 1993, four years after imposing it on its citizens on a mandatory basis. The rate of adverse events – including meningitis, limb loss, and death – was 2,000 times higher than expected, and the shot was pulled after doctors confirmed it had entered at least one child’s nervous system and probably at least three. Japan, not coincidentally, has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world.[59]

Meanwhile, in the US, California has now mandated child vaccination, and several other states have proposed similar compulsory-vaccination laws while their constituents are bombarded with news stories playing up every measles case as the new bubonic plague. The Idaho Department of Health public information officer Tom Shanahan expressed his regret that his state was unlikely to pass such a measure, complaining to Reuters that in Idaho, “there’s a pretty strong culture of individual rights.”[60]

Research

If good quality science exists that could discredit the pro-vaccine argument that there is no connection to autism, it is completely understandable that the media and the government and industry and scientists for hire continue their unrelenting attack on independent scientists, physicians, and most importantly, upon the victims themselves. To acknowledge that the entire vaccine program is unsupported by gold standard science would mean massive lawsuits, congressional investigations and discrediting the CDC, the FDA, US public health services and pharmaceutical companies. In effect, this could be the largest public health scandal in American history, and the public would be very unforgiving. Let’s now take a look at more damning evidence linking vaccines with autism and neurodevelopmental disease and the systemic suppression of this evidence.

The vaccine-autism debate has been limited mainly to two issues: the MMR vaccine, following the controversies over Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s findings in the 1990s, and the toxicology of thimerosal. Studies have pointed to the role of other vaccines than MMR in autism as well. Doctors at Stony Brook University’s Medical Center determined that male infants vaccinated with the Hepatitis B vaccine prior to 1999 have a three-fold higher autism rate than their non-vaccinated peers. The risk was greater among non-white boys.[61]

Concerns over thimersosal are waning because it has been removed from all vaccines except for the influenza shot, and even the flu vaccine cannot account for the rising autism rate. Since 2001, autism has steadily continued to rise. In 2000, it was 1 in 250 children. As of March 2023, the CDC’s reported rate has dropped to a shocking 1 in 36; just a few years prior, in 2018, the rate was 1 in 44.[62] This rate has been found to be even higher by the authors of a JAMA Pediatrics Research Letter published in 2020: they found autism was occurring in 3.49 percent of children and adolescents age 3 to 17. That’s 1 in 30.[63] The CDC argues that this proves thimerosal is not the culprit. It ignores a 2012 Australian study published in the journal Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry that there is a direct maternal transfer of ethylmercury from pregnant mothers to the embryo/fetus.[64] It remains American federal health policy for pregnant women to receive the flu shot, which may contain 25 micrograms of mercury.

*

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.

Helen Buyniski is a journalist and photographer based in New York City. Her work has appeared on RT, Global Research, Ghion Journal, Progressive Radio Network, and Veterans Today. Helen has a BA in Journalism from New School University and also studied at Columbia University and New York University. Find more of her work at http://helenofdestroy.com and http://medium.com/@helen.buyniski or follow her on Twitter at @velocirapture23. 

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Notes

1 View the Evidence: 1348 Abstracts with Vaccination: All Research. Anti-therapeutic Action: Vaccinations: All. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/vaccination-all

2 View the Evidence: 325 Abstracts with Vaccine Adjuvants Research. Toxic Ingredient: Vaccine Adjuvants. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/vaccine-adjuvants

3 View the Evidence: 226 Abstracts with Cell Phone Exposure Research: Toxic Ingredient: Cell phone exposure. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/cell-phone-exposure

4 View the Evidence: 986 Abstracts with Electromagnetic Radiation Research: Anti-therapeutic Action: Electromagnetic Radiation. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/electromagnetic-radiation

5 View the Evidence: 1005 Abstracts with Electromagnetic Field Harms Research: Anti-therapeutic Action: Electromagnetic Field Harms. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/electromagnetic-field-harms

6 View the Evidence: 423 Abstracts with Mobile Phone Radiation Research: Anti-therapeutic Action: Mobile Phone Radiation. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/mobile-phone-radiation

7 View the Evidence: 229 Abstracts with Microwave Radiation Research. Anti-therapeutic Action: Microwave Radiation. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/microwave-radiation

8 View the Evidence: 321 Abstracts with Aluminum Research: Toxic Ingredient: Aluminum. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/aluminum

9 View the Evidence: 175 Abstracts with Fluoride Research: Toxic Ingredient: Fluoride. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/fluoride

10 View the Evidence: 273 Abstracts with Paracetamol Research: Toxic Ingredient: Paracetamol. GreenMedInfo. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/paracetamol (see also: https://greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/tylenol)

11 Sage C, Burgio E. Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Child Dev. 2018 Jan;89(1):129-136. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12824. Epub 2017 May 15. PMID: 28504324.

12 Carter CJ, Blizard RA. Autism genes are selectively targeted by environmental pollutants including pesticides, heavy metals, bisphenol A, phthalates and many others in food, cosmetics or household products. Neurochem Int. 2016 Oct 27:S0197-0186(16)30197-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neuint.2016.10.011. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 27984170.

13 Braun MM, Ellenberg SS. Descriptive epidemiology of adverse events after immunization: reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 1991-1994. J Pediatr. 1997 Oct;131(4):529-35. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(97)70056-8. PMID: 9386653.

14 Andrade C. Use of acetaminophen (paracetamol) during pregnancy and the risk of autism spectrum disorder in the offspring. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016 Feb;77(2):e152-4. doi: 10.4088/JCP.16f10637. PMID: 26930528.

15 Blaylock RL, Strunecka A. Immune-glutamatergic dysfunction as a central mechanism of the autism spectrum disorders. Curr Med Chem. 2009;16(2):157-70. doi: 10.2174/092986709787002745. PMID: 19149568.

16 Good P. Evidence the U.S. autism epidemic initiated by acetaminophen (Tylenol) is aggravated by oral antibiotic amoxicillin/clavulanate (Augmentin) and now exponentially by herbicide glyphosate (Roundup). Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2018 Feb;23:171-183. doi: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2017.10.005. Epub 2017 Dec 1. PMID: 29460795.

17 Good P. Did acetaminophen provoke the autism epidemic? Altern Med Rev. 2009 Dec;14(4):364-72. PMID: 20030462.

18 Dorothy Neufeld. The 50 Most Visited Websites in the World. January 27, 2021. Visual Capital. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-50-most-visited-websites-in-the-world/

19 How to edit a page. Wikimedia. Page last edited April 19, 2023. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_edit_a_page

20 CIA moderating Wikipedia – former editor. 2 Aug, 2023. https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/14020512000277/Frmer-Edir-CIA-Mderaing-Wikipedia

21 Kirsten Grind, Sam Schechner, Robert McMillan and John West. How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753

22 Dr. Peter Hotez on the anti-science movement and declining Joe Rogan’s debate challenge. JUL 13, 2023. American Medical Association Accessed August 17, 2023. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/dr-peter-hotez-anti-science-movement-and-declining-joe-rogan-s-debate

23 Mawson, Anthony & Bhuiyan, Azad & Jacob, Binu & Ray, Brian. (2017). Preterm birth, vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders: a cross-sectional study of 6-to 12-year-old vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Journal of Translational Science. 3. 1-8. 10.15761/JTS.1000187. https://www.oatext.com/Preterm-birth-vaccination-and-neurodevelopmental-disorders-a-cross-sectional-study-of-6-to-12-year-old-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-children.php#Article

24 Mawson, Anthony & Ray, Brian & Bhuiyan, Azad & Jacob, Binu. (2017). Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6-to 12-year-old U.S. children. Journal of Translational Science. 3. 1-12. 10.15761/JTS.1000186. https://howdovaccinescauseautism.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Mawson-2017.pdf

25 Gallagher, Carolyn & Goodman, Melody. (2008). Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1–9 years. Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry. 90. 997-1008. 10.1080/02772240701806501. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02772240701806501#.Ue8MEY1wqSo

26 Unvaccinated. How Do Vaccines Cause Autism? Accessed August 16, 2023. https://howdovaccinescauseautism.org/category/unvaccinated/

27 Delong, G. “Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Safety Research.” Accountability in Research 19, no. 2 (2012): 65-88. Accessed November 14, 2015. doi:10.1080/08989621.2012.660073.

