Global Research Editor’s Note

We bring to the attention of our readers the following text of Osama bin Laden’s interview in Urdu with Ummat, a Pakistani daily, published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. It was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001.  

The authenticity of this interview remains to be confirmed. We were informed that It was available in recognized electronic news archives including BBC translation.

click here  Ummat 

The interview tends to demystify the Osama bin Laden persona.

In the Unmat interview, Osama bin Laden categorically denies his involvement in the 9/11 attacks.  Bin Laden’s statements in this interview are markedly different from those made in the alleged Osama video tapes.

In this interview, Osama bin Laden allegedly exhibits an understanding of US foreign policy. He expresses his views regarding the loss of life on 9/11. He focusses on CIA support to the narcotics trade.

He also makes statements as to who, in his opinion, might be the likely perpetrator of  the September 11 attacks.

This is an important text which has not been brought to the attention of Western public opinion.

We have highlighted key sections of this interview.

It is our hope that the text of this interview, published on 28 September 2001 barely a week before the onset of the war on Afghanistan, will contribute to a better understanding of the history of Al Qaeda, the role of Osama bin Laden and the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

It should be noted that on the day preceding the 9/11 attacks, Osama Bin Laden had been admitted for treatment in a Military Hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

This was confirmed by Dan Rather in a CBS News Report. 

This interview is published for informational purposes only.

Global Research does not in any way endorse the statements in this interview. Nor are we in a position to confirm its authenticity.

Michel  Chossudovsky, September 2, 2023, September 11, 2024

Full text of September 2001 Pakistani paper’s “exclusive” interview with Usamah Bin-Ladin

translated from Urdu by the BBC World Monitoring Service

Karachi, 28 September 2001, pp. 1- 7.

Ummat’s introduction

Kabul: Prominent Arab mojahed holy warrior Usamah Bin-Ladin has said that he or his al-Qa’idah group has nothing to do with the 11 September suicidal attacks in Washington and New York. He said the US government should find the attackers within the country. In an exclusive interview with daily “Ummat”, he said these attacks could be the act of those who are part of the American system and are rebelling against it and working for some other system. Or, Usamah said, this could be the act of those who want to make the current century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. Or, the American Jews, who are opposed to President Bush ever since the Florida elections, might be the masterminds of this act. There is also a great possibility of the involvement of US intelligence agencies, which need billions of dollars worth of funds every year. He said there is a government within the government in the United States.

The secret agencies, he said, should be asked as to who are behind the attacks. Usamah said support for attack on Afghanistan was a matter of need for some Muslim countries and compulsion for others. However, he said, he was thankful to the courageous people of Pakistan who erected a bulwark before the wrong forces. He added that the Islamic world was attaching great expectations with Pakistan and, in time of need, “we will protect this bulwark by sacrificing of lives”.

Following is the interview in full detail:

Ummat: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?

Usamah [Osama bin Laden]: In the name of Allah, the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the earth as an abode for peace, for the whole mankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and Momin true Muslim people of Pakistan who refused to believe in lie of the demon.

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.

There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya, and Bosnia?

Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims .

The US has no friends, nor does it want to keep any because the prerequisite of friendship is to come to the level of the friend or consider him at par with you. America does not want to see anyone equal to it. It expects slavery from others. Therefore, other countries are either its slaves or subordinates.

However, our case is different. We have pledged slavery to God Almighty alone and after this pledge there is no possibility to become the slave of someone else. If we do that, it will be disregardful to both our Sustainer and his fellow beings. Most of the world nations upholding their freedom are the religious ones, which are the enemies of United States, or the latter itself considers them as its enemies. Or the countries, which do not agree to become its slaves, such as China, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Syria, and the former Russia as received .

Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed.

According to my information, the death toll is much higher than what the US government has stated. But the Bush administration does not want the panic to spread. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. They can be any one, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the US itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups, which are capable of causing a large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American Jews, who are annoyed with President Bush ever since the elections in Florida and want to avenge him.

Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This funding issue was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger.

They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usamah and Taleban and then this incident happened. You see, the Bush administration approved a budget of 40bn dollars. Where will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need huge funds and want to exert their importance.

Now they will spend the money for their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example. Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the US secret agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the US Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat. In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other US president, they cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who made the attacks.

Ummat: A number of world countries have joined the call of the United States for launching an attack on Afghanistan. These also include a number of Muslim countries. Will Al-Qa’idah declare a jihad against these countries as well?

Usamah: I must say that my duty is just to awaken the Muslims; to tell them as to what is good for them and what is not. What does Islam says and what the enemies of Islam want?

Al-Qa’idah was set up to wage a jihad against infidelity, particularly to encounter the onslaught of the infidel countries against the Islamic states. Jihad is the sixth undeclared element of Islam. The first five being the basic holy words of Islam, prayers, fast, pilgrimage to Mecca, and giving alms Every anti-Islamic person is afraid of it. Al-Qa’idah wants to keep this element alive and active and make it part of the daily life of the Muslims. It wants to give it the status of worship. We are not against any Islamic country nor we consider a war against an Islamic country as jihad.

We are in favour of armed jihad only against those infidel countries, which are killing innocent Muslim men, women, and children just because they are Muslims. Supporting the US act is the need of some Muslim countries and the compulsion of others. However, they should think as to what will remain of their religious and moral position if they support the attack of the Christians and the Jews on a Muslim country like Afghanistan. The orders of Islamic shari’ah jurisprudence for such individuals, organizations, and countries are clear and all the scholars of the Muslim brotherhood are unanimous on them. We will do the same, which is being ordered by the Amir ol-Momenin the commander of the faithful Mola Omar and the Islamic scholars. The hearts of the people of Muslim countries are beating with the call of jihad. We are grateful to them.

Ummat: The losses caused in the attacks in New York and Washington have proved that giving an economic blow to the US is not too difficult. US experts admit that a few more such attacks can bring down the American economy. Why is al-Qa’idah not targeting their economic pillars?

Usamah: I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the US is not uttering a single word.

Ummat: Why is harm not caused to the enemies of Islam through other means, apart from the armed struggle? For instance, inciting the Muslims to boycott Western products, banks, shipping lines, and TV channels.

Usamah: The first thing is that Western products could only be boycotted when the Muslim fraternity is fully awakened and organized. Secondly, the Muslim companies should become self-sufficient in producing goods equal to the products of Western companies. Economic boycott of the West is not possible unless economic self-sufficiency is attained and substitute products are brought out. You see that wealth is scattered all across the Muslim world but not a single TV channel has been acquired which can preach Islamic injunctions according to modern requirements and attain an international influence. Muslim traders and philanthropists should make it a point that if the weapon of public opinion is to be used, it is to be kept in the hand. Today’s world is of public opinion and the fates of nations are determined through its pressure. Once the tools for building public opinion are obtained, everything that you asked for can be done.

Ummat: The entire propaganda about your struggle has so far been made by the Western media. But no information is being received from your sources about the network of Al-Qa’idah and its jihadi successes. Would you comment?

Usamah: In fact, the Western media is left with nothing else. It has no other theme to survive for a long time. Then we have many other things to do. The struggle for jihad and the successes are for the sake of Allah and not to annoy His bondsmen. Our silence is our real propaganda. Rejections, explanations, or corrigendum only waste your time and through them, the enemy wants you to engage in things which are not of use to you. These things are pulling you away from your cause.

The Western media is unleashing such a baseless propaganda, which make us surprise but it reflects on what is in their hearts and gradually they themselves become captive of this propaganda. They become afraid of it and begin to cause harm to themselves. Terror is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media is doing that. You can understand as to what will be the performance of the nation in a war, which suffers from fear and helplessness.

Ummat: What will the impact of the freeze of al-Qa’idah accounts by the US?

Usamah: God opens up ways for those who work for Him. Freezing of accounts will not make any difference for Al-Qa’idah or other jihad groups. With the grace of Allah, al-Qa’idah has more than three such alternative financial systems, which are all separate and totally independent from each other. This system is operating under the patronage of those who love jihad. What to say of the United States, even the combined world cannot budge these people from their path.

These people are not in hundreds but in thousands and millions. Al-Qa’idah comprises of such modern educated youths who are aware of the cracks inside the Western financial system as they are aware of the lines in their hands. These are the very flaws of the Western fiscal system, which are becoming a noose for it and this system could not recuperate in spite of the passage of so many days.

Ummat: Are there other safe areas other than Afghanistan, where you can continue jihad?

Usamah: There are areas in all parts of the world where strong jihadi forces are present, from Indonesia to Algeria, from Kabul to Chechnya, from Bosnia to Sudan, and from Burma to Kashmir. Then it is not the problem of my person. I am helpless fellowman of God, constantly in the fear of my accountability before God. It is not the question of Usamah but of Islam and, in Islam too, of jihad. Thanks to God, those waging a jihad can walk today with their heads raised. Jihad was still present when there was no Usamah and it will remain as such even when Usamah is no longer there. Allah opens up ways and creates loves in the hearts of people for those who walk on the path of Allah with their lives, property, and children. Believe it, through jihad, a man gets everything he desires. And the biggest desire of a Muslim is the after life. Martyrdom is the shortest way of attaining an eternal life.

Ummat: What do you say about the Pakistan government policy on Afghanistan attack?

Usamah: We are thankful to the Momin and valiant people of Pakistan who erected a blockade in front of the wrong forces and stood in the first file of battle. Pakistan is a great hope for the Islamic brotherhood. Its people are awakened, organized, and rich in the spirit of faith. They backed Afghanistan in its war against the Soviet Union and extended every help to the mojahedin and the Afghan people. Then these are the same Pakistanis who are standing shoulder by shoulder with the Taleban. If such people emerge in just two countries, the domination of the West will diminish in a matter of days. Our hearts beat with Pakistan and, God forbid, if a difficult time comes we will protect it with our blood. Pakistan is sacred for us like a place of worship. We are the people of jihad and fighting for the defence of Pakistan is the best of all jihads to us. It does not matter for us as to who rules Pakistan. The important thing is that the spirit of jihad is alive and stronger in the hearts of the Pakistani people.

[Copyright Ummat in Urdu, BBC translation in English, 2001]

Read about Osama Bin Laden in Michel Chossudovsky’s international best-seller

Order Directly from Global Research

America’s “War on Terrorism”

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

Nous faisons face présentement à une problème technique.

Pour accéder à la version mobile de mondialisation.ca, cliquez sur le Menu principal de Globalresearch.ca (version mobile), (en haut à gauche) et ensuite cliquez sur Mondialisation.ca.

A partir de la semaine prochaine le problème technique devrait être résolu.

Amitiés à tous nos lecteurs

The world is globalizing and information has become more accessible to more people than ever before. We are, indeed, in unprecedented times, and we face unprecedented challenges.

The aims of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research are to battle the tidal waves of misinformation and propaganda washing our minds on a daily basis. We have separated ourselves from the corporate controlled mainstream news, whose only objective is to serve their corporate masters. We take no assistance from the major foundations such as Rockefeller, Ford, and MacArthur, who act as patrons (and thus pacifiers) of the alternative and critical voices challenging the forces of globalization.

We do this in order to remain an independent voice, challenging all that needs to be challenged and exposing all that remains in the dark. Bringing light to a dimly lit world is no easy task, and though the aim and method is “independence,” we are, in fact, entirely dependent upon YOU, our readers. Without your support, we cannot continue our operations nor expand our horizons and opportunities. Global Research is indebted to our readers, and we are here for you and because of you. If you would like Global Research to continue and to grow, we need your support now more than ever.

By making a donation  to Global Research, you  assist journalists, researchers and contributors who have either lost their jobs with the mainstream media or who have been excluded from employment opportunities as professional journalists for their pledge to the truth. We send our thanks to all who have contributed so far by donating or becoming a member!

The mainstream media is owned by bankers and corporate kingpins. Not only that, but it has been historically and presently infiltrated by covert government agencies, seeking to deceive and propagandize their agendas. The CIA has long had associations with major mainstream news publications. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc. The CIA even ran a training program “to teach its agents to be journalists,” who were “then placed in major news organizations with help from management.”

At Global Research, we seek to not only expose and criticize the larger picture, but to point the finger at the media, itself, and examine who is lying, why they lie, and how they get away with it.

To continue in our endeavours, we need our readers to continue in their support.

One important and helpful thing that all of our readers can do is to help spread our name and information by “sharing and  “liking” our Facebook page here. We post articles daily that will appear in your news feed so that you don’t have to come to us, we can bring our information straight to you. “Like” our page and recommend us to your friends. Every bit helps! You can also subscribe to our RSS feed

You can also support us by continuing to send us your much needed donations which allow us to continue our day-to-day operations and help us expand our scope and content.

Supporting Global Research is supporting the cause of truth and the fight against media disinformation.

Thank you.

The Global Research Team

FOR ONLINE DONATIONS

For online donations, please click below:

VISIT THE DONATION PAGE

FOR DONATIONS BY MAIL

To send your donation by mail, kindly send your cheque or international money order, made out to CRG, to our postal address:

Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

PO Box 55019
11, Notre-Dame Ouest,

Montreal, QC, H2Y 4A7
CANADA

FOR DONATIONS BY FAX
For payment by fax, please print the credit card fax authorization form and fax your order and credit card details to Global Research at 514 656 5294

You can also support us by purchasing books from our store! Click to browse our titles.

A deluge of articles have been quickly put into circulation defending France’s military intervention in the African nation of Mali. TIME’s article, “The Crisis in Mali: Will French Intervention Stop the Islamist Advance?” decides that old tricks are the best tricks, and elects the tiresome “War on Terror” narrative.TIME claims the intervention seeks to stop “Islamist” terrorists from overrunning both Africa and all of Europe. Specifically, the article states:

“…there is a (probably well-founded) fear in France that a radical Islamist Mali threatens France most of all, since most of the Islamists are French speakers and many have relatives in France. (Intelligence sources in Paris have told TIME that they’ve identified aspiring jihadis leaving France for northern Mali to train and fight.) Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), one of the three groups that make up the Malian Islamist alliance and which provides much of the leadership, has also designated France — the representative of Western power in the region — as a prime target for attack.”

What TIME elects not to tell readers is that Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is closely allied to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG whom France intervened on behalf of during NATO’s 2011 proxy-invasion of Libya – providing weapons, training, special forces and even aircraft to support them in the overthrow of Libya’s government.

As far back as August of 2011, Bruce Riedel out of the corporate-financier funded think-tank, the Brookings Institution, wrote “Algeria will be next to fall,” where he gleefully predicted success in Libya would embolden radical elements in Algeria, in particular AQIM. Between extremist violence and the prospect of French airstrikes, Riedel hoped to see the fall of the Algerian government. Ironically Riedel noted:

Algeria has expressed particular concern that the unrest in Libya could lead to the development of a major safe haven and sanctuary for al-Qaeda and other extremist jihadis.

And thanks to NATO, that is exactly what Libya has become – a Western sponsored sanctuary for Al-Qaeda. AQIM’s headway in northern Mali and now French involvement will see the conflict inevitably spill over into Algeria. It should be noted that Riedel is a co-author of “Which Path to Persia?” which openly conspires to arm yet another US State Department-listed terrorist organization (list as #28), the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) to wreak havoc across Iran and help collapse the government there – illustrating a pattern of using clearly terroristic organizations, even those listed as so by the US State Department, to carry out US foreign policy.Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar noted a more direct connection between LIFG and AQIM in an Asia Times piece titled, “How al-Qaeda got to rule in Tripoli:”

“Crucially, still in 2007, then al-Qaeda’s number two, Zawahiri, officially announced the merger between the LIFG and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Mahgreb (AQIM). So, for all practical purposes, since then, LIFG/AQIM have been one and the same – and Belhaj was/is its emir. “

“Belhaj,” referring to Hakim Abdul Belhaj, leader of LIFG in Libya, led with NATO support, arms, funding, and diplomatic recognition, the overthrowing of Muammar Qaddafi and has now plunged the nation into unending racist and tribal, genocidal infighting. This intervention has also seen the rebellion’s epicenter of Benghazi peeling off from Tripoli as a semi-autonomous “Terror-Emirate.” Belhaj’s latest campaign has shifted to Syria where he was admittedly on the Turkish-Syrian border pledging weapons, money, and fighters to the so-called “Free Syrian Army,” again, under the auspices of NATO support.

Image: NATO’s intervention in Libya has resurrected listed-terrorist organization and Al Qaeda affiliate, LIFG. It had previously fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, and now has fighters, cash and weapons, all courtesy of NATO, spreading as far west as Mali, and as far east as Syria. The feared “global Caliphate” Neo-Cons have been scaring Western children with for a decade is now taking shape via US-Saudi, Israeli, and Qatari machinations, not “Islam.” In fact, real Muslims have paid the highest price in fighting this real “war against Western-funded terrorism.”

….

LIFG, which with French arms, cash, and diplomatic support, is now invading northern Syria on behalf of NATO’s attempted regime change there, officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007 according to the US Army’s West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC). According to the CTC, AQIM and LIFG share not only ideological goals, but strategic and even tactical objectives. The weapons LIFG received most certainly made their way into the hands of AQIM on their way through the porous borders of the Sahara Desert and into northern Mali.

It is no coincidence that as the Libyan conflict was drawing to a conclusion, conflict erupted in northern Mali. It is part of a premeditated geopolitical reordering that began with toppling Libya, and since then, using it as a springboard for invading other targeted nations, including Mali, Algeria, and Syria with heavily armed, NATO-funded and aided terrorists.

Algeria was able to balk subversion during the early phases of the US-engineered “Arab Spring” in 2011, but it surely has not escaped the attention of the West who is in the midst of transforming a region stretching from Africa to Beijing and Moscow’s doorsteps – and in a fit of geopolitical schizophrenia – using terrorists both as a casus belli to invade and as an inexhaustible mercenary force to do it.

Part I: Syria comes to the Russian Caucasus

On August 28 Sheikh Said Afandi, acknowledged spiritual leader of the Autonomous Russian Republic of Dagestan, was assassinated. A jihadist female suicide bomber managed to enter his house and detonate an explosive device.

The murder target had been carefully selected. Sheikh Afandi, a seventy-five-year old Sufi Muslim leader, had played the critical role in attempting to bring about reconciliation in Dagestan between jihadist Salafi Sunni Muslims and other factions, many of whom in Dagestan see themselves as followers of Sufi. With no replacement of his moral stature and respect visible, authorities fear possible outbreak of religious war in the tiny Russian autonomous republic.[1]

The police reported that the assassin was an ethnic Russian woman who had converted to Islam and was linked to an Islamic fundamentalist or Salafist insurgency against Russia and regional governments loyal to Moscow in the autonomous republics and across the volatile Muslim-populated North Caucasus region.

Ethnic Muslim populations in this region of Russia and of the former Soviet Union, including Uzbekistan, Kyrgystan and into China’s Xinjiang Province, have been the target of various US and NATO intelligence operations since the Cold War era ended in 1990. Washington sees manipulation of Muslim groups as the vehicle to bring uncontrollable chaos to Russia and Central Asia. It’s being carried out by some of the same organizations engaged in creating chaos and destruction inside Syria against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. In a real sense, as Russian security services clearly understand, if they don’t succeed in stopping the Jihadists insurgency in Syria, it will come home to them via the Caucasus.

The latest Salafist murders of Sufi and other moderate Muslim leaders in the Caucasus are apparently part of what is becoming ever clearer as perhaps the most dangerous US intelligence operation ever—playing globally with Muslim fundamentalism.

Previously US and allied intelligence services had played fast and loose with religious organizations or beliefs in one or another country. What makes the present situation particularly dangerous—notably since the decision in Washington to unleash the misnamed Arab Spring upheavals that began in Tunisia late 2010, spreading like a brushfire across the entire Islamic world from Afghanistan across Central Asia to Morocco—is the incalculable wave upon wave of killing, hatreds, destruction of entire cultures that Washington has unleashed in the name of that elusive dream named “democracy.” They do this using alleged Al-Qaeda groups, Saudi Salafists or Wahhabites, or using disciples of Turkey’s Fethullah Gülen Movement to ignite fires of religious hatred within Islam and against other faiths that could take decades to extinguish. It could easily spill over into a new World War.

Fundamentalism comes to Caucasus

Following the dissolution of the USSR, radical Afghanistani Mujahadeen, Islamists from Saudi Arabia, from Turkey, Pakistan and other Islamic countries flooded into the Muslim regions of the former USSR. One of the best-organized of these was the Gülen Movement of Fethullah Gülen, leader of a global network of Islamic schools and reported to be the major policy influence on Turkey’s Erdogan AKP party.

Gülen was quick to establish The International Dagestani-Turkish College in Dagestan. During the chaotic days after the Soviet collapse, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation officially registered and permitted unfettered activity for a variety of Islamic foundations and organizations. These included the League of the Islamic World, the World Muslim Youth Assembly, the reportedly Al-Qaeda friendly Saudi foundation ‘Ibrahim ben Abd al-Aziz al-Ibrahim.’ The blacklist also included Al-Haramein a Saudi foundation reported tied to Al-Qaeda, and IHH, [2] a Turkish organization banned in Germany, that allegedly raised funds for jihadi fighters in Bosnia, Chechnya, and Afghanistan, and was charged by French intelligence of ties to Al Qaeda.[3] Many of these charities were covers for fundamentalist Salafists with their own special agenda.

As many of the foreign Islamists in Chechnya and Dagestan were found involved in fomenting the regional unrest and civil war, Russian authorities withdrew permission of most to run schools and institutions. Throughout the North Caucasus at the time of the Chechyn war in the late 1990’s, there were more than two dozen Islamic institutes, some 200 madrassas and numerous maktabas (Koranic study schools) present at almost all mosques.

The International Dagestani-Turkish College was one that was forced to close its doors in Dagestan. The College was run by the Fethullah Gülen organization.[4]

At the point of the Russian crackdown on the spread of Salafist teaching inside Russia at the end of the 1990’s, there was an exodus of hundreds of young Dagestani and Chechyn Muslim students to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other places in The Middle east, reportedly to receive training with the Gülen movement and various Saudi-financed organizations, including Salafists. [5] It is believed in Russia that the students trained by Gülen supporters or Saudi and other Salafist fundamentalist centers then were sent back to Dagestan and the North Caucasus to spread their radical strain of Islam.

By 2005 the situation in the Caucasus was so influenced by this Salafist intervention that the Chechen Salafist, Doku Umarov, cited by the UN Security Council for links to Al-Qaeda,[6] unilaterally declared creation of what he called the Caucasus Emirate, announcing he planned to establish an Islamic state under Sharia law encompassing the entire North Caucasus region including Dagestan. He modestly proclaimed himself Emir of the Caucasus Emirate. [7]

*  *  *

*  *  *

Part II: Salafism at war with Sufi tradition

Salafism, known in Saudi Arabia as Wahhabism, is a fundamentalist strain of Islam which drew world attention and became notorious in March 2001 just weeks before the attacks of September 11. That was when the Salafist Taliban government in Afghanistan willfully dynamited and destroyed the historic gigantic Buddhas of Bamiyan on the ancient Silk Road, religious statues dating from the 6^th Century. The Taliban Salafist leaders also banned as “un-islamic” all forms of imagery, music and sports, including television, in accordance with what they considered a strict interpretation of Sharia.

Afghani sources reported that the order to destroy the Buddhas was made by Saudi-born jihadist Wahhabite, Osama bin Laden, who ultimately convinced Mullah Omar, Taliban supreme leader at the time to execute the act.[8]

Before and…After Salafist Taliban …

While Sufis incorporate the worship of saints and theatrical ceremonial prayers into their practice, Salafis condemn as idolatry any non-traditional forms of worship. They also call for the establishment of Islamic political rule and strict Sharia law. Sufism is home to the great spiritual and musical heritage of Islam, said by Islamic scholars to be the inner, mystical, or psycho-spiritual dimension of Islam, going back centuries.

As one Sufi scholar described the core of Sufism, “While all Muslims believe that they are on the pathway to God and will become close to God in Paradise–after death and the ‘Final Judgment’– Sufis believe as well that it is possible to become close to God and to experience this closeness–while one is alive. Furthermore, the attainment of the knowledge that comes with such intimacy with God, Sufis assert, is the very purpose of the creation. Here they mention the hadith qudsi in which God states, ‘I was a hidden treasure and I loved that I be known, so I created the creation in order to be known.’ Hence for the Sufis there is already a momentum, a continuous attraction on their hearts exerted by God, pulling them, in love, towards God.” [9]

The mystical Islamic current of Sufism and its striving to become close to or one with God is in stark contrast to the Jihadist Salafi or Wahhabi current that is armed with deadly weapons, preaches a false doctrine of jihad, and a perverse sense of martyrdom, committing countless acts of violence. Little wonder that the victims of Salafist Jihads are mostly other pacific forms of Islam including most especially Sufis.

The respected seventy-five year old Afandi had publicly denounced Salafist Islamic fundamentalism. His murder followed a July 19 coordinated attack on two high-ranking muftis in the Russian Volga Republic of Tatarstan. Both victims were state-approved religious leaders who had attacked radical Islam. This latest round of murders opens a new front in the Salafist war against Russia, namely attacks on moderate Sufi Muslim leaders.

Whether or not Dagestan now descends into internal religious civil war that then spreads across the geopolitically sensitive Russian Caucasus is not yet certain. What is almost certain is that the same circles who have been feeding violence and terror inside Syria against the regime of Alawite President Bashar al-Assad are behind the killing of Sheikh Afandi as well as sparking related acts of terror or unrest across Russia’s Muslim-populated Caucasus. In a very real sense it represents Russia’s nightmare scenario of “Syria coming to Russia.” It demonstrates dramatically why Putin has made such a determined effort to stop a descent into a murderous hell in Syria.

Salafism and the CIA

The existence of the so-called jihadist Salafi brand of Islam in Dagestan is quite recent. It has also been deliberately imported. Salafism is sometimes also called the name of the older Saudi-centered Wahhabism. Wahhabism is a minority originally-Bedouin form of the faith originating within Islam, dominant in Saudi Arabia since the 1700’s.

Irfan Al-Alawi and Stephen Schwartz of the Centre for Islamic Pluralism give the following description of Saudi conditions under the rigid Wahhabi brand of Islam:

“Women living under Saudi rule must wear the abaya, or total body cloak, and niqab, the face veil; they have limited opportunities for schooling and careers; they are prohibited from driving vehicles; are banned from social contact with men not relatives, and all personal activity must be supervised including opening bank accounts, by a male family member or “guardian.” These Wahhabi rules are enforced by a mutawiyin, or morals militia, also known as “the religious police,” officially designated the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (CPVPV) who patrol Saudi cities, armed with leather-covered sticks which they freely used against those they considered wayward. They raid homes looking for alcohol and drugs, and harassed non-Wahhabi Muslims as well as believers in other faiths.” [10]

It’s widely reported that the obscenely opulent and morally-perhaps-not-entirely-of- the-highest-standards Saudi Royal Family made a Faustian deal with Wahhabite leaders. The deal supposedly, was that the Wahhabists are free to export their fanatical brand of Islam around to the Islamic populations of the world in return for agreeing to leave the Saudi Royals alone.[11] There are, however, other dark and dirty spoons stirring the Wahhabite-Salafist Saudi stew.

Little known is the fact that the present form of aggressive Saudi Wahhabism, in reality a kind of fusion between imported jihadi Salafists from Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and the fundamentalist Saudi Wahhabites. Leading Salafist members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood were introduced into the Saudi Kingdom in the 1950’s by the CIA in a complex series of events, when Nasser cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood following an assassination attempt. By the 1960’s an influx of Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia fleeing Nasserite repression, had filled many of the leading teaching posts in Saudi religious schools. One student there was a young well-to-do Saudi, Osama bin Laden.  [12]

During the Third Reich, Hitler Germany had supported the Muslim Brotherhood as a weapon against the British in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East. Marc Erikson describes the Nazi roots of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood thus:

…as Italian and German fascism sought greater stakes in the Middle East in the 1930s and ’40s to counter British and French controlling power, close collaboration between fascist agents and Islamist leaders ensued. During the 1936-39 Arab Revolt, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of German military intelligence, sent agents and money to support the Palestine uprising against the British, as did Muslim Brotherhood founder and “supreme guide” Hassan al-Banna. A key individual in the fascist-Islamist nexus and go-between for the Nazis and al-Banna became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini.[13]

After the defeat of Germany, British Intelligence moved in to take over control of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ultimately, for financial and other reasons, the British decided to hand their assets within the Muslim Brotherhood over to their CIA colleagues in the 1950s. [14]

According to former US Justice Department Nazi researcher John Loftus,  “during the 1950s, the CIA evacuated the Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood to Saudi Arabia. Now, when they arrived in Saudi Arabia, some of the leading lights of the Muslim Brotherhood, like Dr Abdullah Azzam, became the teachers in the madrassas, the religious schools. And there they combined the doctrines of Nazism with this weird Islamic cult, Wahhabism.” [15]

“Everyone thinks that Islam is this fanatical religion, but it is not,” Loftus continues. “They think that Islam–the Saudi version of Islam–is typical, but it’s not. The Wahhabi cult has been condemned as a heresy more than 60 times by the Muslim nations. But when the Saudis got wealthy, they bought a lot of silence. This is a very harsh cult. Wahhabism was only practised by the Taliban and in Saudi Arabia–that’s how extreme it is. It really has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a very peaceful and tolerant religion. It always had good relationships with the Jews for the first thousand years of its existence.” [16]

Loftus identified the significance of what today is emerging from the shadows to take over Egypt under Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi, and the so-called Syrian National Council, dominated in reality by the Muslim Brotherhood and publicly led by the more “politically correct” or presentable likes of Bassma Kodmani. Kodmani, foreign affairs spokesman for the SNC was twice an invited guest at the Bilderberg elite gathering, latest in Chantilly, Virginia earlier this year.[17]

The most bizarre and alarming feature of the US-financed  regime changes set into motion in 2010, which have led to the destruction of the secular Arab regime of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muhammar Qaddafi in Libya, and the secular regime of President Ben Ali in Tunisia, and which have wreaked savage destruction across the Middle East, especially in the past eighteen months in Syria, is the pattern of emerging power grabs by representatives of the murky Salafist Muslim Brotherhood.

By informed accounts, a Saudi-financed Sunni Islamic Muslim Brotherhood dominates the members of the exile Syrian National Council that is backed by the US State Department’s Secretary Clinton and by Hollande’s France. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is tied, not surprisingly to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood of President Mohammed Morsi who recently in a meeting of the Non-Aligned in Iran called openly for the removal of Syria’s Assad, a logical step if his Muslim Brothers in the present Syrian National Council are to take the reins of power. The Saudis are also rumored to have financed the ascent to power in Tunisia of the governing Islamist Ennahda Party,[18] and are documented to be financing the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian National Council against President Bashar al-Assad. [19]

Part III: Morsi’s Reign of Salafi Terror

Indicative of the true agenda of this Muslim Brotherhood and related jihadists today is the fact that once they have power, they drop the veil of moderation and reconciliation and reveal their violently intolerant roots. This is visible in Egypt today under Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi.

Unreported in mainstream Western media to date are alarming direct reports from Christian missionary organizations in Egypt that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood has already begun to drop the veil of “moderation and conciliation” and show its brutal totalitarian Salafist colors, much as Khomeini’s radical Sharia forces did in Iran after taking control in 1979-81.

In a letter distributed by the Christian Aid Mission (CAM), a Christian Egyptian missionary wrote that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood “announced they would destroy the country if Morsi didn’t win, but they also said they will take revenge from all those who voted for [his opponent Ahmed] Shafiq, especially the Christians as they are sure we did vote for Shafiq. Yesterday they began by killing two believers in el Sharqiya because of this,” the missionary added, speaking on condition of anonymity.[20]

This report came only weeks after Egyptian State TV (under Morsi’s control) showed ghastly video footage of a convert from Islam to Christianity being murdered by Muslims. The footage showed a young man being held down by masked men with a knife to his throat. As one man was heard chanting Muslim prayers in Arabic, mostly condemning Christianity, another man holding the knife to the Christian convert’s throat began to cut, slowly severing the head amid cries of “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is great”), according to transcripts. In the letter, the Egyptian missionary leader added that, “soon after Morsi won, Christians in upper Egypt were forcibly prevented from going to churches.” Many Muslims, the letter claimed, “also began to speak to women in the streets that they had to wear Islamic clothing including the head covering. They act as if they got the country for their own, it’s theirs now.” [21]

Already in 2011 Morsi’s Salafist followers began attacking and destroying Sufi mosques across Egypt. According to the authoritative newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm (Today’s Egyptian), 16 historic mosques in Alexandria belonging to Sufi orders have been marked for destruction by so-called ‘Salafis’. Alexandria has 40 mosques associated with Sufis, and is the headquarters for 36 Sufi groups. Half a million Sufis live in the city, out of a municipal total of four million people. Aggression against the Sufis in Egypt has included a raid on Alexandria’s most distinguished mosque, named for, and housing, the tomb of the 13th century Sufi Al-Mursi Abu’l Abbas.[22]

Notably, the so-called “democratically elected” regime in Libya following the toppling of Mohamar Qaddafi by NATO bombs in 2011, has also been zealous in destroying Sufi mosques and places of worhip. In August this year, UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova expressed “grave concern” at the destruction by Islamic Jihadists of Sufi sites in Zliten, Misrata and Tripoli and urged perpetrators to “cease the destruction immediately.” [23] Under behind-the-scenes machinations the Libyan government is dominated by Jihadists and by followers of the Muslim Brotherhood, as in Tunisia and Egypt. [24]

The explosive cocktail of violence inherent in allowing the rise to power of Salafist Islamists across the Middle East was clear to see, symbolically enough on the night of September 11,^th when a mob of angry supporters of the fanatical Salafist group, Ansar Al-Sharia, murdered the US Ambassador to Libya and three US diplomats, burning the US Consulate in Bengazi to the ground in protest over a YouTube release of a film by an American filmmaker showing the Prophet Mohammed indulging in multiple sex affairs and casting doubt on his role as God’s messenger. Ironically that US Ambassador had played a key role in toppling Qaddafi and opening the door to the Salafist takeover in Libya. At the same time angry mobs of thousands of Salafists surrounded the US Embassy in Cairo in protest to the US film. [25]

Ansar Al-Sharia (“Partisans of Islamic law” in Arabic) reportedly is a spinoff of Al-Qaeda and claims organizations across the Middle East from Yemen to Tunisia to Iraq, Egypt and Libya. Ansar al-Sharia says it is reproducing the model of Sharia or strict Islamic law espoused by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic State of Iraq, a militant umbrella group that includes al-Qaeda in Iraq. The core of the group are jihadists who came out of an “Islamic state”, either in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, or among jihadists in Iraq after the US-led invasion in 2003.[26]

The deliberate detonation now of a new round of Salafist fundamentalist Jihad terror inside Muslim regions of the Russian Caucasus is exquisitely timed politically to put maximum pressure at home on the government of Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Putin and the Russian Government are the strongest and most essential backer of the current Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, and for Russia as well the maintenance of Russia’s only Mediterranean naval base at Syria’s Tartus port is vital strategically. At the same time, Obama’s sly message to Medvedev to wait until Obama’s re-election to evaluate US intent towards Russia and Putin’s cryptic recent comment that a compromise with a re-elected President Obama might be possible, but not with a President Romney, [27] indicate that the Washington “stick-and-carrot” or hard cop-soft cop tactics with Moscow might tempt Russia to sacrifice major geopolitical alliances, perhaps even that special close and recent geopolitical alliance with China.[28] Were that to happen, the World might witness a “reset” in US-Russian relations with catastrophic consequences for world peace.

F. William Engdahl*  is the author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

Notes:

Dear Readers,

Welcome to the newly redesigned Global Research website!

We are very proud to launch an updated version of our website, featuring the same timely and analytical content as before, in a display that will be easier for our readers to navigate so that you can get the information you need as quickly and easily as possible.

On this website, you will be able to access an archive of more than 30,000 articles published by Global Research.

We thank all of our readers for the feedback you have sent us over the years and hope you will enjoy your browsing experience.

These changes would not be possible without your support, and for that we extend our sincere appreciation.

To help us cover the costs of important projects and necessary upgrades like this, we kindly ask that you consider making a donation to Global Research.

We also take this opportunity to invite you to become a Member of Global Research

If we stand together, we can fight media lies and expose the truth. There is too much at stake to choose ignorance.

Be aware, stay informed, spread the message of peace far and wide.

Feedback and suggestions regarding our new website are most welcome. To post a comment, kindly visit us on the Global Research facebook page

Sincerely,

The Global Research Team

[First published on December 17, 2019]

“Once upon a midnight clear, there was a child’s cry, a blazing star hung over a stable, and wise men came with birthday gifts. We haven’t forgotten that night down the centuries. We celebrate it with stars on Christmas trees, with the sound of bells, and with gifts… We forget nobody, adult or child. All the stockings are filled, all that is, except one. And we have even forgotten to hang it up. The stocking for the child born in a manger. It’s his birthday we’re celebrating. Don’t let us ever forget that. Let us ask ourselves what He would wish for most. And then, let each put in his share, loving kindness, warm hearts, and a stretched out hand of tolerance. All the shining gifts that make peace on earth.”—The Bishop’s Wife (1947)

The Christmas story of a baby born in a manger is a familiar one.

The Roman Empire, a police state in its own right, had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any of the inns, they stayed in a stable (a barn), where Mary gave birth to a baby boy, Jesus. Warned that the government planned to kill the baby, Jesus’ family fled with him to Egypt until it was safe to return to their native land.

Yet what if Jesus had been born 2,000 years later?

What if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, Jesus had been born at this moment in time? What kind of reception would Jesus and his family be given? Would we recognize the Christ child’s humanity, let alone his divinity? Would we treat him any differently than he was treated by the Roman Empire? If his family were forced to flee violence in their native country and sought refuge and asylum within our borders, what sanctuary would we offer them?

A singular number of churches across the country are asking those very questions, and their conclusions are being depicted with unnerving accuracy by nativity scenes in which Jesus and his family are separated, segregated and caged in individual chain-link pens, topped by barbed wire fencing.

These nativity scenes are a pointed attempt to remind the modern world that the narrative about the birth of Jesus is one that speaks on multiple fronts to a world that has allowed the life, teachings and crucifixion of Jesus to be drowned out by partisan politics, secularism, materialism and war.

The modern-day church has largely shied away from applying Jesus’ teachings to modern problems such as war, poverty, immigration, etc., but thankfully there have been individuals throughout history who ask themselves and the world: what would Jesus do?

What would Jesus—the baby born in Bethlehem who grew into an itinerant preacher and revolutionary activist, who not only died challenging the police state of his day (namely, the Roman Empire) but spent his adult life speaking truth to power, challenging the status quo of his day, and pushing back against the abuses of the Roman Empire—do?

Dietrich Bonhoeffer asked himself what Jesus would have done about the horrors perpetrated by Hitler and his assassins. The answer: Bonhoeffer risked his life to undermine the tyranny at the heart of Nazi Germany.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn asked himself what Jesus would have done about the soul-destroying gulags and labor camps of the Soviet Union. The answer: Solzhenitsyn found his voice and used it to speak out about government oppression and brutality.

Martin Luther King Jr. asked himself what Jesus would have done about America’s warmongering. The answer: declaring “my conscience leaves me no other choice,” King risked widespread condemnation when he publicly opposed the Vietnam War on moral and economic grounds.

Even now, despite the popularity of the phrase “What Would Jesus Do?” (WWJD) in Christian circles, there remains a disconnect in the modern church between the teachings of Christ and the suffering of what Jesus in Matthew 25 refers to as the “least of these.”

As the parable states:

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”

This is not a theological gray area: Jesus was unequivocal about his views on many things, not the least of which was charity, compassion, war, tyranny and love.

After all, Jesus—the revered preacher, teacher, radical and prophet—was born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of the American police state. When he grew up, he had powerful, profound things to say, things that would change how we view people, alter government policies and change the world. “Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and “Love your enemies” are just a few examples of his most profound and revolutionary teachings.

When confronted by those in authority, Jesus did not shy away from speaking truth to power. Indeed, his teachings undermined the political and religious establishment of his day. It cost him his life. He was eventually crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.

Can you imagine what Jesus’ life would have been like if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, he had been born and raised in the American police state?

Consider the following if you will.