28 Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information (transcript). 7-8 Jun 2000. http://thinktwice.com/simpsonwood.pdf Retrieved 18 Jan 2019

29 Verstraeten, TM et.al. “Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine in first month of life.” (original abstract submission). 1999. http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmission_IncreasedRiskOfDevelopmentalNeurologicImpairmentAfterHighExposureToThimerosal-containingVaccine_.pdf Retrieved 18 Jan 2019.

30 Verstraeten, TM et.al. “Safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a two-phased study of computerized health maintenance organization databases.” Pediatrics. 2003 Nov;112(5):1039-48. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14595043

31 Hooker, Brian et.al. “Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe.” BioMed Research International. 2014; Article ID 247218. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/247218/

32 Chapter II: 1999-2000: Simpsonwood. Put Children First. http://putchildrenfirst.org/chapter2.html Retrieved 18 Jan 2019.

33 Hurley, AM et.al. “Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Autism: A Review of Recent Epidemiologic Studies.” Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2010 Jul-Sep; 15(3):173-181. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018252/

34 Luke Timmerman. Merck’s Julie Gerberding, Former CDC Director, on the Future of Vaccines. Xconomy. June 24, 2011. Accessed archive August 16, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20110627073713/www.xconomy.com/national/2011/06/24/mercks-julie-gerberding-former-cdc-director-on-the-future-of-vaccines/

35 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/11/24/Superstar-CBS-Reporter-Blows-the-Lid-Off-the-Swine-Flu-Media-Hype-and-Hysteria.aspx

36 Sanjay Gupta MD. Rush Transcript: Unraveling the Mystery of Autism; Talking With the CDC Director; Stories of Children with Autism; Aging with Autism. CNN Transcripts. Aired March 29, 2008. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/hcsg/date/2008-03-29/segment/01

37 Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Forbes Magazine & CDC’s Rogue Scientist. August 22, 2015. Archived from robertfkennedyjr.com. Archive accessed August 16, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20151113040130/http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/articles/forbes.082215.html

38 Ibid.

39 Ibid.

40 Ibid.

41 August 27, 2014 Press Release, “Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Regarding the 2004 Article Examining the Possibility of a Relationship Between MMR Vaccine and Autism.” Morgan Verkamp LLC. Archive accessed August 16, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20151025025144/http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

42 Brian Shilhavy. Will CDC Whistleblower on Vaccines Testify Before Congress? August 13, 2015. Health Impact News. Accessed August 16, 2023. http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/will-cdc-whistleblower-on-vaccines-testify-before-congress/

43 Ibid.

44 Congressman Posey Accuses CDC Over Corruption. Posted April 16, 2014. Age of Autism. Accessed August 16, 2023. http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/04/congressman-posey-accuses-cdc-over-corruption-.html

45 Ibid.

46 Hooker, Brian. “Dr. Brian Hooker’s official statement regarding William Thompson.” Focus for Health. 26 Apr 2016. https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-brian-hooker-statement-william-thompson/

47 Attkisson, Sharyl. “CDC: ‘Possibility’ that vaccines rarely trigger autism.” Sharyl Attkisson (blog). 10 Dec 2018. https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/12/10/cdc-possibility-that-vaccines-rarely-trigger-autism/

48 Attkisson, Sharyl. “How a pro-vaccine doctor reopened debate about link to autism.” The Hill. 13 Jan 2019. https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/425061-how-a-pro-vaccine-doctor-reopened-debate-about-link-to-autism

49 “NIH Director Dr Bernadine Healy speaks to Sharyl Attkisson about autism susceptibility.” (video) Children’s Health Defense (YouTube). 27 Apr 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZFPpHBNp2M

50 Petitions Filed, Compensated and Dismissed, by Alleged Vaccine, Since the Beginning of VICP, 10/01/1988 through 08/01/2023. (Vaccine Injury Compensation Data: Most Recent Data Report). Updated 08/01/2023. Health Resources and Services Administration. Accessed August 8, 2023. https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vicp/vicp-stats-08-01-23.pdf

51 Wolfe, Eli. “Federal Vaccine Court Quietly Pays Billions.” Fair Warning. 12 Dec 2018. https://www.fairwarning.org/2018/12/vaccine-court-pays-billions/

52 Attkisson, Sharyl. “Family to Receive $1.5M+ in First-Ever Vaccine-Autism Court Award.” CBS News. 10 Dec 2010. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/

53 Zimmerman, Andrew. “RE: Hannah Poling (DOB: 12/27/98); Report of the Office of Special Masters, United States Court of Federal Claims, November 9, 2007.” (letter). 30 Nov 2007. https://www.rescuepost.com/files/rh-4.pdf Retrieved 19 Jan 2019.

54 Attkisson, Sharyl. “Learning from a Previous Vaccine-Autism Case?” CBS News. 8 Aug 2008. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/learning-from-a-previous-vaccine-autism-case/

55 Biological Clinical Safety and Pharmacovigilance: GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development Combined Diptheria, Tetanus and Acellular Pertussis, Hepatitis B enhanced Inactivated Poliomyelitis and Haemophilus Influenzae type B vaccine: Infanrix hexa Summary Bridging Report. 16 December 2011. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-jYsdHZuRhCVXZUbFFlUzdfNGM/edit?pli=1

56 Big Pharma and Big Profits: The Multibillion Dollar Vaccine Market By Timothy Alexander Guzman Silent Crow News 26 January 2016 https://www.globalresearch.ca/big-pharma-and-big-profits-the-multibillion-dollar-vaccine-market/5503945

57 https://healthimpactnews.com/2014/new-study-hepatitis-b-vaccination-in-france-sparked-a-wave-of-new-cases-of-ms/

58 https://www.undergroundhealth.com/courts-quietly-confirm-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism/

59 Hope, Jenny. “Why Japan banned the MMR vaccine.” Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-17509/Why-Japan-banned-MMR-vaccine.html Retrieved 18 Jan 2019.

60 Abutaleb, Yasmeen. “Tougher laws a likely legacy of the Disneyland measles outbreak.” Reuters. 3 Mar 2015. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-measles-vaccines-insight/tougher-laws-a-likely-legacy-of-the-disneyland-measles-outbreak-idUSKBN0LZ15Q20150303

61 J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2010;73(24):1665-77. doi: 10.1080/15287394.2010.519317.

62 Autism Prevalence Higher, According to Data from 11 ADDM Communities. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Last Reviewed: March 22, 2023. Accessed May 22, 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2023/p0323-autism.html

63 Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.1 in 30 U.S. Kids Diagnosed With Autism in 2020 — What’s Behind the Surge? The Defender. July 14, 2022. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/kids-diagnosed-autism-spectrum-disorder-jama-pediatrics/

64 Gallagher CM, Goodman MS. Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002. Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry. Volume 94, Issue 8, 2012

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.

***

President Cyril Ramaphosa of the Republic of South Africa served as the host of the recently held 15th BRICS Summit which turned out to be one of the most significant gatherings in the nearly decade-and-one-half existence of the alliance.

This expansion of the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) grouping encompasses even more of the already 44% of the world’s population with a majority located in the Global South.

At the meeting in Johannesburg from August 23-24, Argentina, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, and the Arab Republic of Egypt were approved for membership in the expanding body. Various reports indicate that the combined population of the BRICS countries including the six new members is conservatively estimated at 47% of the global population and anywhere between 29-36% of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Some sources believe that the combined membership’s population already exceeds half of the people living today.

While six new governments were admitted in Johannesburg, there are many other states clamoring to join the economic bloc. The 55 African Union (AU) member-states were invited to the 15th BRICS Summit. There are methods for non-members to apply as countries like Zimbabwe, which has praised the growth of BRICS as representing the prospects for building a world system independent of the hegemony of the United States, the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom.

Republic of Zimbabwe Vice-President Constantino Chiwenga during the BRICS Africa Outreach sessions was quoted as saying:

“As a country, Zimbabwe perceives how BRICS represents a formidable alliance that fosters a multipolar and inclusive world order. Joining this alliance will provide Zimbabwe with a unique opportunity to collaborate with like-minded nations and harness the benefits of collective strength. As a country, Zimbabwe applauds the establishment of the New Development Bank (NDB) and the proposal to use local currencies between member states in the BRICS and other countries in the south. Like other countries in the south, Zimbabwe hopes to benefit from the New Development Bank as an alternative source of funding for developmental projects.” 

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed attended the summit in South Africa after formally applying for BRICS membership. During the summit he held meetings with other leaders including President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China and Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India.

Ethiopia maintains good relations with leading members of BRICS including China and South Africa. The government views its admission into the economic bloc as providing tremendous impetus to its development agenda.

An editorial in the Herald newspaper noted:

“At its core, BRICS is driven by a bold vision – to establish its own world economic and trade systems that challenge the existing Western-dominated order. The group seeks to reshape the political and economic landscape in a way that benefits its member nations, promoting a more equitable and multipolar world. This ambitious agenda reflects the growing frustration among emerging economies with outdated structures of global governance that no longer reflect the economic realities of the 21st century.” 

Plans to Strengthen Healthcare Networks

One of the important discussions taking place during and after the summit was the increasing collaboration between the AU, its affiliate, the African Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and BRICS in improving healthcare infrastructure and information sharing throughout the Global South. During the height of the coronavirus pandemic the access to vaccines and other medicines were facilitated heavily utilizing networks established among the BRICS states.

When the pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) along with governments internationally, there was much criticism around the concept of “vaccine nationalism” emanating from the developing geopolitical regions. The wealthiest western capitalist governments rushed to vaccinate their own citizens with almost no concern for the overwhelming majority of people across the planet.

Out of this experience over the last three years, production facilities in the Republic of South Africa have been established to play a significant role in the face of another pandemic. Early warning systems already in existence in the aftermath of other major pandemics in Africa and Asia can be activated when necessary.

The South African government which hosted the 15th BRICS Summit said of the discussions around healthcare issues:

“The attendees highlighted the reality of the shifting centers of global power, pointing out that the expanded BRICS family now represents 4.8 billion people, which is over half of the global population. ‘Increasing human and animal interconnectedness, climate change and an increasing frequency of infectious disease outbreaks mean that the AU and BRICS’ ability to contain infectious diseases has a fundamental bearing on global health security. The realization of this growing responsibility compelled AU and BRICS stakeholders to convene and begin a process towards a declared collaborative framework.’ Participants were further encouraged by the collective capabilities identified in medical and digital technologies, human resource potential, and pharmaceutical manufacturing. They also observed that the Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturing Network (DCVMN), which is composed of manufacturers from BRICS member states, contributed to 60% of the COVID-19 vaccine products. The meeting considered the merits of opening up the entire expanded BRICS and AU market to all pharmaceutical manufacturers in the BRICS and AU regions.” 

De-Dollarization and the New Cold War

Perhaps one of the most contemplated questions being debated by BRICS and other economic blocs based in the West, are the proposals aimed at lessening dependence on the U.S. dollar. The beginning of the Russian Special Military Operation in Ukraine has brought to the fore the problems caused by the domination of the dollar as it relates to the imposition of sanctions by Washington against Moscow.

The sanctions have worsened food insecurity amid the challenges associated with the post-pandemic economic recovery in Africa, Asia and other geopolitical regions. A Black Sea grain deal arrived at through diplomatic mediation involving the AU and Turkey, has been shattered due to the refusal of the NATO states, which are behind the Ukraine administration and military, to honor their portion of the agreement.

Russia is a co-founder of BRICS and is respected by the other member-states. President Vladimir Putin attended the summit virtually due to threats to apprehend him at the aegis of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and other officials. Such attacks on the gatherings of governments which represent some of the largest countries within the Global South makes the imperative of independent development even more urgent.

In the same editorial quoted above from the Ethiopian Herald, it emphasizes:

“One of the key objectives discussed at this year’s summit is to reduce global reliance on the U.S. dollar. The dominance of the U.S. currency has far-reaching consequences, often at the expense of other nations. The strength of the U.S. economy directly impacts the value of the dollar, causing fluctuations that ripple through international markets. This volatility undermines the stability of other currencies and hampers the economic prospects of emerging nations. Recognizing this vulnerability, BRICS aims to promote the use of national currencies in international trade as a means to rectify the situation. Russia and China, in particular, have been vocal proponents of de-dollarization, aiming to weaken America’s stranglehold on the global financial system. These nations have legitimate concerns about the potential abuse of economic power by the United States, especially through unilateral sanctions that can wreak havoc on the economies of targeted countries. By diversifying away from the U.S. dollar, BRICS hopes to insulate its member nations from such vulnerabilities and foster a more balanced and resilient global financial architecture.”

These objectives by the BRICS countries further affirms the complete incapacity of the U.S., European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom to engage in effective diplomatic initiatives beyond the perpetuation of unjust wars. As the Global South discusses long-term projects which will be financed by the New Development Bank (NDB) to foster the formation of a multipolar world system, the imperialist states are becoming even more isolated in many geopolitical regions.

The threat that imperialism poses is it has embarked upon a course that could lead to another World War. Intensifying antagonism against the Russian Federation, China, Iran, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Cuba, North Korea, South Africa, etc. along with the expanding anti-imperialist governments and movements in the West Africa region, reflects the desperation of the NATO states and its allies. Obviously, the Global South will be forced to defend its program for economic development and the desire to live in a world free of western hegemony.

*

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.

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

All images in this article are 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.

***

In his 1988 book War Stars: The Superweapon in the American Imagination, H. Bruce Franklin traces a deep-rooted cultural belief in the magic of futuristic weapon systems that would enable the U.S. to defeat any foreign adversary. 

Franklin dates the infatuation to the era of the revolutionary war with the development of the combat submarine by Robert H. Fulton to pulverize the British Navy.

He in turn shows a direct line through World War I and World War II and the development of air power and the atomic bomb, through the Vietnam War where sophisticated U.S. war machines could not defeat the guerrilla warfare tactics of the Vietcong.

Franklin could easily include a new chapter on Ukraine, whose summer counteroffensive has fizzled despite the country’s function as a testing ground for new American weapon systems.

These include space-based satellites and sensors that have been used by the Ukrainians to track Russian troop movements and assist in navigation, mapping and electronic warfare, and positioning systems that guide precision weapons and drones.

A webinar in mid-July hosted by the War Industry Resistance Network placed the U.S. strategy in Ukraine in the context of a broader attempt by the U.S. to militarize space and use it to destroy its leading geopolitical rivals—Russia and China.

A close-up of a blue planet Description automatically generated

Source: spacenews.com

The first speaker, Dave Webb, a retired engineering and peace studies professor from England, emphasized that the 1991 Operation Desert Storm set the groundwork for Ukraine as the first space war in which the U.S. showed off new satellite and precision guided missiles that wound up devastating Iraq.

In 1997, the U.S. Space Command outlined its goal of obtaining full-spectrum military dominance over land, sea, air and space by the year 2020—which achieved partial fulfillment with the Trump administration’s creation in 2019 of a new Space Force as a branch of the U.S. military.

By 2024, the budget of the Space Force reached $30.3 billion, a 15% increase over 2023 and a doubling of the budget from 2020.

Workers prepare Space Test Program-3 mission for the U.S. Space Force’s Space Systems Command on November 22, 2021, at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, for mounting process with an Atlas V rocket. The mission sent two satellites into space. [Source: spacenews.com]

Congress has in a not so veiled way tried to legitimate these budget increases by holding hearings raising alarm about the threat of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO’s).

One in late July featured a former intelligence officer, David Grusch, who claimed that he faced retaliation at the Pentagon for his confidential disclosure that “non-human beings” had been retrieved from spacecraft.[1]

On August 11, the 75th Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Squadron (ISRS) was activated at Peterson Space Force Base in Colorado. It has been tasked with identifying and destroying or disrupting adversary satellites and ground-based lasers aimed at preventing the U.S. from using its own satellites during a conflict.

Space.com reported that the U.S. Space Force has conducted multiple training exercises to practice “live fire” satellite jamming [of Russian and Chinese space based satellites] and “simulated on-orbit combat training” as part of a growing commitment to space-based war.