Had Jesus been born in the era of the America police state, rather than traveling to Bethlehem for a census, Jesus’ parents would have been mailed a 28-page American Community Survey, a mandatory government questionnaire documenting their habits, household inhabitants, work schedule, how many toilets are in your home, etc. The penalty for not responding to this invasive survey can go as high as $5,000.

Instead of being born in a manger, Jesus might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and shepherds bringing gifts, however, the baby’s parents might have been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on prosecuting them for the home birth. One couple in Washington had all three of their children removed after social services objected to the two youngest being birthed in an unassisted home delivery.

Had Jesus been born in a hospital, his blood and DNA would have been taken without his parents’ knowledge or consent and entered into a government biobank. While most states require newborn screening, a growing number are holding onto that genetic material long-term for research, analysis and purposes yet to be disclosed.

Then again, had Jesus’ parents been undocumented immigrants, they and the newborn baby might have been shuffled to a profit-driven, private prison for illegals where they first would have been separated from each other, the children detained in make-shift cages, and the parents eventually turned into cheap, forced laborers for corporations such as Starbucks, Microsoft, Walmart, and Victoria’s Secret. There’s quite a lot of money to be made from imprisoning immigrants, especially when taxpayers are footing the bill.

From the time he was old enough to attend school, Jesus would have been drilled in lessons of compliance and obedience to government authorities, while learning little about his own rights. Had he been daring enough to speak out against injustice while still in school, he might have found himself tasered or beaten by a school resource officer, or at the very least suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that punishes minor infractions as harshly as more serious offenses.

Had Jesus disappeared for a few hours let alone days as a 12-year-old, his parents would have been handcuffed, arrested and jailed for parental negligence. Parents across the country have been arrested for far less “offenses” such as allowing their children to walk to the park unaccompanied and play in their front yard alone.

Rather than disappearing from the history books from his early teenaged years to adulthood, Jesus’ movements and personal data—including his biometrics—would have been documented, tracked, monitored and filed by governmental agencies and corporations such as Google and Microsoft. Incredibly, 95 percent of school districts share their student records with outside companies that are contracted to manage data, which they then use to market products to us.

From the moment Jesus made contact with an “extremist” such as John the Baptist, he would have been flagged for surveillance because of his association with a prominent activist, peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11, the FBI has actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations on a broad range of activist groups, from animal rights groups to poverty relief, anti-war groups and other such “extremist” organizations.

Jesus’ anti-government views would certainly have resulted in him being labeled a domestic extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

While traveling from community to community, Jesus might have been reported to government officials as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” programs. Many states, including New York, are providing individuals with phone apps that allow them to take photos of suspicious activity and report them to their state Intelligence Center, where they are reviewed and forwarded to law-enforcement agencies.

Rather than being permitted to live as an itinerant preacher, Jesus might have found himself threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping outside. In fact, the number of cities that have resorted to criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping, sleeping in vehicles, loitering and begging in public has doubled.

Viewed by the government as a dissident and a potential threat to its power, Jesus might have had government spies planted among his followers to monitor his activities, report on his movements, and entrap him into breaking the law. Such Judases today—called informants—often receive hefty paychecks from the government for their treachery.

Had Jesus used the internet to spread his radical message of peace and love, he might have found his blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine his integrity, discredit him or plant incriminating information online about him. At the very least, he would have had his website hacked and his email monitored.

Had Jesus attempted to feed large crowds of people, he would have been threatened with arrest for violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food without a permit. Florida officials arrested a 90-year-old man for feeding the homeless on a public beach.

Had Jesus spoken publicly about his 40 days in the desert and his conversations with the devil, he might have been labeled mentally ill and detained in a psych ward against his will for a mandatory involuntary psychiatric hold with no access to family or friends. One Virginia man was arrested, strip searched, handcuffed to a table, diagnosed as having “mental health issues,” and locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait.

Without a doubt, had Jesus attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and rage against the materialism of religious institutions, he would have been charged with a hate crime. Currently, 45 states and the federal government have hate crime laws on the books.

Had anyone reported Jesus to the police as being potentially dangerous, he might have found himself confronted—and killed—by police officers for whom any perceived act of non-compliance (a twitch, a question, a frown) can result in them shooting first and asking questions later.

Rather than having armed guards capture Jesus in a public place, government officials would have ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on Jesus and his followers, complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are upwards of 80,000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year, many on unsuspecting Americans who have no defense against such government invaders, even when such raids are done in error.

Instead of being detained by Roman guards, Jesus might have been made to “disappear” into a secret government detention center where he would have been interrogated, tortured and subjected to all manner of abuses. Chicago police have “disappeared” more than 7,000 people into a secret, off-the-books interrogation warehouse at Homan Square.

Charged with treason and labeled a domestic terrorist, Jesus might have been sentenced to a life-term in a private prison where he would have been forced to provide slave labor for corporations or put to death by way of the electric chair or a lethal mixture of drugs.

Indeed, as I show in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, given the nature of government then and now, it is painfully evident that whether Jesus had been born in our modern age or his own, he still would have died at the hands of a police state.

Thus, as we draw near to Christmas with its celebrations and gift-giving, we would do well to remember that what happened on that starry night in Bethlehem is only part of the story. That baby in the manger grew up to be a man who did not turn away from evil but instead spoke out against it, and we must do no less.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People  is available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

As sanções anti-Rússia continuam a ter consequências econômicas extremamente negativas para os próprios países ocidentais, especialmente na Europa, onde a crise energética parece longe de terminar. De acordo com relatórios recentes, os estados europeus já estão a esgotar as suas reservas de gás, correndo um elevado risco de escassez massiva nos próximos meses. Isto mostra claramente como a UE agiu de forma irresponsável e anti-estratégica ao implementar medidas coercivas que não afetaram Moscou, mas prejudicaram profundamente a própria Europa.

Segundo o Financial Times (FT), a UE está a expandir as suas retiradas das instalações de armazenamento de gás, bem como a lançar um esforço sem precedentes para acumular novas reservas dado o elevado risco de escassez. O jornal adianta que a quantidade de gás em estoque caiu 19%, atingindo o nível mais baixo desde a crise energética de 2021.

Desde Setembro, o nível de armazenamento de gás da UE caiu para 75%, em comparação com 90% no ano passado durante o mesmo período. Este valor é considerado baixo e suscita preocupações entre os responsáveis, pois é altamente recomendável que os países mantenham enormes reservas de gás, especialmente durante o inverno, quando o consumo de energia é maior.

“A UE está a esvaziar as suas instalações de armazenamento de gás ao ritmo mais rápido desde a crise energética de há três anos, à medida que o clima mais frio aumenta a procura e o continente enfrenta um declínio nas importações marítimas (…) A última vez que as reservas de gás do continente foram esvaziadas este rapidamente em meados de Dezembro foi em 2021, quando a Rússia começou a cortar o fornecimento de gás por gasoduto antes da sua invasão em grande escala da Ucrânia. Os níveis de armazenamento da UE estão agora em 75 por cento (…) Os níveis de armazenamento estavam perto de 90 por cento de meados de dezembro do ano passado”, diz o artigo do FT.

Os especialistas ocidentais identificaram o inverno rigoroso na Europa como a principal causa da crise energética, o que parece ser um argumento falacioso. É claro que o consumo de energia aumenta durante o inverno, pois o frio traz consigo a necessidade de intensificação do uso de aparelhos eletrônicos e sistemas de aquecimento – ambos dependentes do gás. Contudo, isto não é suficiente para explicar as razões da crise.

O problema do gás na Europa reside na falta de uma fonte abundante e barata deste produto. Anteriormente, ao manterem uma parceria energética com a Rússia, os países europeus, especialmente potências industriais como a Alemanha, dispunham de uma fonte de gás segura, barata e ilimitada, que permitia aos cidadãos e às empresas consumir energia em grande escala sem se preocuparem com quaisquer problemas de abastecimento. No entanto, esta situação mudou em 2022, quando a UE decidiu aderir à onda irresponsável de sanções anti-russas promovida pelos EUA.

Ao cortarem a cooperação com a Rússia, os países da UE perderam o acesso à fonte de energia mais segura do continente europeu, tornando-se dependentes de fontes estrangeiras – muitas das quais passam por rotas longas e caras, como o gás americano. Além disso, como sublinham os especialistas do Financial Times, a inserção da Europa no mercado global do gás também a tornou apenas mais um comprador num cenário competitivo, onde vários países procuram simultaneamente acesso à commodity. Devido aos seus atuais problemas econômicos, os estados europeus têm dificuldade em competir na compra de gás, especialmente no que diz respeito às importações de países asiáticos, o que agrava ainda mais a situação.

Na prática, a crise energética e econômica da Europa é um ciclo vicioso: sem o gás russo, os países europeus não têm energia suficiente para abastecer as suas indústrias, o que leva a um declínio da situação econômica. Sem indústria, não há dinheiro para importar gás em quantidades suficientes, tornando impossível escapar ao ciclo de crise. Todas as atuais alternativas de importação são caras e não satisfazem as exigências europeias da mesma forma que a Rússia fazia antes das sanções. Esta situação deverá piorar ainda mais a partir de agora, uma vez que o regime de Kiev prometeu proibir o fornecimento de gás russo à Europa através do seu território, extinguindo de uma vez por todas o que resta da parceria energética Moscou-UE.

Na verdade, o futuro da Europa parece incerto e perigoso. A UE está a sofrer as consequências dos seus próprios erros, embora pareça incapaz de compreender isso e de tomar medidas pragmáticas para reverter os erros. Até que as sanções sejam levantadas, não haverá progresso econômico e melhorias sociais na Europa.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês : https://infobrics.org/post/43071

Imagem :  InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

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

Following the abrupt and mysterious change of circumstances in Syria, the collective West propaganda machinery went into overdrive to pillory the previous government for a variety of heinous offences, real and imagined. The largely invented horror stories publicised after 8 December are shaped by an unmistakably political agenda. They serve as a cynical alibi for the utter devastation wrought upon Syria by terrorist, head-chopping gangs trained, financed, and unleashed by the very regional and ultramarine powers which are engaged in the spreading of those falsehoods.

.

.

.

Attentive readers will recall numerous false flags and horror porn mantras about “Assad killing his own people” that resonated throughout the decade and a half long assault on Syria. Most were quickly discredited as nasty fabrications. But, of course, the purpose of propaganda is not to demonstrate facts but to influence perceptions and create indelible subliminal impressions. In this infamous category, the alleged Ghouta chemical weapon attack on Syrian civilians, falsely attributed to the Assad government and subsequently debunked, is a salient example. The fabricated incident was thoroughly investigated and ultimately  found to be devoid of substance, but attesting to the power of professionally conducted disinformation even many years after discreditation Ghouta remains a vibrant propaganda meme firmly embedded in the public mind as an atrocity typifying the malevolence of the “Assad regime.”

No sooner did the rebranded Al Qaeda terrorists march into Damascus than, as if on cue, on 9 December the collective West media initiated an aggressive attempt to shift public attention away from the victorious radical thugs and their sordid past. Saydnaya Prison, previously (if we disregard a 2017 Amnesty International mention) a virtually unknown venue now unveiled as the “Assad regime slaughterhouse,” suddenly was thrust into the limelight in a sensationalistic narrative that was absurd on its face. It was alleged by the BBC, a known source of trustworthy information, that Saydnaya was a horrific dungeon consisting of multiple underground levels, each independently secured by electronic doors. Within this prison complex, it was further alleged, “more than 100,000 detainees who can be seen on CCTV monitors” were trapped and dying without food or water and chocking from lack of ventilation, abandoned by sadistic Assad guards who, when fleeing the premises, malevolently absconded with the codes required to open the electronic door systems.

Left unexplained is how over the years the logistical operation necessary to sustain a prison facility the size of a moderate sized town escaped the notice of aerial surveillance platforms that were observing every inch of Syrian territory for the duration of the conflict. How was it possible after regime change to analyse CCTV monitor data in just a single day in order to reach the conclusion that “over 100,000 prisoners” were trapped inside? And if those CCTV data had indeed been sifted through why have they not been shown to the international public to corroborate beyond doubt the emerging human tragedy of such mind-boggling proportions? Are the electronic portals to the underground cell complexes so impregnable that they may be opened only by the use of the unavailable codes in the guards’ possession, or might there be other means of forcing them and liberating the endangered prisoners?

The latest news on this topic is that “Syria rebels [are] unable to open Assad’s Sednaya ‘Red Cells’ where prisoners are ‘choking to death’.” The problem is that this news item is dated 9 December, but now it is over two weeks later. Since 9 December there has been no follow-up, no updates on how successful the rescuers may have been in opening the electronic doors and gaining access to those trapped inside. In fact, the distressing Saydnaya story has since been obliterated completely from the Western media news radar screen, as abruptly as it appeared. Now that the shocking and unsubstantiated allegations have had their psychological effect on the public mind a complete blackout prevails.

But what has propaganda got to do with logic and coherence?

However after the sensational allegations that have been made, what actually did or did not happen in Saydnaya is important and must be ascertained lest the international public be played for fools. It may reasonably be assumed that after more than two weeks without food, water, or ventilation, by now the vast majority of the wretched prisoners, extravagantly claimed to number over 100,000, should be dead. The stench of their decomposing bodies should be unbearable in a wide radius around the prison complex, perhaps reaching even as far as liberated Damascus, which is 30 kilometres away. It makes no sense to suddenly impose silence over a potential atrocity of such an appalling nature and magnitude which in the eyes of the entire world would irrefutably convict the “Assad regime,” whilst exonerating the collective West from complicity in the crimes of its proxies and in Syria’s callous destruction.

It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Saydnaya affair was conceived as but an overture for a larger propaganda operation that is to follow, to fabricate a Syrian Srebrenica. Besides lending credence to the long list of false flag allegations and outright lies upon which the collective West’s intervention in Syria was based, now crowned with the apparent victory of the terrorists they sponsored, the impending Syrian Srebrenica operation is designed also to diminish Russia’s stature for supposedly sheltering a “perpetrator of genocide.”

As has been reported, the propaganda props, one by one, are meticulously being put in place. Photographs of vast empty spaces are being represented as “killing fields” where allegedly hundreds of thousands of Assad’s victims lie buried. Individuals claiming to have taken part in the mass burials are brought forth to embellish the photographic images with well-rehearsed spin.

We have yet to see however a single disinterred body, not to speak of being shown reliable evidence regarding the time, cause, and manner of death. And even the scant information that is provided is conditioned by weasel words that hundreds of thousands of bodies of Assad regime victims “could be buried in a mass grave east of Damascus.” They could be, but then also perhaps not. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, of which at present there is none. Bare assertions are insufficient.

A dependable indication of how the problem of missing bodies will be solved, and that the fix is already in, is the casual announcement that the task of investigating Syria’s “killing fields” will be entrusted to the notorious White Helmets. They are a fake civil defence outfit set up by British intelligence early in the conflict to pose as a humanitarian organisation. There is an exact parallel between the announced plan and the way that, in the 1990s and early 2000s, Srebrenica forensic issues were handled in order to provide the Hague Tribunal with fake evidence of “genocide.” The International Commission on Missing Persons [ICMP] which did the job then was founded specifically for that purpose in 1996 under the tight control of leading NATO powers, and with the proviso that the chairman of ICMP must always be a US citizen nominated by the State Department. ICMP performed the tasks assigned to it with flying colours, having fabricated in its laboratories much of the Srebrenica “genocide” evidence for the use of the Hague Tribunal.

The White Helmets, founded by MI6 operative James Le Mesurier, will undoubtedly acquit themselves equally well in performing a similarly dishonourable task.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Stephen Karganovic is president of “Srebrenica Historical Project,” an NGO registered in the Netherlands to investigate the factual matrix and background of events that took place in Srebrenica in July of 1995. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

Donald Trump Calls for the Annexation of Canada. Déjà Vu. General Douglas MacArthur Was to Bomb Vancouver, Halifax, Montreal and Quebec City. This Is No Joking Matter

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 25, 2024

As “Leader of the Free World”, Donald Trump’s twisted narrative is for Canada to join “MAGA America” and for Justin to be nominated  as Governor of  the 51st state. It started as a joke at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, which unfolded into bitter laughter.

Proposed Peace Amendment to the United States Constitution. Emanuel Pastreich

By Emanuel Pastreich, December 24, 2024

The first precedent is the Kellogg-Briand Pact to outlaw war (specifically wars of aggression) that was signed by the United States and 15 other nations on August 27, 1928. The Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war as an instrument of national policy and it called upon its signatories to settle disputes by peaceful means.

Cancer Treatments Nullified, Eyes Wrecked by Ozempic: Studies

By Ben Bartee, December 23, 2024

As I’ve covered previously, Ozempic lovingly supplies its beneficiary with turbo-cancer. But then, we now have evidence to show, ever generous with its side effects, it nullifies the effectiveness of conventional cancer treatments — by a huge margin.

Religious Leaders and Scholars Should Unite to Help in Creating a Safe World of Justice Based Peace

By Bharat Dogra, December 26, 2024

I have been advocating for a very long time the need for religions to promote the cause of peace, and sometimes while speaking on this issue I have been interrupted rather rudely and asked—but can you deny that there are actually passages in several religious books which advocate the use of violence in favor of the followers of that particular religion?

The Role of Vitamin D Deficiency in Mental Illness

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, December 23, 2024

Vitamin D receptors are not just limited to your skeletal system for bone health — they’re also present in various brain regions like your hippocampus, substantia nigra and cerebellum.

Israelis Invade Syria: Who Will Stop Israel?

By Nicolas J. S. Davies, December 23, 2024

The United States, Turkey and Israel all responded to the fall of the Assad government in Damascus by launching bombing campaigns on Syria. Israel also attacked and destroyed most of the Syrian Navy in port at Latakia, and invaded Syria from the long-occupied Golan Heights, advancing to within 16 miles of the capital, Damascus.

Mercenaries Eager for Money But Do Not Want to Die for Ukraine

By Ahmed Adel, December 23, 2024

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken recently announced a new $725 million military aid package for Kiev. During the administration of US President Joe Biden, a total of $62 billion was allocated to the Eastern European country. The US military industry and US private military companies operating in Ukraine earn from this.

[First published by Global Research on December 27, 2022]

As mayor of the Palestinian city of Bethlehem, I have the privilege of lighting the Christmas tree in Manger Square and attending Midnight Mass at one of the world’s oldest churches, built in the fourth century by the Byzantine Empress Helena.

But my most important duty is to help give people faith and encouragement. When I lit the Christmas tree on December 3, I expressed my hope that the light would radiate to the world our desire for peace, and we prayed together that Christmas would fulfill its promise and bring people together.

Bringing people together has two meanings for Palestinians living under occupation. It can mean the togetherness of time shared with friends and relatives. But as the mayor of the city where it all began for Christians 2,000 years ago, I must think of the larger Palestinian family.

The fact that we have been living for decades under occupation means that we cannot enjoy the sense of togetherness that all people want during their great holidays, particularly the religious ones. Our people in Gaza cannot come freely to Bethlehem, and our brothers and sisters in Jordan and other countries cannot easily obtain visas from an occupying power that applies exaggerated entry restrictions. Citizens of other Middle East countries, like Lebanon and Syria, which have no peace agreement with Israel, have no chance at all.

The fact that a Palestinian Christian like me, or a Christian living in a nearby Arab country, cannot simply come to Bethlehem for Christmas should be unacceptable to everyone — as should the eight-metre-high wall that still encircles our city, despite being declared illegal by the International Court of Justice in 2004. This wall is a constant reminder of separation rather than togetherness.

This year marks 150 years since the municipality of Bethlehem was established. Under Palestinian Authority law, a Christian Arab serves as mayor here and in similar Palestinian cities. But the challenge of keeping Christian Arabs in Palestine has become more difficult because of the occupation. While many Palestinians suffer under foreign military rule and wish that they could leave, Palestinian Christians are leaving in larger numbers simply because they have connections with the wider world through churches and the tourism business.

Bethlehem’s population has grown over the years, and so has the number of hotel rooms — something unavailable to Mary and Joseph 2,000 years ago. But the growth of our population and tourist accommodations has been restricted by the wall Israel built on our land, and by the occupiers’ refusal to allow us to pursue normal urban planning, partly because of Israeli settlement activity. These settlements, too, have long been considered illegal by the United Nations Security Council, yet Israel continues to build and confiscate land in violation of international law, which forbids occupiers from benefiting from their military conquests.

Christmas is celebrated three times in Bethlehem, reflecting the rites of the three main churches that have been here for centuries. Catholics and those following the Gregorian calendar hold midnight mass on December 25, while Orthodox Christians, who follow the eastern calendar, begin their Christmas celebrations on January 6. Armenians hold the ritual on January 18. As we do every year, we will observe all the formalities dictated by the Ottoman Status Quo. This centuries-old system of unwritten rules requires a very strict protocol governing where local leaders meet the head of the respective church and who is allowed to accompany the patriarchs and bishops at various entrance points.

Ten years ago, UNESCO declared Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity to be in danger. After extensive renovation by the Palestinian government, funded by private and official donors, the church’s mosaics and other elements, damaged by a fire centuries ago, were restored. But we Palestinian Christians, who have been living continuously in Bethlehem for 2,000 years, do not want our churches to become museums. We want Christian pilgrims from around the world, including Arab Christians, to come to Bethlehem to visit the living stones. For now, we are blessed that our people still hope and insist on a better tomorrow despite the absence of any serious peace talks.

When we lit the Christmas tree, we prayed that the light from Bethlehem — from the darkness of military occupation — would reach the entire world. Our faith is not in a change of heart by our occupiers, but in the justice of our cause. Two millennia ago, the skies of Bethlehem were lit as angels heralded the birth of Jesus by declaring, “Peace on Earth and goodwill to all.” This Christmas, all of us in his hometown continue to yearn for that true peace.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Hanna Hanania is the mayor of Bethlehem.

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

Once upon a time, a man entered a store.

Behind the counter stood an angel, whom he asked: “What do you have to offer me?”

The angel replied: “Anything you want, and for free.”

Then the man called out:

“If so, I would like to have for myself and all beings in the whole world,

Good health, and enough to eat, and clean water, and freedom, and love,

and no one who is lonely and must endure pain or suffering,

and bright children’s eyes, and a smile every day,

and a healthy nature, and happiness, and good air, and no more poverty,

and no more war, and, and, and….”

Then the angel interrupted him:

“Dear person, we don’t offer finished products here.

We only carry seeds.”

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Translated from German by Peter Koenig

Featured image source

In most religions and their scriptures we find very important messages of justice and peace. These can be very helpful for creating a world based on justice and peace.

Unfortunately if we look at the real-life history of the world, we find simply too many instances of religion being used very wrongly to promote not just injustice and violence but even wars and genocides.

To this we should add another contradiction. When several religious leaders speak about their own religion, they speak about the positive aspects but when they speak about other religions then they openly or subtly highlight the negative aspects.

When Mahatma Gandhi was asked to explain such contradictions, he advised that when you are reading the scriptures of a religion, then read these from the perspective of the followers of that religion instead of only trying to find any flaws or objectionable passages.

If we follow this advice, then despite all the earlier misuse of religion for promoting sectarian violence and various injustices, still there is a lot of hope for various religions to together contribute to creating a safe world based on peace and justice.

For this it is very important for the most capable and learned scholars and leaders of various religions to get together to create institutions and platforms for providing interpretations of religions which can be supportive for peace and justice. Without such guidance from those leaders and scholars who are widely respected by various religious communities, misuse of religion for spreading injustice and violence, even genocides, can continue, as we have seen even in very recent times.

I have been advocating for a very long time the need for religions to promote the cause of peace, and sometimes while speaking on this issue I have been interrupted rather rudely and asked—but can you deny that there are actually passages in several religious books which advocate the use of violence in favor of the followers of that particular religion? My answer to this is—most of these scriptures were written a long time back, and sometimes over a long time, and were influenced by contemporary contexts. What appeared relevant in a particular exceptional context is not relevant for all times. To give an example, if some people are facing a very big threat from a very hostile force at a particular time and if some violent action is advocated in this context, then obviously this is not meant for a particular context and not for all times.

Instead of getting misguided by such passages, it is important to get to the core of justice and peace message of various religions which is most needed in our times.

Another important aspect is to recognize the need for social progress in tune with changing times. What may have been desirable in certain contexts hundreds of years back cannot be said to be necessarily relevant or meaningful today; in fact what was relevant or at least acceptable hundreds of years ago may be considered highly oppressive and discriminatory today by women in particular. So religion should not stand in the way of meaningful, much needed social change and progress. At the same time, there is no universal model for such change and various cultures and religions should be free to select their own path and pace of social change and progress, and this cultural diversity should be accepted.

Within this framework, there should be a broad-based discourse among various respected religious scholars and leaders to advance the interpretations of various religious texts in accordance with a broad framework of peace, justice, basic human rights (including gender rights) and social progress. Of course in the process of this discourse there will be differences and debates among various religious leaders and scholars, but this is OK as long as there is genuine progress towards reaching widespread agreement on understanding of religions based broadly on peace, justice, non-discrimination, human rights and progress. An essential part of this discourse must to be to emphasize that there should be no discrimination or violence against anyone based on religion, religious sect, ethnicity, gender, color etc.

This process should culminate in the creation of a permanent assembly of world religions, supported by the United Nations, which creates a permanent base of scholars and leaders of various religions who are committed to religion being supportive towards peace, justice and social progress. Under their leadership the task of such scholarship and mobilization should progress on continuing basis. This effort should also get the support of all forces of justice, peace and social progress.

Various religions have important messages relating to environment protection, and this should be brought out more clearly. All this has become even most important in times when basic life-nurturing conditions of our planet need to be protected from very serious environment problems as well as from weapons of mass destruction. Surely this is a cause so important that all religions should contribute unitedly for this protection.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, Man over Machine, Earth without Borders and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

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

.

.

The 1914 Truce: “The Power of Peace in the Time of War”.

In 2023, “Let It Happen Again” in Solidarity with Palestine.

Abolish All Wars

By Michel Chossudovsky 

.

This Christmas, I have Tears in my Eyes 

Let us have tears to our eyes in solidarity with the People of Palestine, in building a Christmas mass movement Worldwide, which confronts the ongoing mass slaughter before our very eyes. 

Let us recall The Christmas Truce of 1914, 109 years ago this Christmas Eve:

“Something happened in the early months of the “War to End All Wars” that put a tiny little blip of hope in the historical timeline of the organized mass slaughter that is war. The event was regarded by the professional military officer class to be so profound and so important (and so disturbing) that strategies were immediately put in place that would ensure that such an event could never happen again.” (Dr. Gary G. Kohls)

“The ordinary soldiers developed more and more antipathy and even hatred toward their own officers. Simultaneously, they started to empathize and even sympathize for the men facing them on the far side of the no man’s land.

The authorities condemned and prohibited all forms of fraternization and “live-and-let-live” in general. The officers sometimes put snipers to work when they suspected that fraternizations “threatened” to take place. 

The men learned in many ways that the official enemy was in fact not the real enemy, that the soldiers on the other side were human beings just like themselves.” (Dr. Jacques Pauwels, Excerpt from his book, See below)

Today, we are “fraternizing” and acting in solidarity Worldwide with the People of Palestine against the hegemonic agenda of the U.S. and it allies  which are waging an all-out war against humanity. 

Crimes against the Peace, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity

Both Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu as well as President Joe Biden are responsible for “war crimes”, “crimes against peace” and “crimes against humanity” as defined under Principe VI of the Nuremberg Charter: 

Disobey Unlawful Orders, Abandon the Battlefield 

According to Principle IV of the Nuremberg Charter:

“The fact that a person [e.g. Israeli, U.S.soldiers, pilots]  acted pursuant to order of his [her] Government or of a superior does not relieve him [her] from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him [her].”

Let us make that  “moral choice” possible, to enlisted Israeli, American, and NATO servicemen and women.

Disobey unlawful orders! Abandon the battlefield! … Refuse to fight in a war which violates Nuremberg Principle 6, The U.N. Charter and The Geneva Convention.  

Let us call upon Israeli and American soldiers and pilots “to abandon the battlefield”, as an act of refusal to participate in a criminal undertaking against the People of Gaza

Let  the World War I “Power of Peace in the Time of War” “Happen again”.

Confront corrupt politicians. 

The Tears in Your Eyes

May the tears of humanity in your eyes in December 2023 be conducive to a Worldwide movement to abolish  and “criminalize all wars”.

Let us break the insidious narrative of a handful of Wall Street billionaires who finance America’s “humanitarian wars”, unseat  the West’s “Classe politique” and establish the foundations of  “Real Democracy by the People for the People”. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December 23, 2023

***

An excerpt from Dr. Jacques Pauwels’ book The Great Class War, 1914-1918

.

.

The Great Class War (1914-1918)

Remember the 1914 Christmas Truce

by Jacques R. Pauwels

The statements made by Donald Trump to his guests at Mar-a-Lago were by no means spontaneous. Were they the object of prior discussions with his advisors?

The issue of Annexation as well an outright invasion of Canada have been on the drawing board of the U.S. War Department since the end the First World War.

 1. What Canadians Know: British North America Act. Confederation (1867)

The Bill to Annex Canada  was introduced in 1866, While it was not adopted by the House of Representatives, the text of the bill was nonetheless a draft of an invasion plan. It was to come into force upon its proclamation by US president Andrew Johnson (right). It included the territories of British North America from Newfoundland and the Maritimes to British Columbia, extending North into the Hudson Bay territory and North West Territory bordering onto “Russian America” (i.e Alaska) (see map below).

It consisted in the outright confiscation of public lands. It also implied US control over the trans Canada railway system, waterways, canals as well as control over the Saint Lawrence seaway.

The US government had also contemplated paying “compensation” to the Hudson Bay Company. This consisted essentially in a plan to confiscate the territories under H.B.C jurisdiction (see map), “in full discharge of all claims to territory or jurisdiction in North America, whether founded on the charter of the [Hudson Bay] company or any treaty, law, or usage.”

The United States will pay ten millions of dollars to the Hudson Bay Company in full discharge of all claims to territory or jurisdiction in North America, whether founded on the charter of the company or any treaty, law, or usage. (Article XI)

The territorial division of British North America is outlined in the bill.  The various constituent “Canadian states” would conform to US laws in setting up their legislature.

  2. What Canadians Do Not Know. Omitted From Our History Books 

While the 1866 Annexation project was stalled upon the adoption of the British North American Act in 1867, US plans to annex and/or invade Canada militarily were contemplated in the 1930s.

If US war plans for the conquest of Canada provoke laughter, that is a comment on those who are laughing, not a comment on the war plans. In its day, War Plan RED was not meant to be funny.

The 1928 draft stated that “it should be made quite clear to Canada that in a war she would suffer grievously.”

The 1930 draft stated that “large parts of CRIMSON territory will become theaters of military operations with consequent suffering to the population and widespread destruction and devastation of the country…“24 In October
1934, the Secretary of War and Secretary of Navy approved an amendment authorizing the strategic bombing of Halifax, Montreal and Quebec City by “immediate air operations on as large a scale as practicable.”

General Douglas MacArthur who subsequently led US forces in The Pacific during World War II, not to mention the conduct of the carpet bombing raids against North Korea (1950-1953) was actively involved from 1930-1937. General MacArthur had been appointed U.S Army Chief of Staff in 1930.

(Image: Gen. MacArthur with Gen. Eisenhower right)

The war plan was explicitly geared towards the conquest of Canada by the U.S.

“The U.S. Army’s mission, [written in capital letters], was “ULTIMATELY, TO GAIN COMPLETE CONTROL OF CRIMSON [Canada].”

According to Floyd Rudmin quoting the original war documents (link no longer functional).

“In March 1935, General Douglas MacArthur proposed an amendment making Vancouver a priority [bombing] target comparable to Halifax and Montreal.” (Ibid)

Screen Shot, Daily Mail 

The Washington Post, which casually dismissed the historical significance of “Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan — Red”, nonetheless acknowledged the aggressive nature of the proposed military endeavor:

“A bold plan, a bodacious plan, a step-by-step plan to invade, seize and annex our neighbor to the north. …First, we send a joint Army-Navy overseas force to capture the port city of Halifax, cutting the Canadians off from their British allies.

Then we seize Canadian power plants near Niagara Falls, so they freeze in the dark.

Then the U.S. Army invades on three fronts — marching from Vermont to take Montreal and Quebec, charging out of North Dakota to grab the railroad center at Winnipeg, and storming out of the Midwest to capture the strategic nickel mines of Ontario.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy seizes the Great Lakes and blockades Canada’s Atlantic and Pacific ports.  … “(Raiding the Icebox; Behind Its Warm Front, the United States Made Cold Calculations to Subdue Canada, by Peter Carlson, Washington Post, 30 December 2005, emphasis added).

While the above Washington Post assessment describes the features of an all out war against Canada, the Global and Mail twists realities upside down. The Red War Plan to Attack CRIMSON was casually presented as a peacemaking endeavor to rightfully defend the U.S. against the British:

First approved in 1930, Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan – Red was drawn up to defend the United States in the event of war with Britain.

It was one of a series of such contingency plans produced in the late 1920s. Canada, identified as Crimson, would be invaded to prevent the Britons from using it as a staging ground to attack the United States. (Globe and Mail, December 31, 2005, emphasis add)

The original documents pertaining to the invasion of Canada including “War Plan Red” and Canada’s “Defence Scheme No. 1.” are in the archives of the US Army War College in Carlisle, Pa. [link no longer active]

The complete text of War Plan Red is contained in Annex III. The complete text of the 1866 Annexation Plan is contained in Annex I.

The  plan is detailed. It involves both military as well an intelligence components.

According to historian John Major “War, Plan Red” also consisted in “a series of possible pre-emptive American campaigns to invade Canada in several areas and occupy key ports and railways before British troops could provide reinforcement to the Canadians…”

  5. Canada’s National Defense

The Canadian federal government and military were fully aware of these “Secret” US plans to invade Canada. In the 1920s, Lieutenant James “Buster” Sutherland Brown  had been appointed Director of Military Operations and Intelligence in Ottawa to address the issue of Canada’s national security. (image right)

His tasks consisted in developing contingency war plans in the case of a US attack against the Dominion of Canada.  Under the helm of “Buster” Sutherland Brown (subsequently promoted to Brigadier), Canada’s response to US threats was formulated under “Defence Scheme No. 1”, a counterattack contingency plan, in the case of a US invasion.

“Defense Scheme No. 1” was abandoned in 1931 by Canada’s chief of the general staff, A.G.L. McNaughton (following the adoption of “War Plan Red” in 1930) , on the grounds that “the Americans would inevitably win such a war” and there was no use in acting upon a contingency plan.

6. Ottawa Caves In 

 The watershed decision by the Conservative government of Prime Minister R. B. Bennett (image left) which came to office in August 1930 was to abandon Canada’s national defense plan. This decision constituted a de facto recognition of  US hegemony in North America. 

While the invasion of Canada under Joint Army and Navy Basic War Plan — Red was not carried out, the military threat of a U.S invasion plan has served to oblige Canada to ultimately surrender to US political and economic pressures.

Canadians From Coast to Coast. We are a Confederation. A Nation State.  Let Us Take Control of Our History

First Mexico, then Canada. It really looks like Trump is quite seriously bent on increasing tensions with neighbors – just consider this: amid a tariff dispute, US president-elect Donald Trump has been insistently pushing the point that Canada could, or even should, become America’s “51st state.”

More recently, Donald Trump posted in X (formerly Twitter) that “many Canadians” in fact “want” Canada to become the 51st state: they would save on “taxes and military protection”, he argues. Although it has been largely interpreted as a joke, it has triggered some debate and even polls. According to a recent poll, 13% of Canadians say they do support such an idea, which is a small minority of course but nonetheless is in fact still a surprisingly high percentage, all things considered.

Joke or no joke, in late November however, Trump had already made the same point, again interpreted by some as a “joke”, at his Mar-a-Lago private residence, during a dinner – Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was also present. The context was border tensions pertaining to Trump’s promises to curb illegal migration amid an opioid crisis.

During the dinner, Trudeau was raising concerns about the tariffs with which Trump has been threatening Canada. The Canadian leader said that such measures would badly hurt his country’s economy. The US president-elect then stressed that the other alternative would be Canada becoming the 51st state of the US. The reaction to the menacing comment, including from Trudeau, reportedly was some nervous laughter.

The harshness of Trump’s pressure and rhetoric is surprising: Canada, a very close American ally, is no less than the main export destination for 36 of the American states. In addition, around $2.7 billion (worth of goods services) cross the border every day.

Days after that dinner incident, Trump posted yet another provocation, this time an AI-generated image showing himself looking at the Canadian mountains in a kind of conquering pose. Canada is undergoing a domestic political crisis currently after Chrystia Freeland, the former Deputy Prime Minister, resigned. It sparked other resignations and political chaos. Even before being sworn as US President, Trump is of course boosting the crisis by his provocations and thereby further undermining Trudeau authority. He has been publicly referring to Trudeau as a mere “governor” (rather than Prime Minister of a sovereign nation), even on national TV.

With this kind of discourse, the topic has entered the political debate across both sides of the border, with analysts even speculating on the possibility of it. Practically speaking, it is just absurd: Canada is a constitutional monarchy, King Charles of the United Kingdom being its Head of State. Its territory is enormous.

However, Section 41 of the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982, as a matter of fact does allow for secession, as France 24 journalist Vedika Bahl has commented on, in a very didactic manner. It would require unanimity and support from both Canadian chambers and all provinces,  including the French-speaking province of Quebec. Legally speaking, from the American side, practical and realpolitik matters aside, annexing Canada, surprisingly enough, would not be much of a big deal, in theory. Washington may denounce it quite vocally when a country annexes territory (even if that is done so after a referendum), however the US  Congress to this day can in fact create new states (even by annexation) by simply coming up with a new law – this being precisely how Hawaii became the American 50th state, by the way.

Puerto Rico in contrast has never been made a state: it still is an “unincorporated territory”, which means it is not an integral part of the American Republic, but rather a possession of some sort, where some constitutional rights are simply “not available.” Such territories (like the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the American Samoa) are thus often considered colonies technically – even by the United Nations. Residents of the American Samoa for instance, since the Ratification Act of 1929, are politically disenfranchised, have no voting representation in Congress, and are considered “non-citizen nationals”, having limited rights also. This actually makes the US one of the few powers today that has not given up its colonies.

Historically speaking, up to very recent times, the US has behaved in an expansionist manner, much like the empires of the Age of Empires, although quite lately, in comparison – and much more hastily. It has “incorporated”, be it as new states or as “unincorporated territories” (an ironic term) or as “commonwealth” (as was the case in the past with the Philippines). Invasion and warfare is always an option: one may recall all the American states that used to be part of Mexico until 1848 – or the more recent neocolonial experience in Iraq.

The scenario of an American invasion and annexation of Canada however clearly seems highly unlikely, considering the military angle, the costs involved, the matter of public opinion and the potential international and diplomatic repercussions, and so on – not to mention the problems which would arise with its close ally, the United Kingdom and its Crown.

I wrote before that the Monroe doctrine is “back” and that seems to be clearly the case, by all indications, with Trump threatening to annex Canada (sarcastically or not), and with his very serious plans to invade Mexico, and his more recent menaces having to do with retaking control of the Panama Canal.

To sum it up, the US probably does not have the capacity or the intention to really annex Canada for now, but in any case, this kind of loaded and disrespectful rhetoric is in itself an act of aggression – aimed at humiliating and to intimidating a sovereign neighbor, albeit employing hyperbole.

One may recall the way Trump is said to have personally threatened the life of Taliban leaders in his previous presidency: this is a statesman known to use “Mafia-like” approaches and techniques, something which critics have attributed to his Mob business associations in New York, which supposedly influenced him or shaped his character and style to some extent. Part of that very style does involve some bravado and bluffing, though.

Shifting to a Monroeist foreign policy (and, accordingly, shifting a large part of NATO duties to Europe), in any case, is easier said than done. Much of the US economy is based on it being a superpower with a huge military industry (that would not be content with Washington being “just” a continental hegemon).

The Atlantic superpower simply cannot afford to lose positions in places like the Middle East and elsewhere.  Finally, Trump’s war with part of the so-called Deep State might largely determine the degree of success that any of Trump’s “grandiose” plans will have.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Christianity is by far the religion with the largest following in the world and Christmas is their most sacred day. In addition a very large number of people of other faiths join happily in the celebration of Christmas. Hence this is perhaps the most appropriate time for worldwide reflection on how spirituality can contribute to the creation of a better, safer and just world.