The Space Force’s operations have been made possible by a $1.5 billion space surveillance radar center built by Lockheed Martin in an atoll in the Marshall Islands, which became operational in March 2020. The center now tracks more than 26,000 objects in space, some the size of a marble.

A building with several towers Description automatically generated

An aerial view of the U.S. Space Force’s Space Fence on Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands. [Source: spacenews.com]

Additional surveillance centers have recently been built in Texas, Australia and Great Britain while Boeing is building a secret military space plane, the X-37B, which can carry out orbital space flight missions.

undefined

Boeing X-37. [Source: wikipedia.org]

Webb ended his talk by noting that the spirit of a 1967 Outer Space Treaty that was designed to prevent the militarization of Outer Space is not being followed.

Space exploration is giving way to space exploitation and growing competition with Russia, which has developed its own space-based weapon systems in response to what the U.S. is doing.

A group of men signing papers at a table Description automatically generated

Signing of the Outer Space Treaty in 1967. [Source: spaceflight.com]

The second speaker at the webinar, Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, pointed out that, for the last quarter century, Russia has presented its demand for a new cooperative space treaty before the United Nations but has been blocked by the U.S., Israel and a few of their allies.

The Russians have stated unequivocally, as have the Chinese, that they do not want to devote their countries’ resources to a destructive and fruitless arms race in space, though the U.S. believes it can be master in space and has been taken over totally by the military-industrial complex.

When the creation of the new Space Force came up for a vote in 2019, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives supported it, though it had wanted to call it Space Corps.

Growing up in a military family, Gagnon said he experienced a political awakening while enlisted in the Air Force in 1971 when he came in contact with peace activists at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, California, where he was stationed.

Gagnon’s concern about the militarization of Outer Space began when he read a book by Linda Hunt called Secret Agenda, which detailed the CIA’s recruitment of Nazi scientists under Operation Paperclip who helped found the U.S. space program.

Chief among them was Wernher von Braun, who had helped develop the V-2 rocket in Germany using slave labor.

Gagnon said he finds it chilling that the U.S. Space Force carries out yearly war-game exercises where they simulate fighting using space-based weapons right out of science fiction novels. Among these is the “Rod from God,” a weapon in which tungsten steel rods are fired from orbiting satellites, smacking the Earth from the sky as if sent by God.

Right now, Gagnon says, we are living through a Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse as the U.S. has pointed nuclear weapons directly at Russia from a U.S. military base in Deveselu, Romania, and another in Redzikowo, Poland off the Baltic Sea.

The U.S. goal is to break up Russia as it did Yugoslavia in the 1990s because Russia is the world’s largest resource base and threatens the ability of the U.S. to extract resources from the Arctic unencumbered.

Along with World War III, the current U.S. space strategy is threatening to unleash a major environmental catastrophe as space-based satellites and weapons are leaving debris that cannot be cleaned up.

According to Gagnon, exhaust from escalating numbers of rocket launches is diminishing the ozone layer, and the growing space debris could even cause the Earth to go dark as collisions become more likely.

Back in 1989, Gagnon organized a protest at the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral that was attended by Navy Captain Edgar Mitchell, the only astronaut known to have ever attended a peace rally.[2]

Mitchell told the crowd at the protest that, “if there was ever a war in space, it would be the last war humans ever fought because it would create so much debris orbiting around the planet, there would be no way to clean it up.”

Mitchell’s warning makes clear the importance of supporting the efforts of peace groups to try to prevent the militarization of space and to fight the military-industrial complex, which is a cancer not only to our own planet but to the entire universe.

*

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].

Notes

  1. The disclosure it should be noted was based on second-hand information. 

  2. Born in Hereford, Texas, in 1930, Mitchell obtained a Doctor of Science degree (equivalent to a Ph.D.). from MIT and was the Lunar Module Pilot for the 1971 Apollo 14 mission who was the sixth man to walk on the moon. During his travels to space, Mitchell said that he had an epiphany that led him to work for the rest of his life to “broaden the knowledge of the nature and potentials of mind and consciousness and to apply that knowledge to the enhancement of human well-being and the quality of life on the planet.” 

Featured image is from bbc.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.

***

America’s top general said that Washington plans to maintain its force posture in the Middle East. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley stressed the region’s “significant” importance to America’s foreign policy. 

In an interview with Jordan’s Al-Mamlaka TV on Thursday, Milley said,

“I can’t imagine that the United States would ever walk away from the Middle East. I think we’ll remain committed for many, many years and decades to come.” 

“We have very close friendships and partnerships. And we want to make sure that the region is stable. Obviously, the region is a primary source of oil and energy resources for other parts of the world.” Milley added that the region is “very important and very significant to the United States for a lot of reasons.”

For decades, Washington has used its military in an attempt to control the Middle East. The US has spent trillions of dollars and killed millions of people in dozens of military campaigns conducted over the last 30 years. 

The wars have failed to accomplish America’s stated goals: to bring peace, stability and democracy to the Middle East. Instead, Washington’s wars and financing of various militaries have stoked sectarian tensions. Additionally, the US has armed a multitude of tyrannical governments, enabling them to brutally oppress their citizens.

Washington currently has thousands of soldiers in various countries across the region, including hundreds of troops in Syria. Milley said,

“There are still fighters in small groups in and around Syria and around Iraq…and if we were to somehow suddenly withdraw, [Islamic State] could reconstruct themselves. So the situation is much, much better than it was.” He continued, “But it still requires a level of commitment. So we’ve got some modest amount of forces in Syria and we’ve got forces in Iraq.”

However, American troops in Iraq and Syria often find themselves in conflict with forces supporting the Syrian government, not jihadists. Additionally, American warplanes in Syria have regularly had near misses with Russian fighter jets.  

*

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.

Kyle Anzalone is news editor of the Libertarian Institute, opinion editor of Antiwar.com and co-host of Conflicts of Interest with Will Porter and Connor Freeman.

Featured image: FILE PHOTO: US Army soldiers fire an M777 Howitzer during an operational rehearsal exercise at Mission Support Site Conoco, Syria, December 4, 2022. (Credit: US Army / Sgt. Julio Hernandez)

Are They Prepping for Plandemic 2.0?

August 29th, 2023 by OffGuardian

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 buzz around the alt-news sphere the last few days has been that the establishment is planning to bring back pandemic restrictions. And, in fairness, this is some evidence this could be true.

It started with Alex Jones reporting that a whistleblower from the TSA had informed him the US government was going to start bringing back Covid restrictions in starting in October and going into full lockdown again by December.

There’s also the fact we’re suddenly being told about “case spikes” and not one, not two, but THREE new variants – Eris, Pi and Pirola – have hit the headlines.

Meanwhile, some places are bringing back mask mandates already, such as Morris Brown College in Atlanta. It’s not just the US either, last week a hospital in Dublin re-instituted Covid rules.

Just a few days ago Robin Monotti posted this to Twitter:

Apparently, the UK government’s Health Security Agency is looking to hire a “Vaccine Supply Operations Overseer” for the upcoming “largest vaccination programme” which is to be “delivered at pace”.

Neil Ferguson has even emerged from hiding to warn against the Pirola variant.

So, those warning we’re in for another “Plandemic” aren’t panicking over nothing. There’s no smoke without fire, after all, and there’s a lot of smoke here.

…a suspicious amount of smoke, you might say. An “orgy of evidence” is always hard to trust. And given how watchful Covid sceptics are likely to be, for the establishment to advertise their intentions like that would be a potential mistake.

But what other explanation could there be? Realistically, we’re looking at three potential plans here.

It really is just “Plandemic 2.0”. The reason it looks like they’re gearing up to redo covid…is that they’re gearing up to redo Covid. They’re not shy about making their agenda plain a lot of the time, and this is just an egregious example.

It’s a bluff to discredit alt media. A standard ploy, the establishment deliberately feeds the anxieties of independent media outlets who reflexively report the sky is falling…and then they don’t follow through, making the indy media look like the boy who cried wolf.