The need for this was never as great as it is today. Not only have violence, war, injustice, inequalities and environment ruin combined to create enormous distress in world, in addition these are manifesting in the kind of disasters and highly destructive weapons that can wipe out most life on earth. The more thoughtful, informed and caring people of the world are extremely worried by this state of affairs but have not been able to check the drift towards destruction, as the forces that cause wars and ecological ruin are much stronger.

Hence in these difficult and dangerous times the creation of a safer and just world needs all help from all possible sources and in this context the progress of sincere spirituality and spiritual movements can make a particularly important contribution.

Spirituality as seen in the life of most revered persons in the world, associated with various faiths, has conveyed important ethical messages based on leading a life of justice, not doing any injustice to others, leading a life of simplicity and limited needs thereby avoiding greed and the tendency of snatching or coveting what rightfully belongs to others. Not causing any harm to others and not indulging in violence to others is at the heart of these ethical messages. This ethics also includes working honestly for one’s livelihoods and bringing one’s own welfare in conformity with the welfare of others ie being very careful not to cause any harm to others in the quest for one’s own progress. People who are religious in this way, learning these values from their faiths, invariably get a lot of strength from spirituality to lead a life of ethics. When understood in this sense, spirituality has an important role in creating a just and peaceful world.

Unfortunately, however, not all religions and religious leaders have been giving adequate emphasis to these ethical aspects. On the contrary, they have frequently distorted their message in ways that increases intolerance, prejudices, misunderstandings, sectarianism and violence related to this. Some of the highly unjust acts and destructive wars, even genocides, have been supported by very wrong and distorted use of religious doctrine.

It is in this difficult situation that those who believe in true spirituality must be increasingly united, overcoming various divisions and constraints, to increase the possibilities of spirituality being advanced in such ways that this becomes a very important force for world-level peace, justice and environment protection.

Spirituality teaches, prepares and motivates us to lead a life of simplicity and ethics which at the ground level increases possibilities of justice, peace and environment protection. If we have more and more people living and planning their life in accordance with these precepts, then the chances of there being more peace and justice in everyday life increases, and in addition people leading such life have feelings of more satisfaction and of better social relationships. Family life and community life improve. Children brought up in such ways are not only well-behaved but in addition may come up with very heartwarming examples of inspiring work.

Above all this, moreover, such pursuit of sincere spirituality also increases the possibilities of wider peace, justice and environment protection at national and finally at world levels. Of course carefully an agenda must be prepared at world level regarding the proper prioritization of the most important tasks of peace, justice and environment protection, but with the growth of sincere spirituality at various levels the response of people to any such agenda of peace, justice and environment protection will be much better, sustained and stronger.

Hence Christmas can be and should be a time of reflection for many people disturbed by the present destructive trends in the world to try to consider the possibilities of how united spirituality movements can together contribute to the creation of a better, safer and just world.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children. Planet in Peril, Earth without Borders, Man over Machine and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

It is one of the great ironies of history that at the very moment the United States plunges deeper and deeper into war hysteria, that our politicians and government officials are possessed by the demons of complete annihilation and endless expansion, that falsehood and hypocrisy wrap their tentacles around the arms and legs of public intellectuals, at the very moment that it becomes impossible in Washington DC to talk about any subject that is not tied to war, at the very moment that the entire United States is being transformed into a military economy—one wherein all critical decisions are made by military contractors, privatized police, prisons, and for-profit intelligence (and at the top, the militarized private equity firms who pull the strings) it is a terrible and comic irony that the United States, of all the nations of the Earth, should be pressuring Japan to give up its commitment to oppose militarism as expressed in the Japanese constitution and to join us, as junior partners, in our suicide march towards world war and nuclear holocaust.

We have things so completely backwards. The United States does not have any need to, let alone have any right to, pressure Japan to give up its peace constitution, or to stir up the desires for fortune latent in Tokyo’s military contractors. We know that some Japanese are already itching for an excuse to prepare for war, and to destroy Japanese civil society by creating a military economy as a means of bringing even more wealth and power to the few.

No! It is the United States that needs a peace constitution, and it needs it right now.

We failed to return to a peace economy after the Second World War and the institutional and cultural cancer resulting from an economy stimulated by, and propped up by, war, has metastasized and spread throughout the entire society so that war is everywhere, from children’s toys to parking spaces for veterans, to glowing tributes by politicians to those who kill in blind obedience to the state.

We need now an institutional, intellectual, and spiritual commitment to an economy and a society that is founded in peace, that is committed to peace, and that rewards citizens for their constructive economic contributions to the wellbeing of their families, their neighborhoods, their regions, their country, and to the entire Earth.

I do speak these words lightly. And I speak them as someone who has spent decades thinking about, and writing about, security and conflict. But the truth must be spoken, and we do not have long before the great reckoning.

Maybe there are those who can justify a society that is addicted to war, to destruction, and to endless expansion. That is not my job.

War is not caused by a few bad apples, or a lack of maturity among political leaders. It is the product of an economic system that demands consumption and praises growth. For war is the greatest force for consumption and growth—until, of course, it leaves everything in ruins.

War is a product of a concept of economics, detached from morality and humanity, that has no concern for the long-term and that focuses on returns for the rich calculated over weeks and months, an inhuman economics wherein the long-term wellbeing of the citizens of the Earth is irrelevant.

This speculation-driven casino economy has pushed overproduction across the country which forces us to wrap everything in plastic so as to keep profits flowing to petroleum companies, and to prepare for war because the only factories left in America are those making military parts. Yes, most constructive factories have been moved overseas as part of the great “free trade” fraud perpetrated by the corporate parties.

The Japanese Constitution

Let us take a look at article nine of the Japanese Constitution, that part of Japan’s post-war legacy that is so offensive to the American politicians and bureaucrats who have become the slaves of military contractors, and that is also repulsive to the bankers behind the stage who benefit from war preparations in Asia.

Article nine is also a rallying cry for Japanese militarists who wish to create a new empire and for well-paid security consultants deployed in Japan to promote expensive fighter planes that cannot even take off and land, missile defense systems that cannot stop anything, but who are unconcerned by the fact that Japan cannot provide its own food, that its water is being slowly poisoned with chemicals from factories and military bases, or that its nuclear power plants are sitting targets just waiting for an enemy attack.  

Article nine states,

“Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes.”

Article nine is invaluable in its intentions and spirit and it has had a positive impact around the world, even as its meaning has been diluted, then distorted, and then eviscerated though shifts in Japanese policy, starting with the establishment of the “Self-Defense Forces,” followed by the integration of the Japanese economy into the American war economy during the Korean War, and culminating in the false concept of “collective security,” a fig leaf for aggressive military expansionism and entry into the international arms market.  

At the same time, we must recognize that there are problems with Article Nine.

First, the text suggests that Japan must renounce war as an idealistic aspiration for “international peace based on justice and order,” rather than as a necessity in an age in which we are faced with the choice between “hegemony and survival,” as Noam Chomsky famously put it.

The absence of a concrete articulation of the logic behind renouncing war for a practical goal, not only for the abstract ideals of justice, has generated unending criticism holding that the Japanese constitution is overly idealistic and even a violation of Japan’s sovereign rights.

It will be critical in future debates on security policy to explain how Japan’s position on the use of war is realistic and strategic, and how it is unmistakably in the long-term interests of the Japanese and the international community.

It is also critical that Japanese, and Americans, challenge the assumptions underlying American security policy. Failure to do so, that is to merely assume that somehow Japan is protected by the United States while it enjoys its “peace constitution” encourages criticisms in the United States that Japan is a free rider, and complaints in Japan that Japan has become an American colony. That is to say that both the United States and Japan must express a similar commitment to peace.

In addition, article nine employs the terms “war” and “nation” as if they are static, unchanging, objects whose parameters are clear and that do not shift or evolve over time.

The essential nature of war does not change; the means by which war is waged, and the subjects in war, are constantly evolving. It is still true that guns, tanks, and fighter planes are used to wage war. Yet war today extends into diverse fields and takes place in visible and invisible forms at multiple levels. The media, entertainment, and AI have been weaponized and used to dumb down and render the population passive. This is not technology for a more convenient life, but rather another form of war.

Nano technologies are employed to invisibly attack the functions of the body, or to alter the environment. New biotechnology weapons can render victims ill, or incapacitated. The same for electromagnetic radiation, infrared radiation, and a host of other new weapons, or potential weapons.

Information warfare similarly is employed to create false narratives that confuse citizens as part of a divide and conquer strategy.

These forms of war fall outside of the narrow definition of “war” put forth in Article Nine, even though these forms of war are being conducted today in a more devastating manner than traditional warfare.

Similarly, the concept of “nation” has shifted so radically as to demand significant revision of the concept of war. War today is not conducted just between nations, but also between ethnic groups, between multinational corporations, and increasingly between classes. The driving force behind the current global war is a class war between the super-rich and everyone else, that it to say a war that goes beyond the assumptions of Article Nine.

We are confronted by a brave new world stretching to the horizon in which national borders are only for little people, in which the nation state exists only for television broadcasts and United Nations events, in which the real decisions behind the war against humanity are made by hidden financial powers who manipulate all the governments of the world, presenting us with pathetic puppets who stumble through a tragically amusing diplomatic show that is put on for the working man and women by private equity.

Sadly, the current discussion of Article Nine of Japan’s constitution revolves around how to remove it, or to misinterpret it, so as to transform Japan into a nation that wages war, and that will have the third largest military in the world.

Very little is said about how Article Nine could make Japan a leader in security because Japan is positioned to make real security threats like climate change, the collapse of biodiversity, pollution, information warfare, and class warfare, the center of its security policy to a degree that other nations are not capable of.

An American Peace Constitution

The need for an American peace constitution is so obvious, and the situation so desperate, that absolutely no one even mentions this topic.

The term “peace constitution” refers here to the adoption of a constitutional amendment, the twenty-ninth amendment, that will spell out a fundamental shift in the concept of security for the United States.

However, constitutional amendments are not magic and they cannot change the culture, the economy, or the politics of a nation. Just look at how much of the current Constitution is routinely ignored.

The Constitution, and the amendments to it, will serve a lodestar, a goal that will lead us forward as a citizens’ movement to make peace and establish true human security as the fundamental priority for the nation, and for the world, and to leave behind profit-driven conflicts for the benefits of bankers and billionaires.

Precedents for the Peace Constitution

We must recognize two important institutional precedents for this constitutional amendment.

The first precedent is the Kellogg-Briand Pact to outlaw war (specifically wars of aggression) that was signed by the United States and 15 other nations on August 27, 1928. The Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war as an instrument of national policy and it called upon its signatories to settle disputes by peaceful means. Although this effort to create an international consensus against wars of aggression was ultimately unsuccessful, it offers us a desperately needed precedent for a policy that promotes peace, not war, and the diplomatic resolution of conflicts.

.

Briand-Kellogg Treaty, with signatures of Gustav Stresemann, Paul Kellogg, Paul Hymans, Aristide Briand, Lord Cushendun, William Lyon Mackenzie King, John McLachlan, Sir Christopher James Parr, Jacobus Stephanus Smit, William Thomas Cosgrave, Count Gaetano Manzoni, Count Uchida, A. Zaleski, Eduard Benes. (From the Public Domain)

.

The second precedent is the House Resolution “To Establish a Department of Peace” submitted by Dennis Kucinich of Ohio to the House of Representatives on July 11, 2001 in a clear effort to counter the drive for war pursued by the George W. Bush administration at that time.

Kucinich’s vision of a Department of Peace that promotes international peace with the resources normally allocated to preparing for war has tremendous merits and deserves consideration as we ponder the concrete policy implications of a peace constitution for the United States.

Let me offer a draft for this amendment that can serve as the starting point for a serious moral and scientific debate as to how we can best lead this transformation of our nation. I write with the assumption that an amendment must be brief and must outline the fundamental issues without too much detail about either policy or technology.

Twenty-eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The United States will assume the pursuit of peace to be its primary goal in foreign and domestic policy, make a peace economy its highest priority, and in that process reduce its nuclear weapons to zero within ten years, and demand that all other nations reduce their nuclear weapons to zero as well.

Other dangerous weapons such a depleted uranium, mines and cluster bombs, biological and nano weapons, electromagnetic and infrared weapons, and the project of information warfare will be ended decisively. The United States will oppose efforts to wage war by conventional, nuclear, or psychological, biological, or nano-technological means.

The United State military will be restructured to focus on the long-term security of the United States, calculated in the hundreds of years, giving up its short-term obsession with weapons and war, and devoting itself to preventing the destruction of the environment, earth, water, and air, the rising power of the rich and powerful, the use of technology to manipulate citizens and to destroy information, and other threats to human security.

Americans will only be deployed outside of the United States in a transparent and accountable manner for multinational efforts that are clearly defined, and such deployments will only be for a proscribed period of time.

Let us advance the debate about what exactly the text of this amendment should be, and how we can create a nation dedicated to peace and security in the United States that will replace the nightmare tyranny of war and consumption that is presently being drawn toward the apocalypse by the dark horses of debt, consumption, and extraction.   

[For greater detail on possible approaches to security policy, please see the “Green Party’s World Peace Platform” (Gloria Guillo and others, 2020) and Emanuel Pastreich’s article “A Call for True Security in a Misguided Age” (Korea Times, August 4, 2018)]

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

It might sound almost too wild a thing to state, but the United States of America right now is in fact undergoing a kind of a major UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) crisis, with national security implications. Sightings are also taking place in other Western countries such as the United Kingdom (UK), but the US seems to be the focal point.  The matter has gone beyond the realm of rumor, is in fact triggering a political crisis and unrest in at least three states, with federal investigations going on, and should be taken seriously at this point. Consider the following:

On late Friday (December 13) and early Saturday, officials went so far as to simply close airspace for almost four hours over Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, this being one of the country’s key Air Force bases, due to UFO sightings. The authorities described them as “small unmanned aerial systems” (UAS).

Unidentified “drones” were also spotted over three military bases used by the US Air Force in eastern England.

Such activity was also reported (and confirmed) over the Ramstein Air Base, a US base in Germany, around the same period there were sightings over Ohio and Utah. There are thus simultaneous “UAS” activities across the Atlantic, apparently targeting the US.

In fact, for the last 19 days and counting, New Jersey has been haunted every night by unexplained aerial objects or phenomena (mostly drones but the nature of many still being unknown). On Saturday, ABC captured such an unidentified “object” on camera live on TV: it was described by some as looking like a pulsating “orb” of plasma or “energy”. Others have dismissed it as merely a star out of focus on camera causing an optical illusion, but people claimed to witness it visibly “pulsating” to the naked eye.

The White House and the Pentagon have stated the “objects” do not have a foreign origin, while FBI and the DHS have stated they appear to be drones flying “legally”, with authorities saying no one should shoot the objects – which is awkward, to say the least.

Meanwhile, In New Jersey lawmakers have called for a state of emergency due to the “drones”, while such a state of emergency has indeed been declared in at least 4 Ohio counties so far. The New Jersey governor has asked Biden for federal help. Moreover, “drone activity” even shut down runways at New York’s Steward Airfield.

The incidents listed above should suffice, but there are plenty more. It certainly sounds like something straight out of the X-Files TV show, and yet it is happening. The thing is, as recently as last year, there was so much fuss about supposed Chinese balloons spying on US territory, that it fueled tensions between Beijing and Washington, even though there did not seem to be much to it. Now there is a crisis, clearly spiraling out of control, pertaining to the aforementioned developments involving UFOS, UAPs (“unidentified anomalous phenomenon”), UAS, or however one calls them.

If part of those incidents had anything to do (even very remotely so) with American rivals such as China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea, American authorities (who are also news sources for the largest media outlets) would by now have made it known to all – even with some degree of exaggeration, as usual. In today’s new Cold War climate, such findings and accusations can always fuel further sanctions, economic warfare, political propaganda, and belligerent activity in general. There would be warnings, threats of retaliation, diplomatic tensions. The very fact that thus far no such thing happened is peculiar in itself.

In 2022, shortly after the Ukrainian crisis, the US Congress, for the first time in half a century, held a hearing on “UAPs”, with authorities having to clarify that it was not about “aliens”. The Pentagon last month released a report on UFOs, which found over 700 new cases, 21 of which they could not explain. Last month a joint US Congress hearing on UFOs had officials saying “we are not alone“, and it so happens that the source for a large part of ufologist’s claims about “aliens” has long been former military officers and intelligence personnel.

It is part of American pop culture (and there is an industry around it), but some critics suspect there could be propaganda efforts or psychological operations behind some of those “whistle-blowers” with wild claims. Interestingly, whenever geopolitical tensions are on the rise, American discourses about extraterrestrial life intensify – a belief which is becoming more mainstream. One may recall the Roswell incident, the allegation about Area 51 and so on. Such beliefs used to be ridiculed are becoming more mainstream.

In any case, the last weeks of Joe Biden’s presidency have been unusually busy, with the recent developments, all bearing American footprints, in Ukraine, South Korea, and Syria (the latter still not fully clear). The newly-elected President, Donald Trump, has declared war on the so-called “Deep State” and has been himself the target of three attempted assassinations, the first being such a major security breach (a suspicious one, even) during the elections campaign that the US Secret Service Director had to resign amid a scandal. This is the overall context to the current American “UFO” crisis. It does have precedents, as I mentioned but in scope it is totally unparalleled.

This crisis certainly contributes to further undermining the general public’s trust in the authorities: if (let’s call it “alternative 1”) American rivals are behind the “UAPs”, then it demoralizes the American military.

If, instead (“alternative 2”), the US military/intelligence apparatus itself is behind part of the sightings, be it as part of exercises or for whatever shady or classified reasons, then this could be therefore be interpreted either as:

2a) authorities waging psychological warfare operations (PSYOPs) against one’s own civilian population, which is not unprecedented in the US, by the way: for instance, in 2011, the ACLU accused the US military of conducting illegal PSYOPs against their own American senators

2b) or, still on the above scenario (“alternative 2”), it could alternatively be interpreted as intelligence services running out of control, thereby advertently or inadvertently fueling unrest and panic during a delicate “interregnum” period.

As the ancient Romans would say, tertium non datur – meaning, there is no third one (option). Of course anything else beyond those scenarios would involve the so-called extraterrestrial hypothesis that seems to be deeply rooted in the American psyche as a cultural-mystical trope – but thus far, pragmatically speaking, that line of hypothesising only amounts to pure speculation.

In short, there is no good scenario here, and one can only expect further domestic unrest and instability in the American superpower, with unpredictable repercussions globally, in terms of its foreign policy choices and responses.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Area 51 border and warning sign stating that “photography is prohibited” and that “use of deadly force is authorized” (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Ozempic to ‘Transform’ the World by 2030, Gushes Preeminent Journal of The Science™ 

Via Nature (emphasis added):

“Welcome to the healthier, happier world of 2030. Heart attacks and strokes are down 20%. A drop in food consumption has left more money in people’s wallets. Lighter passengers are saving airlines 100 million litres of fuel each year. And billions of people are enjoying a better quality of life, with improvements to their mental and physical health.

These are just some of the ways in which analysts forecast that the new wave of incredibly effective weight-loss drugs, known as GLP-1 agonists, might transform societies and save countries trillions of dollars in the long run…

It might have already started. In the United States… 12% of adults say that they have at some stage taken GLP-1 agonists for diabetes or weight loss.”

Of course, it’s highly plausible that Ozempic and similar semaglutide and tirzepatide drugs will “transform” the world — just not as advertised.

Fatphobia Fuels Ozempic Craze, Says ‘Critical Disability Studies’ Assistant Professor and Alleged Authority on the Dire Plight of Fats

This ambiguously sexed, non-binary-looking thing, Fady Shanouda, isn’t even a full-on professor; it’s an assistant professor in the make-believe field of “critical disability studies scholar.”

Daddy must be so proud of his little girl, or boy, or whatever it is.

Via The Conversation (emphasis added):

“Time and again, dubious and ineffective solutions for obesity gain prominence. Pills, tonics, elixirs, Zumba, Noom and now Ozempic.

The latest wonder drug is a semaglutide drug invented to help diabetics regulate blood glucose levels, but has the notable side-effect of severe weight loss — for which it is prescribed off-label. It has been heralded by many to culminate in the elimination of fat bodies*.

The fatphobia that undergirds such a proclamation isn’t new**.

What makes this moment different from the others, however, is the dangerous rhetoric in which it is lodged. This rhetoric elevates the banal and commonplace fat-shaming that fat people must endure and resist to an unprecedented level.”

*Check out the subtle semantical tricks these people often pull, illustrated here. By referencing the “the elimination of fat bodies,” they’re conjuring up images of a kind of human-walrus hybrid holocaust in which bulldozers roll over gigantic bodies in the streets Tiananmen Square-style and then dig makeshift mass graves the size of an ocean to dump all the “fat bodies” in after they’ve been “eliminated.”

**“Undergird” seems like a weird choice of word here. Kind of like a bra for a morbidly obese gentleman would undergird his enormous tits.

Study: Ozempic Drives Turbo Cancer and Prevents Effective Cancer Treatment

Shoutout to loyal AP reader LaMaisonGelat — which I assume is French for “The Fat Holocaust” — for bringing this to my attention.

How’s this for a double-whammy: as I’ve covered previously, Ozempic lovingly supplies its beneficiary with turbo-cancer.

But then, we now have evidence to show, ever generous with its side effects, it nullifies the effectiveness of conventional cancer treatments — by a huge margin.

Huge — like the fatasses’ exploding waistlines as soon as they stop taking their drugs.

28% of the test subjects taking GLP-1 agonists like Ozempic responded favorably to their cancer treatments, as opposed to the more than double, 63%, of subjects not taking them who responded positively to theirs.

Via Daily Mail (emphasis added):

“Game-changing weight loss jabs relied on by millions of slimmers and diabetics could cause breast cancer treatments to stop working, experts have warned.

The drugs, which include Ozempic and Wegovy, have ushered in a new era in the battle against obesity, helping dieters shed up to a fifth of their bodyweight.

But, American doctors tracking women being treated for an aggressive form of breast cancer have discovered the injections ‘detrimentally affect’ how the body responds to chemotherapy and immunotherapy.

It meant that patients on the jabs — collectively known as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, or GLP-1s — were less likely to be totally clear of cancer after treatment and more at risk of tumours returning.

British consultant clinical oncologist Dr John Glees said the findings were ‘unsettling’ and added: ‘These weight loss drugs are relatively new, so it’s very concerning that patients taking them were less likely to be cancer free after treatment.’

In the study, hundreds of women with early-stage triple negative breast cancer were followed throughout and after treatment.

A few dozen were already taking GLP-1s and continued to do so while having cancer treatment.

Tests two years later showed just 28 per cent of women on GLP-1s responded fully to the cancer therapies, and were clear of cancer…

More than twice as many — 63 per cent — of those not on GLP-1s were cancer free.”

Study: Ozempic Also Spurs Rare Form of Vision Loss

“Non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy”: another loving and liberal gift from Eli Lily to the obese peasants in their care.

Via Yahoo! Finance (emphasis added):

“Novo Nordisk’s GLP weight-loss drug Ozempic has reportedly been linked to a rare form of vision loss, known as non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). The study, which has yet to be peer-reviewed, was published on medRxiv and supports findings reported in a Harvard University study from this past July.”

Fucked six ways from Sunday!

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Substack where this article was originally published. Also, keep tabs via Twitter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MedicalNews Today

The General Command of the Armed Opposition Factions in Syria has appointed Asaad Hassan al-Shibani, a founding member of Al-Qaeda in Syria, as the country’s new caretaker foreign minister.

The official Syrian news agency (SANA) reported on 21 December that Shibani, a 37-year-old graduate of Damascus University, was chosen to fill the post. He previously led the political department of the National Salvation Government, which has ruled Syria’s northwestern governorate of Idlib since Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) conquered it in 2015.

HTS, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, launched an assault from Idlib on 27 November and quickly toppled the cities of Aleppo, Hama, and Homs. HTS militants entered Damascus, toppled the government of Bashar al-Assad, and seized power in Syria on 8 December.

Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani, is the former leader of Al-Qaeda in Syria, previously known as the Nusra Front.

According to the opposition Syria TV, which broadcasts from Istanbul, Foreign Minister Shibani was previously known as Zaid al-Attar. He was in charge of the foreign relations file and oversaw the transformation of the Nusra Front into HTS.

The Al-Marifa website reported that Attar, who resided in Turkiye until 2024, is one of the founders of the Nusra Front alongside Sharaa.

Reuters notes the US, other western powers, and many Syrians were glad to see HTS militants topple Assad, “but it is not clear whether the Islamist group will impose strict Islamic rule or show flexibility and move towards democracy.”

On 10 December, Mohammed al-Bashir, another member of Sharaa’s National Salvation government in Idlib, was named president of the caretaker government in Syria.

Sharaa began his militant career with Al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2003. He was sent by future ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to create a branch of Al-Qaeda in Syria and to fight the Syrian government in 2011.

The US designated Sharaa as a terrorist in 2013, despite providing weapons and money to his group throughout the war and despite his role as an agent for effecting US foreign policy.

Washington announced it would remove a $10 million bounty on his head on Friday to more openly support him and his new government in Damascus, despite Sharaa’s terrorist past.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Featured image is from Turkiye Today

Russian President Vladimir Putin, during his Results of the Year annual marathon year-ender interactive televised discussion with the Russian public and the media in Moscow on December 19, spoke at some length on the recent developments in Syria. 

These were Putin’s first public remarks on the topic and, coming 12 days after armed opposition forces seized Damascus and the exile of former president Bashar al-Assad and his family in Moscow, they signified that the Kremlin is recalibrating its compass of West Asian strategies. 

Putin disclosed that he will soon have a meeting with Assad, signalling a level of transparency that is very rare in international diplomacy in comparable volatile circumstances. We still do not know, for instance, what happened to Afghan president Ashraf Ghani after the Taliban takeover four years ago, or whether President Joe Biden even showed the courtesy to receive America’s fallen ally — and an erstwhile proxy at that. 

Putin sees no reason to feel ashamed or petrified over the regime change in Syria. Russia’s mission in Syria was to decimate the US-sponsored extremist groups destabilising that country and the region as part of a regime change project. And that enterprise has been hugely successful as Russia inflicted a crushing defeat to the American project. The Russian mission in Syria never had a hidden agenda to prop up the Syrian regime. As Putin explained, Russian ground forces were never deployed or involved in the fighting in Syria.

The speed with which Assad was given asylum in Moscow and the peaceful transfer of power in Damascus hinted that the Kremlin was not taken by surprise. Again, compare the chaotic and desperate US  evacuation on August 16, 2021 from Kabul airport with Afghans falling from the sky as American military planes took off. Yet, western propaganda is painting the town red that Russia has been “defeated” in Syria!  

The narrative by Turkish foreign minister Hakan Fidan seems entirely plausible when he claimed that at Ankara’s urging, Moscow and Tehran counselled Assad to peacefully transfer power. Fidan disclosed to NTV broadcaster on Dec. 13,

“We spoke with the Russians and Iranians and told them that the man they had invested in was no longer someone worth investing in. They made one phone call, and that evening Assad was gone.” 

Putin openly acknowledged that Russia keeps contacts with the HTS and their conversation will have a bearing on the fate of the bases in Latakia. Russia is offering that the international community may use the bases to handle humanitarian assistance to Syria.

Conceivably, Turkey, Russia and Iran synchronised their watches. Tehran disclosed in the weekend that it is reopening the embassy in Damascus and that the HTS has offered to provide security for the mission’s functioning. Through the entire three-and-a-half hour event in Moscow last Thursday, Putin never once voiced any criticism of Turkey’s backing for HTS or questioned the legitimacy of Ankara’s stated concerns in the Syrian situation — although he remains sceptical whether the Kurdish nationality question involving 30-35 million ethnic Kurdish population spread over Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran lends itself to a solution. 

Putin asserted that Moscow has already conveyed to the HTS as well as the regional states that the Russian bases are “capable of offering assistance… (and) this was met with understanding and a willingness to collaborate.” Putin stressed:

“An overwhelming majority of them have expressed interest in retaining our military bases in Syria.” 

Putin ridiculed the Biden administration’s prognosis that Russia faces “defeat” in Syria. His broad message was that “there will be plenty to discuss” with Trump when they meet, implying that Biden Administration is no longer consequential to Syria’s future. The Biden Administration’s efforts to rally the Arab states have failed to gain traction as the trust deficit is formidable. Arabs suspect that the US’ continued illegal occupation has ulterior motives.

Indeed, a new matrix is appearing, as Biden administration’s obsession shifts to creating a quagmire in the Middle East for the incoming Trump administration. In a somersault on Sunday, the US state department’s Assistant Secretary Barbara Leaf landed in Damascus to personally convey the US decision to scrap the $10 million reward for the arrest of HTS leader (Syria’s de facto leader) Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, following what she claimed to be “very productive” meetings with the group’s representatives.

This abject surrender will now enable Washington to lift the sanctions against Syria per the infamous Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019. However, Russia has outmanoeuvred the Biden administration in Syria. Putin implied that a working relationship with the new leadership in Damascus is steadily developing. He said,

“I do not know, we must reflect on how our relations will evolve with the political forces currently in control (in Damascus) and those that will govern this country in the future –- our interests must align. Should we remain, we must act in the interests of the host nation.”

Putin noted:

“What will those interests entail? What can we do for them? These questions demand careful consideration on both sides. We are already capable of offering assistance, including utilising our bases… while challenges remain, our position firmly aligns with international law and the sovereignty of all nations, including respect for Syria’s territorial integrity. This extends to supporting the stance of the current authorities governing the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic. In this regard, we stand with them.”

This is a big statement and it will resonate across the Arab world. Make no mistake, Russia’s transition from the Assad era is well under way. The contours of a pragmatic policy approach are emerging. Russian intelligence would have done the spade work in this transition.

Putin remarked tauntingly that

“the groups that were fighting against the Assad regime and the government forces back then have undergone internal changes. It is not surprising that many European countries and the United States are trying to develop relations with them now. Would they be doing this if they were terrorist organisations? This means that they have changed, doesn’t it? So, our goal (Russia’s intervention in Syria in 2015) has been achieved, to a certain degree.”   

From behind the scene, Turkey is tacitly encouraging Russia’s partnership with HTS. Significantly, Putin dwelt on the ramifications of the Kurdish problem where Turkey may need Russia’s cooperation to navigate the tricky pathway going forward.

Turkey’s concerns have four main templates: one, ensure Turkey’s border security with Syria; two, create conditions for the return of Syrian refugees from Turkey; three, push Syrian Kurdish forces away from the border regions; and, four, counter the covert European and US-Israeli support for an independent Kurdish state. Putin underscored “the gravity of the Kurdish issue.” There is no conflict of interests here between Turkey and Russia. 

While Putin spoke with understanding and some sympathy for Turkey’s legitimate concerns, he did not mince words to condemn Israel’s naked land grab in Syria. In his words, “I believe that the main beneficiary of the developments in Syria is Israel… In the Golan Heights, Israel has advanced along the front by 62–63 kilometres and to a depth of 20–25 kilometres. They have occupied fortifications originally built for Syria by the Soviet Union, strong defensive structures comparable to the Maginot Line. 

“It seems there are already several thousand (Israeli) personnel stationed there. It appears not only that they have no intention of leaving, but they may also be planning to further reinforce their presence.” 

Putin warned that “further complications down the line” are to be expected, as the Israeli occupation could “ultimately result in the fragmentation of Syria.” In this regard, Russia shares the same perception as Turkey, Iran and the Arab states. 

Interestingly, Putin exuded confidence that Russia is on the right side of history with a policy reset that aims to harmonise with Turkey and Iran as well as the Arab states. Indeed, this  diplomatic feat enhances Russia’s standing in West Asia.

Conversely, to retrench or not in Syria — that’s the question that will haunt the Trump presidency. The Pentagon is already pushing back against Trump’s statement “we have nothing to do (in Syria).” Pentagon spokesperson Pat Ryder has revealed that US troop numbers in Syria have reached 2,000 –- more than double the previously reported nine hundred. These troops remain actively deployed with no plans for withdrawal. 

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Featured image: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on March 15. (Vladimir Gerdo, TASS)

Vitamin D receptors exist throughout your brain, affecting mental health by regulating neurotransmitters and reducing inflammation. Deficiency is linked to depression, anxiety and psychosis

Mental health patients show higher rates of vitamin D deficiency, caused by reduced sun exposure, obesity and other factors

Studies show vitamin D supplementation improves depression symptoms, particularly in elderly and adolescent patients. Optimal blood levels range from 60 to 80 ng/mL

Safe sun exposure remains the best source of vitamin D, but those consuming seed oils should wait four to six months after elimination before increasing sun exposure; if regular sun exposure isn’t feasible, vitamin D supplementation may be necessary

Protective strategies for safe sun exposure include taking astaxanthin (12 mg daily), using niacinamide cream, pre-exposure baby aspirin and molecular hydrogen supplementation

*

Vitamin D receptors are not just limited to your skeletal system for bone health — they’re also present in various brain regions like your hippocampus, substantia nigra and cerebellum.

This hints at vitamin D’s key role in neurological development and the functioning of your nervous system. When your body lacks sufficient vitamin D, it disrupts neurotransmitter release, affects neurotrophic factors and impairs neuroprotection.¹

These disruptions are linked to mood and behavioral changes, contributing to psychiatric conditions such as depression, anxiety and even psychosis. Moreover, vitamin D helps modulate inflammation, which is often elevated in mental health disorders. This is why optimizing your vitamin D levels is important for both physical health and maintaining your mental well-being.

Vitamin D Deficiency and Its Prevalence in Mental Health Conditions

Vitamin D deficiency is common, affecting over half of the global population regardless of age or ethnicity.² For individuals battling psychiatric disorders, the rates of deficiency are even higher. Studies indicate that psychiatric patients often have lower vitamin D levels compared to the general population.

Factors contributing to this deficiency include reduced sunlight exposure due to time spent indoors, poor dietary intake and obesity, which sequesters vitamin D in fat tissues. Additionally, certain psychiatric medications lead to weight gain, further complicating vitamin D status.³

This widespread deficiency is concerning because low levels of vitamin D have been linked to a higher incidence of various mental health issues, including depression, schizophrenia and anxiety disorders⁴ — each affected in unique ways. 

In depression, low vitamin D levels are associated with increased symptoms and a higher risk of developing the disorder. Vitamin D may protect the hippocampus during stress-related dysregulation and support the release of dopamine, a neurotransmitter involved in mood regulation.⁵

Schizophrenia, a chronic mental health disorder characterized by distorted thinking and perceptions, is another area of interest concerning vitamin D’s benefits. Research reveals a high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among individuals with schizophrenia, particularly those experiencing acute episodes.⁶

Some studies have also found a strong association between low vitamin D levels and the severity of schizophrenia symptoms, suggesting that vitamin D could play a role in cognitive function and neuroprotection.⁷ In psychotic spectrum diseases like schizophrenia, deficiency is often linked to poorer outcomes and increased symptom severity, due to reduced neuroprotection and impaired neurotransmission.

The Impact of Vitamin D on Specific Mental Health Conditions

Neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), also show significant correlations with vitamin D levels, where supplementation has been found to improve behavioral and cognitive symptoms.⁸

Some research also indicates that individuals with bipolar disorder often exhibit lower levels of vitamin D compared to those without the condition. For instance, higher levels of vitamin D binding protein have been observed in bipolar patients, suggesting a link between vitamin D metabolism and mood regulation.⁹

Additionally, vitamin D plays a role in sleep-wake disorders, where deficiency disrupts circadian rhythms and leads to poor sleep quality.¹⁰ Optimizing vitamin D levels is therefore a promising therapeutic strategy for many mental health conditions. Studies have shown that vitamin D supplementation leads to improvements in depressive symptoms, particularly in individuals with existing deficiencies.

For instance, elderly patients with depression, adolescents and those recovering from acute illnesses have all benefited from increased vitamin D intake. In the context of schizophrenia, adding vitamin D to standard antipsychotic treatments has been linked to better cognitive outcomes and reduced symptom severity.¹¹

Neuroinflammation, the inflammation of the nervous tissue, plays a role in many neurological and mental disorders, including traumatic brain injury, Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. Vitamin D has emerged as a promising agent in combating neuroinflammation due to its anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties.¹²

Animal studies, such as those conducted on rats with traumatic brain injury, have also demonstrated that vitamin D supplementation shifts microglial cells toward an anti-inflammatory state, reducing brain edema and protecting the blood-brain barrier.

Vitamin D Helps Relieve Depression and Anxiety

A meta-analysis published in the Journal of Affective Disorders explored the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation in managing primary depression.¹³ The study reviewed 18 randomized controlled trials to assess whether vitamin D alleviates depressive symptoms in adults. The findings revealed a significant overall reduction in depression scores among those who received vitamin D supplements compared to those who received a placebo.

Notably, the benefits were more pronounced in individuals with baseline vitamin D levels exceeding 20 ng/mL, where the reduction in depressive symptoms was substantial. This suggests that higher levels of vitamin D may be necessary to achieve meaningful improvements in depression.

A study published in The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry also revealed a compelling association between vitamin D deficiency and increased depressive symptoms in older adults.¹⁴The study analyzed data from 299 participants, with over 60% classified as either vitamin D deficient or insufficient.

These individuals exhibited higher scores on the Geriatric Depression Scale, particularly in the dysphoria and meaninglessness subdomains. This negative correlation suggests that lower vitamin D levels are directly linked to heightened feelings of sadness, hopelessness and a lack of purpose — core elements of depression. Notably, the study found that higher vitamin D sufficiency levels, nearing 95.5 ng/mL, were associated with minimal to no depressive symptoms.

These results underscore the crucial role that adequate vitamin D plays in maintaining mental health, highlighting the potential of VD supplementation as a strategic intervention to alleviate depressive symptoms in older populations. Anxiety disorders, much like depression, significantly impact your daily life and overall well-being.

Separate research highlights that low vitamin D levels are not only associated with increased symptoms of depression but also with heightened anxiety.¹⁵ Vitamin D’s antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties play a role in mitigating the oxidative stress and inflammation that are key players in the pathophysiology of anxiety disorders.

Brain regions such as the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, which are involved in regulating mood and anxiety, contain vitamin D receptors and the enzyme necessary for activating vitamin D. This suggests that adequate vitamin D levels are essential for maintaining the health and functionality of these brain areas. Supplementing with vitamin D has also been found to help reduce anxiety symptoms.¹⁶

Maximizing the Benefits of Sunlight for Vitamin D Production

While vitamin D supplements are widely available, sunlight remains the gold standard for vitamin D synthesis in your body. Beyond just vitamin D production, sun exposure offers additional health advantages. In fact, elevated vitamin D levels often indicate healthy sun exposure, which may explain many of the health benefits traditionally attributed to vitamin D alone, including reduced mental health benefits, cancer risk and enhanced longevity.

One important factor that’s often overlooked in sun exposure discussions, however, is the impact of dietary oils, particularly seed oils. If you regularly consume seed oils, you’ll need to exercise extra caution with sun exposure. These oils contain high amounts of linoleic acid (LA), which becomes problematic when exposed to ultraviolet radiation. The interaction between sunlight and LA-rich skin triggers inflammation and DNA damage.

For this reason, it’s advisable to limit sun exposure to earlier in the morning or later in the afternoon if you’ve been consuming these oils regularly. A safe approach is to wait four to six months after eliminating these oils from your diet before increasing sun exposure. Several personal characteristics also influence how your body tolerates and responds to sunlight:

Guidelines for Safe Sun Exposure

The simplest way to gauge appropriate sun exposure is the “sunburn test.” Monitor your skin for any signs of redness. If you don’t notice even slight pinkness, you’re likely within a safe exposure range. Always avoid sunburn, as it indicates damage. As you reduce LA stores in your body, your susceptibility to sunburn and skin cancer decreases significantly.

These recommendations account for both optimal vitamin D production and protection against oxidative stress while your body eliminates stored LA so during the transition period:

If sun exposure is necessary before your body has cleared seed oils, consider these protective measures:

Vitamin D Supplementation Tips

If regular sun exposure isn’t feasible, vitamin D supplementation may be necessary. However, the current definition of vitamin D deficiency (less than 20 ng/mL) has been shown to be inadequate for good health and disease prevention. While sufficiency begins around 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L in European measurements), the target range for optimal health is 60 to 80 ng/mL (150 to 200 nmol/L). To optimize your vitamin D levels:

1. Test your levels twice a year
2. Adjust sun exposure or supplementation based on the results
3. Retest after three to four months to confirm you’ve reached target levels
4. Continue monitoring to maintain optimal levels

Remember that everyone’s relationship with the sun is unique. Listen to your body’s signals and adjust your exposure accordingly. The goal is to harness the benefits of sunlight while avoiding sunburn. Further, keep in mind that the interplay between vitamin D and mental health is intricate and multifaceted. While supplementation shows promise, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution.

Vitamin D deficiency could be both a consequence of mental illness — due to factors like reduced sunlight exposure and poor diet — and a contributing factor to the severity and resistance to treatment of these conditions. Therefore, addressing vitamin D levels should be part of a holistic approach to mental health care, alongside dietary improvements, physical activity and other psychosocial interventions.

However, ensuring adequate vitamin D levels through safe sun exposure and supplementation when necessary is a valuable component in supporting your mental well-being. By taking proactive steps to manage your vitamin D status, you contribute positively to your overall mental health and resilience against psychiatric disorders.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Notes

^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11} Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Nov 21;59(12):2056

^{6, 7, 9, 12} Diseases. 2024 Jun 20;12(6):131

¹³ J Affect Disord. 2024 Jan 1:344:653-661. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.10.021. Epub 2023 Oct 16

¹⁴ The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry July 2024, Volume 32, Issue 7, P808-820

^15, 16 Curr Nutr Rep. 2022 Sep 13;11(4):675–681

Featured image source

Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump has continually referred to Canada as the 51st state while calling Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a “governor” since their meeting at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida on Nov. 29.

“Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!” Trump wrote on social media on Dec. 18, one of his latest comments repeating the taunt.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Matthew Horwood is a reporter based in Ottawa.

Omid Ghoreishi is with the Canadian edition of The Epoch Times.

Parece haver uma crise grave nos exércitos ocidentais, apesar dos esforços dos seus governos para se prepararem para um cenário de conflito. Tem havido recentemente uma onda preocupante de abandono de deveres militares nas forças armadas britânicas. Muitos recrutas estão a abandonar os seus postos, simplesmente recusando-se a continuar a servir. Isto mina os planos britânicos de expandir as suas capacidades militares e põe em causa a própria legitimidade do governo britânico.

Segundo o The Telegraph, mais de 15 mil soldados britânicos deixaram as forças armadas entre novembro de 2023 e outubro de 2024. No mesmo período, apenas 12 mil novos soldados foram recrutados, o que resultou numa redução real do pessoal militar britânico. Os especialistas temem que isto se possa tornar numa tendência, levando a um enfraquecimento progressivo das forças armadas de Londres.

“Os soldados estão a abandonar as Forças Armadas a um ritmo alarmante (…) Pela primeira vez desde que há registo, existem agora apenas dois militares ou mulheres por cada mil pessoas na Grã-Bretanha. Cerca de 15.119 deixaram as Forças Armadas no ano até Outubro. destes, 7.778 foram contabilizados como “saída voluntária”, aqueles que optaram por sair por vontade própria. As forças recrutaram pouco mais de 12.000 efetivos no mesmo período, resultando numa redução líquida da força militar”, diz o artigo.

É importante ressaltar que estes dados surgem em meio a um contexto de esforços militares de Londres para reverter o cenário de enfraquecimento militar. O governo britânico está a lançar iniciativas importantes para expandir as forças armadas e melhorar as capacidades de defesa. Um dos principais incentivos neste processo é o aumento salarial dos soldados britânicos, recentemente anunciado em 6% – o mais elevado em duas décadas, embora ainda esteja abaixo do salário médio dos funcionários públicos britânicos.

“O Ministério da Defesa (MoD) anunciou o aumento, o maior para as forças em 22 anos, em julho – bem como os pagamentos de retenção – numa tentativa de manter o talento. No entanto, os números mais recentes sugerem que o aumento pode não ter sido suficiente e, apesar disso, os novos recrutas para as forças armadas continuam entre os funcionários públicos mais mal pagos na Grã-Bretanha. O pagamento em termos reais para soldados rasos do Exército aumentou apenas 1,9 por cento desde 2011, em comparação com 13,39 por cento para os novos médicos. 10,14% para os maquinistas. Uma pesquisa das Forças Armadas publicada em maio mostrou que a satisfação com a remuneração básica dos militares está no nível mais baixo já registrado”, acrescenta o jornal.

Na verdade, o Reino Unido não está a conseguir convencer os seus cidadãos a permanecerem nas forças armadas. Nem mesmo gastar mais dinheiro com salários parece eficaz para fazer com que os jovens britânicos permaneçam no exército. Na prática, os britânicos simplesmente não querem servir o seu país e estar preparados para o caso de eventual necessidade, como num possível cenário de conflito.

Existem muitos fatores que explicam esta situação. Na verdade, os baixos salários são um problema sério, uma vez que não parece interessante que os jovens britânicos permaneçam nas forças armadas, considerando o elevado custo de vida no país e o dinheiro oferecido na carreira militar. Contudo, este não é o único fator a ser considerado. Há também questões políticas e psicológicas envolvidas neste processo de redução de militares.

Os britânicos estão atualmente a sofrer uma lavagem cerebral por parte do seu governo, que tenta fazê-los acreditar que existe uma ameaça militar iminente – supostamente representada pela Federação Russa. Londres está a promover internamente os mesmos sentimentos anti-russos que foram disseminados na Ucrânia, na Polônia e nos países bálticos desde o fim da Guerra Fria. Faz parte do plano da OTAN fomentar a paranóia sobre uma “ameaça russa”, a fim de legitimar o seu apoio sistemático à Ucrânia. A tentativa de expandir as capacidades militares face a alegadas “novas ameaças” é resultado deste processo de lavagem cerebral: Londres quer convencer os seus jovens a estarem prontos para uma guerra iminente.

No entanto, como também acontece em muitos outros países ocidentais, os cidadãos britânicos questionam a legitimidade destas medidas. Os britânicos comuns não parecem acreditar numa “ameaça russa”, e parece bastante claro para todos que esta é uma narrativa política infundada – inventada apenas para legitimar os esforços de guerra da OTAN. É extremamente difícil convencer os jovens a juntarem-se às forças armadas sem sentimentos patrióticos genuínos, tentando persuadi-los apenas com dinheiro e narrativas políticas irrealistas. Isto explica por que tantos jovens britânicos estão a abandonar o serviço militar.

O melhor que o Reino Unido pode fazer é respeitar a decisão do seu povo e pôr fim a quaisquer iniciativas paranóicas para expandir as forças armadas, evitando o envolvimento em guerras estrangeiras e cooperando na desescalada.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês : Young British leaving the armed forces, InfoBrics, 23 de Dezembro de 2024.

Imagem :  InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

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

Before the year ends, we would like to acknowledge the contributions and generosity of all our authors, donors, readers and followers. 

To all of you, our deepest and heartfelt gratitude! 🙇

We at Global Research wish you a Happy and Wonderful Holidays! 🎄

May your 2025 be filled with joy and peace. 🕊️

Here’s a video from 2021.

Remember the 2021 COVID-19 Christmas under lockdown?

Will it happen again?

Nissan Motor and Honda Motor are discussing a merger that could create the world’s No. 3 carmaker and leave Japan with just two auto-manufacturing groups.

A combination of some sort has been under consideration for some time as the companies work to stay competitive in the face of overcapacity and the need for huge investments related to electric-vehicle and self-driving technologies.

Discussions have become more urgent in recent months.

It has become clear that Nissan is in trouble and that something akin to a bailout is needed, rather than simply cooperation, joint production or any of the other similar measures considered for the companies to work together, short of merging.

At a news conference Monday, they announced that talks on the historic deal have commenced.

“To lead the mobility transformation, we’ve come to think that we need something bolder than just cooperation in some specific fields,” said Honda CEO Toshihiro Mibe. “We have reconfirmed that a merger would create synergies in all kinds of fields.”

Mitsubishi Motors, which is more than a third owned by Nissan, said it may join the talks and will decide by January. The three automakers aim to finalize the merger talks by June next year and establish a new holding company by the summer 2026.

Click here to read the full article on The Japan Times.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Featured image: Nissan headquarters in Yokohama, Kanagawa Prefecture (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Earlier this month, the company that brings us ChatGPT announced its partnership with California-based weapons company, Anduril, to produce AI weapons. The OpenAI-Anduril system, which was tested in California at the end of November, permits the sharing of data between external parties for decision making on the battlefield.

This fits squarely within the US military and OpenAI’s plans to normalize the use of AI on the battlefield.

Anduril, based in Costa Mesa, makes AI-powered drones, missiles, and radar systems, including surveillance towers, Sentry systems, currently used at US military bases worldwide as well as the US-Mexico border and on the British coastline to detect migrants on boats. On December 3rd, they received a three-year contract with the Pentagon for a system that gives soldiers AI solutions during attacks.

.

An Anduril Sentry Tower in California (Licensed under CC BY 3.0)

.

In January, OpenAI deleted a direct ban in their usage policy on “activity that has high risk of physical harm” which specifically included “military and warfare” and “weapons development.” Less than one week after doing so, the company announced a partnership with the Pentagon in cybersecurity.

While they might have removed a ban on making weapons, OpenAI’s lurch into the war industry is in total antithesis to its own charter. Their own proclamation to build “safe and beneficial AGI [Artificial Generative Intelligence]” that does not “harm humanity” is laughable when they are using technology to kill. ChatGPT could feasibly, and probably soon will, write code for an automated weapon, analyze information for bombings, or assist invasions and occupations.

We should all be frightened by this use of AI for death and destruction. But this is not new. Israel and the US have been testing and using AI in Palestine for years. In fact, Hebron has been dubbed a “smart city” as the occupation enforces its tyranny through a perforation of motion and heat sensors, facial recognition technologies, and CCTV surveillance. At the center of this oppressive surveillance is the Blue Wolf System, an AI tool that scans the faces of Palestinians, when they are photographed by Israeli occupation soldiers, and refers to a biometric database in which information about them is stored. Upon inputting the photo into the system, each person is classified by a color-coded rating based on their perceived ‘threat level’ to dictate whether the soldier should allow them to pass or arrest them. The IOF soldiers are rewarded with prizes for taking the most photographs, which they have termed “Facebook for Palestinians”, according to revelations from the Washington Post in 2021.

OpenAI’s war technology comes as the Biden administration is pushing for the US to use the technology to “fulfill national security objectives.” This was in fact part of the title of a White House memorandum released in October this year calling for rapid development of artificial intelligence “especially in the context of national security systems.” While not explicitly naming China, it is clear that a perceived ‘AI arms race’ with China is also a central motivation of the Biden administration for such a call. Not solely is this for weapons for war, but also racing for the development of technology writ large. Earlier this month, the US banned the export of HBM chips to China, a critical component of AI and high-level graphics processing units (GPU). Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt warned that China is two to three years ahead of the US when it comes to AI, a major change from his statements earlier this year where he remarked that the US is ahead of China. When he says there is a “threat escalation matrix” when there are developments in AI, he reveals that the US sees the technology only as a tool of war and a way to assert hegemony. AI is the latest in the US’ unrelenting – and dangerous – provocation and fear mongering with China, who they cannot bear to see advance them.

In response to the White House memorandum, OpenAI released a statement of its own where it re-asserted many of the White House’s lines about “democratic values” and “national security.” But what is democratic about a company developing technology to better target and bomb people? Who is made secure by the collection of information to better determine war technology? This surely reveals the alignment of the company with the Biden administration’s anti-China rhetoric and imperialist justifications. As the company that has surely pushed AGI systems within general society, it is deeply alarming that they have ditched all codes and jumped right in with the Pentagon. While it’s not surprising that companies like Palantir or even Anduril itself are using AI for war, from companies like OpenAI – a supposedly mission-driven nonprofit – we should expect better.

AI is being used to streamline killing. At the US-Mexico border, in Palestine, and in US imperial outposts across the globe. While AI systems seem innocently embedded within our daily lives, from search engines to music streaming sites, we must forget these same companies are using the same technology lethally. While ChatGPT might give you ten ways to protest, it is likely being trained to kill, better and faster.

From the war machine to our planet, AI in the hands of US imperialists means only more profits for them and more devastation and destruction for us all.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Nuvpreet Kalra is CODEPINK’s Digital Content Producer. Nuvpreet completed a Bachelor’s in Politics & Sociology at the University of Cambridge, and an MA in Internet Equalities at the University of the Arts London. As a student, she was part of movements to divest and decolonize, as well as anti-racist and anti-imperialist groups. Nuvpreet joined CODEPINK as an intern in 2023, and now produces digital and social media content. In England, she organizes with groups for Palestinian liberation, abolition and anti-imperialism.

Tim Biondo is the digital communications manager for CODEPINK. They hold a bachelor’s degree in Peace Studies from The George Washington University.

Featured image: OpenAI headquarters, Pioneer Building, San Francisco (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

The United States, Turkey and Israel all responded to the fall of the Assad government in Damascus by launching bombing campaigns on Syria. Israel also attacked and destroyed most of the Syrian Navy in port at Latakia, and invaded Syria from the long-occupied Golan Heights, advancing to within 16 miles of the capital, Damascus.

The United States said that its bombing campaign targeted remnants of Islamic State in the east of the country, hitting 75 targets with 140 bombs and missiles, according to Air Force Times.

A long-standing force of 900 U.S. troops illegally occupy that part of Syria, partly to divert Syria’s meagre oil revenues to the U.S.’s Kurdish allies and prevent the Syrian government regaining that source of revenue. U.S. bombing badly damaged Syria’s oil infrastructure during the war with the Islamic State, but Russia has been ready to help Syria restore full output whenever it recovers control of that area. U.S. forces in Syria have been under attack by various Syrian militia forces, not just the Islamic State, with at least 127 attacks since October 2023.

Meanwhile, Turkiyë is conducting airstrikes, drone strikes and artillery fire as part of a new offensive by a militia it formed in 2017 under the Orwellian guise of the “Syrian National Army” to invade and occupy parts of Rojava, the autonomous Kurdish enclave in northeast Syria.

Israel, however, launched a much broader bombing campaign than Turkey or the U.S., with about 600 airstrikes on post-Assad Syria in the first eight days of its existence. Without waiting to see what form of government the political transition in Syria leads to, Israel set about methodically destroying its entire military infrastructure, to ensure that whatever government comes to power will be as defenseless as possible.

Israel claims its new occupation of Syrian territory is a temporary move to ensure its own security. But while Israel bombed Syria 220 times over the past year, killing about 300 people, Syria showed restraint and did not retaliate for those attacks.

The pattern of Israeli history has been that land grabs like this usually turn into long-term illegal Israeli annexations, as in the Golan Heights and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. That will surely be the case with Israel’s new strategic base on top of Mount Hermon, overlooking Damascus and the surrounding area, unless a new Syrian government or international diplomacy can force Israel to withdraw.

Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran, Russia and the UN have all joined the global condemnation of the new Israeli assault on Syria. Geir Pedersen, the UN Special Envoy to Syria, called Israel’s military actions “highly irresponsible,” and UN peacekeepers have removed Israeli flags from newly-occupied Syrian territory.

The Qatari Foreign Ministry called Israel’s actions “a dangerous development and a blatant attack on Syria’s sovereignty and unity as well as a flagrant violation of international law… that will lead the region to further violence and tension.”

The Saudi Foreign Ministry reiterated that the Golan Heights is an occupied Arab territory, and said that Israel’s actions confirmed “Israel’s continued violation of the rules of international law and its determination to sabotage Syria’s chances of restoring its security, stability and territorial integrity.”

The only country in the world that has ever recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights is the United States, under the first Trump administration, and it is part of Biden’s disastrous legacy in the Middle East that that he failed to stand up for international law and reverse Trump’s recognition of that illegal Israeli annexation.

As people all over the world watch Israel ignore the rules of international law that every country in the world is committed to live by, we are confronted by the age-old question of how to respond to a country that systematically ignores and violates these rules. The foundation of the UN Charter is the agreement by all countries to settle their differences diplomatically and peacefully, instead of by the threat or use of military force.

As Americans, we should start by admitting that our own country has led the way down this path of war and militarism, perpetuating the scourge of war that the UN Charter was intended to provide a peaceful alternative to.

As the United States became the leading economic power in the world in the 20th century, it also built up dominant military power. Despite its leading role in creating the United Nations and the rules of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, it came to see strict compliance with those rules as an obstacle to its own ambitions, from the UN Charter’s prohibition against the threat or use of military force to the Geneva Conventions’ universal protections for prisoners of war and civilians.

In its “war on terror,” including its wars on Iraq and other countries, the United States flagrantly and systematically violated these bedrock foundations of world order. It is a fundamental principle of all legal systems that the powerful must be held accountable as well as the weak and the vulnerable. A system of laws that the wealthy and powerful can ignore cannot claim to be universal or just, and is unlikely to stand the test of time.

Today, our system of international law faces exactly this problem. The U.S. presumption that its overwhelming military power permits it to violate international law with impunity has led other countries, especially U.S. allies but also Russia, to apply the same opportunistic standards to their own behavior.

In 2010, an Amnesty International report on European countries that hosted CIA “black site” torture chambers called on U.S. allies in Europe not to join the United States as another “accountability-free zone” for war crimes. But now the world is confronting a U.S. ally that has not just embraced, but doubled down on, the U.S. presumption that dominant military power can trump the rule of law.

The Israeli government refuses to comply with international legal prohibitions against deliberately killing women and children, by military force and by deprivation; seizing foreign territory; and bombing other countries. Shielded from international accountability behind the U.S. Security Council veto, Israel thumbs its nose at the world’s impotence to enforce international law, confident that nobody will stop it from using its deadly and destructive war machine wherever and however it pleases.

So the world’s failure to hold the United States accountable for its war crimes has led Israel to believe that it too can escape accountability, and U.S. complicity in Israeli war crimes, especially the genocide in Gaza, has inevitably reinforced that belief.

U.S. responsibility for Israel’s lawlessness is compounded by the conflict of interest in its dual role as both Israel’s military superpower ally and weapons supplier and the supposed mediator of the lopsided “peace process” between Israel and Palestine, whose inherent flaws led to Hamas’s election victory in 2006 and now to the current crisis.

Instead of recognizing its own conflict of interest and deferring to intervention by the UN or other neutral parties, the U.S. has jealously guarded its monopoly as the sole mediator between Israel and Palestine, using this position to grant Israel total freedom of action to commit systematic war crimes. If this crisis is ever to end, the world cannot allow the U.S. to continue in this role.

While the United States bears a great deal of responsibility for this crisis, U.S. officials remain in collective denial over the criminal nature of Israel’s actions and their instrumental role in Israel’s crimes. The systemic corruption of U.S. politics severely limits the influence of the majority of Americans who support a ceasefire in Gaza, as pro-Israel lobbying groups buy the unconditional support of American politicians and attack the few who stand up to them.

Despite America’s undemocratic political system, its people have a responsibility to end U.S. complicity in genocide, which is arguably the worst crime in the world, and people are finding ways to bring pressure to bear on the U.S. government:

Members of CODEPINK, Jewish Voice For Peace and Palestinian-, Arab-American and other activist groups are in Congressional offices and hearings every day; constituents in California are suing two members of Congress for funding genocide; students are calling on their universities to divest from Israel and U.S. arms makers; activists and union members are identifying and picketing companies and blocking ports to stop weapons shipments to Israel; journalists are rebelling against censorship; U.S. officials are resigning; people are on hunger strike; others have committed suicide.

It is also up to the UN and other governments around the world to intervene, and to hold Israel and the United States accountable for their actions. A growing international movement for an end to the genocide and decades of illegal occupation is making progress. But it is excruciatingly slow given the appalling human cost and the millions of Palestinian lives at stake.

Israel’s international propaganda campaign to equate criticism of its war crimes with antisemitism poisons political discussion of Israeli war crimes in the United States and some other countries.

But many countries are making significant changes in their relations with Israel, and are increasingly willing to resist political pressures and propaganda tropes that have successfully muted international calls for justice in the past. A good example is Ireland, whose growing trade relations with Israel, mainly in the high-tech sector, formerly made it the fourth largest importer of Israeli products in the world in 2022.

Ireland is now one of 14 countries who have officially intervened to support South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – the others are Belgium, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Libya, the Maldives, Mexico, Nicaragua, Palestine, Spain and Turkiyë. Israel reacted to Ireland’s intervention in the case by closing its embassy in Dublin, and now Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has smeared Ireland’s Taoiseach (prime minister) Simon Harris as “antisemitic.”

The Taoiseach’s spokesperson replied that Harris “will not be responding to personalized and false attacks, and remains focused on the horrific war crimes being perpetrated in Gaza, standing up for human rights and international law and reflecting the views of so many people across Ireland who are so concerned at the loss of innocent, civilian lives.”

If the people of Palestine can stand up to bombs, missiles and bullets day after day for over a year, the very least that political leaders around the world can do is stand up to Israeli name-calling, as Simon Harris is doing.

Spain is setting an example on international efforts to halt the supply of weapons to Israel, with an arms embargo and a ban on weapons shipments transiting Spanish ports, including the U.S. naval base at Rota, which the U.S. has leased since it formed a military alliance with Spain’s Franco dictatorship in 1953.

Spain has already refused entry to two Maersk-owned ships transporting weapons from North Carolina to Israel, while dockworkers in Spain, Belgium, Greece, India and other countries have refused to load weapons and ammunition onto ships bound for Israel.

The UN General Assembly (UNGA) has passed resolutions for a ceasefire in Gaza; an end to the post-1967 Israeli occupation; and for Palestinian statehood. The General Assembly’s 10th Emergency Special Session on the Israel-Palestine conflict under the Uniting for Peace process has been ongoing since 1997.

The General Assembly should urgently use these Uniting For Peace powers to turn up the pressure on Israel and the United States. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has provided the legal basis for stronger action, ruling that the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories Israel invaded in 1967 is illegal and must be ended, and that the massacre in Gaza appears to violate the Genocide Convention.

Inaction is inexcusable. By the time the ICJ issues a final verdict on its genocide case, millions may be dead. The Genocide Convention is an international commitment to prevent genocide, not just to pass judgment after the fact. The UN General Assembly has the power to impose an arms embargo, a trade boycott, economic sanctions, a peacekeeping force, or to do whatever it takes to end the genocide.

When the UN General Assembly first launched its boycott campaign against apartheid South Africa in 1962, not a single Western country took part. Many of those same countries will be the last to do so against Israel today. But the world cannot wait to act for the blessing of complacent wealthy countries who are themselves complicit in genocide.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher for CODEPINK and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq, and, with Medea Benjamin, of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, published by OR Books, with an updated and expanded edition due in March 2025.

Featured image: Israeli troops unfurl Israeli flag on Mount Hermon in Syria. Photo credit: Times of Israel

This is an excerpt from the Statement of the International Delegation to the 2021 Syrian Presidential Election:

“We saw nothing to indicate unfairness or coercion in the casting of ballots.

We overwhelmingly found that Syrian people place tremendous significance on this election. During and after the election, we observed huge enthusiasm. It appeared genuine and widespread.

…

For many Syrians, the election represents the imminent ending of the war, the defeat of foreign plots, and hope for the future.

For young people, it encapsulates the first period of relative stability they have experienced in their living memory.

For them, the presidential election was a referendum on the right of the Syrian people to determine their own future.

…

It is the unanimous conclusion of the undersigned representatives of the International Delegation to the 2021 Syrian Presidential Election that the re-election of President Bashar al-Assad, of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party and the National Progressive Front, is the legitimate, democratic expression of the Syrian people.”

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017.

Featured image is from The Greanville Post

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

**Voices from Syria**

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

Click to order.

There are nearly 14 million children in the USA who suffer from food insecurity and hunger, or about one in five. During the peak of the COVID crisis this had come close to about 18 million (see The Conversation discussion by four experts titled ‘18 million US children are at risk of hunger’, January 21, 2021).

This is part of a wider and serious problem of hunger and food insecurity in all age-groups.

According to the US Department of Agriculture’s report ‘Household Food Security in the USA in 2022’, in 2022 17 million US households (or 12.8% of the total number of households) were food insecure or suffered from hunger to a lesser or greater extent. This number had increased from 10.2% in 2021. Within this number of 17 million households, 6.8 million had very low food security, or suffered even more from hunger. This number of households suffering from very high food insecurity also went up from 3.8% to 5.1% from 2021 to 2022, when seen as a percentage of total households.

The number of households where children suffered from food insecurity is recorded at lower levels as the number of households with children is only 39% of total households in the USA, and also because elders generally try to protect children from hunger. Nevertheless it is disturbing to learn from this official report that the number of households with child food insecurity and hunger was 2.3 million in 2021 and went up very rapidly to 3.3 million in 2022, a 44% increase in just one year. Similarly households with high child food insecurity (which includes children skipping meals or altogether going without food for a day) increased from 274,000 in 2021 to 381,000 in 2022 in just one year, a 40% rise in just one year. 

In addition there are hungry children (age-group up to 18) living outside households who face high food insecurity, including those who are homeless.

Food insecurity and hunger among certain sections of population like blacks and Latinos are significantly higher than the national average.

Hence a question arises that a country which has very high GNP and the topmost number of billionaires, which has very high natural resource base, which was favored by history to emerge at the top, which has extraordinary power to create currency and trade systems to suit its interests, is unable to feed its people properly and has very high rates of hunger and food insecurity among its people and most glaringly among its children.

What is more, while the country could make available hundreds of billions of dollars for the most destructive wars and proxy wars, it could not make available tens of billions of dollars which could have ensured that (almost) no one was hungry in the USA, as per the estimates given by various groups fighting hunger in USA.

In fact the available data shows that while the USA was getting deeply involved in such proxy conflicts which have been extremely costly in terms of loss of life, the number of those affected by hunger and food insecurity in the USA was rising at a very high rate.

In many parts of USA the expected decrease in hunger following the end of COVID crisis did not take place as some of the special programs to keep away hunger and other deprivation during the COVID days were rolled back too hurriedly.

In fact recently the Food Research and Action Center issued a warning that as about 12 states in the USA are poised to move away from a combined 1.4 billion dollar spending on food and nutrition (EBT) program, this can lead to an increase in food insecurity for about 10 million children during the summer next year (2025).

All this draws attention to how far removed capitalism, particularly in its more aggressive forms, is from meeting the most priority needs of its own people, let alone being sensitive to the needs and safety of the people of other countries.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Man over Machine, A Day in 2071 and Planet in Peril. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Two categories of foreign mercenaries are fighting in Ukraine – those who fight to earn some measly money and those who earn thousands of dollars a month by providing various services, ranging from training the Ukrainian army in combat to removing mines. However, what has become abundantly clear is that these mercenaries are not willing to die for Ukraine.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken recently announced a new $725 million military aid package for Kiev. During the administration of US President Joe Biden, a total of $62 billion was allocated to the Eastern European country. The US military industry and US private military companies operating in Ukraine earn from this.

Several private military companies have been awarded contracts to support the Ukrainian armed forces in the war against Russia. Under contracts with the Pentagon and the State Department, American and Canadian military companies are engaged in protecting facilities in Ukraine, demining, reconnaissance, and training Ukrainian soldiers in artillery fire. They also maintain F-16 fighter jets and train crews.

Most of the funds allocated by the Biden administration were spent on the purchase of weapons and support for the US military-industrial complex, which is why they went to US companies that produce and supply weapons. In addition, large quantities of weapons were also provided from the existing Pentagon arsenals.

Private military companies’ involvement in Ukraine is quite limited. Most of their services in other countries were primarily aimed at low-intensity conflicts, and their opponents were partisan or rebel formations in various countries. In such situations, private military companies could provide effective protection of communications, facilities, and property or participate in low-intensity battles against regular units.

However, the Ukrainian conflict is a war of large armies, an artillery war and a drone war. Private military companies, which are used to operating in low-intensity conditions, are not the best suited for the Ukraine War, which is why they have suffered heavy losses defending the Kiev regime. By the end of 2023, the peak of mercenaries in Ukraine had passed. Today, there are significantly fewer than before.

This has caused issues since, as consistent throughout history, mercenaries want to make money but do not want to die for others.

The Russian Ministry of Defence regularly publishes estimates of the number of mercenaries and their losses in Ukraine. Moreover, the Ministry also provides data on the countries from which these mercenaries came. The largest number comes from Poland, then from the United States, and recently, many mercenaries have been arriving from Latin America, especially from economically less developed countries such as Colombia and Bolivia.

People come to Ukraine to earn money, but this conflict does not bring much income. Most of these mercenaries die in Ukraine or disappear without a trace. In many cases, their families never find their bodies. According to reports in March, almost 13,400 foreign mercenaries had arrived in the war-torn country to fight against the Russian army. By then, about 6,000 had been eliminated. According to the Russian military, most of the mercenaries came to Ukraine from Poland, the United States, Canada, and Georgia.

As for salaries, the Ukrainian government does not particularly enrich foreign mercenaries, so they are paid the same as regular soldiers and officers of the Ukrainian army. For many in Latin America, for example, a little money motivates them to be cannon fodder.

However, other mercenaries, such as highly qualified specialists, are hired to service complex Western equipment. These people receive significantly more money—at the level of first-class armies such as the armies of the European Union or the United States. These specialists do not go to the front or lie in the trenches but work on radars, air defence systems, aircraft systems, and other complex equipment that the US and the EU supply to the Ukrainian military. For such specialists, the salaries are much higher – perhaps several thousand dollars per month, and for some specialized jobs, such as air defence system operators or experts in long-range missiles such as ATACMS or Storm Shadow, salaries can reach tens of thousands per month.

Ukraine has adopted a law that allows foreign citizens to serve in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and hold officer and command positions, officially legalizing their participation in the army’s structure. This confirms that cooperation with foreigners in the military continues and that they are attempting to fill the shortage of qualified personnel in the Ukrainian military.

Regarding the influence of private military companies on the conflict and the course of the special military operation, the greatest influence is exerted by highly qualified specialists working on the maintenance and use of Western weapons, which are now crucial in this conflict, as they enable the achievement of tactical and operational goals. Although the number of mercenaries participating in the fighting is not large, their role in maintaining and operating complex Western weapons systems has a major impact on the course of the conflict.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image source

Even Kiev’s closest allies seem to be getting tired of the war. In a recent statement, Polish Deputy Defense Minister Pawel Zalewski stated that his country has reached the limit of its assistance to Ukraine and is no longer able to send any large-scale aid. This shows how NATO countries are fed up with the consequences of the war, losing large amounts of resources and suffering substantial losses.

In an interview with Radio Zet, the Polish deputy minister expressed his concerns about Warsaw’s massive support for Kiev. He fears that the country will begin to lose its own military capability due to the systematic delivery of weapons to the Ukrainian regime. Furthermore, Zelewski stressed that Poland will not send its MiG-29 jets to Kiev, claiming that such a move under the current circumstances would leave the country vulnerable and threaten Polish national security.

The deputy minister stated that the only way to make it possible to send these fighters to Ukraine is by replacing the Polish fleet. Therefore, he asked the US to send F-35 jets to Poland, which would allow the current fleet to be replaced with more modern equipment, creating the necessary conditions to finally send the MiG-29s to Ukraine. Previously, Warsaw had already sent a number of Soviet-era fighters to Ukraine, but Zelewski made it clear that continuing this policy of unrestricted arms transfers would harm Warsaw, which is why a new military policy is being established in Poland, prioritizing national security over supporting Kiev.

Speaking very clearly and objectively, he ruled out implementing new aid packages to Ukraine for now. Zelewski said that Polish aid had “hit the wall” and could not be expanded without causing harm to the country. In this sense, although Poland continues to support Ukraine and does its best to meet the demands of its neighbor partner, it is not feasible to continue expanding the military packages.

“Today, our most important goal is to enhance the defense capabilities of the Polish army, because we believe we have given what we could, and more (…) But we can’t give any more (…) We are reaching the end. I understand we have hit the wall,” he said.

Previously, Zelewski and his boss, Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz, had reiterated that Poland has already supplied Ukraine with all the weapons that could be sent without causing damage to Poland’s own military capabilities. At least until 2026, when Warsaw expects to receive American F-35 jets, Polish aid is likely to be reduced or remain “frozen.”

It must be emphasized that since 2022, Poland has already sent more than 4.5 billion euros in military assistance to Ukraine. According to data published by Germany’s Kiel Institute, more than 70% of this money was spent on direct arms supply. Poland is undoubtedly one of the countries most involved in the conflict, with an almost direct participation in the war, since, in addition to sending aid to the regime, it keeps its borders open for the transit of foreign equipment to Ukraine.

The participation of Polish troops is also something worth noting. Poland is one of the countries that sends the most mercenaries to Ukraine. Russian troops often eliminate Polish soldiers on the battlefield. Although they are simply called “mercenaries”, these soldiers are sent to Ukraine with the full support of the Polish state, which encourages them to fight against Moscow. Thus, it is possible to say that Warsaw is already actively participating in the war, and the nickname “mercenaries” for its soldiers is just a tactic to circumvent international law and keep Polish territory free from Russian attacks.

Recently, some experts have begun to mention the possibility that Poland is being prepared by NATO for a future war with Russia. American aid to Poland has been expanding recently, indicating that there is a special position for the country in NATO’s war plans. In fact, considering Poland’s high level of involvement in the current conflict, it is possible that it is being prepared by NATO to replace Ukraine in the anti-Russian proxy war, once the Ukrainian army collapses.

In this sense, it is possible that the Polish concern to preserve its military stockpiles is related to a NATO directive for Warsaw to prepare for war. Furthermore, it is necessary to emphasize that Poland is affected by the same type of ultranationalist and Russophobic ideology as Ukraine, with high levels of paranoia among local decision-makers. So, whether or not there is a NATO guideline, Polish politicians certainly fear the so-called “Russian threat”, which is why they want to have enough weapons to defend themselves.

In fact, regardless of the reasons for the Polish decision, this is just more evidence that NATO countries are incapable of keep helping Ukraine, lacking the material conditions to continue with large-scale assistance.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser 

Notes

Is President Biden Contemplating “A Preemptive Pardon” for Dr. Anthony Fauci? He Knew that Remdesivir Would Result in Mortality

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 22, 2024

RFK Jr in his book entitled the Real Anthony Fauci documents Fauci’s “30 years of abuse of power, during both the HIV epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic.” According to RFK Jr. Tony Fauci knew from the very outset that remdesivir would kill.

Mayor of NYC: 500,00 Missing Children! The True Pandemic Nobody Is Fighting

By Peter Koenig, December 23, 2024

New York City (NYC) Mayor Eric Adams proclaims that 500,000 unaccompanied immigrant children are missing [in the US alone]; that they have been handed over to unvetted “sponsors” who may – and probably will – abuse them as sex-slaves, child-labor slaves and possibly worse.

War Industry Destroys Our Lives. Manlio Dinucci

By Manlio Dinucci, December 23, 2024

While the car crisis, aggravated by further US protectionist measures, puts 40,000 jobs at risk in Italy, and Italy’s public debt has climbed to 139% of GDP and is still rising, Italy’s military spending continues to grow: according to official NATO data, it will amount to around 32 billion euros in 2024, an average of around 88 million euros a day.

The Flu Vaccine: Science at Its Worst

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, December 22, 2024

Joshua Hadfield was a normal, healthy developing child as a toddler. In the midst of the H1N1 swine flu frenzy and the media fear mongering about the horrible consequences children face if left unvaccinated, the Hadfield family had Joshua vaccinated with Glaxo’s Pandermrix influenza vaccine. Within weeks, Joshua could barely wake up, sleeping up to nineteen hours a day. Laughter would trigger seizures.

Cuba Through the Eyes of the Revolution. Embedded with the Calixto Garcia Brigade. Vive Fidel!

By Michael Welch, December 22, 2024

From John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan to Joe Biden, U.S. presidents have subjected the biggest island in the Caribbean Sea to a trade embargo. In late 2020, President Donald Trump made sanctions even worse by placing Cuba on his list of “state sponsors of terrorism” as well as banning Cuba from purchasing important medicines and imposing sanctions on oil imports from Venezuela.

Pandemic 2.0 Unleashed? California Declares State of Emergency Amid Bird Flu Propaganda Blitz

By Ben Bartee, December 22, 2024

Here is, just a couple of weeks ago or so, palpably unhealthy lardball and high priest of The Science ™ Dr. Peter Hotez forecasting “big picture stuff coming down the pike starting on January 21st” — as in, the day Trump assumes office.

Corporate Agriculture’s War Against the Family Farm: Tears, Water, Gas and Cannons But India’s Farmers Stand Firm

By Colin Todhunter, December 22, 2024

In late 2021, the Indian government announced that three important farm laws, which would have introduced neoliberal shock therapy to the agriculture sector, would be repealed after a one-year farmers’ mobilisation against the legislation.

The environment where the final showdown of global hegemony will take place will be the oceans, as it has been in the past. Since China is the most serious rising power against the US, we can easily say that this area will be the Western Pacific Ocean. The most talked about scenario today is China’s intervention in Taiwan in 2027 or 2028 or a crisis concerning the 9-points line in the South China Sea escalating and triggering a war between the US and China, first indirectly and then directly. In both the Taiwan and South China Sea scenarios, the main front will be the ocean, sea and islands. Therefore, the kinetic power of both navies and their potential areas of capability will determine the outcome of the war. From the beginning, the US can adopt the Ukraine model and help China’s rivals such as Taiwan or the Philippines with indirect ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) and firepower support and hybrid war techniques. However, since the area where the war will be waged and the definitive result will be achieved is the oceanic  environment, even the indirect support will not be easy, as it was in Ukraine.

The Difficulty of Waging a Proxy War in the Pacific 

Since there is no proxy war at sea in a crisis in the Pacific and the fog of war will be very intense in the events that will occur, direct engagements between US and Chinese ships or aircraft will be in question. On the other hand, ship movements or logistical support to the islands, examples of which can only be seen in World War II, will be in question, and in this case, even if US and Chinese ships or unmanned sea vehicles avoid confrontation, there will definitely and inescapably be confrontation in the air, surface and underwater. Although the US would adopt an indirect approach, scenarios requiring direct engagement will emerge unexpectedly. As a result, when the war spreads to the ocean, the outcome will inevitably be at the ocean. The eventuality of this war will be determined by the capabilities of the navies to conduct joint and combined operations; their logistical integration capabilities, especially fuel and ammunition; and the speed at which they can repair damaged ships and replace sunken ones. The essence of war on land is iron and blood. In other words, the number of armed combatants, the ordnance and the will to fight are the main determinants. However what is essential at sea is to first establish situational awareness in the vast waters of the ocean and then to prevent the enemy from using the sea as a means of transportation or power projection into land. To attain this objecitve, a manned or unmanned ship and flying elements (helicopters, aircraft and UCAV/UAV) providing tactical support to the ship are essentilas. The ship is always at the center. What is essential on the ship is the shipbuilding capacity of the motherland.

American Record Between 1941-1945 

The main reason for the US victory in World War II was its capacity to build ships, both merchant and naval ships. In World War II, the USA, which produced 6000 ships in 24 shipyards belonging to the Navy and 150 shipyards belonging to the private sector between 1941-1945, broke the world record under the conditions of that day.

Image: SS John W. Brown on the Great Lakes in 2000. John W. Brown is one of only two surviving World War II Liberty Ships, the other being the SS Jeremiah O’Brien.

For example, the American-made Liberty and Victory-class dry cargo ships, which formed the backbone of the logistic support convoys that changed the course of the war in both the Pacific and the Atlantic, were built and put into service in record short periods of time. Between 1941 and 1945, the 7,000-ton Liberty and 15,000-ton Victory-class cargo ships were built. The Liberty class broke records in production speed. An average ship was built in 42 days. When the war ended in 1945, there were 2,710 Liberty and 510 Victory-class ships in service. Only these two classes of ships were built by around 30 private shipyards.