It’s about vaccines. As covered in our most recent Eris piece, the latest Covid “vaccines” are set to be released next month, amid uptake rates that have plummeted since 2021. By “discovering new variants” and dangling restrictions over our collective heads like a Sword of Damocles, they may just be marketing the new vax.

If the uptake is good then the measures go away, and they can say we “defeated the new variant”. If it’s bad…in with the lockdown. Except for the people who are up to date with their vaccines, of course.

Of course, it could be a mixture of all three, or maybe they haven’t decided yet and will play it by ear.

But what do you think? Are we going to have another round of Covid hysteria? Is there a potential explanation we missed?

*

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 OffGuardian


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.

***

Canada has enacted a new law called the Online News Act that forces social media companies to compensate domestic news organizations for content shared on their platforms. To comply with the new law, Meta banned all news — both national and international news stories — from appearing in Facebook and Instagram feeds in Canada as of June 1, 2023

Google is also blocking all Canadian news from its search, news and discover products in Canada as of June 29, 2023

According to a citizen journalist, X (formerly Twitter) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are working together to censor people on the platform. The ADL has also been influencing crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe to deplatform certain users

The ADL is using artificial intelligence software to comb through podcasts and video-game streams for “extremist” keywords. This suggests ADL is surveilling the online activities of private citizens even if those activities have nothing to do with the ADL’s political and social causes

While Elon Musk has called himself a “free speech absolutist” and promised X would be a free speech platform, evidence suggests otherwise. X CEO Linda Yaccarino is the chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Taskforce on Future of Work and sits on the WEF’s Media, Entertainment and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee. She has stated that “lawful but awful” posts will be “deamplified,” and that the company policy is one of “freedom of speech, not reach.” X is also actively recruiting applicants for various censorship positions for the upcoming election in 2024

*

Censorship is ramping up at a rapid clip, and much of it is clearly directed by the U.S. federal government, despite a federal judge’s order prohibiting federal agencies and officials from communicating with social media companies about content moderation.1

In recent days, several news stories have highlighted governments’ and Big Tech’s intent to increase censorship. There’s even a rumor that Google will ban independent media from its search results altogether.2 I’ve not been able to confirm this, but considering everything else going on, would anyone really be surprised if it were true?

Google, Meta Ban News in Canada

For example, Canada has enacted a new law called the Online News Act that forces social media companies to compensate domestic news organizations for content shared on their platforms. While that may not sound like censorship, it has the same effect, as social media companies are now automatically removing all news links.3

To comply with the new law, Meta banned all news — both national and international news stories — from appearing in Facebook and Instagram feeds in Canada as of June 1, 2023.4

Google is also blocking all Canadian news from its search, news and discover products in Canada as of June 29, 2023.5 In other words, if you live in Canada, you cannot get any news whatsoever unless you subscribe or go to the news source in question directly.

X/Twitter Colludes with Anti-Defamation League to Censor

In other news, X (formerly Twitter) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are working together to censor X users, according to citizen journalist Kyle Clifton (his X account is Kyle Undercover).6

In a series of five videos7 (which you can view here), ADL director of development Courtney Kravitz and the ADL community manager for Arizona, Sarah Kader, discuss a variety of tactics the ADL is using to suppress and censor online speech.

In video No. 1, Kravitz explains that outright bans are not ideal, as it forces people to seek out alternative platforms. Hence a “balance” must be struck between preventing them from “run[ning] to this dark place where they are just with like-minded people” and preventing them from “spewing hate and disinformation.”

It appears the ADL prefers tactics like shadow-banning instead, where the reach of an account or post is severely limited. “Everyone should have freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach,” Kravitz tells Kyle. Interestingly enough, Musk himself used that same line in the summer of 2022.8

In video No. 2, Kravitz admits the ADL has urged Elon Musk to not reverse the ban on certain users, and in video No. 3, Kader explains how the ADL is using novel artificial intelligence software to comb through podcasts and video-game streams for “extremist” keywords.

As noted by Life Site News,9 the admission that ADL is scouring the audio streams of online gamers “suggests ADL has … interest in combing through the online activities of private citizens not involved in political and social causes …” Is that really something the ADL should be doing?

In video No. 4, Kravitz admits the ADL has also been influencing crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe to deplatform certain users, telling them that “extremists” are using their payment processing services to “fund their evil stuff.”

And, in video No. 5, Kader explains how the Arizona ADL has set up a Law Enforcement Advisory Council to identify and address online “hate.” The Advisory Council is made up of “local police departments and other law enforcement agencies all around the state.” Some key questions here, of course, are: What is hateful speech, and who decides what words are considered hateful?

In recent years, we’ve seen how this “anti-hate” narrative has been used to justify the removal of people providing truthful information about COVID and the COVID jabs, for example. Somehow, medical information was deemed “hateful.”

X Censorship Squad Are Anything but Free-Speech Minded

While Musk has called himself a “free speech absolutist” and promised X would be a free speech platform, the people he’s hired are not freedom-loving free speech advocates. Quite the contrary.

X CEO Linda Yaccarino is the chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Taskforce on Future of Work. She’s also part of the WEF’s Media, Entertainment and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee.

linda yaccarino

Yaccarino has publicly asserted that she has autonomy from Musk.10 A more important question is, does she have autonomy from the WEF, or is she using X to further the WEF’s agenda?

Either way, Yaccarino has stated that “lawful but awful” posts will be “deamplified,” read, shadow banned and demonetized.11 And, like Musk, she has stressed that the company policy is one of “freedom of speech, not reach” to protect “brand safety” for advertisers. And, indeed, under Yaccarino’s watch, big advertisers are once again returning to the platform.

X Is Gearing Up for Election Censorship

X is also actively recruiting applicants for various censorship positions,12 including an “Elections Team Lead,” which flies in the face of Musk’s statement that “Free speech is essential for a functioning democracy.”13

X censorship recruiter Aaron Rodericks is also working against Musk’s stated vision by promoting Kate Starbird,14 a former Twitter employee and chief architect of the 2020 election censorship campaign in which 100% of the top “repeat misinformation spreaders” were Conservatives.15

election misinformation

As noted in Michael Shellenberger’s testimony before the House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in March 2023:16

“Kate Starbird, who runs the University of Washington disinformation lab, has for years been funded primarily by U.S. government agencies to do social media narrative analytics of political groups, or insurgency movements, of interest or concern to U.S. military intelligence or diplomatic equities.

Starbird acknowledged that the censorship focus of CISA and EIP [Election Integrity Partnership] moved from ‘foreign, inauthentic’ social media users to ‘domestic, authentic’ social media users between 2016 to 2020.”

Starbird is also one of the 23 members of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s (CISA) Cybersecurity Advisory Committee, launched in December 1, 2021.17

European Union Tightens Censorship Nose

In related news, X has also rolled out a new feature that allows users to report posts that violate the European Union’s new law (the Digital Services Act or DSA) against expression of political dissent, pro-Russian propaganda and other “fake news.”18 The new EU law took effect August 25, 2023.19

Other online platforms required to meet DSA requirements for content moderation or risk heavy fines include Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Snapchat, Amazon, Booking, AliExpress, Google Shopping, Zalando, Apple, Google’s app stores, Google Maps, Wikipedia, Google Search and Bing.20 As reported by Politico:21

“These large platforms will have to stop displaying ads to users based on sensitive data like religion and political opinions. AI-generated content like manipulated videos and photos, known as deepfakes, will have to be labeled.

Companies will also have to conduct yearly assessments of the risks their platforms pose on a range of issues like public health, kids’ safety and freedom of expression. They will be required to lay out their measures for how they are tackling such risks.

‘These 19 very large online platforms and search engines will have to redesign completely their systems to ensure a high level of privacy, security and safety of minors with age verification and parental control tools,’ said [EU’s Internal Market Commissioner Thierry] Breton.

External firms will audit their plans. The enforcement team in the Commission will access their data and algorithms to check whether they are promoting a range of harmful content — for example, content endangering public health or during elections. Fines can go up to 6 percent of their global annual turnover and very serious cases of infringement could result in platforms facing temporary bans.”

The key words there are “content endangering public health” and “elections.” That tells you the EU will force all of these platforms to censor medical information and election information.