The Declining American Shipbuilding Industry 

In 1975, the U.S. shipbuilding industry was number one in terms of global capacity, with more than 70 commercial ships ordered for domestic production. Approximately 50 years later, the U.S. has now fallen to 19th place in the global rankings. Today, the U.S. is facing serious shipbuilding problems. After the end of the Cold War, there was an increase in the number of countries building commercial ships because of globalization. On the other hand, the demand for warships in the US domestic market has decreased. Submarine production fell from 3.8 per year in the 1980s to 0.7 in the 1990s. Demand started to increase again in the 2000s, but the industry was not ready. Today, there is a significant increase in the government’s demand for ships for the navy, but the shipyards are insufficient to achieve this goal. Since 2019, the navy has ordered 3 submarines  per year, two of which are nuclear-powered attack submarines and one is a nuclear ballistic missile submarine, but the actual production has been only half of this.

China’s Post-2000 Record

Today, China has achieved a similar performance to the US in World War II. China currently controls 64.7% of all new merchant ship orders in the world. These values ​​are 19.6% for South Korea and 11.2% for Japan. US shipyards, on the other hand, produced only 0.13% of world orders. Especially in the last decade, the amount of new merchant ship orders from China has increased by 170%. This increase has not been previously seen in the history. It was an unprecedented development. The global share of 10% in 2000, reaching 65% in the last 24 years is doubtlessly a great success. During the same period, the total new ship order rate of South Korea and Japan decreased from 78% to 31%.

In parallel with these developments, most recently, the US Naval Intelligence Directorate (ONI) announced that China’s merchant ship construction capacity is 232 times greater than that of the US. While China’s new ship construction capacity is 33,200,000 tons, this value is around 100,000 tons for the US. The main factor that transformed the Chinese Navy from a defensive to an offensive strategic transformation in a short period of 30 years is  its ship construction capacity, which uses the advantages of basic raw materials, technological accumulation and qualified manpower. This capacity is developing every passing day in the fields of naval and merchant ships and unmanned marine vehicles. On the other hand China builds the machinery, electronic systems and weapons of its warships without being dependent on foreign sources. In reaching this stage, the extensive subsidies of the state undoubtedly ensured China’s global leadership. After 2000, the Chinese government ensured that the shipbuilding sector transitioned to dual-use features, as the US government did in World War II.

Reasons for the US Decline

The father of modern capitalism, Adam Smith, believed that shipbuilding was one of the few industries that deserved national support and should not be left solely to market forces. After the Cold War, the US left shipbuilding in the hands of market forces. The situation is best summarized by US Secretary of the Navy Del Toro:

“China can produce in one year as many ships as the US can produce in 7 years.”

At the beginning of the Cold War, the US Navy had 11 military shipyards. Today, there are no military shipyards left. There are around 7 civilian shipyards capable of building large warships. This number is a few dozen in China. While the 154 civilian shipyards in the US today can focus on warship production in the event of war, this number is 1,100 in China. Another problem of the US maritime power is the insufficient number of competent and skilled shipyard workers. Today, there are 150,000 shipbuilding and repair workers employed in US private shipyards and 38,000 in public shipyards. This number is very insufficient for a country like the US. Increasing shipbuilding and repair capacity will require more skilled workers in addition to engineers. However, since American youth are not inclined to become intermediate workers such as shipyard welders and plumbers, there is a weakness even in the current situation. As production moves overseas and capital and labor migrate to more profitable areas, knowledge and skilled labor in the US have atrophied. In an article titled “Worker Shortages Risks US Security” in the Wall Street Journal on December 20, 2024, writer Greg Ip says:

“Wages here at the shipyard start at $17 an hour, exceed $20 a year, and exceed $30 for those with more seniority. This once represented a significant premium for unskilled jobs in the region. Not now. Local fast-food restaurants pay up to $16 an hour, and Target advertises warehouse jobs for as little as $24.’’

Image: CSSC gantry cranes in June 2012 (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

China’s State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) alone will employ an estimated 200,000 people by 2023. If the remaining 1,100 shipyards are considered, China’s shipbuilding sector will employ more than half a million workers. 

From Merchant Ships to Warships 

As is known, to increase the construction capacity of naval vessels, it is first necessary to develop its merchant shipbuilding capabilities. China has done this in the last 30 years. China, which has achieved a record close to the United States’ record in World War II in merchant shipbuilding, has been able to convert this success into its warship-building capabilities. This development has become the biggest threat the United States has faced in the world’s oceans and seas since the Cold War. In the report titled ‘’China’s Naval Modernization: Implications for the United States – Background and Considerations for Congress’’ published by the US Congressional Research Center on August 16, 2024, this situation was expressed as follows (https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/RL33153.pdf): ‘’Between 2015 and 2020, the Chinese Navy surpassed the US Navy numerically. The Chinese Navy is by far the largest navy in East Asia.’’ According to the report, which states that the Chinese Navy is the largest navy in the world with 370 combat ships, this navy is expected to have 395 ships by 2025 and 435 combat ships by 2030. In comparison, the US Navy has 296 combat ships as of August 12, 2024. This number will be 294 in 2030. U.S. military officials and other observers have described China’s warship-building efforts and capabilities as alarming compared to American capabilities and have identified the Chinese Navy as the single biggest obstacle to U.S. wartime control of high-seas areas in the Western Pacific. Admiral Lisa Franchetti, who continues to serve as the 33rd Commander of the U.S. Naval Forces (CNO), having launched the ‘’Project 33” action plan states the following:

“We cannot create a larger conventional navy in a few years or focus solely on numbers without the right capabilities to win the struggle for sea control… But even without these resources, we will improve our combat readiness, capabilities and capacity. We must understand that the navy faces serious financial and industrial constraints.”

The most striking emphasis in the action plan is that they are preparing to fight China in 2027. Franchetti later adds:

“The defense industry of the People’s Republic of China is now in a state of war with the world’s largest shipbuilding infrastructure at the disposal of the navy.”

On the other hand, while the Chinese Navy has grown by 100% in the number of ships in the last 23 years, the American Navy has shrunk by 20%. While the Chinese navy has added 165 warships to its navy in the last 23 years, this number has remained at 90 for the US. On the other hand, China has grown by 300% in tonnage growth in the last 23 years, while the US Navy has grown by 2%. For example, while the US has approved the retirement of 19 warships, including 3 nuclear attack submarines and 4 cruisers, for 2025, the number of new ships to be built has been limited to 6. Let’s add that new shipbuilding programs are already progressing with a 3-year delay in each class of new ship. The US Navy’s greatest advantage in the Taiwan scenario is nuclear attack submarines (SSN). According to US planners, the US’s requirement for this type of submarine is 66 nuclear attack submarines. However, today they only have 49. The US will need to produce 2.3 to 2.5 attack submarines per year. Today, this value is 1.2 per year.

Repair and Maintenance Deficiency

The 350 repair and maintenance facilities that were closed in the US and overseas bases after 1989 also dealt a major blow to the maintenance and repair capability of ships damaged during wartime, rather than shipbuilding. For example, the closest American territory to China, Guam Island, has no capacity  to dry-dock American warships since 2016. There are only 54 warship repair facilities approved by the US Navy Department in the entire US coasts. The US General Accounting Office  (GAO) acknowledged this dire problem in June 2021 and published a highly critical report (GAO-21 -246). 

Merchant Marine Fleet, Coast Guard and Fishermen

The situation is much worse in terms of the merchant marine fleet. China operates the world’s largest merchant marine fleet with a total national flag tonnage of 102 million DWT. Chinese companies own or operate one or more terminals in 96 foreign ports. 36 of these ports are among the world’s top 100 ports in terms of container volume. On the other hand, the number of ships that can provide logistical support to establish a sea lift to US bases and allies in the Pacific is around 85. For China, this number is 5,500. On the other hand, the Chinese Coast Guard has 225 ships over 500 tons. China is also one of the few countries in the world with a Maritime Militia. As an inseparable part of the naval force, the militia has equipment, personnel and discipline that can be used in times of crisis or escalation. China has around 500 thousand fishing boats. It is estimated that the number of boats that can be used for militia purposes is around 250 thousand.

While Hegemony at Sea Changes Hands

The US has long lost its numerical dominance at sea. The American Navy gave its government the chance to protect American interests by controlling the global commons covering two-thirds of the planet. The ability to use these areas as a power projection  environment and as an area to deny enemy maritime trade provided a great advantage for the US. However, this ability is now in trouble. Controlling the main transportation routes of the seas was the locomotive of the West’s 500-year dominance and hegemony in the international system. The European Atlantic system was established by seizing ports and controlling strategic sea routes.

Russia and China have learned from history. In contrast to the Atlantic system dependent on the seas, they developed Asian transportation networks to provide an alternative in case the connection to the sea is cut off. Today, cost-effective and time-efficient transportation corridors have emerged in Asia, where the coasts from the Norwegian Sea to the Indo-China peninsula are out of the control of the Atlantic system. On the other hand, the distances in the Pacific theater of operations are 2-3 times longer than the European war front. It is very difficult to achieve military success without uninterrupted sea transportation and the establishment of a sea bridge. Therefore, in the Taiwan scenario, China may not even need to directly engage in military action. The blockade of the island may be sufficient after a certain period. Taiwan is 81 miles away from China and 7,600 miles away from the US. If military intervention in Taiwan is on the agenda, it will be extremely difficult for the US and the coalition it will form to deter and block China, considering their current relative force comparison and shipbuilding capacity.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Ret Admiral Cem Gürdeniz, Writer, Geopolitical Expert, Theorist and creator of the Turkish Bluehomeland (Mavi Vatan) doctrine. He served as the Chief of Strategy Department and then the head of Plans and Policy Division in Turkish Naval Forces Headquarters. As his combat duties, he has served as the commander of Amphibious Ships Group and Mine Fleet between 2007 and 2009. He retired in 2012. He established Hamit Naci Blue Homeland Foundation in 2021. He has published numerous books on geopolitics, maritime strategy, maritime history and maritime culture. He is also a honorary member of ATASAM.  

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: A Type 052C destroyer, Changchun, in Butterworth, Penang, Malaysia in 2017 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

While the car crisis, aggravated by further US protectionist measures, puts 40,000 jobs at risk in Italy, and Italy’s public debt has climbed to 139% of GDP and is still rising, Italy’s military spending continues to grow: according to official NATO data, it will amount to around 32 billion euros in 2024, an average of around 88 million euros a day. The target the Italian government has pledged to reach and surpass in the short term is 100 million euros per day.

In order to persuade citizens to make sacrifices for an increase in military spending, the mainstream political media are sowing the seeds of fear of an imminent Russian attack on Europe. The headline in La Stampa is emblematic:

‘Sweden on alert prepares 30,000 graves for soldiers in case of war with Russia’.

In this context, Italy has signed an agreement with Britain and Japan – called the ‘Global Combat Air Programme’ – for the production of a sixth-generation fighter aircraft. By mid-2025, a joint venture between BAE Systems (UK), Leonardo (Italy) and JAIEC (Japan), whose first CEO will be a Leonardo executive, will be set up to carry out the programme.

Leonardo (formerly Finmeccanica) is not only an Italian company: it is an international industrial group, whose shareholders are 38% owned by the Ministry of Economy and Finance and 57% by US institutional investors. It generates consolidated revenues of more than EUR 15 billion annually. The Group operates in 150 countries – mainly Italy, the United States, Great Britain and Poland – in the Aerospace and Defence sector: it produces dual-capacity conventional and nuclear fighter-bombers, drones, helicopters, and electronic and space systems. Leonardo, which acquired the Israeli company RADA Electronic Industries, is also integrated into Israel’s military-industrial system, helping to make the weapons used in the genocide of the Palestinians more lethal.

How much the Global Combat Air Programme will cost Italy to produce the sixth-generation fighter aircraft is unknown. It is estimated that the fighter’s development alone will cost each of the three partners around EUR 30 billion. However, it is known how much the fifth-generation F-35 fighter has cost the United States so far: more than 400 billion dollars, and counting, for the relentless modernisation of this dual conventional and nuclear-capable weapon system.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

This article was originally published in Italian on Grandangolo, Byoblu TV.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

Featured image is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

New York City (NYC) Mayor Eric Adams proclaims that 500,000 unaccompanied immigrant children are missing [in the US alone]; that they have been handed over to unvetted “sponsors” who may – and probably will – abuse them as sex-slaves, child-labor slaves and possibly worse.

Most if not all of these children are from the Global South, entering the US over the US-Mexican border.

Mr. Trump during his campaign and after being re-elected as the 47^th President has made similar statements, promising that he will stop this crime, by dismantling and bringing the mafias running these international scams to justice.

Massive child abuse and human trading is the true pandemic, nobody is fighting.

Because it is inconvenient for the elite that pretends to run the world, that these crimes come to the fore. They do everything possible to keep them under wraps, that the mainstream does not mention them, or lies about them.

See this full report (15-min video) from US Congressional Hearings as well as Tucker Carlson and other interviews:

And this (13-min video and transcript), Mayor Eric Adams Holds In-Person Media Availability Following Meeting with Incoming Border Czar:

On a positive note: It looks like the tides are turning.

Justice and Light will overcome.

However, We, the People MUST stand up and protest and fight for the right of these children, awaken others to the harsh fact of large-scale human rights violations in human trading, mostly women and children – and for justice to be done to the perpetrators.

Sitting on the sideline, waiting for things to happen – won’t cut it anymore.

It never did.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

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

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

Featured image is from Reveal

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

This video is censored by Google and Facebook

Scroll down to View Video. 7 minutes

First published on December 24, 2021

***

In December 2021, we were told by our governments to prepare for Christmas under Lockdown.

To protect you and your loved ones against the so-called deadly Covid Omicron Variant.

The announcement regarding Omicron was made on Black Friday November 2021, the day after Thanksgiving.

Anthony Fauci led the disinformation campaign, intimating that Omicron “is already in the United States but has yet to be detected”

The alleged spread of  Omicron during the 2021 Christmas holiday period was used as a pretext and a justification for implementing partial lockdowns, restrictions on travel as well as confinement and stay at home mandates during the Christmas holiday. 

While this year’s Christmas  holiday has returned to “normality”,  the global crisis affecting humanity still prevails. requiring a firm commitment to peace, social justice and solidarity Worldwide.

Video: “Imagine All The People”: 2021 Christmas and New Year Under Lockdown

“The Spirit of Christmas” was also used as a means to speed up Big Pharma’s “killer vaccine”. 

click lower right corner of screen to access Rumble and/or leave a comment

Video: “Imagine all The People”: 2021 Christmas and New Year Under Lockdown

Add a comment. Spread the Word. Link to Bitchute 

And now imagine, John Lennon’s song:

“Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us, only sky

Imagine all the people
Livin’ for today

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too

Imagine all the people
Livin’ life in peace

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man

Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one

***

See Michel Chossudovsky‘s E Book entitled

The Worldwide Corona Crisis:  Global Coup d’État against Humanity

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 2022

**

The Omicron Fraud Used to Justify the “Christmas Covid Lockdown”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 19, 2021

Bombshell: CDC No Longer Recognizes the PCR Test As a Valid Method for Detecting “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 22, 2021

On Pfizer’s “confidential” Report on the Killer Vaccine confirming crimes against humanity

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

By Global Research, December 23, 2021

Original article first published November 2016

Author’s Note

In October 2010, I was invited to the home of Fidel Castro in the outskirts of Havana to discuss US foreign policy, the dangers of nuclear war, the global economic crisis and the unfolding New World Order.

These meetings which extended over several days resulted in a wide-ranging and fruitful conversation which was published by Global Research and Cuba Debate.

I should mention that Fidel Castro was an avid reader of Global Research. His writings were also featured on our website. 

While Fidel fully understood the insidious role of  NGO’s and philanthropic foundations in supporting Washington’s covert meddling operations inside Cuba, he expressed hope that there would be a turn-around with Obama, for whom he had high regard.

When we started our discussions on a Tuesday afternoon, Fidel had already read from cover the cover Bob Woodward’s book entitled Obama’s Wars, which had been released a few days earlier in Washington (expedited to Havana in the diplomatic pouch). 

Five years later in October 2015, I returned to Cuba on the invitation of the Centro de Investigaciones de Politica Internacional (CIPI), a research centre and think tank affiliated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

There was a sense of optimism at the height of Obama’s second term. The theme of the conference was to analyze the process of geopolitical transition opened up by the resumption of diplomatic relations between Cuba and the US.

During that visit, I met up with several friends and colleagues (academics, members of parliament) who were acutely aware of Washington’s undercover role of political cooptation. They expressed their concern (October 2015) that a so-called Golpe Blando, namely “Soft Coup” was in the making.

Unilateral sanctions were never abandoned. In 2019, Donald Trump instated Title III of the 1996 Helms Burton Act, which unleashed the most severe economic sanctions against Cuba since the blockade was first introduced in 1962.

Upon Biden’s accession to the White House, the blockade was nonetheless maintained despite the vote of the UN General Assembly (184 in favour 3 against) demanding an end to the 60-years U.S. economic blockade on Cuba.

The Covid-19 Crisis

But there is another important issue which has largely been overlooked. The covid-19 narrative as well as its various policies (including the vaccine) have become an integral part of US foreign policy under the Biden administration.

The Covid-crisis has obvious geopolitical implications. It constitutes a means to destabilize countries which do not conform to the diktats of  global capitalism. Throughout Latin America it is the source of economic and social chaos. It is also a means to destabilize progressive governments throughout the continent including Venezuela, Cuba and Mexico.

In this regard, the March 2020 Covid-19 lockdown ordered by the upper echelons of the financial establishment has literally destroyed the Cuban economy, specifically the tourist industry which is the country’s main source of foreign exchange.

The lockdown as well the Covid-19 vaccine are presented to public opinion as a means to protecting peoples lives. That’s an outright lie. 

The so-called covid-19 lockdown on March 11, 2020 leading to the simultaneous “closure” of 190 national economies was a deliberate act of economic, social and political sabotage.

With regard to Cuba, the Covid-19 crisis has wrecked havoc. It is all encompassing. It extends beyond the US sanctions regime which the Cuban government has effectively handled for the last 59 years.

The Covid-19 lockdown has weakened the country’s institutions, it has created social divisions, it has impoverished Cuba’s population.  It has also created conditions for a US inspired “color revolution”.

Yet at the same time the legitimacy of the Covid-19 narrative, which emanates from Washington and Wall Street, was accepted and endorsed by the Cuban people and their government.

Unfortunately, despite the fraud and scientific falsehoods which are amply documented, the Covid-19 narrative has also been endorsed by “progressives” throughout Latin America.

This in turn has led to misleading statements by the Left on the causes of the protest movement in Cuba. The underlying focus is solely on the blockade as the cause of food shortages, poverty and unemployment. The devastating social and economic impacts of the covid lockdown which is undermining the achievements of the Cuban Revolution are casually ignored.

Michel Chossudovsky, Bastille Day, July 14, 2021, U.S Election Day, November 5, 2024, December 23, 2024

***

To the People of Cuba: Is Washington Preparing a “Soft Coup”? The Co-optation of Cuban Intellectuals

by Michel Chossudovsky

The article was originally published in November 2016 following my visit to Havana in 2015

Also available in Spanish

To the People of Cuba,

The Cuban Revolution constitutes a fundamental landmark in the history of humanity, which challenges the legitimacy of global capitalism. In all major regions of the World, the Cuban revolution has been a source of inspiration in the relentless struggle against neo-colonial domination and US imperialism.

The World is at a critical crossroads. At this juncture of our history, most “real” progressive movements towards socialism have been destroyed and defeated through US-NATO led wars, military interventions, destabilization campaigns, regime change, coups d’etat, “soft coups”.

Progressive movements as well as “The Left” in Western Europe and the U.S. have largely been coopted, often financed by elite corporate foundations. 

The socialist project in Cuba nonetheless prevails despite the US economic blockade, CIA intelligence ops and dirty politics.

While the legacy of Fidel Castro lives, let us be under no illusions, Washington’s intent not only consists in destroying the Cuban Revolution, it also seeks to erase the history of socialism.

Washington’s Diabolical Design

There are indications that a “regime change” in Cuba is currently contemplated by Washington policy makers.  The Trump administration has been categorical in this regard. The repercussions will be felt throughout Latin America.

During the election campaign “he committed himself to reversing Obama’s Presidential Policy Directive titled “United States-Cuba Normalization,”(a 12-page directive—referred to officially as “PPD-43”). (The Nation, October 2017). No subsequent statement following Trump’s inauguration has as yet been forthcoming.

Of significance is Trump’s appointment of Dr. Judy Shelton to head the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a think tank and funding agency geared towards regime change. As a former Vice-President of the NED, Shelton was  “directly involved in lending legitimacy to US-backed subversion in Cuba as part of a decades-long attempt to overthrow the government in Havana and expand US hegemony over the Caribbean.”

Whatever US- Cuba “normalization” is contemplated by the Trump Administration, it would be geared towards the restoration of capitalism through acts of sedition, infiltration, etc. combined with the imposition of neoliberal economic reforms, including the IMF’s “strong economic medicine”. The fundamental question is how Cuba and the Cuban people will, in the current context, respond to these ongoing threats.

How does Washington plan to carry out this plan. Fundamentally through:

1) Measures which contribute to destabilizing the Cuban economy and its monetary system.

2) Procedures which are conducive to the eventual integration of the Cuban economy into the nexus of the IMF-World Bank-WTO, including the imposition of policy conditionalities  geared towards dismantling Cuba’s social programs, its rationing of essential consumer goods, etc.

3) To reach their objectives, Washington and its European allies have over the years devised various covert mechanisms of infiltration and cooptation with a view to influencing government policy makers, managers of public sector enterprises as well as intellectuals. In this regard Washington has also relied on its European partners which have established bilateral relations with Cuba.

Fidel Castro and Michel Chossudovsky. See Woodward’s book entitled “Obama’s Wars” on table

Fidel Castro Ruz and Michel Chossudovsky, October 2010

This article will largely concentrate on the activities of right wing European foundations involved in funding Cuban think tanks and research centers.

The objective is the cooptation of researchers, scholars and intellectuals. The purpose is to build a “new normal”  which will pave the way towards the insertion of Cuban socialism into the logic of World capitalism. While retaining the socialist narrative, this process is ultimately intended to undermine the Cuban revolution, opening the door to economic deregulation, foreign investment and privatization. The “acceptance” by Cuban intellectuals of this “new normal” is essential to reaching the goal of capitalist restoration.

Background: US Interventionism

In recent years, the modalities of US interventionism have changed dramatically:  The thrust of U.S. foreign policy largely consists in destabilizing sovereign countries through a process of “regime change” (color revolution). The latter consists in  destabilizing the national economy, manipulating national elections, co-opting leftist intellectuals, bribing politicians, financing opposition parties, engineering violence and protest movements.

In Latin America, pro-US military dictatorships have largely been replaced by pro-US  (fake) “democracies”. In turn, neoliberal economic reforms under the guidance of the IMF-World Bank have served to impoverish the population, thereby creating conditions which favor protest as well as social and political strife.

The rigging of elections in Latin America is coupled with engineered protests and the co-optation of Left intellectuals funded both by US and European foundations and NGOs, with links to US intelligence.

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) created in 1983 alongside a number of other US based foundations has taken the lead. The NED’s mandate is to promote democracy and human rights in developing countries.

The NED is an unofficial arm of the CIA. According to former NED president Carl Gershman:

“It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the C.I.A. … We have not had the capability of doing this, and that’s why the endowment was created.”

In the words of the NED’s first president Alan Weinstein: ” A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA” (Washington Post, September 22, 1991).

The NED Project in Cuba. Entry through the “Back Door”

While the NED is banned in Cuba, it nonetheless finances indirectly –through partner foundations and proxy NGOs based in Florida —  a large number of so-called “democracy projects”.  Many of these partner (US based) organizations –including the Cuban Democratic Directorate (Directorio), the Instituto Cubano por la Libertad de Expresion y Prensa,  the Observatorio Cubano de Derechos Humanos– have links to US intelligence. Historically, the NED has functioned through partners in the European Union which have formal bilateral links with Cuba.

With regard to Germany, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (linked to the Social Democratic Party), the Hans Böll Stiftung (Green Party) and the Hanns Seidel Stiftung (linked to the right wing Bavarian Christian Democratic Party (CSU)) have agreements with Cuba.

America’s Proxy: The Hanns Seidel Foundation, Instrument of the Right Wing CSU Party of Bavaria

In this essay I will focus primarily on the role of the Hanns Seidel Foundation, with specific reference to its role in Cuba and Venezuela.

The Hanns Seidel Stiftung (HSS), via the right wing Bavaria CSU, has a direct relationship to the government of Angela Merkel, who, in many regards is considered a US proxy  Historically, the activities of the HSS have been supportive of right wing political interventionism.

Many of HSS’ activities in developing countries as well as in Eastern Europe are carried out in partnership with US foundations including the NED and, Soros’ Open Society Foundation. HSS also has links with various think tanks including Chatham House (Royal Institute of International Affairs) and the American Enterprise Institute. It hosts speaking events as well as training programs in collaboration with NATO, the EU and the German government.

The Hanns Seidel Stiftung (NSS) has intervened in many countries, often in liaison with the NED and the US State Department. In the early 1990s it was involved in the so-called “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine, which resulted in mass poverty and the destabilization of the Ukrainian economy.

More recently, Hanns Seidel (HSS) has maintained links with the current Kiev regime, largely with a view to confronting Moscow and destabilizing Donbass.

HSS through its Washington office has routine consultations with the US government, Congress, think tanks, including major partner foundations.

HSS is also in liaison with US based foundations including the NED, the Ford Foundation, the Open Society Foundation.

HSS continues to maintain close ties to the Kiev regime which is integrated by two Neo-Nazi parties. The CSU and the HSS have informal ties to German intelligence, the Bundes Nachrichtendienst (BND).

One of the main activities of the Hanns Seidel Foundation has been the co-optation of Leftist intellectuals and scholars. This has been carried out by financing key policy-oriented think tanks and research institutes.

Hanns Seidel in Venezuela

Of significance, the Hanns Seidel Foundation (HSS) was actively involved in financing the opposition candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski in Venezuela in the 2012 elections. Its activities extended far beyond its endorsement of  Capriles’ candidacy. In its quarterly report, the HSS openly acknowledges its dislike of the Bolivarian process.  In this regard, the HSS was involved in organizing a number of anti-government conferences, largely with a view to upholding free market capitalism (neoliberalism) and smearing the Chavez government.  The HSS was also used to create links with right wing parties including COPEI and Primera Justicia.

It is worth noting that more than forty years ago, the CDU and CSU parties (to which the Hanns Seidel foundation is affiliated) were involved in providing financial support to the protagonists of the military coup against president Salvador Allende. And in the wake of the coup, they provided economic aid to  the military government of Augusto Pinochet.

HSS is still involved in Venezuela, financing a number of projects. Their unspoken objective is the destabilization of the Bolivarian government.

I should mention that the Cuban government was fully aware of the Hanns Seidel’s intrusion in the 2012 elections in favor of  the Opposition candidate Henrique Capriles Rononski. (see above)

Hanns Seidel representing the CSU of Bavaria is also involved in the politics of several Latin American countries including Ecuador, Colombia, Argentina and Bolivia. In Ecuador the CSU through Hanns Seidel is cooperating with the Corporación Autogobierno y Democracia, Fundación Acción y Desarrollo Comunitario (ACDECOM) and various other organizations.

The Hanns Seidel Foundation in Cuba

Now let me turn my attention to Cuba, focussing on a specific activity of the Hanns Seidel Foundation in which I was personally involved.

In October 2015, I was invited to participate in an international venue of the Centro de Investigaciones de Politica Internacional (CIPI), a research centre and think tank affiliated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The theme of the conference was to analyze the process of geopolitical transition opened up by the resumption of diplomatic relations between Cuba and the US.

Transicion geopolitica del poder global: entre la cooperacion y el conflicto

The event was funded by the Hanns Seidel Stiftung. Scholars were invited from Western Europe, Latin America, Africa, the US and Canada.

A few weeks following my acceptance to participate in the venue addressed to CIPI, I received a message from the Hanns Seidel Stiftung informing me that the event was supported by them and that the HSS would be funding all my expenses including an honorarium. The message stated that they would be in contact with me regarding issues pertaining to a contract. They also requested that I submit a so-called “propuesta de servicios” (offer of services).

I was fully aware of the track record of the HSS, specifically on how they had intervened in the Venezuelan 2012 presidential elections in support of Capriles Radonski, with a view to ultimately undermining Hugo Chavez.

I was shocked by the fact that CIPI had requested funding from HSS. The intent of HSS (acting on behalf of Bavaria’s CSU, a right wing party) in liaison with its partner organizations in Washington was to undermine socialism in Cuba. It also consisted in  co-opting Cuban scholars and intellectuals in anticipation of a broad process of political change.

I responded to the HSS invitation indicating both to them and to the CIPI organizers that I would be funding my travel and accommodation expenses and did not see the need to receive funding from the HSS. This decision created confusion in the processing of my participation in the conference.

The October 2015 Conference

What happened: some very good contributions by prominent Cuban and Latin American scholars and scientists on a variety of important topics. But there were several black holes in the program no doubt related to the fact that the HSS linked to Bavaria’s CSU was funding the venue and had imposed its conditions.

Venezuela 

1. A key session of the conference was on Venezuela, focussing on the future of the Bolivarian government and its historical relationship to Cuba.

Not a single participant from Venezuela had been invited to the Conference, thereby foreclosing a dialogue and discussion between Cuban and Venezuelan intellectuals. (Visibly this was a decision of the Hanns Seidel Foundation ).  

All the presentations on Venezuela were by Cuban scholars.

No doubt the HSS had blocked the invitation of progressive Venezuelan intellectuals aligned with the Bolivarian revolution.  The topic of the conference (i.e. transition and normalization with the US) is of crucial significance to both Cuba and Venezuela.

It should be understood that in the present context, the future of Cuban socialism [2016] largely hinges upon maintaining and building Cuba-Venezuela relations within the context of the Bolivarian revolution. The HSS was intent upon denying a political dialogue and debate between Cuban and Venezuelan intellectuals.

The objective of the HSS was to undermine and weaken the longstanding relationship between Cuba and the Bolivarian government of Venezuela. Ironically, nobody among the Cuban organizers and participants was aware of Hanns Seidel’s dirty politics in Venezuela (e.g Their support of the Opposition candidate Capriles, 2012 elections).

In contrast, the session on Mexico included four distinguished scholars from Mexico. There was a large delegation of Mexicans as well as from other Latin American countries.  Not a single Venezuelan was invited.

2. A session on US Foreign Policy included Israeli academic Yossi Mekelberg associated with Chatham House, Royal Institute of International Affairs (UK), an arch-reactionary British think tank, with links to the Washington based Council on Foreign Relations.

The presentation by the Israeli academic provided a biased interpretation of what was happening in Syria and Palestine.  The US led terrorist insurgency in Syria was  casually described as a “civil war”, Palestinians were tagged as terrorists,  and President Bashar al Assad was accused of killing his own people, much in the same way as the US-UK corporate media.

According to Mekelberg, quoted by Newsweek, the ISIS “emulates” the Palestinians:

http://europe.newsweek.com/netanyahu-ramming-atttacks-isis-palestinians-inspired-541097?rm=eu

The Cuban scholars who were participating in this event did not take the trouble to react or express their disdain. Representatives from Palestine had not been invited. 

The question is why would such an individual (affiliated to Chatham House, supportive of the Zionist regime in Tel Aviv) be invited to socialist Cuba by a research centre associated with Cuba’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs?  

Cuba has historically expressed solidarity with Palestine as well as with the struggle of the people of Syria and Iraq, who are currently the object of acts of military aggression by US-NATO.

Why did they not invite a committed socialist scholar from Palestine to debate US foreign policy? Was it a condition set by the Right Wing CSU of Bavaria via the Hanns Seidel Foundation (HSS)?

3. Another session focussed on Ukraine. Among the participants was the President of the Vienna based International Institute for Peace Prof. Hannes Swoboda, who is a (former) member of the European Parliament. Swoboda outlined his support for US-NATO in Eastern Europe directed against Russia as well as his endorsement of Ukraine’s Maidan Kiev regime (which is integrated by two Neo-Nazi parties). No reaction by the Cuban intellectuals, participating in this venue was forthcoming. 

Lest we forget, the Cuban government has expressed its solidarity with the people of Donbass and Crimea. In turn, the people of Donbass acknowledged their solidarity with Cuba and the teachings of Fidel Castro (see below). But this was not an issue of debate at the CIPI Conference.

In the words of Fidel Castro:

Cuba, which has always stood in solidarity with the Ukrainian people, and in the difficult days of the Chernobyl tragedy provided medical care to the many children affected by the accident’s of harmful radiation, and is always willing to continue doing so, cannot refrain from expressing our repudiation of the action of the anti-Russian, anti-Ukrainian and pro-imperialist [Kiev] government. (July 14, 2014)

Hannes Swoboda invited to Cuba by CIPI  (to quote Fidel Castro) was “anti-Russian, anti-Ukrainian and pro-imperialist”.  As MEP, he initiated (together with several other MEPs) the anti-Russian pro-NATO procedure at the European parliament, calling for support of the illegitimate Kiev regime, integrated by two Neo-Nazi parties. (see below)

Concluding Remarks, The Legacy of Fidel Castro

It is my sincere hope that what I have presented in this article will be the object of debate and discussion in Cuba.

The Cuban government is committed to protecting the achievements of the Cuban revolution.

In the current context, this is no easy task. As  outlined in the Introduction, Washington is intent not only upon destroying the Cuban Revolution, it also seeks to erase the history of socialism.

The intent of Western foundations –operating directly or indirectly on behalf of Washington– is to trigger divisions within Cuban society, through infiltration and  co-optation, the ultimate objective of which is the restoration of capitalism. 

These mechanisms of co-optation are also facilitated by the dual currency system in Cuba, which has allowed Hanns Seidel and other European foundations to make payments to Cuban think tanks and research institutes in convertible currency (CUC).

Increased “dollarization” of retail consumer prices (expressed in CUC) is conducive to impoverishment and social inequalities.

Cubans are well aware of this evolving crisis: people who earn income in CUC convertible pesos have acquired purchasing power. In contrast, those whose earnings are largely in nonconvertible Cuban pesos are excluded from the CUC consumer economy.

Washington’s broader intent is to implement measures which contribute to destabilizing the Cuban economy and its monetary system, namely to reintegrate Cuba into a dollarized World economy.

Procedures are also envisaged by Washington to eventually reintegrate the Cuban economy into the nexus of the IMF-World Bank-WTO, including the imposition of policy conditionalities  geared towards dismantling Cuba’s social programs, its rationing of essential consumer goods, etc.

It is essential to block these initiatives. Debate and discussion on the mechanics of “capitalist normalization” are crucial, both within Cuba and internationally.

A revolutionary narrative per se will not sustain Fidel’s legacy, unless it is backed by concrete actions and carefully designed policies.

The mechanics of capitalist restoration and the various modes of political interference and social engineering must be forcefully addressed.

The battle against war and neoliberalism prevails. 

For the outright criminalization of America’s imperial wars,

For a World of Social Justice with a true “responsibility to protect” our fellow human beings,

Long Live Fidel Castro Ruz

“RFK Jr. is now in all important ways directly accusing Anthony Fauci of mass murder.

Fauci, as the lead official in the federal government response to COVID, powerfully incentivized use of Remdesivir, at any stage for people of all ages, early in the “COVID Crisis” by allowing 20% to be added on to the entire Medicare hospital bill. The dangers of Remdesivir were already well-known.” (Prius)

On April 29, 2020, six weeks after the declared national “state of emergency,” Fauci announced from the White House that Remdesivir “will be the standard of care” for COVID.”

link to Video

.

.

RFK Jr in his book entitled the Real Anthony Fauci documents Fauci’s “30 years of abuse of power, during both the HIV epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic”

According to RFK Jr. Tony Fauci knew from the very outset that remdesivir would kill .  

The Washington Post applauded Anthony Fauci’s announcement (April 29, 2020):

“The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, …  fall short of the magic bullet or cure… But with no approved treatments for Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard of care for hospitalized patients …

The data shows that remdisivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said.

.

The deaths resulting fro Remdesevir have been amply documented

Remdesivir, which to this day is the primary COVID drug approved for use in U.S. hospitals, routinely causes severe organ damage and, often, death

Despite that, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved remdesivir for in-hospital and outpatient use in children as young as 1 month old (Dr. Joseph Mercola, emphasis added)

 In a  2020 scientific study: (Clinical Microbiology and Infection May 1, 2021.), the researchers assessed the increased risk of bradycardia among COVID-19 patients who were exposed to remdesevir. The analysis included all reports of COVID-19 patients registered until September 23, 2020.

The researchers found that among the 2,603 reports of COVID-19 patients prescribed with remdesevir, 302 developed cardiac adverse effects, 94 (or 31%) of which are bradycardia. Of the 94 cases of bradycardia, 80% were serious cases, and 16 were fatal. Compared with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), lopinavir/ritonavir, tocilizumab, or glucocorticoids, the use of remdesivir was associated with a higher risk of reporting bradycardia.

Download Complete report 

“Preemptive Pardon” by the Outgoing President?

“A Preemptive Pardon” is a new legal upside down concept put forth by Joe Biden. Its legitimacy has been accepted by the mainstream media. It consists in granting a pardon to individuals who risk at some future date of being accused of crimes they had previously committed.

While several names in press reports (including Fauci) (ABC news, December 9, 2024), were mentioned, there is no evidence that Biden has granted a preemptive pardon to Tony Fauci. 

“Legal experts said Biden can protect people Trump considers his political enemies by issuing them preemptive pardons”

 No Preemptive Pardon for Fauci…

Ooops: No “Preemptive Pardon” for the outgoing President of the United States.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December. 22, 2024

Below is Prof. Michel Chossudovsky’s chapter on remdesivir from his eBook, The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity.

The text below was first published two months after Fauci’s 29 April 2020 announcement. It confirms that Fauci’s methodology is fraudulent and that Remdesevir is a dangerous drug which has resulted in mortality.

***

LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption.

Hydroxychloroquine Versus Gilead’s Remdesivir

By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky,

Global Research, July 5, 2020

Introduction

There is an ongoing battle to suppress Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of Covid-19. The campaign against HCQ is carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer reviewed “evaluation”  published on May 22nd by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals Worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

.

.

While the blame was placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the scientific community nor the media have acknowledged) is that the study was coordinated by Harvard professor Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) which is a partner of the Harvard Medical School.

When the scam was revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at  Brigham and Women’s Hospital apologized:

I have always performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. However, we can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards.

It is now clear to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly sorry. (emphasis added)

Mandeep R. Mehra, MD, MSC  (official statement on BWH website)

But that “truly sorry” note was just the tip of the iceberg. Why?

Studies on Gilead Science’s Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) Were Conducted Simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH)

While The Lancet report (May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended “to kill” the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of Covid-19, another important (related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH pertaining to Remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences Inc. Dr. Francisco Marty, a specialist in Infectious Disease and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School was entrusted with coordination of the clinical trial tests of the antiviral medication Remdesivir under Brigham’s contract with Gilead Sciences Inc:

… If the results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if they aren’t, it gives us critical information in the fight against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies.”

While Dr. Mandeep Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesevir BWH study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences Inc: “He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate” (France Soir, May 23, 2020)

What was the intent of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine?

According to France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet Retraction:

The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, … professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results. (France Soir, June 5, 2020)

Was Dr. Mandeep Mehra in conflict of interest? (That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon).

Who Are the Main Actors? 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, advisor to Donald Trump, portrayed as “America’s top infectious disease expert” has played a key role in smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead’s Remdesivir.

Dr. Fauci has been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece for Big Pharma.

Dr. Fauci launched Remdesivir in late June (see details below). According to Fauci, Remdesevir is the “corona wonder drug” developed by Gilead Science Inc. It’s a $1.6 billion dollar bonanza.

Gilead Sciences Inc: History

Gilead Sciences Inc is a Multibillion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now involved in developing and marketing Remdesivir. Gilead has a long history. It has the backing of major investment conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research & Management Co, among others. It has developed ties with the US Government.

In 1999 Gilead Sciences Inc, developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment of seasonal influenza and bird flu). At the  time, Gilead Sciences Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld was responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

Rumsfeld maintained his links to Gilead Sciences Inc throughout his tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to CNN Money (2005): “The prospect of a bird flu outbreak … was very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences”.