X Implementing New Identification Rules

X is also pushing us deeper into surveillance state tyranny by requiring XBlue subscribers to submit a selfie and a government-issued ID to verify their identity.22 X will store this personal information for 30 days and share it with an Israeli identification verification company called AU10TIX.

For now, non-blue users are not required to verify their identities, but I suspect it’s only a matter of time. Eventually, you’ll have to have a digital identity to use the internet at all, and every move you make online will be tracked as part of your social credit score. X is simply paving the way.

CCDH Feigns Innocence

In 2021, it became apparent that the U.S. government was basing many of its censorship decisions on information from an obscure U.K.-based group called the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). Its “Disinformation Dozen” report,23 published March 24, 2021, has without question been one of the most widely cited “justifications” for censorship over these past two years.

The problem is that this report was itself an example of gross misinformation. The CCDH claimed 12 individuals were responsible for 73% of vaccine misinformation on social media, including Facebook, yet an investigation by Facebook revealed the so-called “disinformation dozen” were responsible for just 0.05% of all views of vaccine-related content on the platform.24

Yet, even after Facebook set the record straight, the federal government continued to cite the CCDH report as the reason for why they wanted the people listed in it censored by Big Tech.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren demanded that Amazon ban my book, “The Truth About COVID,” based on the CCDH’s false statements about me, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) even relied on it to identify “domestic threat actors,”25 meaning domestic terrorists.

Put simply, the DHS has tagged me as a domestic terrorist based on the fabrications of a shadowy intelligence-connected group that in a rational society would have no credibility whatsoever.

This is the intelligence community’s version of Nancy Pelosi’s “wrap-up smear” tactic,26 which is when a politician feeds false information to the media and then uses those media reports to support their false claims.

August 3, 2023, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, launched an investigation into the CCDH’s potential role in the Biden administration’s censorship regime.

The group was ordered to hand over records to the Judiciary Committee detailing its interactions with the U.S. government and the executive branch by August 17.27 As reported by The Washington Post that day:28

“On Thursday [August 17], the CCDH responded with a full-throated defense of its research and communications with government officials, dismissing Jordan’s allegations as ‘confusion about the organization’ in a letter.

Related documents, which were exclusively viewed by The Washington Post, show that the organization has worked with government officials from both parties …

Jordan also has released internal communications from Meta, which he has dubbed ‘the Facebook Files,’ citing the CCDH’s research. The emails … show that the White House discussed the CCDH’s coronavirus research with Facebook executives as it pressured the company to take a tougher line against vaccine falsehoods.

Nadgey Louis-Charles, a House Judiciary spokesperson, recently told The Post that these emails expose the ‘extent to which the Biden White House used the work of the CCDH to try to censor speech.’”

Free Speech Without Reach Is Not Freedom

The CCDH’s fabrications have been used by a long list of government actors and representatives, including members of Congress, state attorneys general and even President Biden himself, all of whom publicly called for retaliatory actions to be taken against us.

As a result, we’ve been censored on social media, delisted by Google Search, and demonetized on YouTube. We’ve been deplatformed and cut off from online payment processors, our websites have been cyberattacked and, in several cases, taken down completely — and we’ve been debanked, all for the “crime” of sharing Constitutionally-protected views and published science.

At the end of the day, the so-called “problem” of misinformation and disinformation is pure nonsense. In a free society, people debate issues and bring varying viewpoints to the table. “Misinformation” is a completely fabricated problem, made up by the very people who seek to control the public discourse for their own aims.

The technocratic cabal driving this global censorship movement know they must silence dissenting viewpoints because what they intend to impose on us is so heinous, if people understand what they’re doing, they’ll never be able to achieve their goals.

So, it’s not just “democracy” that hangs in the balance. Basic freedoms, human rights and life as we know it will be taken from us, and the only way to stop it is by waking people up to reality through information sharing. The very survival of humanity now depends on our ability to maintain free speech, which is why we must keep pushing back against all forms of censorship.

*

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

Notes

1 CNN July 6, 2023

2 Dainikbidyaloy.com August 14, 2023

3 CBC August 8, 2023

4 Meta Press Release June 1, 2023

5 NPR June 29, 2023

6, 9 Life Site News August 11, 2023

7 Twitter Kyle Undercover

8 Life Site News June 17, 2022

10, 11 New York Post August 10, 2023

12, 13 BizPacNews August 21, 2023

14 Revolver August 18, 2023

15 Twitter Mike Benz August 16, 2023

16 Michael Shellenberger Testimony, House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, March 9, 2023

17 CISA Press Release December 1, 2021

18 Twitter Afshiin Rattansi August 20, 2023

19 The Guardian June 23, 2023

20, 21 Politico April 25, 2023

22 Social Media Today August 3, 2023

23 Counterhate.com The Disinformation Dozen March 24, 2021

24 Facebook August 18, 2021

25 Combatting Targeted Disinformation Campaigns, Part 2 August 2021

26 Daily Wire October 8, 2018

27 Greenmedinfo.com August 3, 2023

28 Washington Post August 17, 2023

Featured image is from TruePublica

Zelensky Believes Ukraine Will be Permanently Supported

August 29th, 2023 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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.

***

Zelensky seems to be naively optimistic about his country’s future. He believes that Kiev is as important to the US as Israel and worthy of permanent military support, unaffected by internal shifts in US politics.

In an interview with a local TV channel, Zelensky expressed confidence that US military aid to Ukraine will remain unaffected, regardless of what happens in the White House. He compared the Ukrainian situation to that of Israel, a country that has remained a strategic ally of the US over the decades, in a policy of cooperation that has not changed despite the different guidelines of the various American presidents.

He also stated that his country is prepared to face a situation of prolonged conflict. Zelensky believes that fighting with Russia could take years, forming a circumstance of permanent hostility, similar to that seen by Israel in its conflict with the Palestinian resistance. Therefore, comparing both cases, the neo-Nazi president believes that the US aid model for Israel may also be suitable for Ukraine, emphasizing however that, for this to happen, Kiev could not take the conflict into the [demilitarized and undisputed] territory of the Russian Federation, as this would risk the stability of aid and Ukraine could “be left on its own”.

“We need to learn to live with [the conflict]. We need to learn. Israel is at war. It depends on what kind of war. We are prepared to keep fighting for a very long period of time… [while] minimizing the number of casualties. Like in Israel, for example. We can live like that (…) The Israeli model… we will likely get this exact model. The Israeli model that includes weapons, technology, training, finances, etc”, he told journalists during the interview.

There are some curious points in these words by Zelensky. First, it is necessary to note his optimism, as he is apparently convinced that Western aid will become an American stable state policy, immune to local political changes. Zelensky seems to ignore the growing critical opinion of the US role in the conflict, with congressmen condemning the aid to Kiev, in addition to possible future presidential candidates, such as Donald Trump himself, stating that they will “end” the war.

Furthermore, it is interesting to see that Zelensky is reportedly concerned about not allowing the conflict to affect Russian demilitarized territory, as this contradicts what some of his officials have been saying in recent months. High ranking Ukrainian military have pledged drone strikes against Russian cities, meaning they plan to take the conflict outside the combat zone. Apparently, there is no central command in the neo-Nazi regime, with officials saying different things at the same time and contradicting the plans announced by the president.

The key problem with Zelensky’s analysis is that he compares situations that are not alike. In the case of Israel, US military aid has remained intact over the decades because the country is a key US partner in the Middle Eastern region, where Washington has promoted a policy of constant occupation. Furthermore, Israel has many representatives within American society itself, with many political and economic groups supporting the Jewish state.

The Ukrainian case is different. The American strategy for Kiev consists in using the country as a proxy in a war against Russia. The Americans have no hope of beating Russia on the battlefield, but they want to generate attrition and destabilization, so they use Ukrainian soldiers as “cannon fodder” to achieve this goal. In Israel, the US is concerned about the security of its partner, in Ukraine it is not. For Washington, the war must be prolonged “to the last Ukrainian” because this is precisely Kiev’s role in the American strategy for Russia.

In the same sense, it must be remembered that the Russians maintain the military control of the conflict. Moscow is deliberately avoiding creating a major escalation that would allow it to resolve the situation once and for all, but definitely the Russian armed forces could do it at any time. So, the power to decide whether or not to make a prolonged conflict is in the hands of Russian officials, not Ukrainians, which makes Zelensky’s words a mere bluff.

In the end, it looks like Zelensky is trying to show an image of strength and stability when he is actually weak and isolated. Since the NATO summit, when Zelensky was rejected by his sponsors, the Ukrainian president has had a very negative public image. Now, he appears to be simply trying to improve his status by saying that, despite NATO’s denial, Ukraine still has its place in the West’s plans, with the possibility of permanent aid even without membership, in line with the “Israel model.”

There are no arguments to justify this conclusion, but he needs to somehow try to react to his growing unpopularity, even more so when rumors grow that the West wants to replace him. However, given the Ukrainian military catastrophe, public opinion is unlikely to believe Zelensky.

*

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.

***

On March 3, 2023, a German team published an extensive review of MASKING during the COVID-19 pandemic that should put the final nail in the coffin of masking & mask mandates.

The Kisielinski Study 

A German team, led by an independent surgeon in private practice, published a large review of mask use during COVID-19 pandemic.

It has 172 references.

I will summarize key findings:

  • 4.5 billion people (58%) were confronted with a “mask obligation”
  • Fresh air has 0.04% CO2
  • Wearing masks more than 5 minutes: 1.4 to 3.2% CO2

Carbon Dioxide Re-breathing

  • Surgical mask after 30 min = 2.8-3.2% CO2 (U.Butz, 2005)
  • N95 after 1 min = 0.9% CO2 (T.Blad, 2020)
  • N95 after 5 min = 1.28% to 3.52% (Sinkule, 2013)
  • N95 after 60 min = 2.8-3.2% (Roberge, 2010)

Acute CO2 Toxicity

  • 10 min of 2.5-3.5% CO2 increases cerebral blood flow by 100% = headaches
  • hyperventilation, metabolic changes (acidosis)

Chronic CO2 Toxicity (animal studies)

  • 0.3% CO2 – irreversible neuron damage, neuron destruction, increased anxiety, impaired learning and memory (rat studies)
  • 0.5% CO2 – testicular toxicity in adolescents (rat studies show diminished fertility in rat testes after one 4hr exposure at 2.5% CO2)
  • 0.8% CO2 – stillbirths (safety level set by US Navy for female submarine crew, due to rat studies showing fetal malformations, post implantation loss, lower probability of viable fetuses)

Other Findings

  • N95 masks and surgical masks performed at their worst with coronavirus & influenza virus particles (did ok with bigger bacterial sized particles) (source)
  • Children: Data on a total of 25 930 children wearing face masks for 270 min per day showed that 68% complained about discomfort. Side effects included irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%), impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness/fatigue (37%) (source)
  • Any mandatory masking of pregnant women in the real world exceeds the CO2 toxicity limit set by US Navy for female submarine crew

Stillbirths 

  • Are mask mandates responsible for 28% rise in stillbirths worldwide?
  • Italy: 3-fold increase in stillbirths during lockdown period Mar-May 2020 which included mask mandates
  • 42% of US female surgeons lost a pregnancy Nov.2020-Feb.2021
  • Sweden: no mask mandates, no increase in stillbirths
  • Mechanism: increased CO2 and acidity in blood trigger compensatory mechanisms that lead to calcifications in placenta
  • CO2 plays a role in oxidative stress which would impede fetal body development, lead to DNA mutations
  • CO2 can increase inflammation leading to an imbalanced immune response, procoagulant state and early pregnancy loss.
  • Some evidence that N95 mask use by pregnant women could result in their children having significantly reduced verbal, motor and overall cognitive performance (child neurodevelopment study in Rhode Island that had mask mandates). (source)

Children and Adolescents

  • children are not small adults
  • 0.3% CO2 exposure to adolescent brain neurons can cause neuronal destruction, anxiety and impaired learning and memory (Uysal, 2014)
  • 0.3% CO2 – neurons die off (apoptosis), especially under exercise or stress.
  • CO2 can destroy spermatid and Sertoli cells in testes
  • Damaging mechanism of CO2 in testes is oxidative stress, acidosis, increased inflammation and apoptosis.
  • CO2 toxicity to testes has been known for 60 years.

My Take… 

This study ONLY looks at CO2 re-breathing toxicity.

As the authors write:

  • other noxious agents in the masks contribute to toxicological long-term effects like the inhalation of synthetic microfibers, carcinogenic compounds and volatile organic compounds could also play a role regarding our research question”

The animal studies are clear and this review summarizes them thoroughly.

Not only does masking not work on coronaviruses or influenza viruses, but masking causes real harm to vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, children and adolescents.

The harm being caused by masking is very serious. Even a few minutes of wearing a surgical, cloth or N95 mask and you initiate the following long term damages:

  • children – irreversible neuron damage, neuron destruction, increased anxiety, impaired learning and memory
  • adolescents – testicular toxicity
  • pregnant women – stillbirths, fetal malformations, post implantation loss, lower probability of viable fetuses

When you know the physical and mental harms that masks can cause, the intent of those who are pushing mask mandates again, suddenly becomes very 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


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

BRICS Establishes a New International Order

August 29th, 2023 by Manlio Dinucci

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 15th BRICS Summit, held in Johannesburg, South Africa, made a series of decisions that lay the foundation for a new international order, an alternative to that imposed by the West.

The BRICS association-formed by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa-expands to include 6 more countries, which will become full members as of January 1, 2024: the Argentine Republic, the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

At present, 44 countries want to join BRICS: 22 have already officially applied, and another 22 have expressed their intention to do so. Therefore, the Summit instructed foreign ministers to prepare a list of partner countries as a basis for further enlargement.  

The five current members together account for more than 42 percent of the world’s population, 30 percent of the world’s territory, 23 percent of GDP and 18 percent of global trade. 

Candidates that could join the 6 already admitted as full members include: Afghanistan, Indonesia, Thailand, Algeria, Nigeria, Senegal, and Nicaragua. 

A BRICS expanded to include these 13 countries would have more than 4 billion people, or more than half the world’s population, it would own 45 percent of the world’s oil reserves and more than 60 percent of the world’s gas reserves. Its total GDP would amount to about $30 trillion, more than the GDP of the United States and twice that of the European Union.

The realization of a new international order, alternative to that imposed by the West, is therefore possible: indeed, the founding value of the BRICS is the shared commitment to restructure the global political, economic and financial architecture so that it is fair, balanced and representative. Within this framework, the BRICS have launched a plan to de-dollarize trade, which is already reducing the hegemony of the dollar, and have created the New Development Bank, an alternative to the World Bank. Further steps in this direction are expected from the 16th BRICS Summit, to be held in 2024 in Russia.

*

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 byoblu in Italian.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

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 surely not the only one who has noticed that the defensive propaganda lines that are flowing out the Democratic Administration have become more than ordinarily ridiculous of late. One is astonished at the melding of fact and fiction to create narratives that depict the White House and all that pertains to it as forging a new and more wonderful country. Wasn’t “Build Back Better” the battle cry, whatever that is supposed to mean?

And the spin is endless, even when a clueless Joe Biden belatedly winds up in Maui to relate to the tragedy in which at least 1,000 died, only to be greeted by surviving local residents saluting the president with their middle fingers upraised.

As the president looked out over the destruction of an entire city by fire he reminisced by recalling his long ago “almost” encounter with a fire in his kitchen.

Locals who were screaming for help from government were, in fact, getting almost nothing while the nation’s Chief Executive was in the Oval Office gloating over sending another $23 billion to the arch crook Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, money to fight a war that Biden encouraged and has blithely entered into.

Washington politicians characteristically have no morals and are driven only by their desire to perpetuate their party’s dominance so that the corruption that makes so many of those who adhere to the process rich, including Joe Biden. How do 500,000 dead Ukrainians and Russians matter if a myth about the United States and its values can be exploited to obtain electoral victory for Biden in 2024? As the greatly esteemed monster Madeleine Albright once put it, “I think it is worth it!”