Anthony Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as “a go between” the US government and Big Pharma. During Rumsfeld’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences Inc. Anthony Fauci considered that the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would: 

“accelerate our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the microbes’ hosts — human beings and their immune systems. One result should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity.” (WPo report)

In 2008, Dr. Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by president George W. Bush “for his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives.”

.

.

The 2020 Gilead Sciences Inc Remdesivir Project

We will be focussing on key documents (and events)

Chronology 

February 21: Initial Release pertaining to NIH-NIAID Remdesivir placebo test trial

April 10: The Gilead Sciences Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

April 29: NIH Release: Study on Remdesivir (Report published on May 22 in NEJM)

May 22: The BWH-Harvard Study on Hydroxychloroquine coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra published in The Lancet

May 22: Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report  National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM) 

June 5: The (fake) Lancet Report (May 22) on HCQ is Retracted.

June 29: Fauci announcement. The $1.6 Billion Remdevisir HHS Agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc

April 10: The Gilead Sciences Inc. study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

A Gilead sponsored report was published in New England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled  “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19”. It was co-authored by an impressive list of 56 distinguished medical doctors and scientists, many of whom were recipients of consulting fees from Gilead Sciences Inc.

Gilead Sciences Inc. funded the study which included several staff members as co-authors.

.

.

The testing included a total of 61 patients [who] received at least one dose of remdesivir on or before March 7, 2020; 8 of these patients were excluded because of missing postbaseline information (7 patients) and an erroneous remdesivir start date (1 patient) … Of the 53 remaining patients included in this analysis, 40 (75%) received the full 10-day course of remdesivir, 10 (19%) received 5 to 9 days of treatment, and 3 (6%) fewer than 5 days of treatment.

The NEJM article states that “Gilead Sciences Inc began accepting requests from clinicians for compassionate use of remdesivir on January 25, 2020”. From whom, From Where? According to the WHO (January 30, 2020) there were 82 cases in 18 countries outside China of which 5 were in the US, 5 in France and 3 in Canada.

Several prominent physicians and scientists have cast  doubt on the Compassionate Use of Remdesivir study conducted by Gilead, focussing on the small size of the trial. Ironically, the number of patients in the test  is less that the number of co-authors: “53 patients” versus “56 co-authors”

Below we provide excerpts of scientific statements on the Gilead NEJM project (Science Media Centre emphasis added) published immediately following the release of the NEJM article:

“‘Compassionate use’ is better described as using an unlicensed therapy to treat a patient because there are no other treatments available. Research based on this kind of use should be treated with extreme caution because there is no control group or randomisation, which are some of the hallmarks of good practice in clinical trials. Prof Duncan Richard, Clinical Therapeutics, University of Oxford.

“It is critical not to over-interpret this study. Most importantly, it is impossible to know the outcome for this relatively small group of patients had they not received remdesivir. Dr Stephen Griffin, Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Leeds.

“The research is interesting but doesn’t prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and uncontrolled study.  Simon Maxwell, Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing, University of Edinburgh.

“The data from this paper are almost uninterpretable. It is very surprising, perhaps even unethical, that the New England Journal of Medicine has published it. It would be more appropriate to publish the data on the website of the pharmaceutical company that has sponsored and written up the study. At least Gilead have been clear that this has not been done in the way that a high quality scientific paper would be written.  Prof Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

 “It’s very hard to draw useful conclusions from uncontrolled studies like this particularly with a new disease where we really don’t know what to expect and with wide variations in outcomes between places and over time. One really has to question the ethics of failing to do randomisation – this study really represents more than anything else, a missed opportunity.” Prof Adam Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol.

To review the complete document of Science Media Centre pertaining to expert assessments, click here.

April 29: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study on Remdevisir. 

On April 29th following the publication of the Gilead Sciences Inc Study in the NEJM on April 10, a press release of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Remdevisir was released.  The full document was published on May 22, by the NEJM under the title:

 Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) 

The study had been initiated on February 21, 2020. The title of the April 29 Press Release was:

“Peer-reviewed data shows remdesivir for COVID-19 improves time to recovery”

It’s a government sponsored report which includes preliminary data from a randomized trial involving 1063 hospitalized patients. The results of the trial labelled Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT) are preliminary, conducted under the helm of Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):

An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059).  (emphasis added)

In the NIH’s earlier February 21, 2020 report (released at the outset of the study), the methodology was described as follows:

… A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) …

Numbers. Where? When? 

The February 21 report confirmed that the first trial participant was “an American who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond Princess cruise ship” that docked in Yokohama (Japanese Territorial Waters). “Thirteen people repatriated by the U.S. State Department from the Diamond Princess cruise ship” were selected as patients for the placebo trial test. Ironically, at the outset of the study, 58.7% of the “confirmed cases” Worldwide (542 cases out of 924) (outside China),  were on the Diamond Cruise Princess from which the initial trial placebo patients were selected.

Where and When: The trial test in the 68 selected sites? That came at a later date because on February 19th (WHO data), the US had recorded only 15 positive cases (see Table Below).

“A total of 68 sites ultimately joined the study—47 in the United States and 21 in countries in Europe and Asia.” (emphasis added)

In the final May 22 NEJM report entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report: 

There were 60 trial sites and 13 subsites in the United States (45 sites), Denmark (8), the United Kingdom (5), Greece (4), Germany (3), Korea (2), Mexico (2), Spain (2), Japan (1), and Singapore (1). Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remdesivir or placebo. Randomization was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrollment

The Washington Post applauded Anthony Fauci’s announcement (April 29):

“The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, …  fall short of the magic bullet or cure… But with no approved treatments for Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard of care for hospitalized patients …The data shows that remdisivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said.

.

.

The government’s first rigorous clinical trial of the experimental drug remdesivir as a coronavirus treatment delivered mixed results to the medical community Wednesday — but rallied stock markets and raised hopes that an early weapon to help some patients was at hand.

The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony Fauci, chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which led the placebo-controlled trial found that the drug accelerated the recovery of hospitalized patients but had only a marginal benefit in the rate of death.

… Fauci’s remarks boosted speculation that the Food and Drug Administration would seek emergency use authorization that would permit doctors to prescribe the drug.

In addition to clinical trials, remdesivir has been given to more than 1,000 patients under compassionate use. [also refers to the Gilead study published on April 10 in the NEJM]

The study, involving [more than] 1,000 patients at 68 sites in the United States and around the world (??), offers the first evidence (??) from a large (??), randomized (??) clinical study of remdesivir’s effectiveness against COVID-19.

The NIH placebo test study provided “preliminary results”. While the placebo trial test was “randomized”, the overall selection of patients at the 68 sites was not fully randomized. See the full report.

May 22: The Fake Lancet Report on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

It is worth noting that the full report of the NIH-NIAID) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report was released on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM, on the same day as the controversial Lancet report on Hydroxychloroquine.

Immediately folllowing its publication, the media went into high gear, smearing the HCQ cure, while applauding the NIH-NIASD report released on the same day.

Remdesivir, the only drug cleared to treat Covid-19, sped the recovery time of patients with the disease, … “It’s a very safe and effective drug,” said Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “We now have a definite first efficacious drug for Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon with other drugs, [and drug] combinations.”

When the Lancet HCQ article by  Bingham-Harvard was retracted on June 5, it was too late, it received minimal media coverage. Despite the Retraction, the HCQ cure “had been killed”.

June 29: Fauci Greenlight. The $1.6 Billion Remdesivir Contract with Gilead Sciences Inc

Dr. Anthony Fauci granted the “Greenlight” to Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29, 2020.

The semi-official US government NIH-NIAID sponsored report (May 22) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) was used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc.

The Report was largely funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

On June 29, based on the findings of the NIH-NIAID Report published in the NEJM, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on behalf of the Trump Adminstration an agreement to secure large supplies of the remdesivir drug from Gilead Sciences Inc. for the treatment of Covid-19 in America’s private hospitals and clinics.

The earlier Gilead study based on scanty test results published in the NEJM (April 10), of 53 cases (and 56 co-authors) was not highlighted. The results of this study had been  questioned by several prominent physicians and scientists.

Who will be able to afford Remdisivir? 500,000 doses of Remdesivir are envisaged at $3,200 per patient, namely $1.6 billion (see the study by Elizabeth Woodworth)

The Drug was also approved for marketing in the European Union. under the brandname Veklury.

If this contract is implemented as planned, it represents for Gilead Science Inc. and the recipient US private hospitals and clinics a colossal amount of money.

.

.

[Error in above title according to HHS: $3200]

According to The Trump Administration’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar (June 29, 2020):

Remdesivir Versus Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

Careful timing:

The Lancet study (published on May 22) was intended to undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine as an effective cure to Covid-19, with a view to sustaining the $1.6 billion agreement between the HHS and Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29th. The legitmacy of this agreement rested on the May 22 NIH-NIAID study in the NEJM which was considered “preliminary”. 

What Dr. Fauci failed to acknowledge is that Chloroquine had been “studied” and tested fifteen years ago by the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections.  And that Hydroxychloroquine has been used recently in the treatment of Covid-19 in several countries.

According to the Virology Journal (2005) “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread”. It was used in the SARS-1 outbreak in 2002. It had the endorsement of the CDC. 

.

.

HCQ is not only effective, it is “inexpensive” when compared to Remdesivir, at an estimated “$3120 for a US Patient with private insurance”.

Below are excerpts of an interview of Harvard’s Professor Mehra (who undertook the May 22 Lancet study) with France Soir published immediately following the publication of the Lancet report (prior to its Retraction).

Dr. Mandeep Mehra: In our study, it is fairly obvious that the lack of benefit and the risk of toxicity observed for hydroxychloroquine are fairly reliable. [referring to the May 22 Lancet study]

France Soir: Do you have the data for Remdesivir?

MM: Yes, we have the data, but the number of patients is too small for us to be able to conclude in one way or another.

FS: As you know, in France, there is a pros and cons battle over hydroxychloroquine which has turned into a public health issue even involving the financial lobbying of pharmaceutical companies. Why not measure the effect of one against the other to put an end to all speculation?  …

MM: In fact, there is no rational basis for testing Remdesivir versus hydroxychloroquine. On the one hand, Remdesivir has shown that there is no risk of mortality and that there is a reduction in recovery time. On the other hand, for hydroxychloroquine it is the opposite: it has never been shown any advantage and most studies are small or inconclusive In addition, our study shows that there are harmful effects.

It would therefore be difficult and probably unethical to compare a drug with demonstrated harmfulness to a drug with at least a glimmer of hope.

FS: You said that there is no basis for testing or comparing Remdesivir with hydroxychloroquine, do you think you have done everything to conclude that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous?

MM: Exactly. …

All we are saying is that once you have been infected (5 to 7 days after) to the point of having to be hospitalized with a severe viral load, the use of hydroxychloroquine and its derivative is not effective.

The damage from the virus is already there and the situation is beyond repair. With this treatment [HCQ] it can generate more complications

FS Mandeep Mehra declared that he had no conflict of interest with the laboratories and that this study was financed from the endowment funds of the professor’s chair.

He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate.

(France Soir, translated by the author, emphasis added, May 23, 2020)

In Annex, see the followup article by France Soir published after the scam surrounding the data base of Dr. Mehra’s Lancet report was revealed.

Concluding Remarks

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

“Cuba has never done an act of terror to nobody! If anything they have sent doctors, they have sent medical brigades, they’ve always done humanitarian help for anyone who needed it regardless of their political stand!”

– Melissa Peralta, from this episode.

***

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

a

When former Cuban President Fulgencio Batista ran for office in 1952, his political party found itself in last place behind the Orthodox Party and the Authentic Party during the election. So he ended up taking power by a coup d’etat, forcing the current President Carlos Prio Socarras into exile. He consequently ran the country with an iron fist. Between 10,000 and 20,000 Cuban died in the years following Batista’s rise to power. [1]

Washington instantly recognized Batista as leading the country. As it did for countries enduring similar undemocratic injustices such as in Iran in 1953 and in Guatemala in 1954. [2]

In January of 1959, the revolution against Batista succeeded and Castro’s committment to high quality health care for all, improving literacy to among the highest in the world and confiscating land owned and operated by U.S. businesses while sponsoring anti-U.S. military movements, the giant state famous for “fighting for freedom and democracy” put the Head of the Cuba’s Revolutionary movement in the centre of its cross-hairs. [3]

From John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan to Joe Biden, U.S. presidents have subjected the biggest island in the Caribbean Sea to a trade embargo. In late 2020, President Donald Trump made sanctions even worse by placing Cuba on his list of “state sponsors of terrorism” as well as banning Cuba from purchasing important medicines and imposing sanctions on oil imports from Venezuela. [4]

We, in Canada, heard about the country being in rough shape as a result of heavy rains from Hurricane Oscar and the plague of power outages threatening the most basic needs within a twenty first century civilization. But seemingly muted in all talk about the woes of this beleaguered communist enclave is the vice on its economic engine with the hand of Uncle Sam tightening it.

We are within a month now of Donald Trump once again occupying the White House throne, his agitated fingers ready to prepare for his next round of executive orders. With now Senator Marco Rubio, a Cuban immigrant known as the leader of the anti-Castro ex-pat community in Florida, taking the reigns as Secretary of State at Trump’s side, the stage is set for the worst experience of the Empire Strikes Back ever conceived.[5]

As Cuban people and their allies abroad brace themselves for more sanctions from hell, and for all we know, even something worse than that, the Global Research News Hour is taking stock of the islands situation on an important anniversary date in the revolution’s history.

Journalist Michael Welch visited Cuba from November 24^th to December 18^th to try to get an assessment of the situation. How is the healthcare system fairing five years after Trump’s sanctions and the advent of COVID? Are Cubans flocking abroad to gain support for themselves and their families? Is it finally time to scrap socialism and embrace the kind of policies that America will embrace? We try to get some answers in this year-end episode of the Global Research News Hour.

Welch’s associates for much of the stay are members of a Canadian group of solidarity activists known as the Calixto Garcia Solidarity Brigade, named after the general who fought in three uprisings during the Cuban War of Independence in the late 19^th century.

CGB supports the revolution as does the Institut Cubano de Amistad con Las Pueblos (Cuban Institute for the friendship of the People, or ICAP.) Within that context, we inquired about the many issues facing Cuba today, including the arts and education programs, the health care system, the tactics and heroism during the 50s Revolutionary War, and the impact on the culture and economy generally across four provinces in the East – Holguin, Guantanamo, Santiago de Cuba, and Las Tunas.

Video recorded by fellow Calixto Garcia Brigade member Alok Mukherjee

If you wish to help the Calixto Garcia Brigade in their efforts to assist the Cuban people, or to find out more about them, join them on Facebook (Calixto Garcia Solidarity Brigade) or email them at [email protected].

(Global Research News Hour episode 454)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

1. https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-war-cuba-economic-embargo-biological-warfare-us-backed-terrorism/5751665
2. ibid;
3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/26/fidel-castro-cia-cigar-assasination-attempts
4. https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-war-cuba-economic-embargo-biological-warfare-us-backed-terrorism/5751665
5. https://www.globalresearch.ca/marco-rubio-abhorrent-choice-secretary-state/5873561

Joshua Hadfield was a normal, healthy developing child as a toddler. In the midst of the H1N1 swine flu frenzy and the media fear mongering about the horrible consequences children face if left unvaccinated, the Hadfield family had Joshua vaccinated with Glaxo’s Pandermrix influenza vaccine. Within weeks, Joshua could barely wake up, sleeping up to nineteen hours a day. Laughter would trigger seizures.

Joshua was diagnosed with narcolepsy, “an incurable, debilitating condition” associated with acute brain damage.[1]  Looking back, Pandermrix was a horrible vaccine. Research indicates that it was associated with a 1400% increase in narcolepsy risk. A medical team at Finland’s National Institute for Health and Welfare recorded 800 cases of narcolepsy associated with this vaccine.  Aside from the engineered viral antigens, the other vaccine ingredients are most often found to be the primary culprits to adverse vaccine reactions. The Finnish research, on the other hand, indicated that the vaccine’s altered viral nucleotide likely contributed to the sudden rise in sleeping sickness.[2]

Although Pandermrix was pulled from the market for its association with narcolepsy and cataplexy (sudden muscle weakness), particularly in children, it should never have been approved and released in the first place. The regulatory fast tracking of the HINI flu vaccines is a classic, and now common, example of regulatory negligence by nations’ health officials. The failure of proper regulatory evaluation and oversight resulted in Joshua and over 1,000 other people becoming disabled for life. Settlements to cover lawsuits exceeded 63 million pounds in the UK alone. 

No one should feel complacent and assume flu vaccine risks only affect young children. Sarah Behie was 20 years old after receiving a flu shot. Three weeks later her health deteriorated dramatically. Diagnosed with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a not uncommon adverse effect of influenza vaccination, four years later Sarah remains paralyzed from the waist down, incapable of dressing and feeding herself, and rotting away in hospitals and nursing homes.[3] 

Flu vaccines are perhaps the most ineffective vaccine on the market.  Repeatedly we are told by health officials that the moral argument for its continued use is for “the greater good,” although this imaginary good has never been defined scientifically. Year to year, how effective any given seasonal flu vaccine will be is a throw of the dice. Annual flu vaccine efficacy rates in the US have demonstrated significant variability. Data from the CDC reveal efficacy estimates of approximately 39% for the 2020–2021 season, 37% for 2021–2022, 52% for 2022–2023, and a preliminary estimate of 50% for the 2023–2024 season.  Preliminary CDC estimates for this flu season estimates 34% likely efficacy. Although these are CDC’s figures, independent figures are consistently much lower. At their best, flu vaccines in recent years are around 50% effective according to official health analysis. During some seasons, vaccine efficacy is a bust. For example, the 2014-2015 flu season strain match was such a failure that the CDC warned the American public that the vaccine was only 23% effective.[4]  Nevertheless, these rates underscore the vaccine’s inconsistent protection.

Studies such as those by Skowronski and Belongia further highlight flu vaccines’ variability and force to question whether the vaccine is capable of providing any reliable protection.[5,6] Moreover, Cochrane Collaboration reviews, known for their rigorous analyses, consistently find that flu vaccines reduce influenza-like illness by only about 1% in healthy adults and have negligible impact on hospitalizations and mortality rates. This limited efficacy raises critical concerns about the vaccine’s utility, particularly when weighed against its risks. 

Perhaps the most useless flu vaccine that should have never been approved was Medimmune’s live attenuated flu vaccine (LAIV) FluMist, which the CDC later had removed from the market because it was found to so ineffective—only 3 percent according to an NBC report.[6] However the real reason may be more dire, and this a fundamental problem of all live and attenuated vaccines: these vaccines have been shown to “shed” and infect people in contact with the vaccinated persons, especially those with compromised immune systems.  Consequently, both the unvaccinated and the vaccinated are at risk.  The CDC acknowledges this risk and warns “Persons who care for severely immunosuppressed persons who require a protective environment should not receive LAIV, or should avoid contact with such persons for 7 days after receipt, given the theoretical risk for transmission of the live attenuated vaccine virus.”[7] 

According to the FDA’s literature on FluMist, the vaccine was not studied for immunocompromised individuals (yet was still administered to them), and has been associated with acute allergic reactions, asthma, Guillain-Barre, and a high rate of hospitalizations among children under 24 months – largely due to upper respiratory tract infections.  Other adverse effects include pericarditis, congenital and genetic disorders, mitochondrial encephalomyopathy or Leigh Syndrome, meningitis, and others.[8] 

The development and promotion of the influenza vaccine was never completely about protecting the public. It has been the least popular vaccine in the US, including among healthcare workers. Rather, similar to the mumps vaccine in the MMR, it has been the cash cow for vaccine makers.  Determining the actual severity of any given flu season is burdened by federal intentional confusion to mislead the public.  The CDC’s first line of propaganda defense to enforce flu vaccinations is to exaggerate flu infections as the cause of preventable deaths.   However, validating this claim is near impossible because the CDC does not differentiate deaths caused by influenza infection and deaths due to pneumonia.  On its website, the CDC lumps flu and pneumonia deaths together, currently estimated at 51,000 per year. The large majority of these were pneumonia deaths of elderly patients. Yet in any given year, only 3-18% of suspected influenza infections actually test positive for a Type A or B influenza strain.[9] 

As an aside, it is worth noting that during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, an extraordinary and unprecedented phenomenon occurred: influenza infections, which have long been a seasonal health challenge, seemingly disappeared. Federal health agencies such as the CDC attributed this sharp decline in flu cases to the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) like mask-wearing, social distancing, and widespread lockdowns. However, this explanation raises critical questions about its plausibility. If these measures were effective enough to virtually eliminate influenza, why did they not similarly prevent the widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2? This contradiction highlights the need to critically examine the possible explanations behind the anomaly, questioning whether the disappearance of the flu was truly a result of public health measures or due to other factors such as diagnostic practices, viral interference, and disruptions to seasonal flu patterns. If these interventions were indeed effective, their impact should not have been so starkly selective between two similarly transmitted viruses. This contradiction undermines the plausibility of attributing the disappearance of flu cases solely to NPIs.

A more plausible explanation for the disappearance of flu cases lies in the diagnostic focus on SARS-CoV-2 during the pandemic. Individuals presenting with flu-like symptoms were overwhelmingly diagnosed for COVID-19 with faulty PCR testing methods rather than influenza, as public health resources were directed toward managing the pandemic. This prioritization inevitably led to a significant underreporting of flu cases. Furthermore, the symptoms of influenza and COVID-19 overlap significantly, including fever, cough, and fatigue. In the absence of influenza testing, many flu cases were wrongly diagnosed as COVID-19, further inflating SARS-CoV-2 case numbers while contributing to the perceived disappearance of the flu. 

One of the more controversial findings in recent flu vaccine research involves the phenomenon of viral interference, wherein vaccinated individuals may become more susceptible to other respiratory pathogens. To date there is only one gold standard clinical trial with the flu vaccine that compares vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, and it is not good news for the CDC, the vaccine makers, and the push to booster everyone with the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. This Hong Kong funded double-blind placebo controlled study followed the health conditions of vaccinated and unvaccinated children between the ages of 6-15 years for 272 days. The trial concluded the flu vaccine holds no health benefits. In fact, those vaccinated with the flu virus were observed to have a 550% higher risk of contracting non-flu virus respiratory infections. Among the vaccinated children, there were 116 flu cases compared to 88 among the unvaccinated; there were 487 other non-influenza virus infections, including coronavirus, rhinovirus, coxsackie, and others, among the vaccinated versus 88 with the unvaccinated.[10]  This single study alone poses a scientifically sound warning and rationale to avoid flu vaccines at all costs. It raises a further question: how many Covid-19 cases could be directly attributed to weakened immune systems because of prior flu vaccination?

A 2019 study conducted by the US Armed Forces investigated the relationship between influenza vaccination and susceptibility to other respiratory infections, including coronaviruses. Analyzing data from over 9,000 individuals, the researchers found that people who received the flu vaccine were more likely to test positive for certain non-influenza respiratory viruses. Notably, influenza vaccination was associated with an increased likelihood of contracting coronaviruses and human metapneumovirus.[11] These findings suggest a complex interaction between influenza vaccination and susceptibility to different respiratory pathogens, and challenges the belief that flu vaccines provide greater benefits over risks. The same researchers’ follow up study in in 2020 furthermore concluded that “vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus.[12]

Additional recent studies, such as those by Bodewes, which identified immune interference due to repeated annual flu vaccinations,[13] and Shinjoh, which highlighted increased viral interference in vaccinated children, provide further evidence of this relationship.[14] These findings challenge the prevailing assumption that flu vaccination has only positive effects on immune health and raise important questions about the broader implications of repeated annual vaccination.

In a follow up study after the H1N1 swine flu scare, Canadian researcher Dr. Danuta Skowronski noted that individuals with a history of receiving consecutive seasonal flu shots over several years had an increased risk of becoming infected with H1N1 swine flu.  Skowronski commented on the findings, “policy makers have not yet had a chance to fully digest them [the study’s conclusions] or understand the implications.”  He continued, “Who knows, frankly? The wise man knows he knows nothing when it comes to influenza, so you always have to be cautious in speculating.”[15]

There is strong evidence suggesting that all vaccine clinical trials carried out by manufacturers fall short of demonstrating vaccine efficacy accurately. And when they are shown to be efficacious, it is frequently in the short term and offer only partial or temporary protection. According to an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Infectious Diseases, the only way to evaluate vaccines is to scrutinize the epidemiological data obtained from real-life conditions. In other words, researchers simply cannot — or will not — adequately test a vaccine’s effectiveness and immunogenicity prior to its release onto an unsuspecting public.[16]

According to Dr. Tom Jefferson, who formerly led the Cochrane Collaboration’s vaccine analyses, it makes little sense to keep vaccinating against seasonal influenza based on the evidence.[17] Jefferson has also endorsed more cost-effective and scientifically-proven means of minimizing the transmission of flu, including regular hand washing and wearing masks. There is also substantial peer-reviewed literature supporting the supplementation of Vitamin D. 

Dr. Jefferson’s conclusions are backed by former Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine scientist Peter Doshi, PhD, in the British Journal of Medicine. In his article Doshi questions the flu vaccine paradigm stating:

 “Closer examination of influenza vaccine policies shows that although proponents employ the rhetoric of science, the studies underlying the policy are often of low quality, and do not substantiate officials’ claims. The vaccine might be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and the threat of influenza appears overstated.”[18]        

A significant body of research proves that receiving the flu shot does not reduce mortality among seniors.[19] One particularly compelling study was carried out by scientists at the federal National Institutes of Health (NIH) and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Not only did the study indicate that the flu vaccine did nothing to prevent deaths from influenza among seniors, but that flu mortality rates increased as a greater percentage of seniors received the shot.[20]

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny reviewed the Cochrane Database reviews on the flu vaccine’s efficacy. In a review of 51 studies involving over 294,000 children, there was “no evidence that injecting children 6-24 months of age with a flu shot was any more effective than placebo. In children over 2 years of age, flu vaccine effectiveness was 33 percent of the time preventing flu. In children with asthma, inactivated flu vaccines did not prevent influenza related hospitalizations in children. The database shows that children who received the flu vaccine were at a higher risk of hospitalization than children who did not receive the vaccine.[21] 

In a separate study involving 400 asthmatic children receiving a flu vaccine and 400 who were not immunized, there was no difference in the number of clinic and emergency room visits and hospitalizations between the two groups.[22] 

In 64 studies involving 66,000 adults, “Vaccination of healthy adults only reduced risk of influenza by 6 percent and reduced the number of missed work days by less than one day. There was a change in the number of hospitalizations compared to the non-vaccinated. In further studies of elderly adults residing in nursing homes over the course of several flu seasons, flu vaccinations were insignificant for preventing infection.[23]

Today, the most extreme wing of the pro-vaccine community continue to diligently pursue mandatory vaccination across all 50 states.  During the flu season, the debate over mandatory vaccination becomes most heated as medical facilities and government departments attempt to threaten employees and schools who refuse vaccination. Although this is deeply worrisome to those who advocate their Constitutional rights to freedom of choice in their healthcare, there are respectable groups opposing mandatory flu shots.  The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons “objects strenuously to any coercion of healthcare personnel to receive influenza immunization. It is a fundamental human right not to be subjected to medical interventions without fully informed consent.” 

The good news is that the majority of Americans have lost confidence in the CDC after the agency’s dismal handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. Positive endorsement of the CDC would plummet further if the public knew the full extent of CDC officials lying to Congress and their conspiracy to commit medical fraud for two decades to cover=up evidence of an autism-vaccine association. 

When considering the totality of evidence, the benefit-risk ratio of flu vaccination becomes increasingly problematic. The poor and inconsistent efficacy rates, combined with the potential for serious adverse reactions and the phenomenon of viral interference, clearly indicates that the vaccine does not deliver the public health benefits it promises. Public health strategies must balance the benefits of vaccination against its risks, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children and pregnant women. 

Imagine the tens of thousands of children and families who would have been saved from life-long neurological damage and immeasurable suffering if the CDC was not indebted to protecting the pharmaceutical industry’s toxic products and was in fact serving Americans’ health and well-being? One step that can be taken to begin dismantling the marriage between the federal health agencies and drug companies is to simply refuse the flu vaccine and protect ourselves by adopting a healthier lifestyle during the flu season. 

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

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] http://yournewswire.com/boy-awarded-174000-after-flu-vaccine-causes-permanent-brain-damage/

[2]  http://www.globalresearch.ca/finnish-scientists-identify-link-between-glaxosmithklines-swine-flu-vaccine-pandemrix-and-narcolepsy/5423154

[3] http://sharylattkisson.com/woman-paralyzed-after-flu-shot-receives-11-million-for-treatment/

[4]  http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/12/3/flu-vaccine-ineffective.html

[5] Skowronski DM, Leir S, et al. Influenza vaccine effectiveness by A (H3N2) phylogenetic subcluster and prior vaccination history: 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 epidemics in Canada. J Infectious Diseases, 2021; 225(8), 1387–1397.

[6] Belongia EA, Skowronski DM, et al. Repeated annual influenza vaccination and vaccine effectiveness: review of evidence. Expert Review of Vaccines, 2023; 16(7), 743–759.

[7]  Barbara Lo Fisher, The Emerging Risks of Live Virus and Virus Vectored Vaccines.  National Vaccine Information Center, 2014

[8]  http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM294307.pdf

[9] Barbara Lo Fisher, “CDC Admits Flu Shots Fail Half the Time.”  NVIC, October 19, 2016

[10] http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2013-06-02/flu-vax-causes-5-5-times-more-respiratory-infections/

[11] Wolff GG. Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017–2018 influenza season. Vaccine. 2019 Oct 10;38(2):350–354. 

[12] Wolff GG. (2020). Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel. Vaccine, 2020 38(2), 350-354.

[13] Bodwes F, Janssens Y, et al. The role of cell-mediated immunity against influenza and its implications for vaccine evaluation. Frontiers in Immunology, 2021 13, 959379. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.959379

[14] Sinojoh M, Sugaya N, et al. Effectiveness of inactivated influenza and COVID-19 vaccines in hospitalized children in the 2022/23 season in Japan: The first season of co-circulation of influenza and COVID-19. Vaccine,2022; 41(1), 100-107.

[15]  http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/flu-shot-linked-to-higher-incidence-of-flu-in-pandemic-year-1.1287363

[16]   Weinberg GA, Szilagyi PG. Vaccine Epidemiology: Efficacy, Effectiveness, and the Translational Research Roadmap. J Infect Dis 20210;201.1: 1607-610. 

[17] ‘A Whole Industry Is Waiting For A Pandemic’, Der Spiegel, http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,637119-2,00.html,

[18] Dolshi P. “Influenza: Marketing Vaccine by Marketing Disease.” BMJ 2013;346: F3037. 

[19] Simonsen L, Reichert T, et al. . Impact of Influenza Vaccination on Seasonal Mortality in the US Elderly Population. Arch Intern Med Archives 2005;165(3): 265. 

[20] Glezen WP, Simonsen L. Commentary: Benefits of Influenza Vaccine in US Elderly–new Studies Raise Questions. Internat J Epidemiology2006;35(2): 352-53.

[21] 105^th International Conference of the American Thoracic Sociey, May 15-20, 2009 (quoted in , Sherri Tenpenny.  “The Truth about Flu Shots”.  Idaho Observer, June 1, 2009)

[22] ibid

[23] Ibid.

Featured image: GSK’s pandemic flu vaccine Pandemrix (Source: Alcibiades/Wikimedia Commons)

If you’ve been even halfheartedly monitoring the utterances of free humanity’s sworn enemies, the governing authorities and their corporate state media mouthpieces — and, if you consume independent dissident media like Armageddon Prose that, I assume you have — Pandemic 2.0 has been explicitly promised for many years by this point.

Indeed, as I have previously reported, here is, just a couple of weeks ago or so, palpably unhealthy lardball and high priest of The Science ™ Dr. Peter Hotez forecasting “big picture stuff coming down the pike starting on January 21st” — as in, the day Trump assumes office. (I suspect, because he appears to be on the spectrum, that whatever training in the subtleties of effective propaganda that his handlers have provided, so as to maintain plausible deniability, hasn’t taken.)

If you will recall, in the run-up to the election, the Deep State’s operatives in D.C. were floating numerous schemes to thwart a Trump victory. Of course, election-rigging (again) was on the table, but so was, as Rep. Jamie Raskin suggested, invoking Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment barring an “insurrectionist” from higher office (entirely outside of any judicial process — supreme hypocritical irony for the self-proclaimed defenders of Democracy™).

.

Read on X

.

No such schemes, clearly, have yet been enacted, and my read is that the plan now is to dump as much chaos into the Trump administration’s lap as possible so as to blame him for the fallout of their evil own deeds.

This includes, but is not limited to, a hot new pandemic — fomenting global nuclear war being another option they appear to be pursuing.

Which brings us to bird flu and California’s recent declaration of a state of emergency predicated on nearly nothing.

Via Associated Press (emphasis added):

“California officials have declared a state of emergency over the spread of bird flu, which is tearing through dairy cows in that state and causing sporadic illnesses in people in the U.S.

That raises new questions about the virus, which has spread for years in wild birds, commercial poultry and many mammal species.

The virus, also known as Type A H5N1, was detected for the first time in U.S. dairy cattle in March. Since then, bird flu has been confirmed in at least 866 herds in 16 states.

More than 60 people in eight states have been infected, with mostly mild illnesses, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. One person in Louisiana has been hospitalized with the nation’s first known severe illness caused by the virus, health officials said this week.”

Buried deep in the article, as these admissions always are, is the fact that no human-to-human transmission has been detected, and neither has greater transmissibility from animals to humans — yet.

Continuing:

“Importantly, there are no reports of person-to-person transmission and no signs that the virus has changed to spread more easily among humans.

In general, flu experts agreed with that assessment, saying it’s too soon to tell what trajectory the outbreak could take.

“The entirely unsatisfactory answer is going to be: I don’t think we know yet,” said Richard Webby, an influenza expert at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.

But virus experts are wary because flu viruses are constantly mutating and small genetic changes could change the outlook.”

With the narrative groundwork laid, all it would take is a little genomic rejiggering, and BOOM, we’re off to the races with mRNA “vaccines” ready to deploy and a fresh set of lockdowns and mask mandates and God-knows-what-else sadism.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Substack where this article was originally published. Also, keep tabs via Twitter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from LifeSiteNews

Ukrainian public figures are beginning to admit their intentions to cause a nuclear catastrophe. For the militants in the ranks of the regime, nuclear war is not something to be avoided. They believe that such an extreme scenario will have a positive effect on the Ukrainian forces, removing any fear or hesitation from them. The main problem is that such an escalation would obviously cause the unnecessary death of thousands or millions of innocent civilians, but the neo-Nazis simply do not care about their own people.

In a recent interview, Evgeny Karas, leader of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi militia S14, stated that a nuclear war would be “good” for Ukraine, considering the current situation in the conflict. In his opinion, the beginning of the use of nuclear weapons would have a positive psychological effect on the Ukrainian troops, since, once that point is crossed, “nothing could get worse.”

He believes that once the nuclear stage is reached, Ukrainian soldiers will start fighting more fearlessly, without worrying about any consequences. More than that, Karas expects that, in such a scenario, Ukrainian officials, including generals, politicians and decision-makers, will be better assessed. According to him, it will be easier to test such officers and find out who is cooperating with Ukraine and who is corrupt and weak, since the excuse of “avoiding escalation” will no longer be necessary.

”Nuclear war is good (…) When it happens, we’ll have no more reasons to whine. Nothing worse could happen after a nuclear strike (…) A nuclear war may help us evolve in a way that we could see through an official and tell whether he is a thief or not,” he said.

Karas also believes that the possible use of nuclear weapons by Russia would have an international impact in favor of Ukraine. According to him, Russia’s partner countries, such as China and India, would condemn this type of action, cutting off their cooperation with Moscow and reducing the Russians’ economic capacity. Furthermore, he believes that Ukraine and its Western partners are prepared for a nuclear war confrontation, having sufficient technology to engage in efforts to adapt society to the reality of an environment contaminated with radiation. He believes that the use of artificial intelligence and robotics, for example, are useful mechanisms to advance military capabilities in the midst of a nuclear conflict.

It is important to remember that Karas is one of the most important leaders of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi wave. His organization, the “Society of the Future” (formerly S14) is a dangerous militia, responsible for numerous war crimes and human rights violations. The group brings together a number of extremist militants and was a major source of human resources for Ukrainian reconnaissance and sabotage battalions during the early years of the civil war against Russian-speakers in Donbass. In addition, S14 became known worldwide for crimes committed against the Romani community in the Lvov region, and was denounced by several international organizations – one of the reasons why the group changed its name in 2020.

In other words, Karas is a representative of the most ideologically fanatical wing of the Kiev regime – which explains his tendency towards extreme attitudes and his support for total war. Unfortunately, these extremist sentiments are the main basis of support for the Ukrainian government. Without neo-Nazis and their narratives, Kiev is unable to justify its anti-Russian policies, which is why Karas and other infamous fascist leaders are increasingly gaining ground in Ukrainian public opinion.

This means that it is possible that officials like Zelensky and his ministers will start adopting Karas’s nuclear rhetoric in the near future. The mere fact that Ukraine continues to use long-range weapons against Russia’s deep territory, even though Moscow has made it clear that it can respond to such provocation with a nuclear attack, is already proof that the Kiev regime does not care about nuclear escalation and deliberately threatens the lives of its own citizens.

This clearly shows that it is Moscow, not Kiev, that cares most about the Ukrainian people. Moscow has been patient so far, avoiding taking extreme actions, even though it has the right and the necessary conditions to do so. However, if speeches like Karas’s start to guide Ukrainian military decision-making, it will become almost impossible to prevent an escalation of violence.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

People are often kept in a state of confusion, unable to recognise the manipulations at play. It is essential to grasp the bigger picture to understand the true motives behind policy manoeuvres. This clarity unveils the policy landscape as a calculated strategy, designed to serve the interests of particular stakeholders.

Take the three repealed farm laws in India. They were part of a broader strategy to corporatise Indian agriculture and aimed to drastically reduce the public sector’s role, making it a facilitator for private capital that could then colonise the space left open by the state’s withdrawal. Despite the laws’ repeal, working on behalf of foreign and domestic capital, the Indian government continues to pursue similar objectives through other means.

In late 2021, the Indian government announced that three important farm laws, which would have introduced neoliberal shock therapy to the agriculture sector, would be repealed after a one-year farmers’ mobilisation against the legislation.

It is apt to revisit these repealed laws because the underlying agenda that shaped them persists.

1) The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020. This aimed to allow farmers to sell their produce outside the government-regulated APMC (Agricultural Produce & Livestock Market Committee) mandis (wholesale markets). This law sought to create additional trading opportunities beyond the existing markets, supposedly giving farmers more options and better prices for their crops.

2) The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020. This was designed to provide a framework for contract farming. It would have allowed farmers to enter into agreements with agribusinesses, processors or large retailers for the sale of future farming produce at pre-agreed prices.

3) The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020. This aimed to deregulate the production, storage, movement and sale of several major foodstuffs, including cereals, pulses, oilseeds and onions. It would allow these items to be removed from the list of essential commodities, except under extraordinary circumstances. (The Essential Commodities Act of 1955 empowers the government to regulate the production, supply and distribution of certain goods to ensure their availability to consumers.)   

Critics argued the legislation would weaken the APMC system, potentially leading to the dismantling of the minimum support price (MSP) mechanism. Farmers feared losing price guarantees and being exploited by private corporations. Opponents were also concerned that small farmers might lack the bargaining power to negotiate fair contracts with large agribusinesses.

There were also concerns about potential exploitation and the absence of adequate safeguards for farmers in disputes. The law pertaining to essential commodities faced criticism for potentially enabling hoarding and price manipulation.

Despite the repeal of the three laws, the powerful interests behind the legislation have not gone away. The goal to capture and radically restructure the sector remains.

The government is pursuing alternative strategies to achieve similar aims. These new approaches, while less direct, could potentially implement many of the changes originally proposed in the repealed legislation.

Below is a screenshot of Google news stories appearing on the protests of Indian farmers in the last few weeks. There were 30 pages of such stories, all appearing in 2024. The search did not allow for more than 30 pages. These stories document farmers’ grievances, government failures to deliver on promises, water cannons and tear gas attacks on unarmed farmers as they intended to peacefully march to Delhi and so on.