I would suggest that our political class and the parasites that surround it are approaching depths not yet plumbed when I occasionally peruse articles or listen to speeches produced by the Washington DC spin machine. But even by that measure, I was appalled by a recent article that appeared in Politico and which immediately received considerable replay in other publications frequented by the inside-the-Beltway crowd.

Politico was acquired by Axel Springer, a German publisher in 2021, Europe’s largest newspaper and magazine conglomerate. Ideologically, some have described Springer publications’ political bias “as leaning left of center or moderate” but my personal exposure to the group since my army days in Germany has led me to believe that it is actually much more conservative than that. All employees at Springer, to include Politico, are expected to support the European Union, NATO, Israel, the war against Ukraine, the open society, and free market policies.

The article is entitled “Here Are 3 Ways to End the War in Ukraine. One Might Actually Work” with a subtitle “Putin has a veto over two endgames for Ukraine. 

But there’s a third that would bypass him.” The piece was penned by one Tom Malinowski, an assistant secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor in the Obama administration before serving as a Democratic Party congressman from New Jersey’s 7th district between 2019 and 2023.

He is currently under investigation by the Office of Congressional Ethics over “substantial reason to believe” that he had violated federal laws relating to conflicts of interest. He had reportedly traded and failed to disclose approximately $1 million of stock in medical and technical companies that would be receiving taxpayer assistance as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response, which would inevitably result in a large surge in stock values.

Malinowski is currently a senior fellow at the McCain Institute, one of those foundations funded by defense industries where politicians go to hide and get rich between terms in elected office. The Institute is a Washington DC based allegedly “nonpartisan think tank established in cooperation with Arizona State University.” Its declared mission is to “fight for democracy, human dignity, and security for a world that is free, safe, and just for all people.”

Inevitably, it is rather selective in terms of who exactly benefits from its largesse and one might recall that its eponymous founder Senator John McCain hardly ever saw a war he didn’t like and once dismissed Vladimir Putin’s Russia as a “gasoline station pretending to be a real country.” McCain was also a major player in the “regime change” operation in Ukraine in 2014, suggesting that his judgement about America’s relationship with the rest of the world just might be a little flawed.

Malinowski is inevitably fully on board with the White House view of why the United States has gone whole hog in a proxy war against Russia that uses Ukraine as its instrument of choice . He says in his first paragraph that “’Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia — never,’ President Joe Biden said in a speech in Poland this year, and rightly so. For the war in Ukraine to end on terms consistent with American interests and ideals, Ukraine must be seen to have won, and Russia’s invasion must go down in history as a decisive failure, enough to deter other authoritarian powers from launching similar wars of aggression in the future.”

Malinowski poses his “3 Ways” as follows: first, for

“its armed forces to take back all the territory Russia has unlawfully seized since its first invasion in 2014 — including Crimea. This would be a fantastic outcome. It is still possible. And the United States should do everything possible to support it, including, if Congress approves more funding, by providing the more advanced weapons Ukraine has requested.”

If Malinowski thinks armed victory by Ukraine is “still possible” he is delusional, but he does not seriously expect that outcome, except for the “more funding” part. His Second Way, also a “red herring” to disguise where he really wants to go, would be “through a diplomatic agreement.

Earlier this month, 40 countries, including China and the United States, met in Saudi Arabia to discuss President Volodymyr Zelensky’s 10-point plan for peace, which would require the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, the return of abducted children and justice for war crimes. Any settlement based on that plan would, of course, be wonderful. But Russia under Putin has never ended its wars at the negotiating table; at best it has frozen them, keeping its options open. Russia has shown zero interest in making concessions that would come close to the minimal requirements of Ukraine and its allies. As long as his military avoids total collapse, and he believes there is a chance of political change in the West, Putin will likely keep sacrificing Russians to stay in the fight.”

So Malinowski’s Second Way is a deliberately designed dead end and he, of course, blames it all on Putin. His actual “solution” would be the Third Way:

“So if Russia manages to stymie plans A and B, where would that leave us by, say this time next year? Should Ukraine and its allies simply carry on, hoping for a breakthrough in 2025 or beyond? Given what’s at stake — not just the survival of Ukraine but of the whole international order — that would be risky. It would make success dependent on events we cannot predict or control, including on the outcome of elections in Western countries, including the United States. And while we have no right to tell Ukrainians to stop fighting before their country is whole, we also have no right to expect them to keep fighting at any cost. Fortunately, there is a third possible way to satisfy the need for Ukrainian success and Russian failure, over which Putin would have no veto.”

Malinowski requires that:

“the United States would give the Ukrainian military whatever it needs to advance as far as possible in its counteroffensive. At an appropriate point next year, Ukraine would declare a pause in offensive military operations and shift its primary focus to defending and rebuilding liberated areas while integrating with Western institutions.

Then, at its July, 2024 summit in Washington, NATO would invite Ukraine to join the Western alliance, guaranteeing the security of all territory controlled by the Ukrainian government at that point under Article 5 of the NATO treaty… This would be a defensive pact, but not a commitment to take direct part in any future offensive operations Ukraine might choose to undertake.

Ukraine joining NATO could itself be how the war ends, consistent with Biden’s current policy — and at a time and on terms set by Ukraine and its allies, not by Russia. Gaining security within NATO as a strong, pluralistic, democratic state would absolutely count as a victory for Ukraine — arguably as big as quickly regaining Crimea. It might make it politically possible for Zelensky, if he so chooses, to emphasize nonmilitary strategies for reclaiming any parts of his country still under Russian occupation, which Ukraine’s allies would also continue to support — potentially including anything from diplomacy and sanctions to blockade and sabotage…

Adding a democratic Ukraine in NATO would mark the utter and permanent defeat of Putin’s crusade to absorb it into a Russian empire…

Yes, Russian forces could try to go on the offensive again, but the likely futility of attacking fortified Ukrainian positions now backed by the threat of NATO firepower would be a strong deterrent. Meanwhile, sanctions on Russia would remain; its economic and military strength would continue to erode; and Putin could only watch as his frozen assets abroad are drawn down to pay for Ukraine’s reconstruction.”

It is easy to see what is wrong with the Malinowski Third Way apart from it being an open door to initiating a nuclear World War III. And one might suggest that it is also possible to discern the US domestic politics that are driving it. How the war in Ukraine ends all depends on Zelensky behaving rationally, which he is not renowned for, and he is quite capable of joining NATO before using a false flag or otherwise provoking an incident with Russia that would require NATO Article 5 intervention.

Also, all the other parties involved would have to act predictably and sanely, including the US, which is unlikely. Zelensky in particular is desperate to draw the US and NATO into his war and will do whatever it takes to arrive at that point and his non-negotiable demand for full restoration of all Ukrainian territory including Crimea, endorsed by Malinowski, is a deal breaker that in any event Russia could not accept.

Even the up-until-now supportive US mainstream media is beginning to see the light and is admitting both that the highly touted Ukrainian counteroffensive has been a failure and that Ukraine has no ability to defeat Russia no matter how many weapons are put in the pipeline at great cost to sustain it. And there is also the fraud from the Biden regime that is taking place with reports that even the normally biddable CIA has been warning to no avail that the war is unwinnable. The fact that as many as half a million Ukrainians and Russians have already been killed or wounded is starting to hit home with both Americans and Europeans and will increase demands to end the fighting as unconditionally as necessary.

A final but very important point that must be made is the deliberate timing of Malinowski’s “3rd Way” which very conveniently presents Joe Biden with a great military victory just before the US presidential election, erasing all memories of the disgraceful withdrawal from Afghanistan. It apparently matters not that in doing so it continues a bloody and pointless war and destroys Ukraine as a state and as a people.

Online substack observer Simplicius the Thinker describes how

“Democrats will need all the help they can get. If a plan could be designed and packaged in a way where it can be sold as a major ‘victory’ then certainly Democrats will attempt to drag it out until the eve of the election to try to use ‘Biden’s major Ukrainian victory’ as a huge final hour boost.” Joe and Malinowski apparently believe that victory in an election is more important that finding the sanity to take steps to save hundreds of thousands of lives and they will continue to do whatever it takes to “win.”

Sickening.

*

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