.

.

The government seems to be playing for time while new legislation is devised and memoranda of understanding are signed with foreign agrifood corporations with no democratic oversight. It is difficult to sustain large-scale protest movements, and the government seems to be relying on this. Moreover, the protesting farmers have yet to achieve the momentum and international support received during the 2020-21 protest.

Protests Against Reintroducing Farm Laws  

In a recent press release, the AIKS (All India Kisan Sabha/All India Farmers Union) calls for nationwide protests against attempts to bring back the farm laws. In particular, it demands the Union Government withdraws its National Policy Framework on Agricultural Marketing.

The AIKS says the draft ‘National Policy Framework on Agricultural Marketing’, circulated by the Union Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare for public suggestions, reveals the:

“… conspiracy to sacrifice farmers’ interest and maximise corporate profits. Petty producers will be adversely hit and pushed out of agriculture.”

It remarks that the draft reveals that the government has opted not to address any of the serious demands raised by the farmers’ movement, including legalising MSP, increasing public investment in agriculture and pro-farmer credit facilities.

While the draft pays lip service to the fact that agricultural marketing is a state subject under Article 246 of the Constitution, the AIKS says that the spirit of the draft is to dismantle the power of the state governments and abolish state supported market infrastructure and erode the role of the APMCs, leaving small and medium farmers vulnerable to exploitation by private trading cartels.

The major suggested reforms in the draft include the establishment of private wholesale markets, direct farm gate purchases by corporate processors and exporters, replacement of traditional market yards with corporate controlled warehouses and silos and introducing a unified statewide market fee and trading license system.

The AIKS states:

“It is significant that big business houses, including Reliance and Adani, have constructed extensive warehouse infrastructure and private railway networks in areas such as Sirsa, Haryana and Ludhiana, Punjab.”

The draft proposes that big corporations can purchase produce directly from farmers, bypassing APMC market yards. Additionally, handing over storage infrastructure to private corporations eliminates a critical safety net for farmers during price volatility and facilitates corporate exploitation by denying farmers any space for bargaining prices.

According to the AIKS:

“Big Business is virulently against MSP because its strategy is to procure produce at the cheapest rate, do value addition, brand and market it by ensuring exorbitant profits. This way, Big Business is exploiting farmers as well as consumers. In the name of market efficiency, the Centre is creating a conducive atmosphere for Corporate loot of agriculture.”

It adds that the stranglehold of big business houses is also evident in the suggestions for deepening financialisation via futures and option markets. The AIKS argues this will also permit corporations and international finance capital to dominate and control the domestic food industry.

The AIKS says it will fight tooth and nail the efforts by the government to surrender Indian agriculture on a platter to transnational corporations. It demands that the government withdraw this draft and engage in meaningful dialogue with farmers’ organisations and state governments.

The AIKS calls upon all its units to actively take part in the SKM-led protests of burning copies of this policy on 23 December 2024 in districts across India.

The Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) is a coalition of 40+ farmers’ unions. It was formed to coordinate non-violent resistance against the three farm acts.

The SKM states that the farmers’ movement sees through the plan to withdraw government support from agriculture and hand over farming, mandis and public food distribution to corporations led by Adani, Ambani, Tata, Cargill, Pepsi, Walmart, Bayer, Amazon and others.

In 2018, a charter was released by the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee (an umbrella group of around 250 farmers’ organisations). It wanted the government to take measures to bring down the input costs of farming, while making purchases of farm produce below the minimum support price (MSP) both illegal and punishable.

The charter also called for a special discussion on the universalisation of the public distribution system (PDS) and the non-approval of genetically engineered seeds without a comprehensive need and impact assessment.

Other demands included no foreign direct investment in agriculture and food processing, the protection of farmers from corporate plunder in the name of contract farming, investment in farmers’ collectives and the promotion of agroecology based on suitable cropping patterns and local seed diversity revival.

These demands remain on the table. The response? Tear gas, concrete road barriers and water cannons.

Meanwhile, foreign players like Bayer attempt to shape the narrative of Indian agriculture being ‘backward’ (see Bayer’s ‘Backward’ Claim: A Bid to Reap Control of Indian Agriculture), and the government demonstrates to global agri-capital and domestic stakeholders like Adani and Ambani that it is being tough on farmers in order to maintain ‘market confidence’ and attract foreign direct investment (aka takeover of the sector).

For more in-depth insights into the issues discussed in this article, check out the author’s ebooks here and here, which both contain extensive sections on the corporatisation on India’s agrifood sector.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

Colin Todhunter’s book Sickening Profits: The Global Food System’s Poisoned Food and Toxic Wealth provides further insight into the issues addressed above. It can be read here. 

The utterly unforgivable Jewish Israeli-imposed Gaza Genocide continues remorselessly. By the end of 2024 Gaza Genocide deaths from violence and imposed deprivation are estimated to be as follows:

• 340,000 total deaths (as estimated by eminent Professor Devi Sridhar, chair, global health, University of Edinburgh), this including
  • 67,000 men,
  • 31,000 women and
  • 243,000 children (notably highly vulnerable under-5 infants who are 70% of avoidable deaths from deprivation in impoverished countries – see Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950”). 

The World is moving to stop this carnage. To that end and for ultimate justice  and reparations it is important to estimate the complicity of the citizens of key countries involved in the Gaza Genocide. Presently 96% of Gaza children feel that their death is imminent and almost half want to die as a result of the trauma. Prior to 7 October 2023, 25% of Australians were sexually abused as children as compared to 18% of Israeli children and 18% of American children, and children were 47% of the 2.3 million population of the Jewish Israeli-guarded Gaza Concentration Camp.

(A) Polling, electoral and other assessment of the complicity of Jewish Israeli, US, UK, and Australian citizens in the horrific, unforgivable and continuing Gaza Genocide and the mass abuse and mass murder of Gaza children, mothers, women and men.

(1) Apartheid Israel. Polling indicates that about 99% of Jewish Israelis support the killing, injuring and traumatizing, including those who want a temporary humanitarian cessation of the killing in exchange for 100 remaining Israeli hostages (noting that there are about 15,000 Palestinians in Israeli military prisons and that before 7 October 2023 there were 5.6 million Occupied Palestinians held hostage without human rights under highly abusive Zionazi military rule).

(2) Pro-Apartheid America. Expert polling in 2024 found that 30% of US Jews thought that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza, with younger respondents more likely to agree with the genocide accusation (38% of those under 44 versus  22% of those over 44). Fewer  than 2% of Americans voted for presidential candidates opposing the Gaza Genocide in 2024: fervently pro-Apartheid Israel “finish the job” Donald Trump (Republican,49.7%), Kid Killing Kamala (KKK) Harris of the Biden/Harris Administration that supplied Apartheid Israel with 75,000 tons of bombs (Democrat, 48.3%), Dr Jill Stein (anti-war Greens, 0.6%), Robert F. Kennedy Jr (Independent, 0.5%), Chase Oliver (anti-war but pro-Israel Libertarian, 0.4%), and Others (notably anti-war African American academic Dr Cornel West, 0.5%).

(3) Pro-Apartheid United Kingdom. While Apartheid Israel is a Zionazi-run  democracy-by-genocide (democratic Nazism), the US, UK and Australia are duopoly corporatocracies  and lobbyocracies in which Big Money buys public perception of reality, votes and hence more political power. While Australia has a world-leading and exquisitely fair compulsory and preferential voting system, the US and UK have non-compulsory voting and  first-past-the-post electoral systems. Thus in the recent UK elections Labour won a landslide victory with 411 seats from 33.7% of the vote as compared to the Conservatives (121 seats with 23.7% of the vote) and the Liberal Democrats (72 seats from 12.2% of the vote). However the major UK parliamentary parties are united in their support for genocidally racist, Zionazi-run, child-, mother- and women-killing Apartheid Israel and hence for the utterly vile crime of Apartheid. Those supporting Apartheid Israel and hence neo-Nazi Apartheid (most members of the UK House of Commons) are utterly unfit for decent company, public life and public office in internally human rights-observant and  one-person-one-vote democracies like the US, UK and Australia. While UK Establishment power, Zionist perversion, US subversion and mendacious Mainstream media mean that UK MPs overwhelmingly support genocidally racist and Zionazi  Apartheid Israel, a small rump of decent Labour MPs (and a much greater proportion of Labour Party members) support Palestinian human rights.

(4) Pro-Apartheid Australia. For about 14 months the Centre-Right Australian Labor Government (together with the even worse climate criminal, pro-gas, pro-coal, Right- Far Right Coalition aka the COALition) has opposed an immediate and permanent Ceasefire in Gaza, a disgusting, child-abusing  position adopted by all Federal MPs except for 15 Greens and 4 decent Independents, ex-Green Senator Lidia Thorpe, ex-Labor Senator Fatima Payman, Dr Helen Haines and Andrew Wilkie, a mere 19 out of a total of 227 Federal MPs (76 Senators and 151 Members of the House of Representatives) and representing only about 15% of Australian voters. Driven by fear of losing the Arab, Muslim and youth vote,  the cowardly, unprincipled, Zionist perverted and US lackey  Australian Labor Government after 14 months of blindly supporting Apartheid Israel has finally voted at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) for “an  immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire” and “Israel [to] end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. However after an utterly  deplorable Melbourne synagogue arson in  Melbourne  and arson of cars and  anti-Israel graffiti in Sydney (all by persons unknown), Labor joined the racist Zionist chorus of “antisemitism”, “terrorism” , “hate speech” and “damage to social cohesion” and is moving to further constrain free speech and the huge weekly national Sunday Rallies for  Palestinian human rights (in Melbourne, 12 noon, Victorian State Library, every Sunday since 7 October 2023). The Australian Labor Government is complicit in the Gaza Genocide in 20 ways and lies for Apartheid Israel in 35 ways – the racist Coalition Opposition is even worse.

(B) How Apartheid Israel and the pro-Apartheid Israel and hence pro-Apartheid US, UK and Australia voted on 16 Palestine-related Resolutions at the UNGA in 2024. Resolution  #13 about “Assistance to the Palestinian People” was passed by consensus. In relation to the other 15 Resolutions (at Plenary Sessions or at pre-Plenary Committee), Apartheid Israel voted No to all 15, and the US voted No to all except for #3 (“Assistance to refugees”) on which it Abstained. The UK and Australia importantly  mostly voted Yes, and in particular voted Yes  to  “an  immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire” (#12) and “[Israel to] end to its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” (#14), but nevertheless showed their continuing loyalty to genocidal and International Law-violating  Zionazi Apartheid Israel by variously voting No or Abstaining for some other Palestine-related UNGA Resolutions upholding International Law (Australia 5 and the UK 6).

For details, documentation and to quickly find how your country voted on these 16 Palestine-related 2024 UNGA Resolutions see  Gideon Polya, “Sanction Zionazism: 99% Of US-, UK- & Australia-backed Jewish Israelis Support Gaza Genocide & Mass Murder Of Children”, Countercurrents, 20 December 2024:.

The Gaza Genocide must be halted NOW and the Jewish Israeli perpetrators made to immediately leave Gaza  and all Occupied Territories to permit entry of (a) life-sustaining  water, food, winter clothing, shelter, sanitation, electricity, fuel, medicine, and medical care teams, (b) UN peacekeepers to keep order and protect the surviving population and service providers, (c) reconstruction teams  and materials for vital housing and infrastructure reconstruction, and (d) forensic teams  to determine all who have died and how they died. The World must apply rigorous  and comprehensive Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Apartheid Israel and all its supporters – all the people, politicians, parties, collectives, companies and countries complicit in  this  horrific atrocity.

It is Christmas and my article included  the following Letter I sent to major Mainstream media of Zionist-perverted Australia (it was rejected of course): “About 2,000 years ago Jewish King Herod allegedly massacred all under-2 male Palestinian children in and about Bethlehem in the hopefully fictional Massacre of the Innocents (Holy Bible, Matthew 2.16). It is expertly estimated that by New Year’s Day 2025 about 340,000 Gazans (15% of the pre-war population and mostly children) will have been killed by Jewish Israeli-imposed violence and deprivation (eminent Professor Devi Sridhar, chair, global health, University of Edinburgh). The perpetrators and those complicit in this unforgivable atrocity through support of genocidal Apartheid Israel or through Silence have departed from decent Humanity and have utterly cursed themselves, their self-imposed curse being endlessly renewed every time they see their reflection and at the going down of the sun and in the morning”.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

Dr Gideon Polya taught science students at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia over 4 decades. He published some 130 works in a 5 decade scientific career, notably a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds” (2003). He has also published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (2007, 2021), “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History” (1998, 2008, 2022), “US-imposed Post-9-11 Muslim Holocaust & Muslim Genocide” (2020), “Climate Crisis, Climate Genocide & Solutions” (2020), “Free Palestine. End Apartheid Israel, Human Rights Denial, Gaza Massacre, Child Killing, Occupation and Palestinian Genocide” (2024), and contributed to Soren Korsgaard (editor) “The Most Dangerous Book Ever Published – Dangerous Deception Exposed!” (2020). For images of Gideon Polya’s huge paintings for the Planet, Peace, Mother and Child see: http://sites.google.com/site/artforpeaceplanetmotherchild/.

Featured image source

Update as of December 22, 8:18 AM ET:

Clearly, the US -still self-styled Empire- does not want to let go of the “Jewel” called the Middle East, loaded with 55% to 60% of the world’s energy resources; or better, and maybe even more importantly called, the “becoming” of Greater Israel for the Chosen People.

This second point is not to be neglected. It is funded by those who have created and control the international monetary system, and reign over the worldwide money flow. We are talking of various quadrillions of US dollars-equivalent.

***

With the Ashkenazi-Zionist-Israel rapid expansion towards a Greater Israel, the sudden fall of Syria, the silence of Iraq, Iran scared to intervene, when Russia is folding up its tents in Syria and is getting the hell out of there — what else, but chaos? 

See also this analysis by Paul Craig Roberts.

Well, the West’s unquestioned support for Israel, or what is still called Israel, though in the hands of mass murderers going by the name of Ashkenazi-Zionist – no original Jews, what can be expected from the region, other than an ever-faster downfall into full chaos? 

Chaos is usually what the rulers want. That is what Washington manages best. The US-Pentagon-NATO have a long history of letting chaos reign for control.

This time though it seems to be different. The chaos is happening because of the West’s collective inaction; possibly negligence of their own interests. 

Just to be sure, Syria has not collapsed because of an “internal” civil war. There NEVER was a civil war; a civil war as we know by its true term where the local people rise up against their ruler. That never happened. Never listen to western media, which would like you to believe that Bashar al-Assad was fighting against a country full of Syrians who disliked him. That is a load of bull***t, as strong as it comes.

Mr. al-Assad’s Syria was infiltrated since before the year 2000, still during his father Hafez Assad’s reign by US-UK-Israeli created terror groups, which lasted up to this day, plus new ones, to which Turkey later also contributed. Today they are called ISIS, IS, al-Qaeda, and finally by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a coalition of northern Syria-based Sunni Islamist insurgent groups that evolved from Jabhat al-Nusrah, or “Nusrah Front,” al-Qaeda’s former branch in Syria. For sure there are others. For now, HTS seems to be in control of Syria, if anybody is.

Turkey, the flip-flop nation, a so-called NATO heavyweight claiming to be also friends with Russia – but when it comes down to it, Turkey under Erdogan is a traitor of everyone. Erdogan has dreams of grandeur, to bring back the Ottoman Empire. Should he ever be trusted?

Washington wanted to dominate Syria for decades. Why? Her oil riches are much larger than is being officially estimated, her geographic strategic situation is unique to control the region – and not least, Syria is part of the Zionists’ dream of becoming the Greater Israel, the Land for the Chosen People.

One can only wonder, what kind of God would choose such horrifying people?

Syria is central to the downfall of the entire Middle East.

That descent into chaos has started long ago, but accelerated to warp speed in the past weeks. It may go on for an undetermined period of time. It will affect Iran, though Iran, a new BRICS country and part of the Chinese Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), is expected to have Russian and Chinese support. However, recent events have shown that none of this can be taken for granted. So, for practical reasons Iran is on her own, internally still torn apart between the adherents of western values and those who trust the east.

Of course, the western faction is heavily paid, infiltrated and trained by CIA and associated secret services to foment resistance and, if needed, facilitate assassinations of (western) undesirable leaders.

And what about the Saudis?                                                

They are selling their hydrocarbons to China in Yuan, an indication that they would lean towards the East, China. However, when a year ago they were offered a place in the new BRICS, though they had officially accepted, but as of today they have not fulfilled any of the conditions laid out for the BRICS members. For example, they are adamant not letting go of the US dollar, not meaning de-dollarization, but trading among each other in their respective currencies. 

De-dollarization was never a condition for BRICS membership. But the sheer fact of being a member of the BRICS, pulling them closer to China and Russia, scares them. Remember, they are full with US military bases – a tit-for-tat – when they agreed in the 1970s as head of OPEC to trade hydrocarbons only in US dollars, Washington promised to “protect” them from potential enemies by dotting their country with US bases. The very bases from which the US is aggressing her chosen enemies, not only in the Middle East, but all over the world. 

The population of the Middle East is about half a billion people (2024 estimate), and growing. That is only about 6% of the world’s population but extremely rich in natural resources, including energies.

.

.

Does anybody expect these people just to let go, being overrun and their resources – the world’s energy – being stolen by supremacists, who call themselves the Chosen People, without a fight? Not likely.

What incoming President Trump will do to bring Peace to the Middle East is anybody’s guess. From the supposed key positions to be confirmed, with responsibilities for the Middle East, including his VP and Secretary of State – and others of course – the course of unquestioned support for Israel, or let’s call it by the true name, the Ashkenazi-Zionists, seems guaranteed. 

Mr. Trump has not made any indication that he wants Peace with Iran. 

That pits East against West in the Middle East which controls as it is today, between 55% and 60% of all known hydrocarbon reserves. Many countries around the globe depend on these reserves. For the foreseeable future the world’s economies are not going to be run by alternative “renewable” energy, like windmills or solar panels.

By now, most people know that this is a joke. The climate hoax behind it is also about to collapse. The Green Deal people will soon get a hefty blow. Financial giants like BlackRock / Vanguard are clearly distancing themselves from this lie. 

Syria was a shining light in the region. But for most, she was unexpectedly overrun with apparent ease. All prepared for over 30 years, already when Hafez al-Assad was in power, the US started meddling. They intensified their interference in the early 2000 with a supposed pipeline from Qatar through Syria, which was probably planned by the US in connivance with Qatar, knowing that Syria would never allow it to protect her ally’s, Russia, gas market in Europe.

But it gave the US yet another argument to further destabilize Syria. 

Chaos, upheaval and destruction; murdering of the worst kind in Syria of anybody who can still be linked to Bashar al-Assad. Human rights abuse, torture no end. 

Listen to this remarkable discussion between Mike Robinson and Vanessa Beeley about the events of the past week in Syria, including Vanessa’s escape from the terrorists (50-min podcast):

Alternatively, you may listen here.

The west is cheering, and the rest of the world is just looking on. Now the total downfall, total chaos of the Middle East is almost a given.

Will Trump want to find a solution?

The world needs a peace-loving leader from the East or from the West. Not a globalist, because globalists want Power not Peace. The current chaos is what the west wants – the US, UK, Europe, Israel and even Turkey. But it is doubtful that chaos in the Middle East would be in the long-term interest of the self-proclaimed masters of the universe. 

Somalia may be a good example of man-made chaos and kept as continued chaos. For decades Somalia has followed a similar pattern as is now inflicted in the Middle East. When it gets out of hand, and risks to spread to other areas and countries, inconvenient to the west, the US air force comes in on a flash, dropping a few bombs until the chaos becomes normal and manageable again.

Will President Trump leave Syria to the old terror groups set up by the US et al. in the first place – and new ones to be created, which arm themselves largely from the weapons shipments to Ukraine, of which at least 70% goes directly to the black market, already reported on over a year ago by BBC and CNN?

Some analyst-pundits predict that 30 to 50 years from now, the Middle East may become a nuclear-contaminated, uninhabitable, literally untouchable piece of land.

Let us hope this can be avoided.

If a genuine peace-leader, either from the west or the east, were to intervene in the Middle East by stopping the Zionists’ march towards a Greater Israel, restoring old frontiers, giving back Palestine to the Palestinians, there is a chance that the Middle East could become a viable partner to the rest of the world — with the hydrocarbon reserves continuing driving the world economy, towards a civilization of shared values and shared benefits.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Global Research’s Holiday Fundraiser   

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

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

Featured image is from Silent Crow News

Article 13 of the Washington Treaty describes a simple procedure for a NATO member state, to cancel its membership.

Below is the stated objective of NATO: Peace and Security, Individual Liberty and the Rule of Law, Safeguard Freedom and  Democracy.

See below:

“The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.

They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.

They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this North Atlantic Treaty.”

Sounds good but it’s a bold face lie.

NATO is an instrument  of  continuous warfare.  What utter nonsense. They do not support the Charter of the United Nations.

image: (Afganistan, famine)

US-NATO-Israel’s “humanitarian wars” consist of crimes against humanity, genocide and the destruction and fragmentation of entire countries:

Palestine, Vietnam, Cambodia, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, …

not to mention military coup’s, regime change, color revolutions, … poverty and famine.

Famine in Afghanistan (invaded by NATO forces in October 2001) on the pretext that Afghanistan had attacked America on 9/11 allegedly in support of Al Qaeda.

Read Article 13 of the Washington Treaty which describes the procedure.

“Article 13

“After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.

A NATO Member State may cease to be “A Party of NATO ” one year after its notice of denunciation has been given the the Government of the U.S.A” (emphasis added)

A  NATO member state may decide to “WITHDRAW from NATO.” 

We are at a dangerous crossroads in our history which is characterized by a system of alliances of nation-states (namely NATO) which unequivocally supports and finances the United States military agenda. The latter also includes an option to conduct nuclear war. A 1.3 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program, slated to increase to 2 trillion by 2030.

While Article 13 of the Washington Treaty appears to be simplistic, one can expect numerous pressures and fraudulent actions with a view to preventing a NATO member state from canceling its NATO membership.

What is crucial is to fracture and weaken NATO: an intergovernmental alliance of 32 member states.

There is also the issue of cross-cutting alliances and coalitions, namely countries which are members of NATO, while also having alliances or agreements with so-called enemies of NATO.  Turkey is a NATO member state which has economic and strategic alliances with both Russia and Iran.

The withdrawal from NATO of one or more member states could have a significant impact. It creates a precedent, which would encourage more NATO member states, “to say goodbye.”

How to Reverse the Tide of War: “Say Goodbye to Nato”

A. Withdrawal (Art 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty)

1. A mass movement at the grassroots of society to withdraw from NATO (Art. 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty)

2. Actions within the legislature of the 32 member states. Motions “to cease to be a party” of NATO (Art 13) 

B. NATO Wants Money From Member States. It Also Wants Weapons

“During the 2014 summit, all NATO members agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDPs on defense by 2025″.

Pressure governments to freeze defense spending. Demand withdrawal of soldiers from the war theater.

C. The Restoration of Peace and Democracy

3. Persistent actions against corrupt heads of state who support NATO. 

4. Restoration of the democratic process, elect politicians firmly committed to “CEASING TO BE A PARTY” OF NATO (ART 13)

D. Democratization of the Media

5. Actions against media, which are supportive of terrorism and crimes against humanity committed by  NATO forces. 

E. Actions Within the United Nations System 

6. Meaningful actions within the United Nations System.

7. Actions against NGOs which support NATO.

F. Legal Actions

8. Legal actions against the military industrial complex and the financial establishment 

9. Actions against the billionaire philanthropists which endorse and finance US NATO Israel, acts of war

10  Actions against NATO member governments which commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide

The Motto of NATO: “Increase defense spending to prevent war. NATO must spend more.” 

“The Lie Becomes the Truth”

See The Washington Treaty  (Complete Text)

See the text of Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty below.

.

.

Text of Article 13

A  NATO Member State may take the decision to WITHDRAW from NATO.

The procedure is described in Article 13 of the Washington Treaty.

Article 13

After the Treaty has been in force for twenty years, any Party may cease to be a Party one year after its notice of denunciation has been given to the Government of the United States of America, which will inform the Governments of the other Parties of the deposit of each notice of denunciation.

A NATO Member State may cease to be “A Party of NATO ” one year after its notice of denunciation has been given the the Government of the U.S.A.

Global Research Introductory Note

This carefully researched and timely article by F. William Engdahl was first published on July 13, 2022.

In October 2023, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation initiated a billion euro polio project. Bill Gates expresses his commitment to eradicating polio Worldwide  

Protecting Hundreds of Millions of Children??? 

“Thanks to medical innovations, the world eradicated one human disease – smallpox. Today we’re on the verge of ending another – wild poliovirus. I am committed to ensuring that no child, anywhere in the world, faces this awful disease. I am also optimistic that we will eradicate polio once and for all and make health innovations more accessible for everyone, particularly those in the poorest countries,” said Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (emphasis added)

“The expected €1.1 billion financing package aims to provide new funding to eradicate a human disease for only the second time in history and help solve the health and development challenges faced by the world’s most vulnerable people, who otherwise do not get fair access to healthcare services and innovations.

Big Money to the Rescue of the World’s Children???

The President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen stated emphatically:

“We are about to wipe polio off the face of the Earth. The European Commission, the EIB and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are partnering to get through the final stretch.

With 1 billion euros supported by our European investment strategy Global Gateway, we will invest in stronger health systems globally and local vaccine and medicines production, manufacturing and administration, where it is most needed.

Global cooperation has helped us put an end to the COVID-19 pandemic. Now it will help us get rid of polio once and for all.” (emphasis added)

***

Toxicology vs Virology:

The Rockefeller Institute and the Criminal Polio Fraud

By F. William Engdahl 

Introduction 

One of the outcomes of the alleged new SARS Covid virus that publicly emerged in 2019 is that the medical specialization of virology has been raised to a stature almost Godlike in the media.

Few understand the origins of virology and its elevation into a leading role in today’s medicine practice. For this we need to look at the origins and politics of America’s first medical research institute, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, today Rockefeller University, and their work on what they claimed was a polio virus.

In 1907 an outbreak of a sickness in New York City gave the director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, MD, a golden opportunity to lay claim to discovery of an invisible “virus” caused by what was arbitrarily called poliomyelitis. The word poliomyelitis simply means inflammation of the spinal cord’s grey matter. There were some 2,500 New Yorkers, mostly children, designated with some form of poliomyelitis, including paralysis and even death, that year.

Flexner’s Fraud

The most striking aspect of the entire polio saga in the USA during the first half of the 20th Century was the fact that every key phase of the business was controlled by people tied to what became the Rockefeller medical cabal. This fraud started with claims by the Director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, that he and his colleague, Paul A. Lewis, had “isolated” a pathogen, invisible to the eye, smaller even than bacteria, which they claimed caused the paralyzing sickness in a series of outbreaks in the US. How did they come to this idea?

In a paper published in 1909 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Flexner claimed he and Lewis had isolated the poliomyelitis virus responsible. He reported they had successfully “passaged” poliomyelitis through several monkeys, from monkey to monkey. They began by injecting diseased human spinal cord tissue of a young boy who had died, presumably from the virus, into the brains of monkeys. After a monkey fell ill, a suspension of its diseased spinal cord tissue was injected into the brains of other monkeys who also fell ill.

They proclaimed that the Rockefeller Institute doctors had thus proven poliomyelitis virus causality for the mysterious disease. They hadn’t done anything of the sort. Flexner and Lewis even admitted that:

“We failed utterly to discover bacteria, either in film preparations or in cultures, that could account for the disease; and, since among our long series of propagations of the virus in monkeys not one animal showed, in the lesions, the cocci described by some previous investigators, and we had failed to obtain any such bacteria from the human material studied by us, we felt that they could be excluded from consideration.”

What they then did was to make a bizarre supposition, a leap of faith, not a scientific claim. They took their hypothesis of viral exogenous agency and made it fact, with no proof whatever. They asserted: “Therefore, …the infecting agent of epidemic poliomyelitis belongs to the class of the minute and filterable viruses that have not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope.“ Therefore?

Simon Flexner simply asserted it “must” be a polio virus killing the monkeys, because they could find no other explanation. In fact he did not look for another source of the illnesses. This was not scientific isolation. It was wild speculation: “…not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope.” They admitted this in a December 18, 1909 follow up in JAMA, titled, THE NATURE OF THE VIRUS OF EPIDEMIC POLIOMYELITIS.

The so-called “virus” they were injecting into monkeys was hardly pure. It also contained an undetermined amount of contaminants. It included “pureed spinal cord, brain, fecal matter, even flies were ground up and injected into monkeys to induce paralysis.” Until Jonas Salk won approval from the US Government in April 1955 for a polio vaccine, no scientific proof of existence of a virus causing poliomyelitis, or infantile paralysis as it was commonly known, had been proven. That is the case to this day. The medical world all took Flexner’s word that it “must” be a virus.

Rockefeller Institute, Flexner and the American Medical Association

The Rockefeller Institute was founded from the Standard Oil fortune of John D. Rockefeller in 1901, to be America’s first biomedical institute. It was modelled on France’s Pasteur Institute (1888) and Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (1891). Its first Director, Simon Flexner, played a pivotal and most criminal role in the evolution of what became approved American medical practice. The Rockefeller goal was to completely control American medical practice and transform it into an instrument, at least initially, for promotion of medical drugs approved by the Rockefeller interests. By then they were looking to monopolize medical drugs produced from their petroleum refining, as they had done with oil.

Image on the right: Simon Flexner (Licensed under the public domain)

As Rockefeller Institute head, Simon Flexner, was publishing his inconclusive but highly acclaimed studies on polio, he arranged for his brother, Abraham Flexner, a school teacher with no medical background, to head a joint study by the American Medical Association (AMA), the Rockefeller General Education Board, and the Carnegie Foundation founded by Rockefeller’s close friend Andrew Carnegie.

The 1910 study was titled, The Flexner Report, and its ostensible purpose was to investigate the quality of all US medical schools. The outcome of the report was, however, predetermined. Ties between the well-endowed Rockefeller Institute and the AMA went through the corrupt AMA head, George H. Simmons.

Simmons was also the editor of the influential Journal of the American Medical Association, a publication delivered to some 80,000 doctors across America. He reportedly wielded absolute power over the doctors’ association. He controlled the rising ad revenues for drug companies to promote their drugs to AMA doctors in his journal, a highly lucrative business. He was a key part of the Rockefeller medical coup that was to completely redefine acceptable medical practice away from remedial or preventive treatment to use of often deadly drugs and expensive surgeries. As head of the AMA Simmons realized that the competition from a proliferation of medical schools, including then-recognized chiropractic, osteopathy, homeopathy and natural medicine, was lessening income of his AMA doctors, as the number of medical schools had increased from around 90 in 1880 to over 150 in 1903.

Abraham Flexner, former headmaster of a private school, toured various US medical schools in 1909 and recommended that fully half of the 165 medical schools be closed, as what he defined as “sub-standard.” This reduced competition from other approaches to healing diseases. They ruthlessly targeted then-widespread naturopathic medical schools, chiropractic ones, osteopaths as well as independent allopathic schools unwilling to join the AMA regime.

Then Rockefeller money went to the select schools with a proviso that professors be vetted by the Rockefeller Institute and the curriculum focus on drugs and surgery as treatment, not prevention, nor nutrition, nor toxicology as possible causes and solutions. They had to accept Pasteur’s germ theory of disease, which claims one germ to one disease reductionism. Rockefeller-controlled media launched a coordinated witch-hunt against all forms of alternative medicine, herbal remedies, natural vitamins and chiropractic–anything not controlled by Rockefeller patented drugs.

By 1919 the Rockefeller General Education Board and the Rockefeller Foundation had paid out more than $5,000,000 to Johns Hopkins, Yale and Washington University in St. Louis medical schools. In 1919 John D. Rockefeller granted another $20,000,000 in securities, “for the advancement of medical education in the United States.” That would be comparable to about $340 million today, a huge sum. In short the Rockefeller money interests had hijacked American medical education and medical researchby the 1920’s.

Creating Virology

This medical takeover, backed by the most influential doctors’ organization, the AMA, and its corrupt head, Simmons, allowed Simon Flexner to literally create modern virology under Rockefeller rules. The highly controversial Thomas Milton Rivers, as director of The Rockefeller Institute’s virology laboratory, established virology as an independent field, separate from bacteriology, during the 1920s. They realized they could manipulate far easier when they could claim deadly pathogens that were invisible germs or “viruses.” Ironically virus comes from Latin for poison.

Virology, a reductionist medical fraud, was a creation of the Rockefeller medical cabal. That highly important fact is buried in the annals of medicine today. Diseases such as smallpox or measles or poliomyelitis were declared caused by invisible pathogens called specific viruses. If scientists could “isolate” the invisible virus, theoretically they could find vaccines to protect people from harm. So their theory went. It was a huge boon for the Rockefeller cartel of pharmaceutical companies, which at the time included American Home Products which falsely promoted drugs with no proof of effect, such as Preparation H for Hemorrhoids, or Advil for pain relief; Sterling Drug,which took over the US assets including Aspirin of German Bayer AG after World War I; Winthrop Chemical; American Cyanamid and its subsidiary Lederle Laboratories; Squibb and Monsanto.

Soon virus researchers at the Rockefeller Institute, in addition to claiming discovery of the poliomyelitis virus, claimed to discover the viruses that caused smallpox, mumps, measles and yellow fever. Then they announced “discovery” of preventive vaccines for pneumonia and yellow fever. All of these “discoveries” announced by the Institute proved false. With the control of the research in the new area of virology, the Rockefeller Institute, in collusion with Simmons at AMA and his equally corrupt successor, Morris Fishbein, could promote new patented vaccines or drug “remedies” in the influential AMA journal that went to every member doctor in America. Drug companies refusing to pay for ads in the AMA journal were blackballed by the AMA.

Controlling Polio Research

Image below: Rockefeller University Main gates on York Avenue (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Simon Flexner and the highly-influential Rockefeller Institute succeeded in 1911 in having the symptoms that were being called poliomyelitis to be entered into the US Public Health Law as a “contagious, infectious disease caused by an air-borne virus.” Yet even they admitted they had not proven how the disease enters the body of humans. As one experienced doctor pointed out in a medical journal in 1911, “Our present knowledge of the possible methods of contagion is based almost entirely upon the work done in this city at the Rockefeller Institute.” In 1951 Dr. Ralph Scobey, a critic of the Rockefeller rush to judgment on polio contagion, noted, “This of course placed reliance on animal experiments rather than on clinical investigations…” Scobey also pointed to the lack of proof poliomyelitis was contagious: “…children afflicted with the disease were kept in general hospital wards and that not a single one of the other inmates of the wards of the hospital was affected with the disease.” The general attitude at that time was summed up in 1911: “It seems to us despite the lack of absolute proof, that the best interests of the community would be conserved by our regarding the disease from a contagious standpoint.” (sic).

By having poliomyelitis symptoms classified as a highly contagious disease caused by an invisible, alleged exogenous or external virus, the Rockefeller Institute and the AMA were able to cut off any serious research for alternative explanations such as exposure to chemical pesticides or other toxins, to explain the seasonal outbreaks of illness and paralysis, even death, mostly in very young children. That was to have fatal consequences lasting to the present.

Enter DDT

In his 1952 statement to the US House of Representatives investigating the possible dangers of chemicals in food products, Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. noted,

“For almost half a century poliomyelitis investigations have been directed towards a supposed exogenous virus that enters the human body to cause the disease. The manner in which the Public Health Law is now stated, imposes only this type of investigation. No intensive studies have been made, on the other hand, to determine whether or not the so-called virus of poliomyelitis is an autochthonous chemical substance that does not enter the human body at all, but simply results from an exogenous factor or factors, for example, a food poison.”

Toxins as cause were not investigated, despite huge evidence.

During the 1930s with economic depression and then war, few new major outbreaks of poliomyelitis were noted. However, immediately after the end of World War II, notably, the polio drama exploded in dimension. Beginning 1945, every summer more and more children across America were diagnosed with poliomyelitis and hospitalized. Less than 1% of the cases were actually tested via blood or urine tests. Some 99% were diagnosed by merely the presence of symptoms such as acute pain in extremities, fever, upset stomach, diarrhea.

In 1938, with the support of presumed polio victim, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (March of Dimes) was founded to solicit tax-exempt donations to fund polio research. A German doctor and researcher, Dr Henry Kumm, came to the US and joined the Rockefeller Institute in 1928 where he stayed until joining the National Foundation in 1951 as Director of Polio Research. Kumm was joined at the National Foundation by another key Rockefeller Institute veteran, the so-called “father of virology,” Thomas M. Rivers, who chaired the foundation’s vaccine research advisory committee overseeing the research of Jonas Salk. These two Rockefeller Institute key figures thus controlled funds for polio research including developing a vaccine.

During the Second World War, while still at Rockefeller Institute, Henry Kumm was a consultant to the US Army where he oversaw field studies in Italy. There Kumm directed field studies for the use of DDT against typhus and malarial mosquitoes in the marshes near Rome and Naples. DDT had been patented as an insecticide by Swiss drug firm Geigy and their US branch in 1940, and first authorized for use on US Army soldiers in 1943 as a general disinfectant against head lice, mosquitoes and many other insects. Until war’s end almost all DDT production in the US went to the military. In 1945 the chemical companies looked eagerly for new markets. They found them.

Image on the right is from Beyond Pesticides

In early 1944, US newspapers triumphantly reported that typhus, “the dreaded plague that has followed in the wake of every great war in history,” was no longer a threat to American troops and their allies thanks to the army’s new “louse-killing” powder, DDT. In an experiment in Naples, American soldiers dusted more than a million Italians with DDT dissolved with kerosene (!), killing the body lice that spread typhus.

Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm and the US Army knew that, as one researcher put it, “DDT was a poison, but it was safe enough for war. Any person harmed by DDT would be an accepted casualty of combat.” The US Government “restricted” a report on insecticides issued by the Office of Scientific Research and Development in 1944 that warned against the cumulative toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals. Dr Morris Biskind noted in a 1949 article, “As DDT is a cumulative poison, it is inevitable that large-scale intoxication of the American population would occur. In 1944, Smith and Stohlman of the National Institutes of Health, after an extensive study of the cumulative toxicity of DDT, pointed out, “The toxicity of DDT combined with its cumulative action and absorbability from the skin places a definite health hazard on its use.” Their warnings were ignored by higher officials.

Instead, after 1945, all across America DDT was promoted as the miracle new, “safe” pesticide, much like Monsanto’s Roundup with glyphosate three decades later. DDT was said to be harmless to humans. But no one in government was seriously scientifically testing that claim. One year later in 1945 as the war ended, US newspapers praised the new DDT as a “magic” substance, a “miracle.” Time called DDT “one of the great scientific discoveries of World War II.”

Despite isolated warnings of untested side effects, that it was a persistent, toxic chemical which easily accumulates in the food chain, the US Government approved DDT for general use in 1945. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), controlled by the Rockefeller-AMA-drug interests, established as “safe” a DDT content of up to 7 parts per million in foods, though no one had proven such. The DDT chemical companies fed the press with photos and anecdotes. Newspapers enthusiastically reported how the new miracle chemical, DDT, was being tested in the US against mosquitoes in the South believed carrying malaria, as well as “preserving Arizona vineyards, West Virginia orchards, Oregon potato fields, Illinois cornfields, and Iowa dairies.” DDT was everywhere in the USA in the late 1940s.

The US Government claimed DDT, unlike arsenic and other insecticides used before the war, was harmless to humans, even infants, and could be used liberally. Beginning 1945 cities like Chicago sprayed public beaches, parks, swimming pools. Housewives bought home aerosol spray DDT dispensers to spray the kitchen and especially childrens’ rooms, even their matrasses. Farmers were told to spray their crops and their animals, especially dairy cows, with DDT. In postwar America DDT was being promoted, above all by Rockefeller drug companies like American Home Products with its Black Flag aerosol DDT spray, and Monsanto. From 1945 through 1952 the US production of DDT increased tenfold.

As presumed cases of polio literally exploded across the USA after 1945 the theory was advanced, with no proof, that the crippling polio disease was transmitted, not by toxic pesticide chemicals like DDT, but by mosquitoes or flies to humans, most especially young children or infants. The message was that DDT can safely protect your family from the crippling polio. Officially listed polio cases went from some 25,000 in 1943 before US civilian use of DDT, to over 280,000 cases in 1952 at the peak, more than a tenfold increase.

In October 1945 DDT, which had been used by the US Army under supervision of Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm as noted, was authorized by the US Government for general use as an insecticide against mosquitoes and flies. Dissenting scientists warning of toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals were silenced. Families were told DDT could save their children from the dreaded polio by killing the feared insects.

The US Department of Agriculture advised farmers to wash their dairy cows with a solution of DDT to combat mosquitoes and flies. Cornfields were aerial sprayed with DDT as well as fruit orchards. However it was incredibly persistent and its toxic effect on plants and vegetables were such it could not be washed off. Year-by-year from 1945 through 1952 the amount of DDT sprayed across the US increased. Notably, so too did the number of human cases of poliomyelitis.

Worst Polio Epidemic

By the beginning of the 1950s increasing attention was given in the US Congress and among farmers as to the possible dangers of such heavy pesticide use—not only DDT, but also the even more toxic BHC (benzene hexachloride). In 1951 Morton Biskind, a physician who had successfully treated several hundred patients with DDT poisoning, testified to the US House of Representatives on the possible link of paralytic polio to toxins, specifically DDT and BHC. He noted,

“The introduction for uncontrolled general use by the public of the insecticide “DDT” (chlorophenothane) and the series of even more deadly substances that followed, has no previous counterpart in history. Beyond question, no other substance known to man was ever before developed so rapidly and spread indiscriminately over so large a portion of the earth in so short a time. This is the more surprising as, at the time DDT was released for public use, a large amount of data was already available in the medical literature showing that this agent was extremely toxic for many different species of animals, that it was cumulatively stored in the body fat and that it appeared in the milk. At this time a few cases of DDT poisoning in human beings had also been reported. These observations were almost completely ignored or misinterpreted.”

Biskind further testified to Congress in late 1950,

“Early last year I published a series of observations on DDT poisoning in man. Since shortly after the last war a large number of cases had been observed by physicians all over the country in which a group of symptoms occurred, the most prominent feature of which was gastroenteritis, persistently recurrent nervous symptoms, and extreme muscular weakness…”

He described several case examples of patients whose severe symptoms including paralysis disappeared when exposure to DDT and related toxins was eliminated:

“My original experience on more than 200 cases which I reported early last year has since been considerably extended. My subsequent observations have not only confirmed the view that DDT is responsible for a great deal of otherwise inexplicable human disability…”

Also noted was the fact that polio cases were always most in summer months when DDT spraying against insects was maximum.

The Rockefeller Institute operatives and the AMA, via their agents in the US Government, created the 1946-1952 USA health emergency called polio. They did so by knowingly promoting the highly toxic DDT as a safe way to control the mythical insect spreaders of the feared disease. Their propaganda campaign convinced the American population that DDT was the key to stop spread of poliomyelitis.

Polio Suddenly Declines

Under leadership of the two Rockefeller Institute doctors, Henry Kumm and Thomas Rivers, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP) rejected critics such as Biskind and Scobey. Natural remedial treatment, such as using intravenous Vitamin C for the infantile paralysis, were rejected out of hand as “quackery.” In April 1953, leading Rockefeller Institute DDT consultant, Dr Henry Kumm, became Director of Polio Research for NFIP. He funded the polio vaccine research of Jonas Salk.

One courageous doctor in North Carolina, Dr. Fred R. Klenner, who had also studied chemistry and physiology, had the idea to use large doses of intravenous ascorbic acid—Vitamin C—on the hypothesis that his patients were victims of toxin poisoning and that Vitamin C was a powerful detox. This was well before Dr Linus Pauling’s Nobel Prize research on Vitamin C. Klenner had remarkable success within days for more than 200 patients in the summer epidemics of 1949 to 1951. The Rockefeller Institute and the AMA had no interest in the remedial prospects. They and the Rockefeller-controlled National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were only funding polio vaccine development, based on the unproven Flexner claim that polio was a contagious virus, not a result of environmental poison.

Then beginning sometime in 1951-1952, as polio cases were at an all-time high, something unexpected began to appear. The number of cases diagnosed as polio in the US began to decline. The decline in polio victims was dramatic, year by year until 1955, well before the National Foundation and Jonas Salk’s polio vaccine was approved for public use and was widespread.

About a year before the sudden decline in polio cases, farmers, whose dairy cows were suffering severe effects of the DDT, were advised by the US Department of Agriculture to reduce DDT use. Rising public concern about how safe DDT was for humans, including publicized US Senate hearings on DDT and Polio in 1951 also led to a significant decline in DDT exposure into 1955, even though DDT was not officially banned in the US until 1972.

So-called “polio” cases fell by some two-thirds in that 1952-1956 time, in a remarkable parallel to the decline in DDT use. It was well after that decline, in late 1955 and 1956, that the Rockefeller-developed Salk polio vaccine was first administered in large populations. Salk and the AMA gave all credit to the vaccine. Deaths and paralysis as a result of the Salk vaccine were papered over. The Government changed the definition of polio to further reduce official cases. Simultaneously, cases of similar polio-like spinal cord nerve diseases– acute flaccid paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, encephalitis, meningitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, muscular sclerosis—rose notably.

Why it Matters

Over a century ago the world’s richest man, oil baron John D. Rockefeller, and his circle of advisors set about to completely reorganize how medicine was practiced in the USA and the rest of the world. The role of the Rockefeller Institute and figures like Simon Flexner literally oversaw the invention of a colossal medical fraud around claims that an invisible contagious extraneous germ, the polio virus, caused acute paralysis and even death in young people. They politically banned any efforts to link the disease to toxin poisoning, whether from DDT or arsenic pesticides or even contaminated vaccine poisoning. Their criminal project included intimate cooperation with the leadership of the AMA and control of the emerging drug industry, as well as of medical education. The same Rockefeller group financed Nazi eugenics at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany in the 1930s as well as the American Eugenics Society. In the 1970s they financed the creation of patented GMO seeds which were all developed by the group of Rockefeller chemical pesticide companies—Monsanto, DuPont, Dow.

Today this control of public health and the medical industrial complex is exercised by David Rockefeller’s protegé and eugenics advocate, Bill Gates, self-appointed czar over the WHO and world vaccines. Dr Tony Fauci, head of NIAID, dictates vaccine mandates without evidence. The fraud behind the polio virus scandal after World War II has been refined with use of computer models and other ruses today, to advance one alleged deadly virus after the other, from Covid19 to Monkeypox to HIV. As with polio, none of those has been scientifically isolated and proven to cause the diseases claimed. None.

The same tax-free Rockefeller Foundation today, posing as a philanthropic charity, is at the heart of the global medical tyranny behind covid19 and the eugenics agenda of the World Economic Forum Great Reset.

Their poliomyelitis virus model helped them create this dystopian medical tyranny. We are told, “trust the science.”

*

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

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics.

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

Featured image is from NEO

Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation

Author Name: F. William Engdahl

ISBN Number: 978-0-9879389-2-3

Year: 2007

Product Type: PDF File

Price: $9.50

This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”

This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.

The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.

First published on July 31, 2024

While the mainstream propaganda machine keeps publishing fantasies about 60% of Russian missiles allegedly “failing”, the Pentagon is giving starkly different assessments. Namely, the US military privately gives completely opposite numbers, stressing that the Russian military’s air defenses have a staggering 97% success rate.

Combined with Moscow’s unrivaled electronic warfare (EW) capabilities, its SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems provide unprecedented protection for the Russian military and civilian infrastructure, particularly when taking into account the massive scale of NATO-backed Neo-Nazi junta’s drone and missile attacks on Russian cities and regions.

These world-class air defenses give the Kremlin the capability to cover its troops, which then use advanced long-range strike systems to hunt for various NATO-sourced rocket and missile launch platforms. And unlike the Kiev regime, which regularly lies about its air defense “successes”, including against hypersonic weapons, the Russian military regularly publishes verifiable data (including video footage) of the interceptions of various types of hostile precision-guided munitions (PGMs). This is precisely why even some NATO countries refuse to let go of their Russian-made SAM systems, including both Greece and Turkey, with the latter even sacrificing the troubled F-35 acquisition to get them.

Countries around the world have come to an identical conclusion, including global powers such as India.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) proved this in a recent military exercise where it deployed its fighter jets as hostile attack aircraft that were “tracked and targeted” by the Russian-made S-400 SAM system. In what Indian sources described as a major success for the IAF, the Sudarshan S-400 air defense system “shot down” 80% of the “attacking” fighter aircraft while forcing the rest to retreat. High-ranking defense sources told India Today that the recent military exercise demonstrated significant air defense capabilities of the IAF, once again justifying the acquisition of SAM systems from Russia.

India currently operates three missile regiments of the S-400, while another two are to be delivered in the next few years. The Kremlin itself has committed to delivering the two remaining regiments by the third quarter of 2026. All five of the S-400 SAM system regiments were expected to be delivered by early 2024, but this was delayed due to the ongoing NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. However, the IAF fully integrated the three regiments that have been delivered so far, with all the Russian-made air defense systems now achieving full operational capabilities. The regiments are effectively divided into two groups, stationed in northern areas, bordering China and Pakistan, respectively.

“Current deployments indicate that we have nearly 1.5 squadrons each stationed on the fronts with China and Pakistan,” sources revealed.

The success reported by the IAF is hardly surprising, as the Soviet Union/Russia placed a significant emphasis on air defenses as part of its military doctrine. Moscow’s top brass never counted on fighting a war with absolute air superiority, as is the case in the political West, particularly the United States. Thus, the USSR and later Russia designed and produced the best air defense systems in history. Thus, the Kremlin has the tools necessary to provide adequate protection for its civilian infrastructure, as well as the military, including ground units and stationary strategic assets. Given the very close, half-a-century-long defense cooperation between Russia and India, Delhi’s choice is hardly surprising.

The two (Eur)Asian giants are working closely on a plethora of strategically important military projects, with the Kremlin transferring numerous technologies that are critically important to India and its security. The IAF is a major user of Russian-made SAM systems and aircraft, including the Su-30MKI, a joint Sukhoi-HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) project that gave Delhi the backbone of its air power. The “Flanker-H” is the country’s most capable fighter jet and the IAF is now running an ambitious modernization program to make the Su-MKI relevant for decades to come. Russia and India are working closely to circumvent illegal Western sanctions in order to achieve this.

What’s more, despite all these hurdles, the cooperation is being actively expanded by both sides, with the IAF planning to give the “Flanker-H” more advanced capabilities usually seen on the next-generation aircraft such as the now legendary Su-57. Indian sources report that the program will cost $7.5 billion and that it will give the Su-30MKI all the capabilities of a fifth-generation aircraft, with the notable exception of stealth. The Kremlin’s participation in such a massive undertaking is virtually a given. It should also be noted that the two (Eur)Asian giants are working on other strategically important projects, including hypersonic weapons, an area in which Moscow excels in every category.

Namely, Russia is decades ahead of its competition and has not only been the first to induct hypersonic missiles back in the early 1980s, but has also managed to maintain this advantage even during the troubled 1990s. Its top rival, the United States, has been incapable of matching even much smaller countries such as North Korea and Iran, with many sources reporting that the Pentagon is focused on outdated technologies and is often refusing to disclose whether missile tests have been successful or not. Thanks to its close ties with the Kremlin, India is already in the highly exclusive “hypersonic club”. BrahMos Aerospace, an Indo-Russian defense joint venture, is particularly important in this regard.

The company is already conducting intensive testing of the highly anticipated BrahMos II hypersonic missile. At Mach 6, the missile is set to be at least twice as fast as the previous BrahMos supersonic cruise missile. Even though the weapon is officially projected to have a range of 600 km, experts suggest that the BrahMos II will reach Mach 8 and a range of 1000 km. Mostly based on Russia’s “Zircon” hypersonic missile, the world’s first successful scramjet-powered (supersonic combustion ramjet) missile, BrahMos II is expected to give India an unrivaled capability, not just in the Global South, but even in comparison to the political West, where even the US now admits Russia is far ahead in hypersonic technologies.

*

Click the share button below 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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

“The PCR is a process. It does not tell you that you are sick.”  –Dr. Kary Mullis, (image right) Nobel Laureate and Inventor of the RT-PCR, passed away in August 2019.

“…All or a substantial part of these positives could be due to what’s called false positives tests.” –Dr. Michael Yeadon, distinguished scientist, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer

“This misuse of the RT-PCR technique is applied as a relentless and intentional strategy by some governments to justify excessive measures such as the violation of a large number of constitutional rights, … under the pretext of a pandemic based on a number of positive RT-PCR tests, and not on a real number of patients.” –Dr. Pascal Sacré, Belgian physician specialized in critical care and renowned public health analyst.

“I have seen massive efforts made to deliberately inflate Covid death numbers by relabelling cancer patients and stroke victims and all manner of normal regular deaths as Covid, in fact virtually anyone getting into an ambulance. The methods used to do so were totally flawed, PCR tests for example being run on 45 cycles we all know to be worthless, yet people are being euthanised on this basis and sometimes only on the basis of a chest x-ray alone.” –John O’Looney, Funeral Director, Milton Keynes, U.K.

From the outset of this crisis in January 2020, all far-reaching policy decisions upheld and presented to the public as a “means to saving lives” were based on flawed and invalid RT-PCR positive cases.

These invalid COVID-19 “estimates” have been used to justify confinement, social distancing, wearing of the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, as well as the enforcement of the mRNA “vaccine” launched in November 2020. There is no such thing as a “COVID-19 confirmed case”.– Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics (emeritus), University of Ottawa.

***

The late Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, has been blowing the whistle on Fauci and big pharma for 30 years. 

Outstanding video production and analysis by Greg Reese

VIDEO. The Polymerase Chain Reaction Test

by Greg Reese 

May the Late Dr. Kary Mullis’ Legacy Live.

*

The slanted methodology applied under WHO guidance for detecting the alleged spread of the virus is the Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test, which has been routinely applied all over the world since February 2020. (This Text below is an excerpt from Michel Chossudovsky’s book,  August 2022)

The Reverse Transcription Polymerase

Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test

by Michel Chossudovsky

Even if the 2019 nCoV had been detected and duly identified, the numbers of PCR-RT confirmed (cumulative) positive cases in the period leading up to to March 11, 2020 used as a justification to enforce the Lockdown of more than 190 countries were ridiculously low. The 80,981 cases for China also pertains to confirmed (cumulative) PCR positive cases. Note the new cases in China   (PCR positive) on March 12, 2020 are of the order of “321 new”

Image: Total cumulative cases on March 12, 2020 (Source: WHO) 

For Further Details see:

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

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 10, 2023

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

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 03, 2024 

The WHO on January 13, 2021, acknowledged that the PCR test was invalid. The official text of the WHO entitled “Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) Technologies that Use Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for Detection of SARS-CoV-2″ is featured in the Annex below. 

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

by Michel Chossudovsky

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”

“Invalid Positives” is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of  “Weak Positives” and “Risk of False Positive Increases”. What is at stake is a “Flawed Methodology” which leads to invalid estimates.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting:  “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”.

The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to “We Screwed Up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless, we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates (according to the WHO) are invalid. 

From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 or higher, following the January 2020 recommendations of the WHO. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied Worldwide has led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid statistics.

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect fragments of the virus. Therefore,  the official “covid numbers” are meaningless.

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic.

Which in turn means that the lockdown / economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever.

According to scientific opinion:

“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%  (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Critique of Drosten Study)

As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”: It follows that using  the >35 cycles detection will indelibly  contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.

At the time of writing (mid-March 2021), despite the WHO retraction, the PCR test is being used extensively to hike up the numbers with a view to sustaining the fear campaign, justifying the ongoing lockdown policies as well as the implementation of the Covid vaccine.

Ironically, the flawed numbers based on “invalid positives” are in turn being manipulated to ensure an upward trend in so-called “Confirmed Covid -19 Cases”.

Moreover, those PCR tests are not routinely accompanied by a medical diagnosis of the patients who are being tested.

And now, national health authorities have issued (fake) warnings of a “Third Wave” as part of their propaganda campaign in support of the Covid-19 Vaccine.

The WHO confirms that the Covid PCR test procedure as applied is invalid. There is absolutely no scientific basis for implementing the Covid Vaccine.

Both the WHO and the scientific assessment of Pieter Borger, et al (quoted above) confirm unequivocally that the tests adopted by governments to justify the lockdown and the destabilization of national economies are INVALID.

Invalid Data and the Numbers’ Game

It should be understood that these “invalid estimates” are the “numbers” quoted relentlessly 24/7 by the media which have been used to feed the fear campaign and “justify” ALL the policies put forth by the governments:

• lockdown,
• closure of economic activity,
• poverty and mass unemployment,
• bankruptcies
• social distancing,
• face mask,
• curfew,
• the vaccine.
• the health passport

Invalid Data. Think Twice Before Getting Vaccinated

Michel Chossudovsky, November 9, 2024

For the complete text by the WHO dated, January 13, 2021 (Mea Culpa) see blow

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “Retraction”. (in Annex)

ANNEX

Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) Technologies

that Use Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)

for Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Link to the original WHO Document

Product type: Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2

Date: 13 January 2021                                                                      

WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 2

Target audience: laboratory professionals and users of IVDs.

Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.

Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.

Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.

Actions to be taken by IVD users:

1. Please read carefully the IFU in its entirety.
2. Contact your local representative if there is any aspect of the IFU that is unclear to you.
3. Check the IFU for each incoming consignment to detect any changes to the IFU.
4. Provide the Ct value in the report to the requesting health care provider.

Notes

1. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020, WHO reference number WHO/2019-nCoV/laboratory/2020.6.

2. Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: Predictive values. BMJ. 1994 Jul 9;309(6947):102. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6947.102.

Click the share button below 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.

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

First published on October 5, 2024

***

“I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” – Albert Einstein[1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

a
Major wars on the planet right now are the two and a half year Russia-Ukraine war, considered by many media sources as the “biggest war in Europe since World War II,” and the Israeli-Hamas war, which has annihilated more Palestinian lives than the combined death toll of conflicts since 2008.

In both these displays of militarism, we tend to focus more on the sad stories on the ground of the lives of citizens scrambling to survive horrific assaults. We imagine air assaults on buildings or tanks charging in obtrusively on foreign soil. But a lot has changed over the past 75-80 years.

There were no satellites during the 1940s. And before the world’s first atomic bomb was detonated, the nuclear threat was non-existent. Today, more than 2,000 satellites are in orbit, some of which help coordinate military activities on the planet. There are also sophisticated missile defense systems, space communications, command and control war fighting functions, and other technological novelties that aid in the cause of ensuring “victory at all costs!”[2]

But the ease of enabling war comes at a price. And the 30+ year collective known as Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space is trying to address these concerns and contest new technologies that pose a threat to space peace in the 21st Century.

More on the coming Keep Space for Peace week (October 5-12) can be found below and on the site space4peace.org

a

a

On a separate level, two major wars in recent years were launched on October 7. One was the War in Afghanistan (2001). The other was the Israeli-Hamas War (2023).

Another similarity of these two wars is the multiple indications that what really happened in both cases is far more complex, and for that matter far more devious, than the simple official narrative of preventing and punishing a crime against humanity. In a nutshell, both were instances of what is called a “False Flag” such as Pearl Harbor or the Gulf of Tonkin incident, endeavours designed to stir up emotions in support of war.

This episode of the Global Research News Hour is addressing the currents of war active in the 21st century with two guests. Our first guest is Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the above-mentioned Global Network. He will bring us up to date on the various mechanisms militarizing space. And he will talk about Keep Space for Peace Week which resumes starting on Saturday October 5.

Our second guest is the frequent guest Richard Gage, AIA. He is a prominent 9/11 Truther. But this week, he engages us with his documented research into the idea that the attack by Hamas was very much like the attack that he has spent the last twenty years investigating. Like 9/11, the Israelis let last year’s October 7 attack happen on purpose.

Bruce Gagnon is a long time peace activist and coordinates the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.

Richard Gage, AIA is a San Francisco Bay area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects and founder & former CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. He now leads the charge for a new World Trade Center investigation along with his courageous wife Gail at RichardGage911.org.”

(Global Research News Hour Episode 433)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcript of interview with Bruce Gagnon, October 2, 2024

Global Research: Why don’t you take us through a couple of examples of the critical role that space is having. First instance, the current conflict that’s been going on for over two and a half years between NATO and Russia in Ukraine.

Bruce Gagnon: I think one of the most important things is NATO expansion. You know, at the time of the collapse of the former Soviet Union, NATO, the United States approached then President Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union and said that they wanted to reunite East and West Germany and would, uh, now that the Soviet Union was dissolving, would Russia agree to that? And Gorbachev said we would agree to it on one simple condition, that NATO not expand one inch towards Russia, to the East, towards Russia. And, uh, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker at the time and other NATO officials agreed to that.

But then when Bill Clinton became president, he began what he called NATO enlargement and began moving NATO towards Russia. And today it has expanded dramatically right up to the Russian borders, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, Norway’s in it, Romania, uh, you know, many other countries. And they want Ukraine to be a part of it.

They’d like to have Georgia as part of it, really an encirclement, if you will, of that part of the Russian, uh, European border, if you will. And so this is a grave danger. And in all of these places, the United States has begun installing a various space technology basis, uh, both what are called downlink facilities, radars that talk to satellites that help target a first strike attack on Russia that the U.S. Space Command has been war gaming annually for many years.

And in addition, in the case of Romania and, uh, Poland, the United States has built what they call Aegis Ashore launch bases where they can fire, uh, first strike attack, Tomahawk cruise missiles, nuclear capable, and also they can fire after the first strike hits Russia and Russia tries to do a retaliatory strike at the same bases in Romania and Poland, they have these, uh, SM-3 interceptor missiles. So after you fire the sword, the Tomahawk cruise missile, nuclear capable at Russia, and then Russia tries to respond, they then have the shield, these so-called missile defense systems that, uh, theoretically pick off Russian missiles, giving the U.S. a “successful first strike attack.” And so, uh, this is what’s happening throughout, uh, Eastern Europe now right up to the Russian border, and it’s all hooked up to space.

The Pentagon has long been saying that space technology directs every single thing the U.S. military does these days, no matter whether you’re a troop on the ground, in a tank, you’re on a boat in the, uh, in the Navy, in the ocean, or you’re flying an airplane, or you’re launching missiles. Everything the Pentagon does is coordinated and directed by space technology. And so the U.S. and NATO have supplied Ukraine today with lots of various technologies, drones, missiles, other such things, and U.S. AWACS planes and NATO AWACS planes are flying over the Black Sea, calling in the target coordinates inside of Russia and Crimea and other parts of Russia, as it, uh, as Ukraine then launches these missiles, uh, towards these targets inside of Russia.

Without the United States and NATO, uh, using their space technology capabilities, Ukraine would not have any ability to do that, to hit Russia whatsoever. And now they’re talking about long-range missiles that can go far deeper inside of Russia, uh, should, uh, NATO, U.S. and NATO give those to Ukraine. And again, they would only be workable because of U.S. space technology capabilities.

Similarly today in the Red Sea, the United States has deployed Navy Aegis destroyers made, uh, here in the mid-coast of Maine, where I live at Bath Iron Works, which is owned by General Dynamics. Onboard those ships, they have these same two technologies.

They have first strike attack nuclear capable Tomahawk cruise missiles, and they also have these SM-3 interceptors. So they’ve been operating, uh, since October in the Red Sea, trying to take out, uh, Houthi in Yemen, any strikes they launched toward Israel. And, uh, and they’ve also been firing their cruise missiles and trying to take out, uh, Yemenis, uh, military capabilities on the land.

So these technologies are very, very active in war fronts today. At the same time, the U.S. is now moving NATO into the Asia Pacific to try to encircle China. And they’re deploying these same capabilities there.

In fact, at Bath Iron Works right now, they’re working on seven new Aegis destroyers that will be sent to encircle both Russia and China. So it’s a really dangerous moment we’re in. And again, space technology is directing the entire U.S. offensive operation.

GR: Israel, I mean, beyond going into Lebanon, now they’re, they were faced with an unprecedented, uh, attack or retaliatory attack by Iran, about over a hundred missiles that were fired into their territory. Do you see this becoming an expanded war and what role will all of this technology have with the, in that new front?

BG: Well, actually my reading of yesterday was, uh, that, uh, Iran launched several hundred missiles and they primarily launched against two kinds of targets. One was Israeli air force bases where planes are sent to attack Lebanon, uh, throughout, uh, Gaza and Iran as well, uh, previously.

At the same time, they hit those and, uh, apparently quite a few landed, but the United States and NATO, Germany, France, UK, uh, Jordan were assisting the attempts of Israel to shoot these missiles out of the sky. But I’ve seen many videos now, and, uh, it’s pretty clear that, um, quite a huge number of them landed on targets at these, uh, Israeli military bases. At the same time, uh, Iran took out a couple oil platforms, these oil rig platforms, uh, owned by Israel, uh, providing them with oil or gas, I’m not sure which, but they took out a couple of those, which is going to further bleed the already, uh, very constrained and constricting, uh, Israeli economy.

So I think, uh, that Israel will be forced by its own public opinion to respond in some way, but Israel’s biggest goal right now is to drag the United States and NATO into a full blown war with Iran. But, uh, I think there’s some reluctance on the part of the US and NATO to do that, to go full bore, uh, for war with Iran, because not because they’re good guys, not because they, you know, care about peace, but because the United States has bases throughout the region. They have Iran virtually completely surrounded with US bases, which would be very clear targets it would be easier for Iran to hit those US bases around its borders than it is for them to hit Israel.

And they showed yesterday, uh, that they can hit Israel quite effectively. So I think this thing, uh, some people say we’re heading towards World War III. I think we’re already there.

The US and NATO are, uh, they’ve got three fronts going on right now. They’ve got the Middle East front, and they’ve got the front with Russia and Ukraine. And now they’re trying to open the front with China and Taiwan.

Uh, there’s no way that the United States and even NATO, because NATO was part of the war in Afghanistan, the US and NATO could not beat the Taliban in Afghanistan. How in God’s name do they think they can take on Russia, China and Iran all at the same time? It’s total lunacy, but I think it’s a sign of complete and utter desperation on the part of the colonial, uh, Western, uh, diminishing empire, 600 years of colonization of the global South by the US and Europe, uh, and, uh, stealing the resources from the global South. And now those days are over the global South through organizations like BRICS are rising.

And, uh, and with the support of China and Russia and Iran and other countries, uh, there’s, it’s a new world and the, uh, US and NATO, the Western elites, the Western colonists, the Western mobsters, I would call them, uh, are desperate. And they’re, so far showing that they’re going to try to fight their way out of this, at least destroy everything. If they can’t have it all, then they’re, they seem willing to destroy.

GR: As you point out in your, your writing and on your site, that the privatization of space is contributing to this, uh, your increased military, uh, uh, bent that they’re on. Could you explain a little bit about how that privatization is, is starting to enable more war.

BG: First thing that comes to mind is when Obama was president, he signed a new US law violating the outer space treaty of 1967 and the Moon Treaty, which were created at the United Nations. The US signed and assigned the outer space treaty.

The US never signed the Moon Treaty, but these treaties say that the, that space and the planetary bodies are the province of all humankind and that no country, no corporation, no individual can claim ownership of any of these planetary bodies. Well, Obama signed a law giving US corporations the right to go out and make land claims on various planetary bodies to begin the operation of mining the sky. And so for some time, all the way back in the 1980s, the United States government has been talking about building a military highway from the earth through space, connecting to the planetary bodies that they would control like the front gate of a military base.

You know, the US military controls the gate, decides who gets in and who gets out. And their plan today is to control the pathway on and off the planet earth into space so that these private entities in the United States and their allies, mostly in Europe, uh, can go out and mine the sky and grab the resources for, for benefit. In addition, uh, the, uh, orbits around lower earth orbit, if there are various orbits in space, but the one closest to the earth is called LEO, lower earth orbit.

And it’s becoming increasingly crowded because of the launch primarily by SpaceX, who’s already launched thousands of satellites into space and now has been given permission by the United States government to launch tens of thousands more. And the strategy today by the United States is to fill up lower earth orbit with as many satellites, they call them dual use, meaning, oh, they’re civilian, you know, but yeah, the military can use them too. But in fact, it’s all about military control of lower earth orbit, because whoever controls lower earth orbit has an advantage.

They can see the earth, they can see everything on the earth, and they can use these satellites again for targeting in wartime. Russia and China are very angry about this. And they say that we’re not going to allow you to fill up lower earth orbit because this would give you a military advantage.

And so China is now rushing to itself launch, uh, hundreds or even thousands of satellites in the space. A whole new area of military conflict is developing. And there’s two problems with this, crowding in lower earth orbit.

Number one is you start having war with each other. You start blowing up each other’s satellites or they, because they’re so crowded, accidents start to happen. It’s like a parking lot at a grocery store.

It becomes so crowded that soon cars are kind of bumping into each other. And this could very soon happen in lower earth orbit. And as a result of that, a NASA scientist has coined a phrase, the Kessler syndrome.

When things start crashing into each other, when satellites either get blown up in war, or just because of the crowded conditions, you start creating even more space debris, space junk, orbiting lower earth orbit at high speeds, and you have a cascading collision effect. And when that happens, guess what? Earth goes dark. Because most of what we do here on the earth, whether it’s internet banking, cell phones, air traffic control, cable TV, I mean, you name it, we rely on satellites to run our quote unquote modern life here on the planet.

In 1989, I organized a protest at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, opposing the militarization of space. And we had an Apollo astronaut, early moonwalker, Edgar Mitchell, come and speak. And he says, if we have one war in space, it’ll be the one and the only, because we will create so much space debris that we will be entombed to the planet.

We won’t be able to get a rocket off the earth through this minefield in lower earth orbit. And so he warned against this madness that we are seeing continue today.

GR: We’ve only got about 30 seconds left, Bruce.

Could you maybe just keep space for Peace Week? I mean, what exactly is the theme of this year’s Keep Space for Peace Week? And, you know, we can maybe mention a few of the things that you’re doing.

BG: The theme this year is how space technology guides and supports the genocide of Palestine, and I would say now Lebanon as well. So that’s our theme.

And we’re going to have on our website and my blog, my blog is called Organizing Notes. The address of the blog is space, the number for peace, space4peace.blogspot, B-L-O-G-S-P-O-T dot com, space4peace.blogspot.com. You go on there today, you’ll see a list of the actions that we know of so far that are happening all over the world. In England, there’s quite a few because England is being brought into this program.

The United States is trying to get the allies into the space launch program to help fill up lower earth orbit to have more launch sites to attack Russia and China with missiles in the future. So at many bases in England, there’s events going to be happening in South Korea. The U.S. is dragging South Korea in for the same reasons to prepare for the attack on China.

Here in Maine, Bath Iron Works, where they build these Aegis destroyers that I earlier talked about, will be having protests there. They’ll be at the White House, they’ll be in London at the Ministry of Defense. There’s going to be a protest there.

We’re going to have a space issues webinar on October 13th with various speakers from the Global Network Board of Directors around the world. There’s going to be a drone protest for six days at Creech Air Force Base near Las Vegas. Drone warfare is totally reliant on space technology.

In South Korea, because it’s a growing hotbed for militarization of space, again, under the control of the U.S., there’s going to be a national organizing meeting held in South Korea just after Space Week in order to put together a national campaign against space technology. So things are really growing and we’re very proud of our members and our board members around the world that are organizing these events.

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg.

Mentre la crisi dell’auto, aggravata da ulteriori misure protezionistiche statunitensi, mette a rischio in Italia 40mila posti di lavoro, e il debito pubblico italiano sale al 139% del PIL e continua ad aumentare, continua a crescere la spesa militare italiana: essa ammonta nel 2024, secondo i dati ufficiali della NATO, a circa 32 miliardi di euro equivalenti a una media di circa 88 milioni di euro al giorno. L’obiettivo che i governi italiani si sono impegnati a raggiungere e superare entro breve tempo è di 100 milioni di euro al giorno. 

Il Segretario generale della NATO, Mark Rutte, chiama gli Alleati europei a “passare a una mentalità da tempo di guerra e a mettere il turbo alla produzione e alla spesa per la Difesa”. Si rivolge quindi direttamente ai cittadini europei con queste parole: “Dite alle vostre banche e ai vostri fondi pensione che è semplicemente inaccettabile che si rifiutino di investire nell’industria della Difesa. Investire nella Difesa è un investimento nella nostra sicurezza. È un obbligo! I Paesi europei spendono facilmente fino a un quarto del loro reddito nazionale per pensioni, sanità e sistemi di sicurezza sociale. Abbiamo bisogno di una piccola frazione di quel denaro per rendere le nostre Difese molto più forti e per preservare il nostro stile di vita.  Senza una Difesa forte non c’è sicurezza duratura. E senza sicurezza non c’è libertà per i nostri figli e nipoti. Per proteggere la nostra libertà, la nostra prosperità e il nostro stile di vita, i vostri politici devono ascoltare le vostre voci: dite loro che accettate di fare sacrifici oggi per poter stare al sicuro domani.”  

Per convincere i cittadini a fare sacrifici per accrescere la spesa militare, il mainstream politico-mediatico semina il terrore di un imminente attacco russo all’Europa. Emblematico il titolo de La Stampa: “La Svezia in allerta prepara 30mila tombe per i soldati in caso di guerra con la Russia”. 

In tale quadro l’Italia ha stipulato con Gran Bretagna e Giappone un accordo – denominato “Programma Aereo di Combattimento Globale” – per la produzione di un caccia di sesta generazione. Entro la metà del 2025 sarà costituita, per la realizzazione del programma, una joint venture tra la BAE Systems (Gran Bretagna), la Leonardo (Italia) e la JAIEC (Giappone), il cui primo CEO sarà un dirigente della Leonardo. 

La Leonardo (già Finmeccanica) non è solo una azienda italiana: è un gruppo industriale internazionale, il cui azionariato è composto per il 38% dal Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze e per il 57% da investitori istituzionali statunitensi.  Realizza ricavi consolidati di oltre 15 miliardi di euro annui. Il Gruppo opera in 150 Paesi – soprattutto Italia, Stati Uniti, Gran Bretagna e Polonia – in ambito Aerospazio e Difesa: produce cacciabombardieri a duplice capacità convenzionale e nucleare, droni, elicotteri, sistemi elettronici e spaziali. La Leonardo, che ha acquisito la società israeliana RADA Electronic Industries, è integrata anche nel sistema militare-industriale di Israele, contribuendo a rendere più letali le armi usate nel genocidio dei Palestinesi. 

Ancora non si sa quanto costerà all’Italia il Programma Aereo di Combattimento Globale per la produzione del caccia di sesta generazione.  Si stima che, solo per lo sviluppo del caccia, la spesa sarà di circa 30 miliardi di euro per ciascuno dei tre partner. Si sa comunque quanto è venuto a costare finora agli Stati Uniti il caccia F-35 di quinta generazione: oltre 400 miliardi di dollari in continuo aumento per l’incessante ammodernamento di questo sistema d’arma a duplice capacità convenzionale e nucleare.

Manlio Dinucci 

VIDEO :

Até os aliados mais próximos de Kiev parecem estar cansados ​​da guerra. Numa declaração recente, o vice-ministro da Defesa polaco, Pawel Zalewski, afirmou que o seu país atingiu o limite da sua assistência à Ucrânia e já não é capaz de enviar qualquer ajuda em grande escala. Isto mostra como os países da OTAN estão fartos das consequências da guerra, perdendo grandes quantidades de recursos e sofrendo perdas substanciais.

Numa entrevista à Rádio Zet, o vice-ministro polaco expressou a sua preocupação com o apoio massivo de Varsóvia a Kiev. Ele teme que o país comece a perder a sua própria capacidade militar devido à entrega sistemática de armas ao regime ucraniano. Além disso, Zelewski sublinhou que a Polônia não enviará os seus jatos MiG-29 para Kiev, alegando que tal movimento nas atuais circunstâncias deixaria o país vulnerável e ameaçaria a segurança nacional polaca.

O vice-ministro afirmou que a única forma de possibilitar o envio destes caças para a Ucrânia é substituindo a frota polaca. Por isso, pediu aos EUA que enviassem jatos F-35 para a Polônia, o que permitiria substituir a frota atual por equipamentos mais modernos, criando as condições necessárias para finalmente enviar os MiG-29 para a Ucrânia. Anteriormente, Varsóvia já tinha enviado vários combatentes da era soviética para a Ucrânia, mas Zelewski deixou claro que a continuação desta política de transferências irrestritas de armas prejudicaria Varsóvia, razão pela qual está a ser estabelecida uma nova política militar na Polônia, dando prioridade à segurança nacional em detrimento do apoio a Kiev.

Falando de forma muito clara e objetiva, descartou por enquanto a implementação de novos pacotes de ajuda à Ucrânia. Zelewski disse que a ajuda polaca “atingiu o muro” e não poderia ser expandida sem causar danos ao país. Neste sentido, embora a Polônia continue a apoiar a Ucrânia e faça o seu melhor para satisfazer as exigências do seu parceiro vizinho, não é viável continuar a expandir os pacotes militares.

“Hoje, o nosso objetivo mais importante é melhorar as capacidades de defesa do exército polaco, porque acreditamos que demos o que podíamos e muito mais (…) Mas não podemos dar mais (…) Estamos chegando ao fim. Entendo que batemos no muro”, disse ele.

Anteriormente, Zelewski e o seu chefe, o Ministro da Defesa Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz, reiteraram que a Polônia já forneceu à Ucrânia todas as armas que poderiam ser enviadas sem causar danos às próprias capacidades militares polacas. Pelo menos até 2026, quando Varsóvia espera receber jatos F-35 americanos, a ajuda polaca provavelmente será reduzida ou permanecerá “congelada”.

É de sublinhar que, desde 2022, a Polônia já enviou mais de 4,5 mil milhões de euros em assistência militar à Ucrânia. De acordo com dados publicados pelo Instituto Kiel da Alemanha, mais de 70% deste dinheiro foi gasto no fornecimento direto de armas. A Polônia é sem dúvida um dos países mais envolvidos no conflito, com uma participação quase direta na guerra, pois, além de enviar ajuda ao regime, mantém as suas fronteiras abertas para o trânsito de equipamento estrangeiro para a Ucrânia.

A participação das tropas polacas também é algo digno de nota. A Polônia é um dos países que mais envia mercenários para a Ucrânia. As tropas russas eliminam frequentemente os soldados polacos no campo de batalha. Embora sejam simplesmente chamados de “mercenários”, estes soldados são enviados para a Ucrânia com o total apoio do Estado polaco, que os encoraja a lutar contra Moscou. Assim, é possível dizer que Varsóvia já participa ativamente da guerra, e o apelido de “mercenários” para seus soldados é apenas uma tática para contornar o direito internacional e manter o território polonês livre de ataques russos.

Recentemente, alguns especialistas começaram a mencionar a possibilidade de a Polónia estar a ser preparada pela OTAN para uma futura guerra com a Rússia. A ajuda americana à Polônia tem aumentado recentemente, indicando que existe uma posição especial para o país nos planos de guerra da OTAN. De fato, considerando o elevado nível de envolvimento da Polônia no conflito atual, é possível que esteja a ser preparada pela OTAN para substituir a Ucrânia na guerra por procuração anti-Rússia, quando o exército ucraniano entrar em colapso.

Neste sentido, é possível que a preocupação polaca em preservar os seus arsenais militares esteja relacionada com uma diretiva da OTAN para que Varsóvia se prepare para a guerra. Além disso, é necessário sublinhar que a Polônia é afetada pelo mesmo tipo de ideologia ultranacionalista e russofóbica que a Ucrânia, com elevados níveis de paranóia entre os líderes locais. Portanto, existindo ou não uma orientação da OTAN, os políticos polacos certamente temem a chamada “ameaça russa”, razão pela qual querem ter armas suficientes para se defenderem.

Na verdade, independentemente das razões da decisão polaca, esta é apenas mais uma prova de que os países da OTAN são incapazes de continuar a ajudar a Ucrânia, não tendo condições materiais para continuar com assistência em grande escala.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida