Finally, the Search Engine Better Than Google

July 21st, 2024 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Perplexity is an AI-powered “answer engine” that provides direct answers to queries with source citations, combining search capabilities with large language models to reduce hallucinations and increase reliability

Unlike traditional search engines, Perplexity aims to feed curiosity by offering related questions and encouraging users to dig deeper into topics, viewing itself as a discovery engine

Perplexity utilizes advanced AI techniques like retrieval augmented generation and chain of thought reasoning to improve accuracy and performance in natural language processing tasks

The future of AI may involve developing systems capable of higher-level reasoning and natural curiosity, potentially leading to breakthroughs in creating new knowledge and understanding complex truths

While AI tools like Perplexity enhance human capabilities, they should be viewed as aids to critical thinking and creativity rather than replacements for uniquely human attributes

*

In the video above, computer scientist and AI researcher Lex Fridman interviews Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity, an AI-powered “answer engine.” Unlike typical search engines, which require you to sort through pages of results to find the information you need, Perplexity provides a real-time answer to your query.

One of the pitfalls of current AI technologies like ChatGPT is the tendency to hallucinate or fabricate information on occasion. To minimize this risk, you can ask it to provide source links and verify the accuracy of the information given. However, Perplexity addresses this issue from the start, and while it can still hallucinate, it has a factual grounding.

“[Perplexity] aims to revolutionize how we humans get answers to questions on the internet. It combines search and large language models, LLMs, in a way that produces answers where every part of the answer has a citation to human-created sources on the web,” Fridman says.

“This significantly reduces LLM hallucinations, and makes it much easier and more reliable to use for research, and general curiosity-driven late night rabbit hole explorations that I often engage in.”1

Part Search Engine, Part Question-Answering Platform

Fridman describes Perplexity as part search engine — a software system designed to search for information on the internet — and part LLM. LLM is a type of artificial intelligence system trained on vast amounts of text data to understand and generate human-like text. LLMs can perform various language-related tasks such as answering questions, generating content, translating languages and more. 

Unlike standard search engines that provide links, Perplexity attempts to directly answer queries. Srinivas explains:2

“Perplexity is best described as an answer engine. You ask it a question, you get an answer. Except the difference is, all the answers are backed by sources. This is like how an academic writes a paper. Now, that referencing part, the sourcing part is where the search engine part comes in. You combine traditional search, extract results relevant to the query the user asked. You read those links, extract the relevant paragraphs, feed it into an LLM …

That LLM takes the relevant paragraphs, looks at the query, and comes up with a well-formatted answer with appropriate footnotes to every sentence it says, because it’s been instructed to do so, it’s been instructed with that one particular instruction, given a bunch of links and paragraphs, write a concise answer for the user, with the appropriate citation.

The magic is all of this working together in one single orchestrated product, and that’s what we built Perplexity for.”

Srinivas, who previously was an AI researcher at DeepMind, Google and OpenAI, says he views Perplexity as a discovery engine that feeds curiosity:3

“The journey doesn’t end once you get an answer. In my opinion, the journey begins after you get an answer. You see related questions at the bottom, suggested questions to ask. Why? Because maybe the answer was not good enough, or the answer was good enough, but you probably want to dig deeper and ask more. That’s why in the search bar, we say where knowledge begins, because there’s no end to knowledge. You can only expand and grow.”

Breakthroughs in AI

Please understand that while Perplexity is not perfect and still exhibits some bias, particularly regarding COVID-19 information, it significantly outperforms Google in almost every other search query. The AI-driven technology behind Perplexity provides more accurate, comprehensive, and nuanced results, making it a superior choice for general searches. Its advanced algorithms ensure that users receive the most relevant and insightful information, setting it apart from traditional search engines.

Srinivas describes several ways Perplexity embraces state-of-the-art advances in machine learning, along with general innovation. This includes retrieval augmented generation (RAG), an advanced technique in natural language processing (NLP) that combines the capabilities of LLMs with information retrieval systems to produce more accurate and contextually relevant responses.

This approach is particularly useful for tasks that require precise and up-to-date information, such as question answering, summarization and dialogue systems. In short, RAG involves the search aspect of the query, but Perplexity goes beyond this. Srinivas says:4

“The principle in Perplexity is you’re not supposed to say anything that you don’t retrieve, which is even more powerful than RAG because RAG just says, ‘OK, use this additional context and write an answer.’ But we say, ‘Don’t use anything more than that too.’ That way we ensure a factual grounding. And if you don’t have enough information from documents you retrieve, just say, ‘We don’t have enough search resource to give you a good answer.’”

They’re also using chain of thought reasoning, which takes NLP tasks up a notch in terms of performance. Chain of thought reasoning in AI refers to the ability of a language model to generate logical, step-by-step explanations or sequences of thoughts that lead to a conclusion or answer. This approach enhances the model’s performance on complex reasoning tasks by encouraging it to articulate the intermediate steps in its reasoning process. Srinivas explains:5

“Chain of thought is this very simple idea where, instead of just training on prompt and completion, what if you could force the model to go through a reasoning step where it comes up with an explanation, and then arrives at an answer?

Almost like the intermediate steps before arriving at the final answer. And by forcing models to go through that reasoning pathway, you’re ensuring that they don’t overfit on extraneous patterns, and can answer new questions they’ve not seen before.”

The Beginning of Real Reasoning Breakthroughs

Whether or not AI is fundamentally capable of higher-level reasoning, akin to human cognitive processes, remains to be seen. Reaching that point, however, relies in part on applying more inference compute, which in AI refers to the computational resources and processes involved in running an AI model to make predictions or decisions based on new data.

This stage is distinct from the training phase, which involves building and optimizing the model. Broken down, inference is the process by which an AI model applies learned patterns to new data to generate predictions, classifications or other outputs. For example, using AI to classify images or predict stock prices.

The compute aspect, meanwhile, refers to the computational power required to perform inference. It involves hardware, software frameworks and algorithms optimized for efficient computation. Srinivas says:6

“Can you have a conversation with an AI where it feels like you talked to Einstein or Feynman? Where you ask them a hard question, they’re like, I don’t know. And then after a week they did a lot of research … and come back and just blow your mind.

I think if we can achieve that amount of inference compute, where it leads to a dramatically better answer as you apply more inference compute, I think that will be the beginning of real reasoning breakthroughs … It’s possible. We haven’t cracked it, but nothing says we cannot ever crack it.”

Curiosity Is a Key Part of What Separates Humans From AI

Part of cracking this code involves teaching AI how to mimic natural human curiosity. “What makes humans special though, is our curiosity,” Srinivas explains. “Even if AIs cracked this, it’s us still asking them to go explore something. And one thing that I feel like AIs haven’t cracked yet is being naturally curious and coming up with interesting questions to understand the world and going and digging deeper about them.”7

Beyond this, there’s a lot of controversy and fear around artificial general intelligence (AGI), which refers to a type of AI that possesses the ability to understand, learn and apply knowledge across a wide range of tasks at a level comparable to human intelligence.

Srinivas says he doesn’t think we need to worry about “AIs going rogue and taking over the world,” but there is an issue of who controls the compute on which AGI runs. “It’s less about access to a model’s weights. It’s more access to compute that is putting the world in more concentration of power and few individuals. Because not everyone’s going to be able to afford this much amount of compute to answer the hardest questions.”

A sign of higher intelligence in AI, Srinivas says, is becoming capable of creating new knowledge and providing truth to questions we don’t know the answers to — and helping us understand why it’s the truth.

“Can you build an AI that’s like Galileo or Copernicus where it questions our current understanding and comes up with a new position, which will be contrarian and misunderstood, but might end up being true? … And the answer should be so mind-blowing that you never even expected it.”8

What’s the Future of Search and AI?

We’re already seeing AI tools like Perplexity, which are exponentially superior to existing search engines. In the future, however, Srinivas says the goal isn’t about building a better search tool but building a platform for knowledge:9

“If you zoom out, before even the internet, it’s always been about transmission of knowledge. That’s a bigger thing than search … So, we imagine a future where the entry point for a question doesn’t need to just be from the search bar. The entry point for a question can be you listening or reading a page, listening to a page being read out to you, and you got curious about one element of it and you just asked a follow-up question to it.

That’s why I’m saying it’s very important to understand your mission is not about changing the search. Your mission is about making people smarter and delivering knowledge. And the way to do that can start from anywhere. It can start from you reading a page. It can start from you listening to an article … It’s just a journey. There’s no end to it.”

Keep in mind that Perplexity and other AI tools are not a replacement for your own critical thinking; rather, they serve as an aid to enhance your creativity. It’s vital to keep this in mind and remember that AI is an adjunct to, not a substitute for, your intellectual and creative capacities.

While precautions need to be taken, including not sharing personal or confidential information, this is not about replacing human action but enhancing it, allowing individuals to focus on aspects of their work that require uniquely human attributes like empathy, strategic thinking, creativity and curiosity. Srinivas explains:10

“So, I think curiosity makes humans special and we want to cater to that. That’s the mission of the company, and we harness the power of AI and all these frontier models to serve that. And I believe in a world where even if we have even more capable cutting-edge AIs, human curiosity is not going anywhere and it’s going to make humans even more special.

With all the additional power, they’re going to feel even more empowered, even more curious, even more knowledgeable in truth-seeking and it’s going to lead to the beginning of infinity.”

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

Notes

1 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 0:28

2 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 2:05

3 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 7:14

4 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 1:56:44

5 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 1:16:04

6, 7 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 1:23:53

8 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 1:34

9 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 2:34

10 LexFridman.com, Transcript for Aravind Srinivas: Perplexity CEO on Future of AI, Search & the Internet, 2:50

The International Court of Justice said Friday that Israel’s decades-long occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful and must end “as rapidly as possible.”

The court’s non-binding advisory opinion was read aloud by ICJ President Nawaf Salam, a Lebanese judge and academic. Salam said the court determined based on “extensive evidence” that Israel is guilty of confiscating “large areas” of Palestinian land for use by Israeli settlers, exploiting natural resources, and undermining the local population’s right to self-determination under international law.

The court pointed to “Israel’s systematic failure to prevent or punish” settler violence and “demolition of Palestinian property” in the West Bank as part of its case that the Israeli government’s actions in the occupied territories are indicative of an attempt to permanently annex land and forcibly transfer Palestinians from their homes.

“Israel is not entitled to sovereignty in any part of the occupied Palestinian territory on account of its occupation, nor can security concerns override the prohibition on acquisition of territory by force,” said Salam.

The ICJ vote against Israel’s occupation was 11-4. The court also voted to call on Israel to evacuate all settlers from the West Bank.

In a 12-3 vote, the ICJ said that all nations

“are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the state of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the continued presence of the state of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory.”

The United States was among the countries that warned the ICJ against advising that Israel must swiftly end its occupation.

The ICJ handed down its opinion as the court is also considering a genocide case brought against Israel over its ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip—a devastating war that the court did not weigh as part of its new advisory opinion.

Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, applauded the ICJ’s call for the dismantling of Israeli settlements and reparations for Palestinians harmed by Israel’s occupation.

“The ICJ ruling in essence confirmed what the majority of people (except the West) already knew and have recognized: that Israel’s occupation is illegal, that it is still occupying Gaza, it is annexing the West Bank, and Israel is an apartheid state,” Parsi wrote on social media. “If there is any respect for international law, Western media must now include this in all its Israel coverage. Most don’t even describe settlements as illegal!”

Nancy Okail, president and CEO of the Center for International Policy, said in a statement that

“while the ICJ’s action is nonbinding, countries that seek to uphold international law should respect the court’s determination and take all appropriate steps to counter the injustices of the occupation and bring it to a peaceful end.”

“At a minimum, countries should not engage in actions which help to perpetuate the occupation and its discriminatory, annexationist goals,” said Okail. “In particular, the United States must end the unconditional supply of arms that Israel uses in connection with the dispossession and settlement of Palestinian land and other violations of Palestinian rights.”

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

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.

Featured image: Illegal Israeli settlements

Bring out the bon bons, the bubbles, and the praise filled memoranda for that old alliance.  At the three-quarter century mark of its existence, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is showing itself to be a greater nuisance than ever, gossiping, meddling, and dreaming of greater acts of mischief under the umbrella of manufactured insecurity. 

It is also being coquettish to certain countries (Ukraine, figures prominently in the wooing stakes) making promises it can never make good.

Its defenders, as is to be expected, see something very different before the mirror.   They call the alliance a call for freedom, its enduring importance a reassuring presence.  The more appropriate response would be convenience, the assurance of an alliance with collective obligations that would, given the circumstances, compel all parties to wage war against the aggressor.  In terms of alliances, this is one programmed for conflict.

NATO is a crusted visage of a problem long dead.  In the Cold War theatre, it featured in the third act of every play involving the United States and the USSR, a performance that always took place under the threat of a nuclear cloud.  Any confrontation in Europe’s centre could have resulted in the pulverization of an entire continent.  For its part, Moscow had the Warsaw Pact countries.

At the end of the Cold War, NATO had effectively ceased to be relevant as a deterrent force on the European continent.  A new cut of clothing was sought for the members.  Rather than passing into retirement, it became, in essence, a broader auxiliary force of US power.  In the absence of a countering Soviet Union, the organisation adopted a gonzo approach to international security.

In 1999, the alliance became a killing machine for evangelical humanitarianism, ostensibly seeking to protect one ethnic group against the predations of another in Kosovo. 

In 2011, it involved itself in military operations against a country posing no threat to any members of the alliance.  NATO, along with a steady air attacks and missile barrages, enforced the no-fly zone over Libya as the country was ushered to imminent, post-Qaddafi collapse.  When the International Security Force (ISAF) completed its ill-fated mission in Afghanistan in 2015, NATO was again on the scene.

NATO’s Strategic Concept document released at the end of June 2022 took much sustenance from the Ukraine conflict while warning about China’s ambitions, a fairly crude admission that it wished to move beyond its territorial limits.  “The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) stated ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interests, security and values.”  Why such an alliance should worry about such eastward ambitions illustrates the wayward dysfunction of the association.

On April 27, 2022 the then UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and ultimately doomed prime minister pushed the view that NATO needed to be globalised.  Her Mansion House speech at the Lord Mayor’s Easter Banquet was one of those cat-out-of-the-bag disclosures that abandons pretence revealing, in its place, a disturbing reality.

After making it clear that NATO’s “open door policy” was “sacrosanct”, Truss also saw security in global terms, another way of promoting a broader commitment to international mischief.  She rejected “the false choice between Euro-Atlantic security and Indo-Pacific security.  In the modern world we need both.”  A “global NATO” was needed.  “By that I don’t mean extending the membership to those from other regions.  I mean that NATO must have a global outlook, ready to tackle global threats.”

Praise for the alliance tends to resemble an actuarial assessment about risk and security. Consider this from former US ambassador to NATO, Douglas Lute.  NATO, in his mind, is “the single most important geostrategic advantage over any potential adversary or competitor”.  With pride, he notes that “Russia and China have nothing comparable.  The 32 allies in NATO train together, operate together, live together under a standing unified command structure, making them far more capable militarily than any ad-hoc arrangement.”

There is nothing to suggest in these remarks that NATO was one of the single most provocative security arrangements that helped precipitate a war that torments and convulses eastern Europe.  Many a Washington mandarin has been of such a view: moving closer to Russia’s borders was not merely an act of diplomatic condescension but open military provocation.

One should, with tireless consistency, refer to the State Department’s doyen of Soviet studies, George F. Kennan, on this very point. In 1997, he issued the appropriate warning about the decision to expand NATO towards the Russian border:

“Such a decision may be expected to inflame nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”

This speared provocation is repeated in the 2024 NATO Declaration made in Washington this month. It is effaced of history and context, Ukraine being a tabula rasa in the international system with no role other than that of glorified victimhood, a charity case abused in the international system.  “We stand in unity and solidarity in the face of a brutal war of aggression on the European continent and a critical time for our security,” states the declaration.

Kyiv is promised aid under the NATO Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine program, though such provision is, in the manner of an all-promising eunuch, crowned by a caveat: “NSATU will not, under international law, make NATO a party to the conflict.”  The prospects for future conflict are guaranteed by the promise, however empty, that, “Ukraine’s future is in NATO.”

The declaration goes on to speak on the “interoperable” and “integrated” nature of Kyiv’s operations with the alliance.  “As Ukraine continues this vital work, we will continue to support it on its irreversible path to full Euro-Atlantic integration, including NATO membership.”

NATO’s warring streak was further affirmed at the Washington summit by injudicious remarks about trying to make it “Trump proof” – a testament to the sleepless nights the strategists must be having at the prospect of a presidency that may change the order of things.  He is bound to have gotten wind of that fact.  Aggravated, the Republican contender may well withdraw the US imperium from the alliance’s clutches.  In Washington’s absence, the NATO family might retreat into fractious insignificance.  The ensuing anarchy, rather than stimulating war, may well do the opposite.

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

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

Featured image is licensed under Fair Use

On Friday, Hezbollah fired a heavy barrage of missiles at an Israeli military base in the Upper Galilee region near the southern Lebanese border, causing fire and destroying some of it.

The northern Israeli settlement of Mitzpe Abirim was also hit by the Lebanese resistance group, which said the attack was in response to the Israeli attacks on civilians in southern Lebanon’s towns of Safad al-Batikh, Majdal Salam, and Shaqra.

The Lebanese National News Agency reported that two shells fired by the Israeli occupation army fell near a police station at the Marj Junction in the town of Hula, southern Lebanon.

The Israeli occupation forces began a war on Gaza which has killed more than 38,000 Palestinians since October 2023.  Hezbollah, and other resistance groups have responded to the onslaught in solidarity and support of the Palestinian people who have been denied all human rights and live under a brutal Israeli military occupation.

In an effort to understand the situation, Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Lebanese journalist Ibrahim Darwish.

Steven Sahiounie (SS):  The whole world is focused on a possible new Israeli war on Lebanon. In your opinion, what are the factors that would prevent this war?

Ibrahim Darwish (ID):  If the Israeli occupation had the necessary tools, and the ability to change the situation in the north, it could have destroyed Lebanon, and occupy it from the south to the north. However, the reality in Lebanon has changed considerably, with the accumulation of resistance capabilities, expertise and capabilities, through continuous operations on its positions in southern Lebanon, leading to liberation in 2000, to exposing the weakness of its army and tanks, and the destruction of its machinery in July 2006, with the very persistence of Hezbollah in the southern front. 

The residents and landowners in the south of Lebanon, who support the resistance movement Hezbollah, are standing in the face of Israeli aggression, which prevents the Israelis from crimes and massacres of Lebanese people farther north, who may not support Hezbollah.

The south of Lebanon, and its’ people, are in effect protecting the Lebanese areas such as Beirut, Jbeil, and Tripoli.

On October 8, the second day of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation, Hezbollah prevented the Israeli occupation from crossing the ‘red-lines’ on the battlefield, despite the Israeli occupation targeting Lebanese civilians, and their properties in the south.

Hezbollah determined the times of attack and calm, while the Israeli army had the disadvantage of a loss of tanks and ammunitions, as they admitted, due to the Israeli war on Gaza and the attacks on Lebanon.

All that is stated above is a threat and message to the Israelis from Mr. Nasrallah, concerning the abilities and readiness of the resistance in targeting new settlements if Israel continues attacking innocent civilians of the south of Lebanon.

SS:  The Lebanese army has been kept weak by the US.  In your point of view, can the Lebanese army play a role in a possible war?

ID: The ideology of the Lebanese army is firm, and the Lebanese are firm in their hostility to the Israeli occupation, as the sole enemy of Lebanon.

Always, the blood of the army, the blood of the resistance has been united in the defense of Lebanon.

This is reinforced by the clause of the Defense ministerial statement, which affirms “the right of Lebanon and its people and its army and the resistance to free and defend their territory.”

SS: Lebanon has been without a president for over two years. In your opinion, do you see any international movement on this issue?

ID: On the subject of the presidency of the Republic, it is clear that the Lebanese domestic issue has been placed on ice, while awaiting changes in the region, which is undergoing major transformations. It is entering into a larger cycle of transformation at the global level, even though the long-term results have not yet been made clear.

Unfortunately, the problem is not only linked to choosing a President of the Republic, but also to the stability of the country.

There are foreign plans which are trying to prevent the orderly functioning of the institutions in Lebanon. But, we must recognize that the Lebanese political system has long-standing problems and imbalances.

There is a great need to amend some laws, and to separate the judicial system from political life, and to rely on the rule of law in the management of the country.

There is a need to hold to account the corrupt, and to close the door in the face of those seeking to sabotage the country.

SS: The US envoy Amos Hochstein was sent to Lebanon in an effort to decrease tension between Israel and Hezbollah. In your view, did he make any progress?

ID: Since the beginning of this conflict, the role of Hochstein has not been to ease the tension. Since the beginning, he has tried to try to intimidate and force Lebanon to follow American orders.

What is needed today is clear in terms of stopping the inhumane aggression against the Gaza Strip. Today, the oppressed people of Palestine are trying to lift a decades-old injustice and resistance, based on their history, morality and humanity.

The Lebanese resistance, Hezbollah, from the standpoint of national security, rushed to the support of the Israel war on Gaza, beginning on October 8.  The Al-Aqsa Flood operation of October 7 was a result of a heinous blockade, starvation, oppression and slow killing, which is being committed against an entire people, under the banner of the support of the international community.

SS: Lebanon has been going through a massive financial crisis. The IMF presented a recovery proposal. In your opinion, has any progress been made?

ID: The World Bank has never been a life-saver of people. The only way any country can save its financial system, is for national unity among the people, and to reject the handing over of national decisions to foreign entities.

Lebanon cannot be isolated and separated from its region, national unity and allies. 

If this financial crisis were to strike another country, it would not be able to continue.

Today, it is part of a destructive project that is trying to destroy Lebanon at a time when it can chart the course of this conflict.

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

The citizens of India have a problem. In what the media like to call ‘the world’s biggest democracy’, there is a serious, proven conflict of interest among officials in the areas of science, agriculture and agricultural research that results in privileging the needs of powerful private interests ahead of farmers and ordinary people.

This has been a longstanding concern. In 2013, for instance, prominent campaigner and environmentalist Aruna Rodrigues said:

“The Ministry of Agriculture has handed Monsanto and the industry access to our agri-research public institutions, placing them in a position to seriously influence agri-policy in India. You cannot have a conflict of interest larger or more alarming than this one.”

In 2020, Kavitha Kuruganti (Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture) stated that the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee had acted more like a servant for Monsanto — there is an ongoing revolving door between crop developers (even patent holders) and regulators, with developers-cum-lobbyists sitting on regulatory bodies.

However, the capture of public policymaking space by the private sector is set to accelerate due to a recent spate of memorandums of understanding between state institutions and influential private corporations involved in agriculture and agricultural services, including Bayer and Amazon.

Corporate Capture  

As part of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and Amazon (June 2023), farmers will produce for Amazon Fresh stores in India as part of a ‘farm to fork’ supply chain. It will see “critical inputs” in agriculture and “season-based crop plans” in collaboration with Amazon based on “technologies, capacity building and transfer of new knowledge.”

ICAR-signs-MOU-Amazon-Kisan-Empower-Farmers-01.jpg

Source

This corporate jargon ties in with the much-publicised notion of ‘data-driven agriculture’ centred on cloud-based data information services (which Amazon also offers). In this model, data is to be accessed and controlled by corporates and the farmer will be told how much production is expected, how much rain is anticipated, what type of soil quality there is, what must be produced and what type of genetically engineered seeds and inputs they must purchase and from whom.

This has been described as the recolonisation of Indian agriculture, which will eventually involve a handful of data owners (Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet etc.), input suppliers (Bayer, Corteva, Syngenta, Cargill etc.) and retail concerns (Amazon and Walmart-Flipkart — both firms already control 60% of India’s e-commerce market) at the commanding heights of the agrifood economy, determining the nature of agriculture and peddling industrial food. Farmers who remain in this AI-driven system (a stated aim is farmerless farms) will be reduced to exploitable labour at the mercy of global conglomerates.

This is part of a broader strategy to shift hundreds of millions out of agriculture, ensure India’s food dependence on global finance and foreign corporations and eradicate any semblance of food democracy (or national sovereignty).[1]

In addition to the MoU with Amazon, an MoU was signed between the ICAR and Bayer in September 2023. Bayer (it bought Monsanto in 2018), which profits from various environmentally harmful and disease-causing chemicals like glyphosate, signed the MoU to help “develop resource-efficient, climate-resilient solutions for crops, varieties, crop protection, weed and mechanization”, according to the ICAR website.

The ICAR is responsible for co-ordinating agricultural education and research in India, and Bayer seems likely to exploit the ICAR’s vast infrastructure and networks to pursue its own commercial plans, including boosting sales of toxic proprietary products.

But that’s not all. According to the non-profit GRAIN in its article ‘The corporate agenda behind carbon farming’, Bayer is gaining increasing control over farmers in various countries, dictating exactly how they farm and what inputs they use through its ‘Carbon Program’.

GRAIN says:

“You can see in the evolution of Bayer’s programmes that, for corporations, carbon farming is all about increasing their control within the food system. It’s certainly not about sequestering carbon.”

Given the seriousness of what is laid out by GRAIN in its article, India’s citizens and farmers should take heed, especially as the ICAR website states that a focus of the MoU with Bayer will be on developing carbon credit markets.

In a letter (14 July 2024) to Rabindra Padaria, principal scientist at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), and Himanshu Pathak, director-general of the ICAR, Aruna Rodrigues says:[2]

“Inking in ICAR’s formal partnership with Bayer (Monsanto) quite simply confirms straightforwardly that the ICAR protects its interest, which is the same as those of Bayer-Monsanto, large chemical/herbicide corporates… the ICAR has ditched its mandate to Indian farmers and farming, which is to promote farmer interests as a priority in an unbiased and objective assessment of what is right and good for Indian farming and food… “

A separate ‘citizen letter’ (20 July 2024) has also been sent to Pathak on the various MoUs that the Indian government has signed with influential private corporations.[3] Hundreds of scientists, farmer leaders, farmers and ordinary citizens have signed the letter.

It states:

“Bayer is a company notorious for its anti-people, anti-nature business products and operations in itself and, furthermore, after its takeover of Monsanto. Its deadly poisons have violated basic human rights of peoples across the world, and it is a company that has always prioritised profits over people and planet.”

It goes on to say that it is not clear what the ICAR will learn from Bayer that the well-paid public sector scientists of the institution cannot develop themselves. The letter says entities that have been responsible for causing an economic and environmental crisis in Indian agriculture are being partnered by ICAR for so-called solutions when these entities are only interested in their profits and not sustainability (or any other nomenclature they use).

The letter poses some key questions such as: Where was the democratic debate on carbon credit markets? How is the ICAR ensuring that the farmers get the best rather than biased advice that boosts the further rollout of proprietary products? Is there a system in place for the ICAR to develop research and education agendas from the farmers it is supposed to serve as opposed to being led by the whims and business ideas of corporations?

These are fundamental questions given that agriculture is a state subject as per India’s constitution. It is all the more concerning given that the authors of the citizen letter note that copies of the MoUs are not being shared proactively in the public domain by the ICAR.

The letter asks that the ICAR suspends the signed MoUs, shares all details in the public domain and desists from signing any more such MoUs without necessary public debate.

However, on 19 July, there were reports that the ICAR had signed another MoU, this time with Syngenta for promoting climate resilient agriculture and training programmes. In response, the authors of the letter state that the ICAR has (again) partnered with a corporation that has a track record of anti-nature and anti-people activities, selling toxic products like paraquat, class action suits against its corn seeds and anti-competitive behaviour.

Mutagenic HT Rice  

It is becoming clear who the ICAR actually serves. Let us return to Aruna Rodrigues and her letter to Rabindra Padaria (IARI) and Himanshu Pathak (ICAR) for additional insight.

Rodrigues’ letter focuses on the commercial cultivation of basmati rice varieties tolerant to imazethapyr-based, non-selective herbicides. These chemicals can be liberally sprayed on herbicide tolerant (HT) crops because the crops have been manipulated to withstand the toxic impacts of spraying.

The HT varieties of rice have undergone some form of mutagenesis rather than genetic engineering. Mutagenesis has traditionally involved subjecting plant cells to chemical or physical agents (e.g. radiation) that cause mutations to the DNA in the hope that a resulting mutation may produce a desirable effect in the plant. This kind of mutation breeding has been used for decades but only affects a minority of the plants on the market. Industry watchdog GMWatch says this risky technology (mutagenesis breeding) in the past managed to escape regulation.

So, this HT crop by the mutagenesis route is not defined as ‘genetic engineering’ (the method usually used to create HT crops) and therefore falls outside the purview of current GM regulations.

Although, the Supreme Court-appointed Technical Expert Committee (TEC) bars HT crops (a) for being an HT crop and (b) on account of contamination of crops in a centre of genetic diversity, it has been a long-standing aim of biotech companies like Bayer (Monsanto) to get HT crops cultivated in India.

Rodrigues asks:

“Is it a deliberate decision of the ICAR to use the mutagenesis route to produce HT rice varieties (tolerant to imazethapyr) with the explicit objective to bypass the formal regulation of GE crops/GMOs?”

Rodrigues accuses the ICAR of effectively ditching its mandate to Indian farmers, many of whom regard organic farming as their competitive advantage. This step is also a potential threat to India’s export markets, which are based on organic standards, along with the necessary co-surety that India’s foods and farms are not contaminated by herbicides, a consequence of using HT crops.

By adding a trait for herbicide tolerance, the ICAR is informed:

“ICAR’s action directly impacts this vital issue of contaminating our germ plasm in rice and contravenes a Supreme Court Order of “No Contamination”. Furthermore, our export markets for basmati are in excess of US $5 billion in 2023-24. Your action will also directly impact India’s exports and thereby, impact farmer export potential, incomes and income opportunities that premium prices provide.”

Moreover, Rodrigues asserts that the entire mutagenesis process for HT rice must be elaborated, especially when the mutant variety is for the purpose of human consumption. The ICAR is duty-bound to provide, for example, whether a physical or a chemical mutagen was used, the range of doses used and the toxicity for the said material, the herbicide(s) used to test the HT of the basmati rice being used, the concentrations of the herbicides used and the genetic mechanism by which HT rice through mutagenesis has a resistant gene to imazethapyr.

While the issue of intellectual property rights for the HT rice varieties using mutagenesis is unclear, the ICAR and IARI have executed a technology transfer agreement of the HT trait for commercial cultivation.

A Failed Technology  

In her letter, Rodrigues states that, based on empirical evidence of 35 years of HT crops in the US and Argentina, HT crops are a failed technology: it spawns super weeds, increased herbicide use and no added performance yield. Moreover, for India, HT crops are a perverse use of technology, whether genetic engineering or through mutagenesis, that risks small and marginal farmers’ crops and herbs and plants used in many Ayurvedic medicines because of herbicide drift. It will also uniquely impact the employment of women in weeding.

She goes on to state that in the US overall herbicide use has increased more than tenfold since the introduction of HT Crops (1992-2012 figure). In addition, HT crops are designed for monocultures and completely unsuited to Indian small-holder, multi-crop farming: anything not HT will be destroyed, the resistant crop stands, but everything else dies, including non-target organisms.

The herbicides used with HT crops are also a major human health issue. There is a strong link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In relation to this, there are more than 100,000 lawsuits winding their way through US Courts. Glyphosate (used in Bayer’s Roundup herbicide) is also an endocrine disruptor and is linked to birth defects. Rodrigues notes that Monsanto and the US Environmental Protection Agency had both known for over 40 years that glyphosate and its formulations cause cancer.

Other herbicides used by Bayer include glufosinate (used in its Liberty herbicide), which is acknowledged as more toxic than glyphosate and, like it, is a systemic, broad spectrum, non-selective herbicide. It is a neurotoxin that can cause nerve damage and birth defects and is damaging to most plants that come into contact with it.

Glufinosate is banned in Europe and not permitted in India. It has been implicated in brain developmental abnormalities in animal studies and is very persistent in the environment, so it will certainly contaminate water supplies in addition to food where it will be absorbed.

Imazethapyr (contained in Bayer’s Adue herbicide) is also a systemic broad-spectrum herbicide and is banned in some countries and not approved for use in the EU.

Prof. Jack Heinemann (University of Canterbury in New Zealand) adds that the likes of imazethapyr must be tested for their ability to cause bacterial antibiotic resistance. An important concern given that India’s population has some of the highest levels of antibiotic resistance in the world. Any spread of HT crops would put people at severe risk of resistance and disease.

Despite these environmental and health concerns, the herbicide market in India is projected to grow by around 54% in the next five years, from USD 361.85 million in 2024 to USD 558.17 million by 2029.

In her letter, Rodrigues concludes:

“In view of the above evidence of serious irreversible harm to health, food and agriculture across several dimensions and contravention of the PP (Precautionary Principle), it is a required scientific response for the ICAR to immediately withdraw HT rice varieties and desist from introducing any HT crop through mutagenesis.”

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

Notes  

1. For further insight into this, see Food, Dependency and Dispossession: Resisting the New World Order by C Todhunter on Globalresearch.ca or Academia.edu.

2. ICAR Introduces HT Rice Varieties by the Mutagenesis Process Tolerant to Imazethapyr, letter to the Indian Council for Agricultural Research and the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, A Rodrigues, 14 July 2024.

3. Citizens’ letter (incl. farmer leaders and agri scientists) to ICAR against multiple recent MoUs with agri-corporations – ASHA Kisan Swaraj, 20 July 2024.

Featured image is by Sebastian Rittau via Wikimedia Commons

Ireland – Mass Immigration and the Great Reset

July 21st, 2024 by Gavin OReilly

On Monday morning, Ireland would awake to reports of unrest in the Dublin suburb of Coolock, when after months of peaceful protest by local residents over plans to move upwards of 500 male migrants into a disused paint factory in the working-class neighborhood, tensions would come to a head when Irish riot police cleared the on-site protest camp in a heavy-handed early morning raid. In response, work vehicles intended to convert the site would be set ablaze, leading to scenes reminiscent of the north of Ireland in the late 60s or early 70s.

As the day progressed, the parallels between Coolock and the Ireland of half a century ago would grow. Heavily-militarised police, under the direction of Garda commissioner and former RUC Deputy Constable Drew Harris, would soon arrive in the North Dublin suburb, resulting in scenes akin to Belfast or Derry in 1969. Local residents, including women, children, and the elderly, would be brutalised, a popular video streamer and citizen journalist would be arrested, and a number of elected representatives, who had arrived on the scene in a bid to calm tensions, would be pepper sprayed by police. By the end of the day, 15 people would be arrested and charged, with their names and addresses highly-publicised by the Irish media, an effective warning to others to not protest against the current immigration policies being imposed by Leinster House, which has seen large numbers of male migrants being placed into wildly unsuitable locations such as an inner city office block and children’s primary school, with no prior consultation being held with local communities beforehand.

Watch the video on X

Watch the video on X

Indeed, similar scenes would erupt in the small rural village of Newtownmountkennedy in late April, when again, after weeks of peaceful protest by local residents in opposition to plans to house male migrants in a disused hospital in the locality, police would once again carry out a heavy-handed early-morning raid on an on-site protest camp. In the ensuing hours, local residents would again be brutalised, a female journalist would be pepper sprayed, and martial law would effectively be imposed on the sleepy town.

Watch the video on X

In a grim irony, less than a week later, the southern Irish state would issue a statement condemning the response of the Georgian government to protests against its Transparency of Foreign Influence law, the previous week’s scenes in Newtownmountkennedy being wilfully ignored by Leinster House.

The current tensions surrounding immigration in Ireland began in November 2022, when, using the Russian intervention in Ukraine as a pretext, upwards of 300 migrants were moved into a disused office block in East Wall, a working-class neighbourhood in inner city Dublin. Protests would begin immediately amongst local residents, citing the unsuitability of the location and the lack of consultation with community representatives beforehand. Similar protests would take place at other sites in Dublin and throughout Ireland.

One year later, the tensions regarding immigration policy in Ireland would explode in their most notable manner so far. On the 23rd of November 2023, three children and their teacher were stabbed outside their Gaelscoil (Irish-language school) in central Dublin. With it soon emerging that the attacker was an immigrant previously subject to a deportation order, matters would come to a head. Calls for a protest in Dublin later that night would quickly spread throughout social media, seemingly attracting an opportunistic element who would engage in looting and the burning of vehicles. The Dublin riots would gain worldwide attention, with the focus seemingly more on the damage done to outlets such as McDonald’s and Footlocker, than the attack on the children and their teacher.

Image: Helen McEntee (Source: Houses of the Oireachtas/Shawn Pogatchnik / Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

undefined

In the days following the riots, Security Minister for the southern Irish state, Helen McEntee, announced that facial recognition technology laws would be introduced in response, thus revealing the true intent behind current immigration policy in Ireland.

In addition to the devaluing of labour and the lowering of wages on behalf of industrialists, the mixing of vast amounts of people from different cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds that mass-immigration entails, ultimately leads to tensions. Tensions that, in tight-knit areas such as working-class neighbourhoods and small rural villages, will inevitably spill over.

As a result, the government-corporate alliance is presented with a ready-made pretext to implement solutions that align with their agenda. In this case, the same facial recognition technologies that are outlined in the Great Reset, the initiative launched by the World Economic Forum in 2020, using ‘Covid’ as a pretext, intended to create even further integration between the public and private sector worldwide.

With the issue of migrants arriving into Ireland without proper identification also receiving mainstream media attention, it is likely this is is being done with the intention of directing the narrative towards the introduction of mandatory digital ID; which, combined with facial recognition technology, will lay the groundwork for the dystopian digital surveillance state that the Great Reset envisages.

Indeed, upon the recent election of WEF aficionado Keir Starmer as British Prime Minister, Taoiseach Simon Harris announced that it marked a ‘great reset’ in relations between both countries. A deliberate choice of words, indicating that like his predecessor Leo Varadkar, he is also a World Economic Forum ‘Young Global Leader’, fully intending to continue the Davos agenda in Ireland.

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

Gavin O’Reilly is an activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism. Secretary of the Dublin Anti-Internment Committee, a campaign group set up to raise awareness of Irish Republican political prisoners in British and 26 County jails. His work has previously appeared on American Herald Tribune, The Duran, Al-Masdar and MintPress News. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Support him on Patreon. 

Featured image is a screenshot from this video

 

First published on October 5, 2023

If an experimental vaccine were to damage the heart and immune system in a significant number of individuals who received it, it is possible that it could lead to a decline in the overall population size.

This could occur for several reasons.

  • First, damage to the heart could lead to an increase in cardiovascular diseases, which are a leading cause of mortality worldwide. This could result in a higher number of deaths among individuals who received the vaccine.
  • Second, damage to the immune system could leave individuals more susceptible to other infections and diseases, which could also contribute to an increase in mortality.
  • Last, but by no means least, the negative impacts of the vaccine on fertility and reproductive health could lead to a decline in the number of births, further contributing to a decline in the overall population size.

If such a vaccine were to be developed and distributed, it could potentially lead to depopulation due to increased mortality and decreased fertility.

Unfortunately, the world has found itself in a situation where powerful institutions and Governments have coerced millions of people into getting an experimental Covid-19 vaccine that causes all of the ill-fated effects mentioned above.

Official Government reports and confidential Pfizer documents prove it.

Therefore, you are witnessing mass depopulation unfold before your very eyes.

The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination was never about combating a virus. It was about reducing the global population.

This goal aligns with the interests of certain powerful corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population now that AI is advanced enough to replace hundreds of millions of workers.

Regardless of the specific cause, the implications of what is currently occurring in the real world are significant.

Millions Have ‘Died Suddenly’

Did you know that data on excess deaths in 15% of the world’s countries can be found on the website of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)?

This includes major countries like the USA, Canada, and the UK.

Additionally, we were able to extract even more up-to-date data on 28 European countries from EuroMOMO.

All of this information has been provided to the OECD and EuroMOMO by each country’s Government organizations, such as the Centers for Disease Control in the USA and the Office for National Statistics in the UK.

The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US) as well as 27 other European countries –

Are you aware of the staggering number of excess deaths that have occurred in the US and Europe in recent years?

In 2021, the US saw almost 700,000 excess deaths, with another 360,000 excess deaths by November 11th, 2022.

Europe had a similarly alarming 382,000 excess deaths in 2021, with 309,000 excess deaths by November 2022.

And these figures don’t even include Ukraine!

Shockingly, even countries like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada have seen excess deaths that have not decreased since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine.

The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of overall excess deaths in Australia in 2020, 2021, and up to week 30 of 2022 –

Did you know that the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine in Australia led to a shocking 747% increase in excess deaths, from 1,303 in 2020 to 11,042 in 2021?

And the situation has only gotten worse since then.

By the end of July 2022, there were a staggering 18,973 excess deaths in Australia – a 1,356% increase from 2020.

That’s more excess deaths in 7 months than in the previous two years combined.

And the situation in the US is similarly alarming –

Are you aware of the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the US following the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?

By week 38 of 2022, 1,700 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020, and by week 38 of 2021, a shocking 109,000 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020.

These numbers indicate that rather than decreasing, deaths have actually increased following the vaccine rollout.

The following two charts illustrate the total excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” and Europe since the beginning of 2021 when the Covid-19 vaccine was introduced –

Did you know that over 1.8 million excess deaths have occurred in the “Five Eyes” and most of Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?

This shocking figure includes over 1 million excess deaths in the US and over 690,000 excess deaths in Europe according to the Centers for Disease Control and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as significant numbers of excess deaths in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.

The official narrative that the vaccine is safe and effective and would reduce the number of deaths is completely contradicted by these figures, which suggest that the Covid-19 vaccines may be the main cause of the excess deaths.

Children / Teens & Young Adults Have ‘Died Suddenly’

Did you know that excess deaths among children aged 0 to 14 in Europe skyrocketed by a staggering 755% between January and September 2022, according to official data?

This alarming increase, which has prompted the European Union to launch an investigation, occurred despite efforts by EuroMOMO to downplay the figures.

It’s worth noting that the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine was approved for use in children by the European Medicines Agency on 28th May 2021. Which was week 21 of 2021.

Then excess deaths “only “coincidentally” began to be recorded from week 22 once this emergency use authorisation was granted.

Overall, excess deaths rose 630% since the vaccine’s approval for use in children by September of 2022.

It’s a sad reality that despite the mounting evidence pointing to the clear danger of Covid-19 vaccinations for children, it is highly unlikely that authorities will acknowledge this risk.

Tragically, the significant increase in excess deaths among children in Europe since the European Medicines Agency emergency approved the vaccine for use in this population is likely to be dismissed as just another “coincidence” in the long list of such occurrences since the start of the pandemic.

It’s vital that we continue to examine and scrutinize the data to ensure that the health and well-being of our children are protected.

Did you also know that according to official figures quietly published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), nearly half a million children and young adults died by October 9th 2022 in the USA since the Food & Drug Administration first granted emergency use authorization for a Covid-19 vaccine?

This heartbreaking development has resulted in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 average.

The figures also reveal that there have been 7,680 more excess deaths among children and young adults in 2022 so far compared to the same time frame in 2020, at the height of the alleged Covid-19 pandemic.

However, the worst year for deaths among 0 to 44-year-olds was 2021, with 291,461 excess deaths in total, nearly 60,000 more than occurred in 2020.

According to the official CDC figures, this increase was mainly due to a mysterious sudden rise in deaths among children and young adults starting around week 31 of 2021.

It’s a heartbreaking reality that nearly half a million people aged 0 to 44 have died since week 51 of 2020, resulting in a staggering 117,719 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.

According to official data, the average life expectancy in the USA was 77.28 years as of 2020.

If we are to believe the official narrative that Covid-19 is a deadly disease, then it’s perhaps understandable that 231,987 children and young adults up to the age of 44 died in 2020, resulting in 40,365 excess deaths as an unfortunate consequence of this alleged disease.

However, if we are to accept the official narrative that Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, how do we explain the further increase in deaths among children and young adults in both 2021 and 2022?

It’s worth noting that millions of Americans were pressured into getting the vaccines, and millions of parents were similarly coerced into forcing their children to receive the injections.

The answer is clear: the official narrative is a blatant lie. The Covid-19 vaccines are neither safe nor effective.

The hard-to-find data provided by the CDC only hints at this disturbing trend of young American deaths, but further data published by the UK Government confirms it.

For example, a report published on July 6th, 2022 by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, a government agency, provides further evidence of the danger of these vaccines.

The report is titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here.

Have you seen Table 2 of the report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, which contains the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for deaths per 100,000 person-years in England up to May 2022?

If not, you should take a look, because the figures it contains are truly disturbing.

We’ve taken the data provided by the ONS for January to May 2022 and created the following chart, which illustrates the devastating consequences of the mass Covid-19 vaccination campaign.

The chart shows the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status among 18 to 39-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022.

It’s clear from this data that the risks associated with these vaccines cannot be ignored.

It’s a disturbing trend: in every single month since the start of 2022, partly vaccinated and double vaccinated 18-39 year-olds have been more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds.

The situation has been particularly dire for triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds, whose mortality rate has worsened month by month since the mass Booster campaign that took place in the UK in December 2021.

In January, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were slightly less likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 29.8 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated and 28.1 per 100,000 among the triple-vaccinated.

However, from February onwards, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were 27% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals, with a mortality rate of 26.7 per 100k among the triple-vaccinated and 21 per 100k among the unvaccinated.

The situation worsened even further by May 2022, with triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 52% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 21.4 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and 14.1 among the unvaccinated.

The partly vaccinated also fared poorly, with May seeing partly vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 202% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group.

The report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics also includes mortality rates for children, although the UK government attempted to conceal this data.

The following chart shows the mortality rates by vaccination status per 100,000 person-years among children aged 10 to 14 in England for the period 1st January 2021 to 31st May 2022 –

According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, the mortality rate for Covid-19 deaths among unvaccinated children aged 10 to 14 is 0.31 per 100,000 person-years.

However, for one-dose vaccinated children, the mortality rate is 3.24 per 100,000 person-years, and for triple-vaccinated children, the mortality rate is an alarming 41.29 per 100,000 person-years.

The situation is no better when it comes to non-Covid-19 deaths. The all-cause death mortality rate is 6.39 per 100,000 person-years among unvaccinated children and slightly higher at 6.48 among partly vaccinated children.

However, the rate worsens with each additional injection: the all-cause death mortality rate is 97.28 among double-vaccinated children and an alarming 289.02 per 100,000 person-years among triple-vaccinated children.

This means, according to the UK government’s own official data, double-vaccinated children are 1422% or 15.22 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children, while triple-vaccinated children are 4423% or 45.23 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children.

The data provided by the Office for National Statistics, which is age-standardized and rates per 100,000 population, is definitive proof that Covid-19 vaccines increase a person’s risk of death.

It’s no surprise, then, to learn that a secret CDC report confirms that nearly half a million American children and young adults have died following the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, resulting in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.

You Only Have One Heart & It Will Not Regenerate

The potential consequences of a COVID-19 vaccine that harms the heart are dire. If such a vaccine were widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population, it could lead to millions of sudden deaths.

The heart is a vital organ that plays a critical role in maintaining the body’s proper functioning, so any adverse effects on it could have disastrous consequences.

Unfortunately, at least two Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna do exactly this, and they have now been administered to millions of people multiple times, and it is likely that these vaccines are responsible for the millions of excess deaths recorded worldwide since their rollout.

The risk of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can lead to sudden death if not treated, is a serious concern when it comes to the Covid-19 vaccine. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, who may not experience any symptoms of myocarditis until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.

Symptoms of myocarditis can include chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, and abnormal heart rhythms, and if left untreated, it can result in heart failure, cardiac arrest, and sudden cardiac death.

This is likely why an investigation of official figures published by Public Health Scotland in April 2022 found that there has been a 67% increase compared to the historical average in the number of people aged 15 to 44 experiencing heart attacks, cardiac arrest, myocarditis, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases since this age group was offered the Covid-19 vaccine.

Unfortunately, a study conducted by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has shown that the risk of myocarditis following mRNA COVID vaccination is around 133x greater than the background risk in the population.

This means Covid vaccination increases the risk of suffering myocarditis, an autoimmune disease causing inflammation of the heart, by 13,200%.

It is clear from the data presented that the Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna have had a significant impact on the health of millions of people worldwide.

The potential adverse effects on the heart, including myocarditis and an increased risk of heart attacks, cardiac arrest, and other cardiovascular diseases, could lead to a significant number of sudden deaths if these vaccines are widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population.

Additionally, the high number of excess deaths that have occurred since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines suggests that these vaccines may be contributing to a larger trend of depopulation.

Excess deaths refer to the number of deaths above what would normally be expected in a given population, and the fact that there have been millions of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries and Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine is a cause for concern.

The potential consequences of depopulation are far-reaching and could have significant impacts on society, including economic disruption and a decrease in the overall population size. It is imperative that further research is conducted to understand the true extent of the impact of the Covid-19 vaccines on population health and to ensure that any future vaccines are thoroughly tested and deemed safe before being distributed.

Obviously, it stands to reason that more people need to be dying than are being born for depopulation to take place. And unfortunately, confidential Pfizer documents confirm this is now our reality.

The Confidential Pfizer Documents

The data contained in this document is alarming and raises serious concerns about the safety of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy and lactation. According to the data, there have been numerous cases of pregnant women experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine, including miscarriages, stillbirths, and other serious complications.

Furthermore, the data suggests that the vaccine may also pose risks to breastfeeding infants. There have been numerous reports of infants experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine when it is passed to them through their mother’s milk.

These findings are extremely concerning and highlight the need for further research into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. If the risks associated with these vaccines are not properly addressed, it could have significant implications for fertility rates and overall population numbers.

It is imperative that authorities take these concerns seriously and conduct thorough investigations into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. The health and well-being of both mothers and their children must be a top priority.

Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has been linked to a high number of adverse reactions in pregnant women. According to the company’s own data, of the 270 known cases of exposure to the vaccine during pregnancy, 46% of the mothers (124) experienced an adverse reaction.

Of these, 75 were considered serious, including uterine contractions and fetal death.

This means that 58% of the mothers who reported adverse reactions suffered a serious event. These troubling findings raise concerns about the safety of the vaccine for pregnant women and highlight the need for further research.

It is alarming that Pfizer’s own data shows that 124 out of 270 pregnant women who were exposed to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine experienced an adverse reaction. Of those, 75 were considered serious, including fetal death.

It is also concerning that Pfizer has no information on the outcomes of 238 out of 270 pregnancies. These figures raise serious questions about the safety of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women and their fetuses.

The findings of another Pfizer study on Wistar Han rats show that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time.

The ovaries are a pair of female glands that produce eggs and the female hormones estrogen and progesterone.

The study, which can be found in the list of confidential Pfizer documents published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under a court order, administered a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine to 21 female and 21 male rats.

The researchers measured the concentration of total radioactivity in the blood, plasma, and tissues of the rats at various points after the injection was administered. The accumulation of the vaccine in the ovaries raises concerns about its potential impact on fertility and reproductive health.

One of the most concerning findings from the study on the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is the fact that it accumulates in the ovaries over time.

In the first 15 minutes following injection, the total lipid concentration in the ovaries measured 0.104ml, but this increased to 1.34ml after just one hour, 2.34ml after four hours, and 12.3ml after 48 hours.

While the scientists conducting the study did not continue their research beyond 48 hours, it’s unclear whether this concerning accumulation continued.

These findings raise serious questions about the potential long-term effects of the Pfizer vaccine on fertility and reproductive health.

But according to data published by Public Health Scotland, the number of people suffering from ovarian cancer has significantly increased in 2021 compared to the previous year and the 2017-2019 average.

This could potentially be linked to the accumulation of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in the ovaries, as found in a study on rats.

Ovarian Cancer – Source

Newborn baby deaths in Scotland have also reached a critical level for the second time in just seven months, according to official figures.

The rate of neonatal deaths in March 2022 was 4.6 per 1,000 live births, a 119% increase from the expected rate of deaths.

This means the neonatal mortality rate exceeded an upper warning threshold known as the “control limit” for the second time following the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines to women / pregnant women.

The last time it exceeded this limit was in September 2021, when neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births reached 5.1. These levels are on par with those typically seen in the late 1980s.

At the time, PHS said the fact that the upper control limit has been exceeded “indicates there is a higher likelihood that there are factors beyond random variation that have contributed to the number of deaths that occurred”.

This news is shocking and raises serious concerns about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines.

Increased Mortality

It’s alarming to see in figures found in a report published by the UK Government titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here, that in every single month between January and May of 2022, individuals aged 18 to 39 who were either partly or fully vaccinated were more likely to die from non-Covid causes compared to their unvaccinated counterparts.

The situation is particularly dire for triple-vaccinated individuals, whose mortality rates have only worsened month after month since the widespread booster campaign in December 2021.

These shocking figures, provided by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, confirm that the Covid-19 vaccines significantly increase a person’s risk of death.

It’s clear that the vaccines are not only failing to protect individuals, but they are actively causing harm. It’s crucial that action is taken to halt their distribution and investigate the true dangers they pose.

But this situation isn’t isolated to 18 to 39-year-olds. It’s common among every single age group.

The following two charts show the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status for non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 for all age groups –

You can read a full investigation of the above figures broken down by age group here.

Depopulation by COVID-19 Vaccination

The potential consequences of the Covid-19 vaccination campaign are alarming and could lead to depopulation on a global scale.

The heart is a vital organ and any adverse effects on it could have devastating consequences. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, as myocarditis may not cause any symptoms until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.

Data from Pfizer reveals that 46% of pregnant women who received the vaccine suffered adverse reactions, with 58% experiencing serious adverse events ranging from uterine contraction to fetal death.

Moreover, studies have shown that the vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time, raising concerns about its potential impact on fertility.

Official figures also reveal that mortality rates are highest among the vaccinated and lowest among the unvaccinated population in every age group.

With all of this evidence, it is clear that the Covid-19 vaccination campaign could have serious consequences for the future of humanity.

But Why?

There are various reasons that some people may want to depopulate the planet.

One reason could be overpopulation, as some people believe that the earth’s resources are being depleted at an unsustainable rate due to the increasing population.

Other people may argue that depopulation is necessary due to the negative impact that humans have had on the environment, and reducing the population could help mitigate some of these problems.

Some people may also advocate for depopulation due to concerns about the impact of climate change, as a smaller population would likely lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Finally, some people may simply believe that a smaller population would be more manageable and easier to control, and may advocate for depopulation for this reason.

Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates are two powerful figures who have expressed support for the idea of depopulation through various means, including vaccination.

Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, has argued that reducing the global population would be beneficial for the environment and the economy, and has suggested that advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence could play a role in achieving this goal.

Similarly, Bill Gates has stated that vaccination campaigns can be used to reduce the population, and has funded numerous initiatives that promote vaccination as a means of controlling population growth.

So it should now begin to make sense as to why powerful figures like Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab have been advocating for widespread vaccination campaigns.

The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination isn’t about combating a virus, but about reducing the global population.

This goal aligns with the interests of certain corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population.

*

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

Featured image is from The Expose


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

They just keep coming. On the weekend, Israel launched another devastating air strike on Gaza, killing at least 90 Palestinians and wounding hundreds more, including women, children and rescue workers.

Once again, Israel targeted refugees displaced by its earlier bombs, turning an area it had formally declared a “safe zone” into a killing field.

And once more, western powers shrugged their shoulders. They were too busy accusing Russia of war crimes to have time to worry about the far worse war crimes being inflicted on Gaza by their Israeli ally – with weapons they supplied.

The atrocity committed at al-Mawasi camp, packed with 80,000 civilians, had the usual Israeli cover story – one rolled out to reassure western publics that their leaders are not the utter hypocrites they appear to be for supporting what the World Court has described as a “plausible genocide”.

Israel said it was trying to hit two Hamas leaders – one of them Mohammed Deif, head of the group’s military wing – although Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed uncertain as to whether the strike was successful.

No one in the western media appeared to wonder why the pair preferred to make themselves a target in an overcrowded, makeshift refugee camp, where they were at huge risk of being betrayed by an Israeli informant, rather than sheltering in Hamas’s extensive tunnel network.

Or why Israel deemed it necessary to fire a multitude of massive bombs and missiles to take out two individuals. Is that Israel’s new, expansive redefinition of a “targeted assassination”?

Or why its pilots and drone operators continued the strikes to hit emergency rescue crews dealing with the initial destruction. Was there intelligence that Deif was not just hiding in the camp, but had hung around to dig out survivors, too?

Or how killing and maiming hundreds of civilians in an attempt to hit two Hamas fighters could ever possibly satisfy the most basic principles of international law. “Proportion” and “distinction” require armies to weigh the military advantage of an attack against the expected toll on civilian life.

Biblical Vengeance

But Israel has torn up the rulebook on war. According to sources within the Israeli military, it now considers it acceptable to kill more than 100 Palestinian civilians in the pursuit of a single Hamas commander – a commander, let us note, who will simply be replaced the moment he is dead.

Even if the two Hamas leaders were assassinated, Israel could not have been in any doubt that it was perpetrating a war crime. But it has learned that, the more routine its war crimes become, the less coverage they receive – and the less outrage they provoke.

In recent days, Israel has struck several United Nations schools serving as shelters, killing dozens more Palestinians. On Tuesday, another strike in the “safe zone” of al-Mawasi killed 17.

According to the UN refugee agency, UNRWA, more than 70 percent of its schools – almost all of them serving as refugee shelters – have been bombed.

Last week, western doctors who had volunteered in Gaza said Israel was packing its weapons with shrapnel to maximise injuries to those caught in the blast radius. Children, because of their smaller bodies, were being left with much more severe wounds.

Aid agencies cannot properly treat the wounded, because Israel has been blocking the entry of medical supplies into Gaza. Committing war crimes, if western publics have not worked it out by now, is the very point of the “military operation” Israel launched in Gaza in the wake of Hamas’s one-day attack on 7 October.

A Red Crescent worker carries a child to the hospital after a bombing in Deir al-Balah, December.Credit: Palestine Red Crescent Society

That is why there are more than 38,800 known deaths from Israel’s 10-month assault – and likely at least four times that number unrecorded, according to leading researchers writing in the Lancet medical journal this month.

That is why it will take at least 15 years to clear the rubble strewn across Gaza by Israeli bombs, according to the UN, and as much as 80 years– and $50bn – to rebuild homes for the remnants of the enclave’s 2.3 million people still alive at the end.

Israel’s twin goals have been biblical vengeance and the elimination of Gaza – a genocidal rampage to drive the terrified population out, ideally into neighbouring Egypt.

Shoot-everyone Policy

If that was not clear enough already, six Israeli soldiers recently stepped forward to speak out about what they had witnessed while serving in Gaza – a story the western media has entirely failed to report.

Their testimonies, published by the Israel-based publication 972 last week, confirm what Palestinians have been saying for months.

Commanders have authorised them to open fire on Palestinians at will. Anyone entering an area the Israeli military is treating as a “no-go zone” is shot on sight, whether man, woman or child.

Back in March, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz warned that the Israeli military had created just such “kill zones”, where anyone entering was executed without warning.

After months of an Israeli aid blockade that has created a man-made famine, Israel’s military has turned the people of Gaza’s ever-more frantic search for food into a game of Russian roulette.

This perhaps explains, in part, why so many Palestinians are unaccounted for – Save the Children estimates some 21,000 children are missing. The soldiers quoted in 972 say the victims of their shoot-everyone policy are bulldozed out of view along routes where international aid convoys pass.

A reserve soldier, identified only as S, said a Caterpillar bulldozer “clears the area of corpses, buries them under the rubble, and flips [them] aside so that the convoys don’t see it – [so that] images of people in advanced stages of decay don’t come out”. The soldier also noted:

“The whole area [of Gaza where the army operates] was full of bodies… There is a horrific smell of death.”

Several of the soldiers reported that stray cats and dogs, denied food and water for months just like Gaza’s population, feed on the dead bodies.

The Israeli military has repeatedly refused to publish its open-fire regulations since it was first challenged to do so in the Israeli courts in the 1980s.

A soldier named B told 972 that the Israeli army enjoyed “total freedom of action”, with soldiers expected to shoot directly at any Palestinian approaching their positions, rather than a warning shot in the air: “It’s permissible to shoot everyone, a young girl, an old woman.”

When civilians were ordered to evacuate from a school serving as a shelter in Gaza City, B added, some mistakenly exited right towards the soldiers, rather than to the left. That included children.

“Everyone who went to the right was killed – 15 to 20 people. There was a pile of bodies.”

According to B, any Palestinian in Gaza can inadvertently find themselves a target:

“It is forbidden to walk around, and everyone who is outside is suspicious. If we see someone in a window looking at us, he is a suspect. You shoot.”

‘Like a Computer Game’

Drawing on military practices familiar in the occupied West Bank too, the Israeli army encourages its soldiers to shoot even when no one is engaging them. These random, indiscriminate eruptions of fire are known as “demonstrating presence” – or more accurately, terrorising and endangering the civilian population.

In other instances, soldiers open fire just to let off steam, have fun, or, as one soldier put it, “experience the event” of being in Gaza.

Yuval Green, a 26-year-old reservist from Jerusalem, the only soldier prepared to be named, observed:

“People were shooting just to relieve the boredom.”

Another soldier, M, similarly noted that “the shooting is very unrestricted, like crazy” – and not just from small arms. Troops use machine guns, tanks and mortar rounds in a similar, unwarranted frenzy.

A, an officer in the army’s operations directorate, pointed out that this mood of utter recklessness extended all the way up the chain of command.

Although the destruction of hospitals, schools, mosques, churches and international aid organisations requires authorisation from a senior officer, in practice, such operations are almost always approved, A said:

 “I can count on one hand the cases where we were told not to shoot. Even with sensitive things like schools, [approval] feels like only a formality … No one will shed a tear if we flatten a house when there was no need, or if we shoot someone who we didn’t have to.”

Commenting on the mood in the operations room, A said destroying buildings often “felt like a computer game”. In addition, A cast doubt on Israel’s claim that Hamas fighters comprised a high proportion of Gaza’s death toll. Anyone caught in Israel’s “kill zones” or targeted by a bored soldier was counted as a “terrorist”.

Burning Homes

The soldiers also reported that their commanders destroyed homes not because they were suspected of serving as bases for Hamas fighters, but purely out of an urge for revenge against the entire population.

Their testimonies confirm an earlier Haaretz report that the army was implementing a policy of torching Palestinian homes after they served their purpose as temporary locations for soldiers. Green said the principle was:

“If you move [on], you have to burn down the house.” According to B, his company “burned hundreds of houses”.

A policy of wanton, vengeful destruction is similarly implemented – on a far larger scale – by Israel’s fighter pilots and drone operators, explaining why at least two-thirds of Gaza’s housing stock has been left in ruins.

There are other deceptions too. One of the stated reasons for Israel being in Gaza is to “bring back the hostages” – many dozens of Israelis who who were dragged into Gaza on 7 October. That message, however, has apparently not reached the Israeli military.

Green noted that, despite a blunderbuss operation last month that killed more than 270 Palestinians to rescue four Israeli hostages, the army is actually deeply indifferent to their fate.

He said he heard other soldiers stating:

“The hostages are dead, they don’t stand a chance, they have to be abandoned.”

Back in December, Israeli troops shot dead three hostages waving white flags. Reckless shooting into buildings poses the same threat to the lives of hostages as it does to Palestinian fighters and civilians.

Such indifference might also explain why the Israeli political and military leadership has been willing to conduct such a comprehensive bombing of buildings and tunnels in Gaza, risking the lives of the hostages as much as Palestinian civilians.

Culture of Violence

The story told by these soldiers in 972 should not surprise anyone – apart from those still desperately clinging to fairytales about Israel’s “most moral army in the world”.

In fact, an investigation by CNN on the weekend found that Israeli commanders identified by US officials as committing particularly heinous war crimes in the occupied West Bank over the past decade have been promoted to senior positions in the Israeli military. Their job includes training ground troops in Gaza and overseeing operations there.

A whistleblower from the Netzah Yehuda battalion who spoke to CNN said the commanders, drawn from Israel’s religious extremist ultra-Orthodox sector, stoked a culture of violence towards Palestinians, including vigilante-style attacks.

As the CNN investigation indicates, the wanton death and destruction in Gaza is very much a feature, not a bug.

For decades, the Israeli military has been implementing its inhumane policies towards Palestinians not just in the tiny enclave, but across the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem too.

Israel has been suffocating Gaza with a siege for 17 years. And since 1967, it has been suffocating the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem with illegal settlements – many of them home to violent Jewish militias – to drive out the Palestinian population.

What is new is the intensity and scale of the death and destruction Israel has been allowed to inflict since 7 October. The gloves have come off, with the West’s approval.

Israel’s agenda – of leaving historic Palestine empty of Palestinians – has been advanced from an ultimate, distant goal to an urgent, immediate one.

Snake-like Politicians

Nonetheless, Israel’s much longer history of violence and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is about to come sharply into focus, despite the best efforts of Israel to keep our attention fixed on a Hamas “terrorism” threat.

The International Court of Justice in the Hague, often referred to as the World Court, is considering two cases against Israel. Best known is the one launched in January, putting Israel on trial for genocide.

But on Friday, the World Court is due to issue a ruling on an older case – one that predates 7 October. It will pronounce on whether Israel has broken international law by making the occupation of Palestine permanent.

While stopping the genocide in Gaza is more pressing, a ruling from the court recognising the illegal nature of Israel’s rule over Palestinians is equally important. It would give legal backing to what should be obvious: that a supposedly temporary military occupation long ago mutated into a permanent process of violent ethnic cleansing. 

Such a ruling would provide the context for understanding what Palestinians have been truly up against, while western capitals and western media have gaslit their publics year after year, decade after decade.

This week, Oxfam accused the new British government under Keir Starmer of “aiding and abetting” Israel’s war crimes by calling for a ceasefire from one side of its mouth while actively supplying Israel with weapons to continue the slaughter. The Labour government is also dragging its feet on restoring funding to UNRWA, best placed to address the famine in Gaza. 

 

Screenshot from The National

At Washington’s behest, Labour is seeking to block efforts by the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor to issue arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant, for war crimes. And there are still no signs that Starmer has any plans to recognise Palestine as a state, thus putting a UK marker down against Israel’s ethnic cleansing programme.

Sadly, Starmer is typical of the West’s snake-like politicians: flaunting his outrage at Russia’s “depraved” attacks on children in Ukraine, while keeping silent on the even more depraved bombing and starvation of Gaza’s children.

He vows that his support for Ukrainians “won’t falter”. But his support for Palestinians in Gaza facing a genocide never even started.

The Palestinians of Gaza – and the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem – are not just up against a law-breaking, savage Israeli military. They are being betrayed each day afresh by a West that gives such barbarity its blessing.

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

Jonathan Cook is the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at www.jonathan-cook.net

Featured image is from UNRWA

 

The Criminalization of International Law. Part I

“Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 04, 2024

 

The following text was first published February 9, 2024

 .

Part II

.

The Criminalization of International Law

 

A “False Flag” Operation to Justify

 

The Israel-U.S. Genocide against the People of Palestine

.

by

Michel Chossudovsky

Introduction

From the outset on October 7, 2023, “A Tissue of Lies” has served to justify the killings in the Gaza Strip of more than 30,000 civilians, of which 70% are women and children. The atrocities committed against the People of Palestine are beyond description. At the time of writing, at least 13,000 children have been killed:

That is one Palestinian child killed every 15 minutes… Thousands more are missing under the rubble, most of them are presumed dead.”

 

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.

Had  Hamas’ “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been spontaneously carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023. The “State of Readiness” etiquette (revealed on October 7) points to a carefully prepared plan. 

It is now well established that Israel’s Operation “State of Readiness for War” which consisted in “Wiping Gaza Off the Map” was carefully coordinated with U.S. military and intelligence. It is part of a broader joint Israel-U.S. military agenda.

Washington not only supports the Genocide, it oversees the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Although South Africa’s legal initiative was directed against the State of Israel, the conduct of the genocide is a joint Israel-U.S. project, with U.S. military and intelligence operatives collaborating directly with their Israeli counterparts. 

This collaboration is also supported by an extensive flow of military aid. 

The Criminalization of International Law 

What is at stake is the criminalization of the international judicial process. The ICJ not only refused to propose a “Cease Fire”, which was part of South Africa’s demand, its January 26, 2024 Judgment failed to question the role of the Netanyahu coalition government, which was largely responsible for the planning prior to October 7 of a comprehensive military agenda directed against Palestine, with the support of Washington.

Although the Republic of South Africa’s ICJ accusation was directed against the State of Israel, it is now confirmed, amply documented that the Genocide against the People of Palestine was a joint Israel-U.S. operation.

In this regard, the ICJ President Joan Donoghue — former Legal Advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the Obama administration– is in conflict of interest. The latter indelibly raises the issue of her Recusal.  (See:  Recusals of Arbitrators and Judges in International Courts and Tribunals, Chiara Giorgetti).

While Article 2 of the ICJ Statute (p.212) “provides that the court should be comprised of independent judges”, the practice of recusal of a judge, specifically with regard to the President of the ICJ is almost impossible. Nonetheless, the issue of “conflict of interest” must be raised. Judge Joan Donoghue takes her instructions from Washington.

“Escalate the Genocide”

The ICJ has granted Israel –with the full endorsement of the Biden Administration– with a de facto “green light” (carte blanche) to continue and “escalate the genocide”.

The ICJ’s January 26, 2024 Judgment has set in motion a new wave of atrocities directed against the People of Palestine. 

On that same day (January 26), Netanyahu confirmed that the genocide was ongoing and would continue.

“We will not compromise on anything less than total victory. That means eliminating Hamas, …” 

While rhetorical condemnations against Israel prevail, what the peace movement fails to acknowledge is that no legal obstruction or hindrance  was formulated  by the World Court in its January 26, 2024 Judgment.

The Occupied West Bank, Jewish Settlements in Gaza

Criminal acts are now being committed in the occupied West Bank, coupled with an increase in the deployment of IDF forces. 

In Gaza, IDF commanders have ordered soldiers to “Setting fire to homes belonging to non-combatant civilians, for the mere purpose of punishment”. 

Moreover, barely a few days after the January 26, ICJ Judgment, plans were announced to establish a cohesive network of Jewish settlements in Gaza.

Israel’s Plan: Mass Starvation

The Biden administration responding to Netanyahu has ordered to cut  funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which is indelibly slated to result in famine and the total collapse of social services:

UNRWA provides food, shelter, health care, education … for the 5.7 million UNRWA-registered Palestinian refugees in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.  

The curtailment of UNRWA funding is an integral part of the Netanyahu government’s carefully designed project to trigger mass starvation throughout the Gaza Strip. 

“Gaza is experiencing mass starvation like no other in recent history. Before the outbreak of fighting in October, food security in Gaza was precarious, but very few children – less than 1% – suffered severe acute malnutrition, the most dangerous kind. Today, almost all Gazans, of any age, anywhere in the territory, are at risk.

There is no instance since the second world war in which an entire population has been reduced to extreme hunger and destitution with such speed. And there’s no case in which the international obligation to stop it has been so clear.” 

These facts underpinned South Africa’s recent case against Israel at the international court of justice. The international genocide convention, article 2c, prohibits “deliberately inflicting [on a group] conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. (Guardian)

Documentation of the Atrocities Committed against the People of Palestine

The atrocities are carefully documented in Sarah Abushaar’s courageous video production entitled 

Video

Transcript

“How much persecution and human cruelty Palestinians have suffered for generations — for the inalienable right to life.

Since israel’s establishment through the ethnic cleansing and massacre of Palestinians from Palestine — persisting in its massacre, mass expulsion, abduction, torture and terror of indigenous Palestinians.

The theft of land, life and human rights.

Israel’s unconscionable slaughter of 13,000 children, extermination of 30,000 civilians, destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system as it wounds 60,000 and mass starvation of 2.3 million, part of what it’s been committing on Palestinian life for decades – continuing its ongoing genocide now on hyperdrive.

Palestinians massacred and held hostage in the hundreds of thousands, terrorized in the millions under illegal siege, violent occupation and vicious apartheid. A person’s stance on Palestine says everything about their moral compass.

You are either for or against genocide. For or against ethnic cleansing. For or against violent illegal occupation and vicious apartheid.

For or against systems of supremacy – the persecution of human life.. the denial of millions of people their life, freedom, and fundamental human rights.

There is no middle ground. It’s not complicated. In the same way the Holocaust is not complicated. Slavery or Apartheid are not complicated.

But they persisted because of those who didn’t see.

There’s a horrific persecution and oppression that has lasted for 8 decades.

An oppressor and an oppressed. It’s impossible for human beings of conscience or morals to know the truth on Palestine and to uphold this for human life.

It goes against all law, morality and our very humanity.

What we condemn in history and in every other context, what’s been committed on Palestinian life for decades…

As with all systems built on human persecution and oppression, this will not survive. All the inhumanity in the world in this, Palestine is fighting for all of our humanity and for all the world’s justice.” (Sarah Abushaar)

“Secret Memorandum” to Commit Genocide

While earlier documents –which might reveal the detailed planning of Israel’s genocidal attack on the Gaza Strip, including those negotiated with the U.S.– remain classified, An official “secret” memorandum authored by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence was made public on October 13, 2023.

The authenticity and purpose of this report remain to be confirmed. It was released a week after October 7, 2023. It nonetheless confirms the military actions which are currently being implemented against the People of Palestine. Was it intended to be in the public domain? 

What the intelligence document recommends is:

“The forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”,

The 10-page document, dated Oct. 13, 2023 assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip …

“It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. …”

The document has been translated into English in full here.

The Israel’s Intelligence Memorandum

“… assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip … It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. …”

Click here to access complete document (10 pages).

Was It A False Flag Operation? 

“As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case. (Philip Giraldi, October 2023)

U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack.

“One would have to be almost hopelessly naïve to buy the corporate state media line that the Hamas invasion was an Israeli “intelligence failure”. Mossad is one of, if not the, most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet.”

Israel’s plan to wage an all out war against Palestine had been envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”. 

This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite. 

Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Al Aqsa Hamas attack. 

Revealed by the New York Times: 

“Israeli officials obtained Hamas’s battle plan for the Oct. 7 terrorist attack more than a year before it happened, documents, emails and interviews  …  The approximately 40-page document, which the Israeli authorities code-named “Jericho Wall,” outlined, point by point, exactly the kind of devastating invasion that led to the deaths of about 1,200 people. (emphasis added)

Screen Shot: New York Times

See also the analysis of Manlio Dinucci

According to the NYT, “Israeli officials dismissed it as aspirational and ignored specific warnings”. Nonsense. Israel’s intelligence apparatus was fully cognizant of what was going on, well in advance. It was part of their “False Flag” Agenda. 

Let us be under no illusions, Israel’s “false flag” operation is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned, in liaison and  coordination with US intelligence and the Pentagon. Israel is a de facto member of NATO (with a special status) since 2004, involving active military and intelligence coordination as well as consultations pertaining to the occupied territories.

In this section we will provide evidence pertaining to the False Flag Operation waged by the Netanyahu government.

We will focus on the following topics: 

  1. The History of Israeli False Flags
  2. Corroborating Mea Culpa Statements by Netanyahu
  3. Testimonies by Members of Israel’s IDF 

1. The History of Israeli False Flags

Numerous Israeli False Flags have been carried out in the course of the last 25 years. They are on record: carefully documented. While they are of a criminal nature, resulting in the deaths of innocent Israelis, they have barely  been acknowledged by Western governments and the media. The historical record confirms that the intent of these false flags is to trigger Israeli deaths as a means to justify attacks against Palestinians. See below: 

“Green Light to Terror”

The late  Prof Tanya Reinhart confirmed the formulation in 1997 of a False Flag Agenda entitled “The Green Light to Terror” which consisted in promoting (engineering) suicide attacks against Israeli civilians, citing “the Bloodshed as a Justification” to wage war on Palestine: 

“…This is the “green light to terror” theme which the Military Intelligence (Ama”n) has been promoting since 1997, when its anti-Oslo line was consolidated. This theme was since repeated again and again by military circles, and eventually became the mantra of Israeli propaganda”

The 2001 “Justified Vengeance” Operation

Predicated on the implementation of A False Flag. 

The blueprint, titled “The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces”, was presented to the Israeli government by chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, on July 8 [2001].

The assault would be launched, at the government’s discretion, after a big suicide bomb attack in Israel, causing widespread deaths and injuries, citing the bloodshed as justification.” (Tanya Reinhart, December 22, 2001)

It is worth noting that “Operation Justified Vengeance”: a Secret Plan to Destroy the Palestinian Authority was confirmed by Janes Foreign Report:

“…Israel’s invasion plan — reportedly dubbed Justified Vengeance — would be launched immediately following the next high-casualty suicide bombing, would last about a month and is expected to result in the death of hundreds of Israelis and thousands of Palestinians. (emphasis added)

Israeli False Flags, which consist in deliberately triggering Israeli casualties as a means to justify a broader attack against Palestine are DÉJÀ VU

I should mention that the October 7, 2023 “False Flag” is more sophisticated than those outlined above.

Israeli Casualties

Israel’s False Flag Operation is a criminal endeavor engineered by the Netanyahu government (with the support of its intelligence apparatus) against innocent Israeli men, women and children. 

Official Israeli IDF sources confirm 1,200 Israeli deaths of combatants and civilians (including “friendly fire” by the IDF). Approximately  50% of the casualties are Israeli civilians. 

In contrast, the number of deaths of Palestinians (at the time of writing) is of the order of 30,000 of which at least 10,000 are children. 

For further details and a Historical Review See:

Video: “Justified Vengeance” and The History of Israeli “False Flags”(2001-2024): Palestine Portrayed as “The Aggressor”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 07, 2024

2. Corroborating Statements by Netanyahu: “Money to a Faction within Hamas” As Part of an Intelligence Op?

It is worth noting that Netanyahu has acknowledged that Money had been Transferred to a pro-Israeli Intelligence Faction within Hamas:

“Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (Times of Israel, October 8, 2023 emphasis added)

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”[Netanyahu] (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

3. Testimonies by Members of Israel’s IDF

3.1  Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence

“I served in the IDF 25 years ago, in the intelligence forces. There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming.

A cat moving alongside the fence is triggering all forces. So this??

What happened to the “strongest army in the world”?

How come border crossings were wide open?? Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system.

To me this suprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts. 

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say that this feels like the work of the Deep State.

It feels like the people of Israel and the people of Palestine have been sold, once again, to the higher powers that be. 

(Statement by Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence,  October 7, 2023, emphasis added)

3.2 Commander of the Kerem Shalom Battalion

“Something here doesn’t add up to me!!! This is a mystery that I can’t find an answer to.

I happen to know how things work in Gaza and on the border.

I was the commander of the Kerem Shalom sector (Rafih), I was in charge of the Kissuf sector, I know the perimeter fence very well, I know how the army works there. I was in the Shatti refugee camp in Gaza, I was in charge of the Jibaliya refugee camp, I would make ambushes on the fence and deep in the area. I met Gazans, ate and breathed Gaza.

The obstacle is built so that even a fox cannot pass it:

Set alerts according to 3 levels of pressure. She must alert when she is cut. There are 24/7 forces that are responsible for arriving within a few minutes, if not seconds, to the point where there is an alert in the fence.

Every day do at least one penetration practice. Each subdivision has a standby squad whose role is to increase the force in an emergency situation. Observations scattered along the border cover every inch of it. The female observers are champions in identification. They don’t miss. They detect movement even before it even approaches the obstacle – day and night.

At problematic points (dead areas) they place a tank with observation and detection capabilities, and a terrifying firepower. In some cases snipers are deployed in the field.

Every day before dawn there is a “dawn alert” procedure. At this hour all the forces are awake (in this case also the hour when hundreds of terrorists entered Israel). The night shift alternates with the day shift. The commander of each force inspects the axis to make sure there were no infiltrations during the night. Trackers that move on the axis know how to recognize traces. They know who crossed the fence, how much and even when.

So how the hell does a Palestinian tractor move towards the fence without anyone reacting to it?

How did the tractor manage to sabotage the fence for a long hour and open access to Israel without anyone reacting to it?

How did all this happen under our noses? Where did an entire division go? Where did 3 brigades go? 

Who swallowed 9 battalions? What happened to 36 companies? Where did an entire regular infantry brigade go that usually outnumbers the elite?

Where were all the reserve battalions that augment the regular army? Where did thousands of soldiers go???

Someone here needs to provide explanations!!”

emphasis added

Statement of General Herzl Halevi, October 2023

Is Egypt Involved? Secret Bilateral Talks

The declared objective is to Wipe Gaza off the Map through mass killings and total destruction thereby creating conditions for the exclusion of Palestinians from their homeland: A ‘Second Nakba”.

The implementation of Netanyahu’s “War of Readiness” requires the support of Egypt with a view to triggering the exodus of Palestinians from Gaza to the Sinai, where the installation of extensive refugee camps is contemplated.

There is evidence of bilateral meetings between Cairo and Tel Aviv to that effect. The C Option Plan drafted by Israeli Intelligence (see above) states that “Egypt has an obligation under international law to allow the passage of the [Palestinian] population”. 

What is contemplated by the Israeli Ministry of Intelligence (Option C above) is: 

“the forced and permanent relocation of the entire Palestinian population of Gaza to Egypt’s Sinai desert peninsula” with tent refugee camps.” (See Manlio Dinucci)

The Plan includes a list of countries “which agree to absorb [The Palestinians ] as refugees”. 

Bilateral Israel-Egypt Intelligence Agreement?

In 2021-22, Egypt and Israel were involved in “secret bilateral talks” regarding “the extraction of natural gas off the coast of the Gaza Strip”.

The media reports point to “Egyptian Mediation”.

Were these negotiations  contingent upon Egypt playing a key role in establishing refugee camps in the Sinai, which would facilitate the mass deportation of Palestinians from Gaza.

It is worth noting that the Palestine Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas was also involved.

“Egypt succeeded in persuading Israel to start extracting natural gas off the coast of the Gaza Strip, after several months of secret bilateral talks.

This development … comes after years of Israeli objections to extract natural gas off the coast of Gaza on [alleged] security grounds, … 

British Gas (BG Group) has also been dealing with the Tel Aviv government.

What is significant is that the civilian arm of the Hamas Gaza government had been bypassed in regards to exploration and development rights over the gas fields:

The field, which lies about 30 kilometers (19 miles) west of the Gaza coast, was discovered in 2000 by British Gas (currently BG Group) and is estimated to contain more than 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

The official in the Egyptian intelligence service told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity, “An Egyptian economic and security delegation discussed with the Israeli side for several months the issue of allowing the extraction of natural gas off the coast of Gaza. …Al-Monitor, October 22, 2022

Was the issue of refugee camps in the Sinai Desert discussed behind closed doors?

It is worth noting that the agreement  with Egypt was reached one year prior to the onslaught of Israel’s Genocidal Attack against Gaza.

Look at the proposed Timeline: “Beginning of 2024”

Following the completion of the Israel-Egypt consultations pertaining to economic and security issues, A Memorandum of Understanding was signed, which had the rubber-stamp of the Palestinian National Authority (PA):

“The Egyptian [intelligence] official explained that Israel required the start of practical measures to extract gas from the Gaza fields at the beginning of 2024, to ensure its own security. (Al-Monitor, October 22, 2022

 

May the Truth Prevail in Reversing the Course of History.

Those Western Politicians Who Unequivocally Endorse The Atrocities Directed against the People of Palestine are Complicit in the Conduct of Crimes against Humanit

In Solidarity with the People of Palestine.

Based on the Nuremberg Charter, what is required is a grass-roots campaign encouraging: 

Israeli, American and NATO Combatants to “Disobey Unlawful Orders” and “Abandon the Battlefield” both in Israel as well as in ALL U.S.-NATO War Theaters. 

Abandoning the Battlefield as a Means to Criminalizing War is based on Principle IV of the Nuremberg Charter  which defines the responsibility of combatants “to refuse the orders of Government or a superior … “

For detail see: 

“Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 04, 2024

Michel Chossudovsky, February 7, 2024

Did the Dulles Brothers Seal Our Fate?

July 21st, 2024 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

 

Important article first published on May 22, 2024

***

The “Soviet Threat” which became Washington’s foreign policy mindset was a self-serving creation of Allen and John Foster Dulles. The consequences of their creation and its recreation by the US neoconservatives await us unaddressed.

brothers

Some years ago I reviewed Stephen Kinzer’s book, The Brothers, an extraordinary account of two men long serving at the top of the US government, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and CIA Director Allen Dulles.

Both were appointed to office by President Eisenhower. Allen Dulles was the Director of the CIA, and John Foster Dulles was the Secretary of State. The interests of the two men’s law firm became in effect the agenda of the government of the United States.

Both men used their power in service of their powerful law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell. Both are examples of the privatization of government to serve private interests. Foreign government that got in the way of their firm’s clients’ interests, they plotted to overthrow.

To justify their use of the US government in service to the clients of their law firm, the brothers invented the “communist threat of world subversion” and inaugurated the Cold War. The brothers came up with six monsters to destroy.

Image: Mohammad Mosaddegh in court, 8 November 1953 (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

The first was the first democratically elected leader of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh, certainly no communist. Mossadegh’s offense was that he nationalized Iranian oil, thus angering the British government. He also angered the brothers. Sullivan & Cromwell’s client, the J. Henry Schroder Banking Corp, was the financial agent for the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company on whose board Allen sat. The nationalization of Iranian oil also disrupted Foster’s activities in behalf of Chase Manhatten Bank.

Allen Dulles had negotiated for Sullivan & Cromwell’s client, Overseas Consultants Inc, an Iranian development plan from which the law firm and its client expected to earn massive profits together with an ideal base for John Foster Dulles to project American influence throughout Iran and the Middle East. But the Iranian legislature supported Mossadegh and vetoed the project.

Thus Mossadegh’s fate was sealed.

A narrative was created and opinion manipulated. Allen Dulles formed an overthrow team that paid US tax dollars to street thugs to attack the government, as the US did in the “Maidan revolution” in Ukraine. Foster Dulles created a propaganda campaign against Mossadegh presenting him as a weak leader about to be overthrown by Soviet agents. The story fed to President Eisenhower, Congress, and media was that Iran was in danger of being lost to expansionist communism.

It worked. This success of the brothers’ ability to easily manipulate the US government, parts of the Iranian population, and the insouciant American public gave us Iran’s enmity and the Cold War, which in its resurrected state after Reagan buried it threatens to bury us.

The brothers’ next target was Guatemala’s first democratically elected government. Guatemala, long ruled by Sullivan & Cromwell’s client, United Fruit Company, decided with its free election to take Guatemala’s rule out of the United Fruit Company’s hands. The new president, Jacobo Arbenz, nationalized fallow land held by United Fruit in order to put the resources in service to the country.

Image: Jacobo Arbenz (From the Public Domain)

This sealed Arbenz’s doom.

Arbenz said he was concerned with Guatemala, not with international ideological rivalries. His statement gave Foster Dulles the opportunity to create a new threat to America–“creeping neutralism”–later defined by George W. Bush as “you are with us or against us.”

Being against us, Arbenz was quickly turned into a communist by the brothers and the American media that the brothers easily controlled. Arbenz, a nationalist leader, was turned into a communist whose beachhead into the Americas would seal our doom. Eisenhower, Congress and the media bought the official narrative hook, line, and sinker.

Allen created a fake “liberation army” and a fake radio station to report non-existent advances in Guatemala’s liberation against the alleged communist regime of Arbenz. Allen used US planes to bomb Guatemala military bases to make the armed rebellion look real.

But it wasn’t working. Poor illiterate Guatemalans were not as insouciant as Americans. So the brothers got American Cardinal Francis Spellman, the most prominent Catholic prelate in the US, to issue a pastoral letter designed to portray a Guatemalan nationalist leader as a communist. Priests read Spellman’s letter to their congregations, and the newspapers carried it throughout the country. As Kinzer says, it is “a masterpiece of propaganda, steeped in the vocabulary of faith, fear, and patriotism.” Here is an opening paragraph:

“At this moment, we once again raise our voice to alert Catholics that the worst atheistic doctrine of all time–anti-Christian Communism–is continuing its brazen advance in our country, masquerading as a movement of social reform for the needy classes.”

The brothers having successfully destroyed Guatemalans belief in their protector against foreign interests, replaced the elected president they had successfully demonized with their man.

What Kinzer shows is that the long, expensive Cold War, both in terms of US money and US civil liberties, was the creation of two holders of powerful US government offices used in defense of their law firm’s clients.

The brothers set the pattern for the future. It has been eons since any US government policy served any public interest. What public interest is served by open borders, creating enemies out of Russia and China, demonizing white people, teaching white school children that they are racist, weaponizing law, offshoring high productivity jobs, creating endless money and financial bubbles? You can add to the list.

President Reagan succeeded in ending the Cold War despite the opposition of the CIA and the powerful military/security complex and the senators and representatives dependent on the military/security’s complex’s campaign donations. But the neoconservative dominated Clinton, George W. Bush, Obama, and Biden regimes resurrected the Cold War which is warming into a hot stage in the Ukraine conflict.

Putin and Xi have been slow to understand the situation that they face. In their deluded thinking they believe they can negotiate a solution with the West or simply out wait the West. They do not understand that just as their national existence is an existential issue, for Washington its hegemony is an existential issue. Without hegemony Washington cannot pay its bills and control its Western empire.

As both the Russian and Chinese leaders are incapable of comprehending the reality that confronts them, the chance of avoiding a Third World War with nuclear weapons is not high.

Kinzer’s account of a Secretary of State, who used the fear of communism that he implanted as a cover for serving the interest of his law firm’s clients, and a CIA director, who not only used his office in defense of his law firm’s interests but to live an exciting James Bond life complete with endless women, demonstrates a US government captured by private interests. There is no “public sector.”

These two men using government to serve their interests created the Cold War that almost brought our end in the Cuban Missile Crisis and turned government into the service of private interests. Lincoln had turned domestic policy to the service of private interests, and the Dulles brothers turned foreign policy to the service of private interests.

President John F. Kennedy fired Allen Dulles for trying to sandbag him into supporting the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion. It was probably Allen Dulles who plotted the assassination of President Kennedy, and it was Allen Dulles who was appointed to the Warren Commission to cover up Kennedy’s assassination.

Image: Hồ Chí Minh (From the Public Domain)

The Vietnamese nationalist Ho Chi Minh was the next on the list to be turned into a communist threat. Brandishing the “domino theory,” the brothers led us into the Vietnam war. The brothers extraordinary manipulative powers were again demonstrated, but they failed to dislodge Ho, and the brothers experienced the bitterness of defeat.

Their next plot was against President Sukarno of Indonesia, and it also ended in a mess.

The next was the prime minister of Congo, Patrice Lumumba. Again it was the Soviet threat narrative and a Soviet bridgehead in Africa. The CIA had Lumumba murdered in Katanga. Next was the long plot against Castro, elements of which were exposed by the Church Committee hearings in the 1970s.

The brothers were behind much more mischief. Allen created a 14,000 Tibetan army that was crushed by China. Tens of thousands of Tibetans were killed, and the Delai Lama had to flee Tibet. Allen declared his operation a success. It had baited the Chinese into repression and produced propagand value. Just as in Ukraine today, Washington paid thousands of other people’s lives for its propaganda posters.

The CIA had a hand in the Hungarian Revolution crushed by the Soviets. Frank Wisner, the CIA’s man who instigated the Hungarian uprising, never recovered from his realization that Washington never intended any help for the Hungarians. The intent was not Hungary’s freedom but anti-Soviet propaganda at the expense of Hungarian lives.

What began as the removal of obstacles to their law firm’s clients ended in an anti-communist crusade in which the brothers became believers of their own propaganda. Today the revival of this propaganda again positions Washington at sword’s point with Russia and China. Anti-Russian propaganda is so much a part of Washington’s consciousness that it appears to be embedded, continuing to cause foreign policy mistakes and overthrows of countries. Washington’s overthrow of Ukraine has led to an ever-widening war, the consequences of which remain to be seen. The legacy of the brothers might well be nuclear Armageddon.

The official narrative is that the brothers protected us from the Soviet threat. Others see it differently. Diego Rivera’s mural has John Foster Dulles in the center wearing a flak jacket and cruelly grinning. Allen Dulles is sneering with a satchel of dollars hanging from his waist. Eisenhower’s face decorates a bomb. Dead Guatemalan children lie at their feet.

*

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

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

Featured image source

Important article first publish on September 24, 2019

The 5G danger can’t be overstated. 

5G (5th Generation) is now being actively rolled out in many cities around the world. Simultaneously, as awareness over its horrific health and privacy impacts is rising, many places are issuing moratoriums on it or banning it, such as the entire nation of Belgium, the city of Vaud (Switzerland) and San Francisco (USA). Radiofrequency radiation (RF or RFR) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) are being increasingly recognized as new types of pollution – environmental pollution. Here are 13 reasons exposing the 5G danger, which could turn into an unmitigated health and privacy catastrophe if enough people don’t rise up to stop it.

1. 5G Danger: Hijacking Your Sweat Duct Antennae

The 5G network uses and broadcasts frequencies which affect our sweat ducts, which act as antennae. In other words, our largest organ, the skin, can be influenced and manipulated by 5G. As I reported in this the article 5G and IoT: Total Technological Control Grid Being Rolled Out Fast, scientist Dr. Ben-Ishai exposed the connection between 5G and our body’s sweat ducts in this video:

“[The 5G frequencies] will zap [us] with wavelengths that will interact with the geometrical structure of our skin We found that sweat ducts work like helical antennas … the sweat duct was an integral part of the mechanism for the absorption of energy, electromagnetic, between 75-100 GHz, and that if you changed the character of the sweat duct, i.e. made it work, you could actually change that absorption at some point, and if you could do that you could trace how a person is under stress.

2. 5G Danger: 5G Amplifies EMF Damage via VGCCs

Wireless radiation and EMF scientist Dr. Martin Pall has done groundbreaking research in explaining exactly how EMFs cause premature aging and injury to the human body, including damage to fertility, brains, hearts and even DNA! He pioneered research showing how EMFs activate the body’s VGCCs (Voltage-gated calcium channels) which causes them to release excess calcium ions into the cell. This then leads to nitric oxide (NO) and superoxide which react nearly instantaneously to form peroxynitrite and free radicals. Many studies like this show peroxynitrite damages DNA. Dr. Pall has stated unequivocally that the “5G rollout is absolutely insane.” 

3. 5G Danger: Pulsed Wave Far More Damaging than Continuous Wave Radiation

A significant and unique feature of Smart Meters is that they emit pulsed wave radiation not continuous wave radiation. In other words, they run in start-stop cycles of emitting a burst of EMF then going temporarily inactive. This happens an incredibly high amount of times per day; court documents with testimony from utility companies (like Pacific Gas and Electric Company of California) reveal that smart meters send pulsed waves between 9,600 and 190,000 times per day!

In this 2018 video, Dr. Pall states there are 13 studies which show that pulsed wave EMFs are more active (and dangerous) than continuous wave EMFs. You can read the evidence here.

4. 5G Danger: 5G Promotes Deep EMF Penetration

The main reason why cell or mobile phones are more dangerous for children than adults (apart from the fact that radiation absorption is cumulative over a lifetime) is due to EMF penetration.

 

Dr. Pall writes:

“The industry has also made claims that more conventional microwave frequency EMFs are limited in effect to the outer 1 cm of the body. We know that is not true, however because of the effects deep in the human brain, on the heart and on hormone systems. Perhaps the most important two studies demonstrating effects deep within the body are the studies of Professor Hässig and his colleagues in Switzerland on cataract formation in newborn calves. These two studies clearly show that when pregnant cows are grazing near mobile phone base stations (also called cell phone towers), the calves are born with very greatly increased incidences of cataracts.”

Hässig wrote in his 2009 study:

“Of 253 calves, 79 (32%) had various degrees of nuclear cataract, but only 9 (3.6%) calves had severe nuclear cataract. Results demonstrate a relation between the location of veals calves with nuclear cataracts in the first trimester of gestation and the strength of antennas. The number of antennas within 100 to 199 meters was associated with oxidative stress and there was an association between oxidative stress and the distance to the nearest MPBS (Mobile Phone Base Station).”

5. 5G Danger: 5G is a Weapons System Disguised as a Consumer Convenience

Mark Steele has been very outspoken against 5G and has now been widely interviewed, including by Project Camelot and also by Sacha Stone in his documentary 5G Apocalypse: The Extinction Event. Steele claims that although widespread reports state that 5G is operating in the 24-100 GHz range, it is actually sub-gigahertz (meaning under the GHz threshold, so still measured in MHz). He says 5G is a weapons system like long-range radar, phased array radar and directed energy (DEW was used in 9/11 and various fires like the Paradise fires). He claims that when you examine 5G hardware, it has a dielectric lens which is proof it is a weapons system. Autonomous vehicles can use 5G to shine in mirrors of other drivers (which is so strong and damaging it is equivalent to assault). Mark talks about how 5G is powerful enough to kill babies in wombs. He states:

“5G is a weapons system, nothing more, nothing less. It’s got nothing to do with telecommunications for humans. 5G is a machine to machine connection for autonomous vehicles.”

6. 5G Danger: LA Firefighters Develop Ailments After Being Too Close to Towers

In this video a 25 year veteran firefighter from Los Angeles compares cell towers to cigarettes. He calls for a stop to the cell/mobile phone base stations being built on or near fire stations. Firefighters are not the only ones suffering the effects; it was reported that hundreds of birds fell from the sky in the Netherlands during a 5G test.

7. 5G Danger: Same Frequencies as used for Crowd Dispersal

5G purportedly uses millimeter wave (MMW) frequencies, so called because the frequencies are so high (in the 24-100 GHz range). Since 1 GHz = 1 billion GHz, we are talking about frequencies with very very short wavelength (the distance between the peak of one wave and the next). The distances are so tiny they are measured in millimeters, hence the term millimeter wave. These are the exact same frequencies used by the military for their non-lethal weapons such as Active Denial Systems for crowd dispersal. These weapons have the capacity to cause tremendous injury. Dr. Paul Ben-Ishai said, “If you are unlucky enough to be standing there when it hits you, you will feel like your body is on fire.”

8. 5G Danger: Mutagenic (Causing DNA Damage) and Carcinogenic (Causing Cancer)?

The MMW frequencies of 5G cause mitochondrial DNA damage – which is then passed down generations. 5G is mutagenic. These mutations are inherited by the next generation! This has grave implications for genetic purity. How many people are thinking about this when they can’t stop looking at their screens? This website lists many studies showing the mitochondrial damage that occurs after exposure to EMF radiation.

With mutagenesis usually comes carcinogenesis. In other words, once something is powerful and dangerous enough to cause DNA damage, chances are high it will lead to cancer. Mark Steele says 5G is a class 1 carcinogen, although the WHO (World Health Organization) very conservatively classifies cell phone towers as a class 2b possible carcinogen. It’s important to note, however, that the WHO is an agency of the UN which was set up by the Rockefellers, an illustrious NWO Illuminati family who plan to use the UN as a vehicle to usher in a One World Government.

5G is being rushed out without the proper safety testing done, so we don’t have much data on how 5G specifically causes cancer, but there is an abundance of evidence showing how 2G, 3G and 4G EMFs are implicated in many kinds of cancer, including brain cancer. This website has a good collection of the many studies done.

9. 5G Danger: Phased Array Densification

5G requires significantly more transmitters or broadcasters than earlier generations. It is a plan of massive infrastructure creation, with stations, towers and bases planned to be put almost everywhere, including in the heart of residential neighborhoods. The effects of this kind of densification could be disastrous.

5G is powerful enough to 3D map the inside of your home and other buildings. Mark Steele specifically highlights the 868 MHz frequency, previously used for battlefield interrogations and which can travel with ease through bricks and concrete. He claims this frequency can single out specific people … interesting given all the electronic harassment and gang stalking which occurs against TIs (Targeted Individuals).

5G infrastructure will consist of small phased array antennas shooting out radiation at their targets like a bullet. The rays of microwaves they produce will be strong enough to pass through walls and human bodies. We will be blanketed with this 24/7/365, and what’s worse, the coverage area is slated to be broader than the current 4G, eventually encompassing every square inch of Earth.

10. 5G Danger: Killing All the Insects?

Insects, birds and children are the most vulnerable to 5G due to their body size. Claire Edwards is a former UN staff editor who brought the EMF/5G issue to their attention of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. She stated in an anti-5G rally speech in Stockholm:

“It’s interesting to note that in the last 20 years we have lost 80% of our insects. And if we get 5G, we’re going to lose 100% of our insects.  When the insects go, we go too.”

Both insects and 5G need antennas: insects use them, among other things, in their sense of smell, while 5G uses them to propagate waves. Not surprisingly, insects are sensitive to 5G EMF waves; this recent study showed that insects exposed to 5G radiation experienced an increase in their body temperature.

“Studies have shown that the frequencies used by 5G increase the body temperature of insects. This phenomenon was not observed with 4G or WiFi.”

Meanwhile the study Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz concludes:

“Future wavelengths of the electromagnetic fields used for the wireless telecommunication systems will decrease and become comparable to the body size of insects and therefore, the absorption of RF-EMFs in insects is expected to increase.”

11. 5G Danger: Space-Based 5G

5G is planned to be an inescapable grid – with plans afoot to beam it down from space! This ties into the Space Fence agenda as I discussed in my article Space Fence: Connecting the Surveillance and Transhumanist Agendas. The organization International Appeal Stop 5G on Earth and in Space writes:

“At least five companies are proposing to provide 5G from space from a combined 20,000 satellites in low- and medium-Earth orbit that will blanket the Earth with powerful, focused, steerable beams. Each satellite will emit millimetre waves with an effective radiated power of up to 5 million watts from thousands of antennas arranged in a phased array.”

It is vital to understand the bigger picture of the grand conspiracy here. All these disruptive and hazardous technologies – 5G, wi-fi, wireless radiation, HAARP, ionospheric heating, geoengineering, GMOs, etc. – are going to be woven into one giant integrated system of surveillance, command and control. Just as one small example, geoengineering involves the spraying of chemtrails loaded with metal particulates – which 5G can use.

12. 5G Danger: Re-Radiation Inside the Body

Way back in 2002, RF researcher Arthur Firstenberg published an analysis of 5G long before the technology was approved. He explained how, due to 5G EM pulses being extremely short and delivered in bursts, they actually replicate inside the body – and end up creating tiny new 5G antennas internally. Firstenberg wrote:

“… when extremely short electromagnetic pulses enter the body, something else happens: the moving charges themselves become little antennas that re-radiate the electromagnetic field and send it deeper into the body …”

“These re-radiated waves are called Brillouin precursors … They become significant when either the power or the phase of the wave changes rapidly enough … This means that the reassurance we are being given – that these millimeter waves are too short to penetrate far into the body – is not true.”

This echoes a previous point made – that 5G penetration is a serious danger.

13. 5G Danger: Insurance Companies Refuse to Underwrite Big Wireless. What Do They Know?

Insurance companies (the most famous of which is Lloyds of London) have made headlines by refusing to insure Big Wireless (the telecommunication corporate conglomerate) against wi-fi and 5G-related illnesses and claims:

“Well, Lloyd’s November 2010 Risk Assessment Team’s Report gives us a solid clue: the report compares these wireless technologies with asbestos, in that the early research on asbestos was “inconclusive” and only later did it become obvious to anyone paying attention that asbestos causes cancer. Keep in mind that Lloyd’s Risk Assessment study of wi-fi was published over 8 [now 9 – Ed.] years ago. Even back then, however, their Risk Assessment Team was smart enough to realize that new evidence just might emerge showing that the various wi-fi frequencies do cause illness.”

Conclusion: 5G Grid Part of Larger Command, Control, Surveillance and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Agenda

5G is qualitatively and quantitatively different to 4G. It is much more than just the next step up from 4G. 5G will not only beam tens to hundreds times more radiation than 4G, but the introduction of MMW technology means a whole new host of hazards. History repeats itself. Just like it took some time for real science to catch up with tobacco/cigarettes, and just like it took some time for real science to catch up with the monstrosity that are GMOs (now rebranded as BioEngineered Foods), so too will real science catch up with 5G. In the meantime, you can expect all sorts of junk science to be put forth to justify it, including misdirections and distractions like only focusing on the thermal effects of wireless (and ignoring the evidence of dangerous non-thermal effects).

Ultimately, 5G is part of the NWO agenda to set up a giant, inescapable command and control grid that eliminates all privacy and allows the manipulators to surveil every single person on the planet all the time. If there was ever a time for activists to step up in the name of freedom, truth, health, privacy and sovereignty, now is the time.

*****

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. Makia is on Steemit and FB.

Sources:

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/5g-iot-technological-control-grid/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuVtGldYXK4

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsUWbUB6PE

*https://www.emfacts.com/2018/08/martin-palls-book-on-5g-is-available-online/

*http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/PGERFDataOpt-outalternatives_11-1-11-3pm.pdf

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsUWbUB6PE

*https://s3.amazonaws.com/nghl-ntge/pall-to-eu-on-5g-harm-march-2018.pdf

*https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19780007

*https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4712174/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol3tAxnNccY

*https://everydayconcerned.net/2019/02/15/5g-is-a-weapons-system-nothing-more-nothing-less-technical-weapons-expert-mark-steele-issues-wake-up-call-to-all-uk-residents-on-5g-led-street-lights-rollout-in-gateshead/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-x_xv6dg9E

*https://thetruthrevolution.net/hundreds-of-birds-fall-from-the-sky-during-5g-test-in-the-netherlands

*https://jnlwp.defense.gov/About/Frequently-Asked-Questions/Active-Denial-System-FAQs/

*https://mdsafetech.org/mitochondrial-effects/

*https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/braintumours.asp

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hayxz_GEha8 (stockholm)

*http://emrabc.ca/?p=15174

*https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/space-fence-surveillance-transhumanism/

*https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal

*https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/5g-from-blankets-to-bullets/

*https://principia-scientific.org/lloyds-insurers-refuse-to-cover-5g-wi-fi-illnesses/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 5G Danger: 13 Reasons 5G Wireless Technology Will Be a Catastrophe for Humanity

German Government Admits There Was No Pandemic

July 20th, 2024 by Baxter Dmitry

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 Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

Introductory Note

What is significant is that the German Health authorities based on official data have now been obliged under Freedom of Information to reveal the devastating nature and impacts of the Covid lockdowns imposed on 190 countries, starting March 11, 2020.

Most of the independent studies including those conducted by Global Research have been the object of censorship.

Of Significance,  the official documents of Germany’s Ministry of Health are consistent with the independent reports published in the course of more than 4 years pertaining to the COVID-19 lockdowns, the mandatory wearing of the face mask, and the experimental mRNA vaccines.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, April 4, 2024

 

***

Huge news out of Germany as the federal government have been forced to admit that so-called “conspiracy theorists” were right about everything during the Covid pandemic.

In fact, according to the German government data, there was no pandemic at all, just a tightly choreographed military grade psy-op to brainwash the masses into accepting an experimental vaccine with disastrous consequences.  

These secret German government documents obtained via a Freedom of Information request and subsequent lawsuit have blown the lid of the global elite’s Covid lies and it’s vitally important that as many people as possible are made aware of the truth.

More and more people all over the world are waking up and seeing the global elite for what they always have been: deranged psychopaths hell bent on destruction and domination.

Germany is no different. The German population suffered some of the most brutal lockdowns and vaccine mandates in all of Europe and now the people are rising up and demanding accountability.

Step forward Paul Schreyer and Multipolar magazine who launched a Freedom of Information request and then launched a lawsuit against the German government when they tried every trick in the book to keep the secret documents under lock and key.

As Professor Steven Homburg explains, the results are stunning, and represent total vindication for everyone who dared to question the narrative of lockdowns and mask and vaccine mandates.

The secret government documents – all 2,000 pages of them – reveal that we were right about nearly everything and the so-called “pandemic” was all fraud.

These facts are damning and prove the official narrative about Covid, pushed by world governments and mainstream media, is completely bogus.

Which makes the tyranny we experienced during the so-called pandemic even harder to swallow, as Professor Homburg explains.

The data also reveals that Sweden, which was the only European country free of masks and lockdowns, performed much better than Germany. Which raises the question, what were the tyrannical lockdowns and mandates really about?

Professor Homburg has the answer – and as it turns out, we were right all along.

Breaking down vaccine hesitancy through brutal lockdowns was always the goal of the global elite. Unfortunately, for those who did not see through the psy-op at the time, the health consequences are dire. Serious questions must be asked.

Unfortunately for the vaxxed, the bad news doesn’t end there. Japanese researchers have linked Covid vaccines to hundreds of diseases.

While a new study out of the US has found that those who have been vaccinated and boosted can expect to meet their maker far sooner than they would have expected.

A disturbing new study has revealed that people who have been “fully vaccinated” with Covid mRNA injections can expect to lose a staggering 25 years from their life expectancy.

Researchers analyzed data from the CDC, Cleveland Clinic Data, and insurance company risk assessment data and uncovered a disturbing trend of plummeting life expediencies among those who had multiple doses of mRNA.

Unfortunately for the vaxxed, the news gets even worse. The chronic damage to health caused by each dose of mRNA does not lessen over time, as previously believed.

In reality, the negative health effects appear to continue indefinitely.

According to the researchers, CDC All-Cause Mortality data reveals that each jab increased mortality by 7% in the year 2022 compared to the mortality in 2021.

This means that people who have had 5 doses – that’s two doses and three boosters – were 35% more likely to die in 2022 than they were in 2021.

Correlating with the German information, the study also confirmed that people who are not vaccinated were no more likely to die in 2022 than in 2021.

These numbers are damning. But anybody paying attention can see that something is very wrong with the vaccinated. They are dropping like flies with heart problems and turbo cancer all over the world.

Professional athletes are supposed to be among the healthiest people on the planet but in the past few years thousands have collapsed with sudden and inexplicable heart conditions.

Fully vaccinated professional athletes are continuing to drop like flies, with four professional soccer players have collapsed suddenly, clutching their hearts, in the last week alone.

Egyptian star Ahmed Refeat became the third professional soccer play to suffer cardiac arrest in front of live TV cameras, with doctors later admitting they “hadn’t seen something like this before.”

Orlando Pirates midfielder Makhelene Makhaula was the second football star to collapse on the field this week, as medical staff were seen desperately attempting to revive the South African star.

Listen as the stunned announcer admits, in his own words, that footballers are dropping like flies all over the world since the vaccine roll out.

On Sunday in the Argentinian top flight, Estudiantes’ Javier Altamirano suffered a seizure and collapsed suddenly in the big match against Boca Juniors, one of the biggest clubs in South America.

It’s not just professional athletes dropping like flies. People from all walks of life, including popular social media influencers, are being struck down with heart conditions and rare forms of cancer at unprecedented rates.

An ethical media would be highlighting these incidents on the front pages, putting their resources into investigating why so many young and healthy people are suffering from cardiac arrests, strokes, and rare forms of cancer.

Instead, the media is attempting to normalize the phenomenon and convince you that professional athletes and young people having heart attacks is par for the course.

However, anybody capable of independent thought understands this situation is far from normal.

*

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

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at The People’s Voice. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Email: [email protected]

Featured image is from TPV


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

A London reporter writes in WSJ that the assassination attempt on Trump, coming after Biden’s “stumbles” during the recent presidential debate, has pushed the superpower to enter “an unusually turbulent and unpredictable period, prompting allies to question its reliability and foes to gloat.”

First published on July 17, 2024

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

As a foe of US imperialist foreign policy, not of “America” (my husband is American and my children, like so many other children in the US, are hyphenated Americans), I am not gloating at the sorry spectacle the US election “turbulence” is parading before the world. Rather, I am ashamed. And more importantly, I am aghast at US obliviousness that any gloating that may be taking place, especially in the Global South, is entirely of its own making.

“There is no place in America for this kind of violence,” Biden said. It is well known, however, that the US believes there is a place for “this kind of violence” other than in America. The United States, often through the CIA, has been involved in various coups and assassinations in the Global South. These actions have had profound and lasting impacts on the region.

Let’s count some of them. I’ll start with Venezuela, because, just as in America, the country is undergoing presidential elections there currently, and a CNN headline in World/Americas (July 14, 2024) links the US elections and the Venezuelan elections thus: Why a fair election in Venezuela could change the fate of millions of migrants — and Joe Biden.

CNN writes that the political crisis in Venezuela that produced millions of migrants was caused by “a crash in the price of oil — a key export for Venezuela — combined with chronic corruption and mismanagement at the hands of government officials.” Today, the conventional wisdom in US media is that Nicolás Maduro (United Socialist Party) faces an uphill election battle “after leading Venezuela into crisis.” The US actively supports Venezuelan Western-leaning opposition presidential candidate Edmundo González and wishes to “ease” Maduro and his cohorts out under the banner of “democracy and the rule of law” — i.e., “fair elections.”

By “fair elections” CNN means elections as influenced by US foreign policy. In 2019, The US supported efforts to oust Maduro, including backing opposition leader Juan Guaidó.

In contrast to the above, Al Mayadeen coverage of the Venezuelan elections explains that the United Nations has sent four of its electoral experts to Venezuela to compile a report on the voting there and that Maduro signed in June a document with several candidates to respect the outcome of the election.

The Al Mayadeen report goes on to say,

“The Venezuelan people trust President Maduro because he belongs to the school of thought and principles of the late President Hugo Chavez and represents a symbol of continuity in the Bolivarian Revolution… It is noteworthy that Maduro’s 2018 reelection was rejected as ‘illegitimate’ by most Western countries.”

And shockingly:

“Last week, a Colombian paramilitary group announced in a video that Venezuela’s far-right reached out to them requesting they assassinate Maduro. The incumbent president had previously accused the United States and the Venezuelan opposition of seeking to manipulate the results of the election and destabilize the country.”

US foreign policy has no problem with instigating political violence (aka terrorism if we are to speak plainly) in the Global South. In Bolivia in 2019, the resignation of President Evo Morales was followed by U.S. involvement in the political upheaval that led to his departure. A couple of weeks ago, Bolivia weathered a coup attempt and US media is speculating as to “Why Bolivia Descended Into Yet Another Coup Attempt.”

Well, here are clues as to possibly why:

— In Guatemala (1954): The CIA orchestrated a coup to overthrow President Jacobo Árbenz, who had implemented land reforms that threatened U.S. business interests.

— In Brazil (1964): The U.S. supported a military coup that overthrew President João Goulart, who was perceived as leaning towards communism.

— In Chile (1973): The U.S. supported the military coup led by General Augusto Pinochet, which ousted democratically elected President Salvador Allende.

— In Congo (1960): The CIA was involved in the assassination of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, who was seen as a threat to Western interests.

The list of US involvement in such political violence goes on to include Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama, the Philippines, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Korea. The U.S. justified these actions as necessary to combat the spread of communism and protect American interests, but they had significant and often devastating impacts on the affected countries.

Needless to say, when it comes to the Middle East, American hubris, double standards, and meddling for purely selfish reasons know no bounds and have been an unmitigated disaster for people there.

—In the West Bank and Gaza in 2006, the Bush administration and its allies undid the results of democratic elections that ushered a Hamas government.

— In Iran in 1953, the CIA, along with British intelligence, orchestrated a coup to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, who had nationalized the oil industry.

— In Iraq in 1963, the CIA played a role in the coup that brought the Ba’ath Party to power, which eventually led to Saddam Hussein’s rise. The US provided lists of suspected communists to the Ba’athists, who then executed many of them. In 2003, the US-led invasion of Iraq resulted in the overthrow of Saddam Hussein leading to regime change.

— In Libya in 2011, the US, along with NATO allies, played a crucial role in the military intervention in Libya, which led to the overthrow and death of Muammar Gaddafi.

— In Syria in 1949: The CIA supported a coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of President Shukri al-Quwatli. This was primarily to secure American and Western oil interests. Today, US involvement in internal Syrian politics include hostilities against Iranian-backed militia groups supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s embattled regime, without explicit congressional authorization or any clear military objective beyond deterring future attacks.

In the meantime, U.S. taxpayers continue to pay for the hundreds of U.S. military bases scattered around the world, many of them unwelcome, and the double standard the US exercises in and outside America is appalling.

For fear of inciting more violence in the US, for example, Democrats are no longer allowed to talk about Trump as “posing an existential threat to democracy.” On the other hand, in accepting Israel’s Jewish supremacist narrative that Palestinian armed struggle for liberation poses an existential threat to Jews (i.e. it is antisemitic and not liberationist in nature), the US incites Israeli violence against Palestinians and provides Israel with the wherewithal to commit genocide against them in Gaza.

A glimmer of hope may be on the horizon, however. What’s happening in Palestine and the Ukraine is challenging the unipolar dominance of the United States and significantly influencing the shift towards a multipolar world order.

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s Medium.

Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa. She is an activist, researcher, and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: AI-generated 4th of July photo (Source: Rima Najjar)

Give Truth a Chance. Secure Your Access to Unchained News, Donate to Global Research.

***

[Incisive article by Peter Koenig first published by Global Research on June 14, 2023

DARPA Neurologist and Chief of the Neuroethics Studies Program at Georgetown University, Washington DC, Dr. James Giordano, who is also a weapons expert, started his presentation at West Point NY Military Academy by saying, “The brain is and will be the 21st Century battlefield. End of story.” 

DARPA stands for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, a Pentagon thinktank.

Dr. Giordano talks about how Directed Energy can be and is being weaponized. Individuals’ brains can be targeted by microwaves, the type of 5G and soon to come 6G, of which you see antennas growing like mushrooms all over the word.

They tell you, it is to make your internet, and ever more sophisticated computers and smart phones faster, with more outreach capacity – and to help advance digitization.

This may all be true to some extent, but the real reason behind these microwave towers is to target YOU, the individual.

Why? From other sources we know that the Fourth Industrial Revolution is in full implementation.

Klaus Schwab, eternal CEO of the World Economic Forum (WEF), published his book, “Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution”, already in 2018.

In it he writes about such significant topics as Embedding Values in Technologies; The Internet of Things; Data Ethics; Artificial Intelligence and Robotics; and a special chapter on “Altering the Human Being”.

In this chapter, Schwab addresses biotechnologies, and neurotechnologies, transhumanism – precisely the science that Dr. Giordano was talking about in 2018 at the West Point Military Academy, and which is in full implementation.

If we connect the dots, we realize that the “Brain as the Battlefield of the Future” is NOW and that we were warned way ahead. According to Dr. Giordano, the science of neurotechnologies has started some 40 years ago and he, Giordano, has been part of it for at least 35 years. Therefore, warnings have been all over the place, at the latest by Klaus Schwab’s “Fourth Industrial Revolution” (available from Amazon).

The Death Cult has again given people warnings, according to its “rules” – way ahead of time, so, They may be successful.

Why is it, that we never take note of such warnings?

Because we do not believe in so much built-in evil in humanity? Or, because we do not want to leave our “comfort zone”, our dystopian view of a “safe world”? They know it. And we MUST break that boundary between comfort and reality. If not, we are doomed.

“If you are targeted there is virtually nothing you can do,” says William Binney, ex-NSA Technical Director and whistleblower. The NSA is the US National Security Agency, one of 15 US Intelligence Agencies.

If you want a lead-demonstrator to stop demonstrating, you target his brain with ultra-shortwaves.

We by now know them as 5G. You make them depressed, so they do not want to demonstrate anymore; you make them suicidal and the problem is resolved. You do this as many times as you want and create an ambiance of depression. These are paraphrased words of Barry Trower, ex-MI5 Microwave scientist and whistleblower.

Mr. Trower adds, that low-level micro-waves can cause all sorts of cancers and leukemias and further elaborates that for the past 40 years or so the UK Government, plus basically all the Anglosaxon governments, have been lying to their people, to protect not only the high-flying profits of these “industries of death”, but perhaps more importantly for not divulging the evil objective of total surveillance and enslavement that they have planned.

Today, we gradually see what this “plan” entails.

Through “Electronic Telepathy”, Trower adds, we are able to monitor the brain. If at one point, technology foresaw that tiny, hardly visible chip-implants were necessary in the brain to be able to electronically access individuals’ thinking – hence the highly magnetic graphene oxide in many of the covid vaxx-injections – this may no longer be necessary.

In other words, we are all vulnerable – vaxxed or unvaxxed – to mind interference through the worldwide coverage of 5G shortwaves. And the worst is, we may not even notice when it “hits” us.

Mind manipulations may take many forms. One of them is that people physically hear voices – it is not that people are imagining voices, but they can physically hear voices… it can be anything, anything you want to hear, or you are scared to hear, angelic voices or diabolical voices; to repeat the words of neuroscientists.

This technology may have been applied to the US Embassy personnel in Havana, first reported by US and Canadian Embassy staff in Havana, Cuba. The so-called Havana Syndrome, of 2016. This may be a cluster of idiopathic symptoms experienced mostly abroad by U.S. government officials and military personnel. The symptoms range in severity from pain and ringing in the ears to cognitive dysfunction.

The Havana Syndrome has apparently now also been reported by US Embassy staff in China.

DARPA let a couple of contracts in 2011 / 2012 with the University of California for what is called “electronic telepathy”, to be able to monitor the brains of people at distance and to determine what they are thinking.

Under a separate contract the university was to investigate sending in signals to the brain of a person, literally sending them messages saying what they must think – and do. This is where the technology is today.

This could be used in your private life, as well as your professional life. It means, already today, they could make you do and behave as whatever they would like. They could make you a murderer, a cheater or just simply obedient to orders that may follow.

To repeat: “What you must know is that the brain is and will be the 21st Century’s battlefield”, says Dr. James Giordano, DARPA neurologist, during his talk at the Modern War Institute at West Point NY.

It is important to remember, especially since we should pay more attention to our surroundings, to people’s behavior, than what we are used to. We may deduct many lessons. So, that we may continue and expanding the field of connecting the dots.

In the video below, you will see a chart, indicating that Neuroscience, Neurotechnology in the Narcotics and Special Investigation Division (NSID), part of DARPA, has been “Valid, valuable and already in NSID use since 2014.”

The technology could be used to prompt you to commit mass murder. Are some of the “sudden and unexpected” school and shopping mall mass shootings are triggered by such mechanisms?

This is a distinct possibility, because in most cases the shooter is not apprehended and brought to justice, but immediately killed on the scene by the police, lest he might recall what happened to him and divulge the secret in court, the NSID use of the brain as a battlefield. In most cases the police simply say the “culprit” was know to the police, and / or had already a police record. This is to disguise you from thinking further.

Why are they doing it? They, being the “monsters”, which cannot easily be called humans.

To create terror, constant fear, to keep you on your toes. To get you used to terror and violence, as worse, much worse is to come, if they have their way. And we just comply, become depressed and passive, instead of rebelling in unison and Peace, but strongly rejecting the dominion of a few over us, the many.

Curiously, the Fourth Industrial Revolution does not give one single valid reason why all digitization, transhumanism, total control of humanity is good for humanity and for Mother Earth; nor does the Great Reset, nor does UN Agenda 2030.

We must stop this abuse of humanity, the human enslavement for the benefit of a few. For example, we can do so, among other actions, by collectively and in solidarity disabling the 5G / 6G antennas; by staying away as much as possible from vaxxes, from medication altering your brain activities, like causing depression, and extreme cheerfulness. Stay away from mainstream medication and especially from short-wave antennas.

Remember, scared people are easier manipulated. And that is one of the end goals, to manipulate you according to their will.

The DARPA expert, Giordano, who is also a prominent scientist in the US Health and Human Service Department – that speaks for itself – also talks about non-invasive technologies, such as the so-called “N3 Program”, the neurosurgical, neuromodulation and narcotics program.

“The idea is to put minimal size electrodes in your brain, for only minimal intervention to be able to read and write into the brain function. In real time. Remotely….. influencing in ways that are kinetic and non-kinetic the attitudes, believes, thoughts, emotions, activities; look at the power and tools that brain sciences afford.”

This was the level of science in 2018, when Dr. Giordano gave his infamous speech at West Point. In the meantime, neuroscience has leaped forward, so that implants are no longer necessary.

Ex-MI5 Microwave scientist, Barry Tower, explains how they destroy a targeted individual. He says,

“If you want to cause a specific psychiatric illness, you would have the microwave beam always target a specific gland, or a specific part of the brain, or an eye, or a heart…” And there is nothing you can do. “If that doesn’t work, they can always send the FBI, take a photo, and then take you out in other ways.”

Intelligence communities, even those within governments, with the help of their algorithm-assisted surveillance tools, become so powerful that they escape the boundaries of the state for which they are working, become independent, and control the state that should control them.

We are moving in warp speed towards a Nazi-Stasi State which we see coming, but are incapable of doing anything against it, because we are not connected with each other, we are kept apart as individuals, with our little individual advantages and special treats – keeping us on individual leashes, purposefully away from uniting with others.

“Stasi” – for those, too young to remember, is a colloquial term to describe the East-German Ministry of State Security.

This affects not only the United States, but countries all around the world, especially the western world, which is still intent to remain THE Empire, emerging into a One World Order (OWO).

This can happen only with (i) a massively reduced population, to reduce resistance; (ii) with a scared-to-death population; and eventually, (iii) with the survivors transformed into easily manipulable transhumans.

How that works has very eloquently been demonstrated in the video above. Below is a summary version but equally explicit (23 min. video).

Is that the future that awaits us?

It sure looks like it, especially since most people, maybe as many as 99.999% of the people, have no clue, and are totally vulnerable but, as such, perfect guinea pigs for trials, to perfect their “brain battlefield”, so to speak.

This is not a life worth living. But suicide is not the answer. To the contrary, stepping out from under this diabolical system, being openly promoted by the World Economic Forum (WEF) with “The Great Reset”; WHO, with the international QR code-based vaxx and travel certificate enslavement; and the United Nations Agenda 2030, that may be read at par with The Great Reset.

The UN, what you may least believe, the UN with their Agenda 2030, with targets and goals virtually identical with the WEF’s Reset, has ceased to be what we all believe it is and what it was supposedly created for – supporting and enabling World Peace.

This cessation of “Peace Maker” of the UN system has started gradually, already decades ago. In fact, as far back as the Club of Rome’s “Limits of Growth” (1972), when inspired by the Rockefeller Brothers, the UN was to gradually follow the Limits of Growth agenda which had to do with massive depopulation and – yes, climate change.

A corner stone of change was the first United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as the ‘Earth Summit’, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992. From then on followed almost on an annual basis the infamous UN sponsored COP conferences (COP – Conference of the Parties).

The last one, COP27, took place in November 2022 in Egypt. The annual repetition of COPs is a well-studied method of social brainwashing, manipulation à la Tavistock – has worked wonders. It is today hard to find anybody under the common people, who does not believe in the CO2-emitting man-made climate change. No matter what evidence to the contrary is produced.

The UN sell-out to a corrupt elite has taken a visible and giant step forward with the beginning of the Decade 2020, i.e., with the UN Agenda 2030. All of this must first sink into the brain of most people, before we can even start resisting and move into another sphere of vibration.

However, like with everything spiritual and dynamic, once a critical mass has started with critical thinking the move into the Light may be fast.

Moving into the Light is what is predicted for 2023 / 2024. In no ways should this prediction be taken as a “lean-back” and watch-what-happens encouragement. To be FREE is only a right, if we defend it and fight for it. Let us not leave cracks for diabolical seduction.

Before we can step out, we must recognize these diabolical “Illuminati” methods and stand up in unison against them.

This writing is about spreading this information on the brain as the ongoing and next battlefield”. Many will find it so off their current-thinking matrix, they will just shake their heads in disbelief, or calling such facts and news “misinformation”. Many of us, have been there. It does not matter. We must continue the offense with the truth.

The field of those who start thinking on their own, is growing; of those who come to the same conclusions, that we are being enslaved by a small but powerful elite, and the evidence that it is high time to escape this enslavement, is overwhelming.

Indeed, the era where our brain is the next battlefield needs to be fought against with all our vigor.

We do not want battlefields of any kind. We want PEACE.

*

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

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

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

Featured image is from the US Army

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

[This article was first published by GR on July 7, 2022.]

***

“And thus it renders more and more evident the great central fact that the cause of the miserable condition of the working class is to be sought, not in these minor grievances, but in the capitalistic system itself.” Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845) (preface to the English Edition, p.36)  

The IMF and World Bank have for decades pushed a policy agenda based on cuts to public services, increases in taxes paid by the poorest and moves to undermine labour rights and protections.

IMF ‘structural adjustment’ policies have resulted in 52% of Africans lacking access to healthcare and 83% having no safety nets to fall back on if they lose their job or become sick. Even the IMF has shown that neoliberal policies fuel poverty and inequality.

In 2021, an Oxfam review of IMF COVID-19 loans showed that 33 African countries were encouraged to pursue austerity policies. The world’s poorest countries are due to pay $43 billion in debt repayments in 2022, which could otherwise cover the costs of their food imports.

Oxfam and Development Finance International (DFI) have also revealed that 43 out of 55 African Union member states face public expenditure cuts totalling $183 billion over the next five years.

According to Prof Michel Chossudovsky of the Centre for Research on Globalization, the closure of the world economy (March 11, 2020 Lockdown imposed on more than 190 countries) has triggered an unprecedented process of global indebtedness. Governments are now under the control of global creditors in the post-COVID era.

What we are seeing is a de facto privatisation of the state as governments capitulate to the needs of Western financial institutions.

Moreover, these debts are largely dollar-denominated, helping to strengthen the US dollar and US leverage over countries.

It raises the question: what was COVID really about?

Millions have been asking that question since lockdowns and restrictions began in early 2020. If it was indeed about public health, why close down the bulk of health services and the global economy knowing full well what the massive health, economic and debt implications would be?

Why mount a military-style propaganda campaign to censor world-renowned scientists and terrorise entire populations and use the full force and brutality of the police to ensure compliance?

These actions were wholly disproportionate to any risk posed to public health, especially when considering the way ‘COVID death’ definitions and data were often massaged and how PCR tests were misused to scare populations into submission.

Prof Fabio Vighi of Cardiff University implies we should have been suspicious from the start when the usually “unscrupulous ruling elites” froze the global economy in the face of a pathogen that targets almost exclusively the unproductive (the over 80s).

COVID was a crisis of capitalism masquerading as a public health emergency.

Capitalism  

Capitalism needs to keep expanding into or creating new markets to ensure the accumulation of capital to offset the tendency for the general rate of profit to fall. The capitalist needs to accumulate capital (wealth) to be able to reinvest it and make further profits. By placing downward pressure on workers’ wages, the capitalist extracts sufficient surplus value to be able to do this.

But when the capitalist is unable to sufficiently reinvest (due to declining demand for commodities, a lack of investment opportunities and markets, etc), wealth (capital) over accumulates, devalues and the system goes into crisis. To avoid crisis, capitalism requires constant growth, markets and sufficient demand.

According to writer Ted Reese, the capitalist rate of profit has trended downwards from an estimated 43% in the 1870s to 17% in the 2000s. Although wages and corporate taxes have been slashed, the exploitability of labour was increasingly insufficient to meet the demands of capital accumulation.

By late 2019, many companies could not generate sufficient profit. Falling turnover, limited cashflows and highly leveraged balance sheets were prevalent.

Economic growth was weakening in the run up to the massive stock market crash in February 2020, which saw trillions more pumped into the system in the guise of ‘COVID relief’.

To stave off crisis up until that point, various tactics had been employed.

Credit markets were expanded and personal debt increased to maintain consumer demand as workers’ wages were squeezed. Financial deregulation occurred and speculative capital was allowed to exploit new areas and investment opportunities. At the same time, stock buy backs, the student debt economy, quantitative easing and massive bail outs and subsidies and an expansion of militarism helped to maintain economic growth.

There was also a ramping up of an imperialist strategy that has seen indigenous systems of production abroad being displaced by global corporations and states pressurised to withdraw from areas of economic activity, leaving transnational players to occupy the space left open.

While these strategies produced speculative bubbles and led to an overevaluation of assets and increased both personal and government debt, they helped to continue to secure viable profits and returns on investment.

But come 2019, former governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King warned that the world was sleepwalking towards a fresh economic and financial crisis that would have devastating consequences. He argued that the global economy was stuck in a low growth trap and recovery from the crisis of 2008 was weaker than that after the Great Depression.

King concluded that it was time for the Federal Reserve and other central banks to begin talks behind closed doors with politicians.

That is precisely what happened as key players, including BlackRock, the world’s most powerful investment fund, got together to work out a strategy going forward. This took place in the lead up to COVID.

Aside from deepening the dependency of poorer countries on Western capital, Fabio Vighi says lockdowns and the global suspension of economic transactions allowed the US Fed to flood the ailing financial markets (under the guise of COVID) with freshly printed money while shutting down the real economy to avoid hyperinflation. Lockdowns suspended business transactions, which drained the demand for credit and stopped the contagion.

COVID provided cover for a multi-trillion-dollar bailout for the capitalist economy that was in meltdown prior to COVID. Despite a decade or more of ‘quantitative easing’, this new bailout came in the form of trillions of dollars pumped into financial markets by the US Fed (in the months prior to March 2020) and subsequent ‘COVID relief’.

The IMF, World bank and global leaders knew full well what the impact on the world’s poor would be of closing down the world economy through COVID-related lockdowns.

Yet they sanctioned it and there is now the prospect that in excess of a quarter of a billion more people worldwide will fall into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 alone.

In April 2020, the Wall Street Journal stated the IMF and World Bank faced a deluge of aid requests from scores of poorer countries seeking bailouts and loans from financial institutions with $1.2 trillion to lend.

In addition to helping to reboot the financial system, closing down the global economy deliberately deepened poorer countries’ dependency on Western global conglomerates and financial interests.

Lockdowns also helped accelerate the restructuring of capitalism that involves smaller enterprises being driven to bankruptcy or bought up by monopolies and global chains, thereby ensuring continued viable profits for Big Tech, the digital payments giants and global online corporations like Meta and Amazon and the eradication of millions of jobs.

Although the effects of the conflict in Ukraine cannot be dismissed, with the global economy now open again, inflation is rising and causing a ‘cost of living’ crisis. With a debt-ridden economy, there is limited scope for rising interest rates to control inflation.

But this crisis is not inevitable: current inflation is not only induced by the liquidity injected into the financial system but also being fuelled by speculation in food commodity markets and corporate greed as energy and food corporations continue to rake in vast profits at the expense of ordinary people.

Resistance  

However, resistance is fertile.

Aside from the many anti-restriction/pro-freedom rallies during COVID, we are now seeing a more strident trade unionism coming to the fore – in Britain at least – led by media savvy leaders like Mick Lynch, general secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), who know how to appeal to the public and tap into widely held resentment against soaring cost of living rises.

Teachers, health workers and others could follow the RMT into taking strike action.

Lynch says that millions of people in Britain face lower living standards and the stripping out of occupational pensions. He adds:

“COVID has been a smokescreen for the rich and powerful in this country to drive down wages as far as they can.”

Just like a decade of imposed ‘austerity’ was used to achieve similar results in the lead up to COVID.

The trade union movement should now be taking a leading role in resisting the attack on living standards and further attempts to run-down state-provided welfare and privatise what remains.

The strategy to wholly dismantle and privatise health and welfare services seems increasingly likely given the need to rein in (COVID-related) public debt and the trend towards AI, workplace automisation and worklessness.

This is a real concern because, following the logic of capitalism, work is a condition for the existence of the labouring classes. So, if a mass labour force is no longer deemed necessary, there is no need for mass education, welfare and healthcare provision and systems that have traditionally served to reproduce and maintain labour that capitalist economic activity has required.

In 2019, Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, accused British government ministers of the “systematic immiseration of a significant part of the British population” in the decade following the 2008 financial crash.

Alston stated:

“As Thomas Hobbes observed long ago, such an approach condemns the least well off to lives that are ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’. As the British social contract slowly evaporates, Hobbes’ prediction risks becoming the new reality.”

Post-COVID, Alston’s words carry even more weight.

As this article draws to a close, news is breaking that Boris Johnson has resigned as prime minister. A remarkable PM if only for his criminality, lack of moral foundation and double standards – also applicable to many of his cronies in government.

With this in mind, let’s finish where we began.

“I have never seen a class so deeply demoralised, so incurably debased by selfishness, so corroded within, so incapable of progress, as the English bourgeoisie…

For it nothing exists in this world, except for the sake of money, itself not excluded. It knows no bliss save that of rapid gain, no pain save that of losing gold.

In the presence of this avarice and lust of gain, it is not possible for a single human sentiment or opinion to remain untainted.” Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845), p.275

*

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.

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) in Montreal.

The author receives no payment from any media outlet or organization for his work. If you appreciated this article, consider sending a few coins his way: [email protected] 

Featured image is from Red Voice Media


Read Colin Todhunter’s e-Book entitled

Food, Dispossession and Dependency. Resisting the New World Order

We are currently seeing an acceleration of the corporate consolidation of the entire global agri-food chain. The high-tech/big data conglomerates, including Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Google, have joined traditional agribusiness giants, such as Corteva, Bayer, Cargill and Syngenta, in a quest to impose their model of food and agriculture on the world.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is also involved (documented in ‘Gates to a Global Empire‘ by Navdanya International), whether through buying up huge tracts of farmland, promoting a much-heralded (but failed) ‘green revolution’ for Africa, pushing biosynthetic food and genetic engineering technologies or more generally facilitating the aims of the mega agri-food corporations.

Click here to read.

 

In commemoration of JFK’s assassination, we repost this article by Edward Curtin that was first published by GR on November 22, 2021. Updated on November 22, 2023.

***

 

 

 

What is the truth, and where did it go?
Ask Oswald and Ruby, they oughta know
“Shut your mouth,” said the wise old owl
Business is business, and it’s a murder most foul

Don’t worry, Mr. President
Help’s on the way
Your brothers are coming, there’ll be hell to pay
Brothers? What brothers? What’s this about hell?
Tell them, “We’re waiting, keep coming”
We’ll get them as well

– Bob Dylan, Murder Most Foul

 

Why President Kennedy was publicly murdered by the CIA sixty years ago has never been more important.  All pseudo-debates to the contrary – including the numerous and growing claims that it was not the U.S. national security state but the Israelis that assassinated the president, which exonerates the CIA – the truth about the assassination has long been evident.  There is nothing to debate unless one is some sort of intelligence operative, has an obsession, or is out to make a name or a buck.  I suggest that all those annual JFK conferences in Dallas should finally end, but my guess is that they will be rolling along for many more decades.  To make an industry out of a tragedy is wrong.  And these conferences are so often devoted to examining and debating minutiae that are a distraction from the essential truth. 

As for the corporate mainstream media, they will never admit the truth but will continue as long as necessary to titillate the public with lies, limited hangouts, and sensational non-sequiturs.  To do otherwise would require admitting that they have long been complicit in falsely reporting the crime and the endless coverup.  That they are arms of the CIA and NSA.

The Cold War, endless other wars, and the nuclear threat John Kennedy worked so hard to end have today been inflamed to a fever pitch by U.S. leaders in thrall to the forces that killed the president. President Joseph Biden, like all the presidents that followed Kennedy, is JFK’s opposite, an unrepentant war-monger, not only in Ukraine with the U.S. war against Russia and the U.S. nuclear first-strike policy, but throughout the world – the Middle-East, Africa, Syria, Iran, and on and on, including the push for war with China. 

Nowhere is this truer than with the U.S. support for the current Israeli genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza, a slaughter also supported by Robert Kennedy, Jr., who, ironically, is campaigning for the presidency on the coattails of JFK and his father Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who would be appalled by his unequivocal support for the Israeli government.  By such support and his silence as the slaughter in Gaza continues, RFK, Jr. is, contrary his other expressed opinions, supporting a wide range of war-related matters that involve the U.S.- Israel alliance, which is central to the military-industrial forces running U.S. foreign policy.  To say this is dispiriting is a great understatement, for RFK, Jr., a very intelligent man, knows that the CIA killed his uncle and father, and he is campaigning as a spiritually awakened man intent on ending the U.S. warfare state, something impossible to accomplish when one gives full-fledged support to Israel.  And I believe he will be elected the next U.S. president.

The Biden administration is doing all in its power to undo the legacy of JFK’s last year in office when on every front he fought for peace, not war.  It is not hard to realize that all presidents since John Kennedy have been fully aware that a bullet to the head in broad daylight could be their fate if they bucked their bosses.  They knew this when they sought the office because they were run by the same bosses before election.  Small-souled men, cowards on the make, willing to sacrifice millions to their ambition.

I believe that the following article – my final one on this matter – which I published two years ago, is worth reading again if you have once done so, and even more important if you have never read it. It is not based on speculation but on well-sourced facts, and it will make clear the importance of President Kennedy and why his assassination lay the foundation for today’s dire events.  In this dark time, when the world is spinning out of control, the story of his great courage in the face of an assassination he expected, can inspire us to oppose the systemic forces of evil that control the United States and are leading the world into the abyss.

List of Sections

  • Pressured to Wage War
  • A War Hero Who Was Appalled By War
  • A Prescient Perspective
  • Patrice Lumumba
  • Dag Hammarskjöld, Indonesia, and Sukarno
  • The Bay of Pigs
  • Kennedy Responds After the Bay of Pigs Treachery
  • The Fateful Year 1963
  • The Assassination on November 22, 1963
  • Who Killed Him?
  • Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
  • Who Had the Power to Withdraw the President’s Security?
  • Oswald, The Preordained Patsy
  • The Message to Air Force One
  • Oswald’s Prepackaged Life Story
  • Epilogue by James W. Douglass

*

Despite a treasure trove of new research and information having emerged over the last fifty-eight years, there are many people who still think who killed President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions. They have drunk what Dr. Martin Schotz has called “the waters of uncertainty” that results “in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.”[i]

Then there are others who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald “lone-nut” explanation proffered by the Warren Commission.

Both these groups tend to agree, however, that whatever the truth, unknowable or allegedly known, it has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, ancient history, stuff for conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking is that the assassination occurred more than a half-century ago, so let’s move on.

Nothing could be further from the truth, for the assassination of JFK is the foundational event of modern American history, the Pandora’s box from which many decades of tragedy have sprung.

Pressured to Wage War

From the day he was sworn in as President on January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy was relentlessly pressured by the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency, and by many of his own advisers to wage war – clandestine, conventional, and nuclear.

To understand why and by whom he was assassinated on November 22, 1963, one needs to apprehend this pressure and the reasons why President Kennedy consistently resisted it, as well as the consequences of that resistance.

It is a key to understanding the current state of our world today and why the United States has been waging endless foreign wars and creating a national security surveillance state at home since JFK’s death.

A War Hero Who Was Appalled By War

It is very important to remember that Lieutenant John Kennedy was a genuine Naval war hero in WW II, having risked his life and been badly injured while saving his men in the treacherous waters of the South Pacific after their PT boat was sunk by a Japanese destroyer. His older brother Joe and his brother-in-law Billy Hartington had died in the war, as had some of his boat’s crew members.

As a result, Kennedy was extremely sensitive to the horrors of war, and, when he first ran for Congress in Massachusetts in 1946, he made it explicitly clear that avoiding another war was his number one priority. This commitment remained with him and was intensely strengthened throughout his brief presidency until the day he died, fighting for peace.

Despite much rhetoric to the contrary, this anti-war stance was unusual for a politician, especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Kennedy was a remarkable man, for even though he assumed the presidency as somewhat of a cold warrior vis-à-vis the Soviet Union in particular, his experiences in office rapidly chastened that stance. He very quickly came to see that there were many people surrounding him who relished the thought of war, even nuclear war, and he came to consider them as very dangerous.

A Prescient Perspective

Yet even before he became president, in 1957, then Senator Kennedy gave a speech in the U.S. Senate that sent shock waves throughout Washington, D.C. and around the world.[ii] He came out in support of Algerian independence from France and African liberation generally and against colonial imperialism. As chair of the Senate’s African Subcommittee in 1959, he urged sympathy for African independence movements as part of American foreign policy. He believed that continued support of colonial policies would only end in more bloodshed because the voices of independence would not be denied, nor should they be.

That speech caused an international uproar, and in the U.S.A. Kennedy was harshly criticized by Eisenhower, Nixon, John Foster Dulles, and even members of the Democratic party, such as Adlai Stevenson and Dean Acheson. But it was applauded in Africa and the Third World.

Yet JFK continued throughout his 1960 presidential campaign raising his voice against colonialism throughout the world and for free and independent African nations. Such views were anathema to the foreign policy establishment, including the CIA and the burgeoning military industrial complex that President Eisenhower belatedly warned against in his Farewell Address, delivered nine months after approving the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in March 1960; this juxtaposition revealed the hold the Pentagon and CIA had and has on sitting presidents, as the pressure for war became structurally systemized.

Patrice Lumumba

Image on the right: Patrice Lumumba (Source: Bob Feldman 68)

One of Africa’s anti-colonial and nationalist leaders was the charismatic Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba. In June, 1960, he had become the first democratically elected leader of the Congo, a country savagely raped and plundered for more than half a century by Belgium’s King Leopold II for himself and multinational mining companies. Kennedy’s support for African independence was well-known and especially feared by the CIA, who, together with Brussels, considered Lumumba, and Kennedy for supporting him, as threats to their interests in the region.

So, three days before JFK’s inauguration, together with the Belgian government, the CIA had Lumumba brutally assassinated after torturing and beating him. According to Robert Johnson, a note taker at a National Security Council meeting in August 1960, Lumumba’s assassination had been approved by President Eisenhower when he gave Allen Dulles, the Director of the CIA, the approval to “eliminate” Lumumba. Johnson disclosed that in a 1975 interview that was discovered in 2000.[iii]

On January 26, 1961, when Dulles briefed the new president on the Congo, he did not tell JFK that they already had Lumumba assassinated nine days before. This was meant to keep Kennedy on tenterhooks to teach him a lesson. On February 13, 1961, Kennedy received a phone call from his UN ambassador Adlai Stevenson informing him of Lumumba’s death. There is a photograph by White House photographer Jacques Lowe of the horror-stricken president sitting in the oval office answering that call that is harrowing to view. It was an unmistakable portent of things to come, a warning for the president.

Dag Hammarskjöld, Indonesia, and Sukarno

One of Kennedy’s crucial allies in his efforts to support third-world independence was United Nations’ Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld. Hammarskjöld had been deeply involved in peacekeeping in the Congo as well as efforts to resolve disputes in Indonesia, both important countries central to JFK’s concerns. Hammarskjöld was killed on September 18, 1961 while on a peacekeeping mission to the Congo. Substantial evidence exists that he was assassinated and that the CIA and Allen Dulles were involved. Kennedy was devastated to lose such an important ally.[iv]

Kennedy’s strategy involved befriending Indonesia as a Cold War ally as a crucial aspect of his Southeast Asian policy of dealing with Laos and Vietnam and finding peaceful resolutions to other smoldering Cold War conflicts. Hammarskjöld was also central to these efforts. The CIA, led by Dulles, strongly opposed Kennedy’s strategy in Indonesia. In fact, Dulles and the CIA had been involved in treacherous maneuverings in resource rich Indonesia for decades. President Kennedy supported the Indonesian President Sukarno, while Dulles opposed him since he stood for Indonesian independence.

Just two days before Kennedy was killed on November 22, 1963, he had accepted an invitation from Indonesian President Sukarno to visit that country the following spring. The aim of the visit was to end the conflict (Konfrontasi) between Indonesia and Malaysia and to continue Kennedy’s efforts to support post-colonial Indonesia with non-military economic and development aid. His goal was to end conflict throughout Southeast Asia and assist the growth of democracy in newly liberated post-colonial countries worldwide.

Of course, JFK never made it to Indonesia in 1964, and his peaceful strategy to bring Indonesia to America’s side and to ease tensions in the Cold War was never realized, thanks to Allen Dulles and the CIA.  And, Kennedy’s proposed withdrawal of American military advisers from Vietnam, which, in part, was premised on success in Indonesia, was quickly reversed by Lyndon Johnson after JFK’s murder and within a short time hundreds of thousand American combat troops were sent to Vietnam. In Indonesia, Sukarno would be forced out and replaced by General Suharto, who would rule with an iron fist for the next 30 years. Soon, both countries would experience mass slaughter engineered by Kennedy’s opponents in the CIA and Pentagon.[v]

The Bay of Pigs

In mid-April 1961, less than three months into his presidency, a trap was set for President Kennedy by the CIA and its director, Allen Dulles, who knew of Kennedy’s reluctance to invade Cuba. They assumed the new president would be forced by circumstances at the last minute to send in U.S. Navy and Marine forces to back the invasion that they had planned. The CIA and generals wanted to oust Fidel Castro, and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. This had started under President Eisenhower and Vice President Nixon. Kennedy refused to go along with sending in American troops and the invasion was roundly defeated. The CIA, military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy.

But it was all a sham. Classified documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned the date of the invasion more than a week in advance and had informed Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro, but—and here is a startling fact that should make people’s hair stand on end—the CIA never told the President. The CIA knew the invasion was probably doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway.

Why? So, they could blame JFK for the failure afterwards.

Kennedy later said to his friends Dave Powell and Ken O’Donnell, “They were sure I’d give in to them and send the go-ahead order to the [Navy’s aircraft carrier] Essex. They couldn’t believe that a new president like me wouldn’t panic and save his own face. Well, they had me figured all wrong.”[vi]

This treachery set the stage for events to come. Sensing but not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen Dulles (who, as in a bad joke, was later named to the Warren Commission investigating JFK’s assassination) and his assistant, General Charles Cabell (whose brother, Earle Cabell, to make a bad joke absurd, was the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was killed.) It was later discovered that Earle Cabell was a CIA asset.[vii]

JFK said he wanted “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Not sentiments to endear him to a secretive government within a government whose power was growing exponentially.[viii]

Kennedy Responds After the Bay of Pigs Treachery

The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, now even more suspicious of the military-intelligence people around him, and in opposition to nearly all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign policy.

In 1961, despite the Joint Chiefs’ demand to put combat troops into Laos – advising 140,000 by the end of April – Kennedy bluntly insisted otherwise as he ordered Averell Harriman, his representative at the Geneva Conference, “Did you understand? I want a negotiated settlement in Laos. I don’t want to put troops in.”[ix]  The president knew that Laos and Vietnam were linked issues, and since Laos came first on his agenda, he was determined to push for a neutral Laos.

Also in 1961, he refused to accede to the insistence of his top generals to give them permission to use nuclear weapons in a dispute with the Soviet Union over Berlin and Southeast Asia. Walking out of a meeting with his top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands in the air and said, “These people are crazy.”[x]

In March 1962, the CIA, in the person of legendary operative, Edward Lansdale, and with the approval of every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented the president with a pretext for a U.S. invasion of Cuba. Code-named Operation Northwoods, the false-flag plancalled for innocent people to be shot in the U.S., boats carrying Cuban refugees to be sunkand a terrorism campaign to be launched in Miami, Washington D.C., and other places, all to be blamed on the Castro government so that the public would be outraged and call for an invasion of Cuba.[xi]

See this.

Kennedy was appalled and rejected this pressure to manipulate him into agreeing to terrorist attacks on Americans that could later be used against him. He already knew that his life was in danger and that the CIA and military were tightening a noose around his neck. But he refused to yield.

As early as June 26, 1961, in a White House meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s spokesperson, Mikhail Kharlamov, and Khrushchev’s son-in-law, Alexei Adzhubei, when asked by Kharlamov why he wasn’t moving faster to advance relations between the two countries, JFK said “You don’t understand this country. If I move too fast on U.S.-Soviet relations, I’ll either be thrown into an insane asylum, or be killed.”[xii]

JFK refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. The Soviets had placed offensive nuclear missiles and more than 30,000 support troops in Cuba to prevent another U.S.-led invasion. American aerial photography had detected the missiles. This was understandably unacceptable to the U.S. government. While being urged by the Joint Chiefs and his trusted advisors to order a preemptive nuclear strike on Cuba, JFK knew that a diplomatic solution was the only way out as he wouldn’t accept the death of hundreds of millions of people that would likely follow a series of nuclear exchanges with the Soviet Union. Only his brother, Robert, and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara stood with him in opposing the use of nuclear weapons. Daniel Ellsberg, a former Pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst, reported a coup atmosphere in the Pentagon as Kennedy chose to settle rather than attack.[xiii] In the end, after thirteen incredibly tense daysof brinksmanship, Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev miraculously found a way to resolve the crisis and prevent the use of those weapons.

Afterwards, JFK told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith that “I never had the slightest intention of doing so.”[xiv]

The Fateful Year 1963

In June, 1963, JFK gave an historic speech at American University in which he called for the total abolishment of nuclear weapons, the end of the Cold War and the “Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war,” and movement toward “general and complete disarmament.”[xv]

A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita Khrushchev.[xvi]

In October 1963 he signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 calling for the withdrawal of 1,000 U. S. military troops from Vietnam by the end of the year and complete withdrawal by the end of 1965.[xvii]

All this he did while secretly engaging in negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev via Saturday Evening Post editor and anti-nuclear weapon advocate, Norman Cousins, Soviet agent Georgi Bolshakov,[xviii] and Pope John XXIII,[xix] as well as  with Cuba’s Prime Minister Fidel Castro through various intermediaries, one of whom was French Journalist Jean Daniel. Of course, secret was not secret when the CIA was involved.

Kennedy, deeply disturbed by the near nuclear catastrophe of the Cuban missile crisis, was determined to open back channel communications to make sure such a near miss never happened again. He knew fault lay on both sides, and that one slipup or miscommunication could initiate a nuclear holocaust.  He was determined, therefore, to try to open lines of communications with his enemies.

Jean Daniel was going to Cuba to interview Fidel Castro, but before he did he interviewed Kennedy on October 24, 1963.  Kennedy, knowing Daniel would tell Castro what he said, asked Daniel if Castro realizes that “through his fault the world was on the verge of nuclear war in October 1962….or even if he cares about it.”  But he also added, to soften the message:

I approved the proclamation Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we will have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear.[xx]

Such sentiments were anathema, shall we say treasonous, to the CIA and top Pentagon generals. These clear refusals to go to war with Cuba, to emphasize peace and negotiated solutions to conflicts rather than war, to order the withdrawal of all military personnel from Vietnam, to call for an end to the Cold War, and his willingness to engage in private, back-channel communications with Cold War enemies marked Kennedy as an enemy of the national security state. They were on a collision course.

The Assassination on November 22, 1963

After going through the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis and many other military cliffhangers, Kennedy underwent a deep metanoia, a spiritual transformation, from Cold Warrior to peacemaker. He came to regard the generals who advised him as devaluing human life and hell-bent on launching nuclear wars. And he was well aware that his growing resistance to war had put him on a dangerous collision course with those generals and the CIA. On numerous occasions, he spoke of the possibility of a military coup d’état against him.

The night before his trip to Dallas, he told his wife, “But, Jackie, if somebody wants to shoot me from a window with a rifle, nobody can stop it, so why worry about it.”[xxi]

And we know that nobody did try to stop it because they had planned his execution from multiple locations to assure its success.

Who Killed Him?

If the only things you read, watched, or listened to since 1963 were the mainstream corporate media (MSM), you would be convinced that the official explanation for JFK’s assassination, the Warren Commission, was correct in essentials. You would be wrong, because those corporate media have for all these years served as mouthpieces for the government, most notably the CIA that infiltrated and controlled them long ago under a secret program called Operation Mockingbird.[xxii] In 1977, celebrated Watergate journalist, Carl Bernstein, published a 25,000-word cover story for Rolling Stone, “The CIA and the Media,” in which he published the names of many journalists and media, such as The New York Times, CBS, Time, Newsweek, etc., who worked hand in glove with the CIA for decades. Ironically, or as part of “a limited hangout” (spy talk for admitting some truths while concealing deeper ones), this article can be found at the CIA’s own website.

Total control of information requires media complicity, and with the JFK assassination, and in all matters they consider important, the CIA and the MSM are unified.[xxiii] Such control extends to literature, arts, and popular culture as well as news. Frances Stonor Saunders comprehensively documents this in her 1999 book, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters,[xxiv] and Joel Whitney followed this up in 2016 with Finks: How the CIA Tricked the World’s Best Writers, with particular emphasis on the complicity of the CIA and the famous literary journal The Paris Review.  Such revelations are retrospective, of course, but only the most naïve would conclude such operations are a thing of the past.

The Warren Commission claimed that the president was shot by an ex-Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald, firing three bullets from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository as Kennedy’s car was already two hundred and fifty feet past and driving away from him. But this is patently false for many reasons, including the bizarre claim that one of these bullets, later termed “the magic bullet,” passed through Kennedy’s body and zigzagged up and down, left and right, striking Texas Governor John Connolly who was sitting in the front seat and causing seven wounds in all, only to be found later in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital.[xxv] And, any lone assassin looking out the 6th floor window would have taken the perfect shot as the limousine approached within forty feet of the TSBD on Houston St.

The absurdity of the government’s claim, a ballistic fairytale, was the key to its assertion that Oswald killed Kennedy. It was visually shattered and rendered ridiculous by the famous Zapruder film that clearly shows the president being shot from the front right, and, as the right front of his head explodes, he is violently thrown back and to his left as Jacqueline Kennedy climbs on to the car’s trunk to retrieve a piece of her husband’s skull and brain.

This video evidence is clear and simple proof of a conspiracy.[xxvi]

Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?

But there is another way to examine it.

Image on the right: Lee Harvey Oswald (Source: TheFreeThoughtProject.com)

Oswald

If Lee Harvey Oswald, the man The Warren Commission said killed JFK, was connected to the intelligence community, the FBI and the CIA, then we can logically conclude that he was not “a lone-nut” assassin or not an assassin at all. There is a wealth of evidence to show how, from the very start, Oswald was moved around the globe by the CIA like a pawn in a game, and when the game was done, the pawn was eliminated in the Dallas police headquarters by Jack Ruby two days later.

James W. Douglass, in JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, the most important book on the matter, asks this question:

Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?

This is a key question.

After serving as a U.S. Marine at the CIA’s U-2 spy plane Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan with a Crypto clearance (higher than top secret, a fact suppressed by the Warren Commission) and being trained in the Russian language, Oswald left the Marines and defected to the Soviet Union.[xxvii] After denouncing the U.S., rejecting his American citizenship, working at a Soviet factory in Minsk, and taking a Russian wife—during which time Gary Powers’ U-2 spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union—he returned to the U.S. with a loan from the American Embassy in Moscow, only to be met at the dock in Hoboken, New Jersey, by Spas T. Raikin, a prominent anti-Communist with extensive intelligence connections recommended by the State Department.[xxviii]

Oswald passed through immigration with no trouble, was not prosecuted, moved to Fort Worth, Texas where, at the suggestion of the Dallas CIA Domestic Contacts Service chief, he was met and befriended by George de Mohrenschildt, an anti-communist Russian, who was a CIA asset. De Mohrenschildt got him a job four days later at a photography and graphic arts company that worked on top secret maps for the U.S. Army Map Service related to U-2 spy missions over Cuba.

Oswald was then shepherded around the Dallas area by de Mohrenschildt. In 1977, on the day he revealed he had contacted Oswald for the CIA and was to meet with the House Select Committee on Assassinations’ investigator, Gaeton Fonzi, de Mohrenschildt allegedly committed suicide.

Oswald then moved to New Orleans in April, 1963 where he got a job at the Reily Coffee Company owned by CIA-affiliated William Reily. The Reily Coffee Company was located in close vicinity to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and Naval Intelligence offices and a stone’s throw from the office of Guy Banister, a former Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Chicago Bureau, who worked as a covert action coordinator for the intelligence services, supplyingweapons, money, and training to anti-Castro paramilitaries. Oswald then went to work with Banister and the CIA paramilitaries.

From this time up until the assassination, Oswald engaged in all sorts of contradictory activities, one day portraying himself as pro-Castro, the next day as anti-Castro, many of these theatrical performances being directed from Banister’s office. It was as though Oswald, on the orders of his puppet masters, was       enacting multiple and antithetical roles in order to confound anyone intent on deciphering the purposes behind his actions and to set him up as a future “assassin” or “patsy.”

James Douglass persuasively argues that Oswald “seems to have been working with both the CIA and FBI,” as a provocateur for the former and an informant for the latter. Jim and Elsie Wilcott, who worked at the CIA Tokyo Station from 1960-64, in a 1978 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, said, “It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency.”[xxix]

When Oswald moved to New Orleans in April, 1963, de Mohrenschildt exited the picture, having asked the CIA for and been indirectly given a $285,000 contract to do a geological survey for Haitian dictator “Papa Doc” Duvalier, which he never did, but for which he was paid.[xxx]

Ruth and Michael Paine then entered the scene on cue. Ruth had been introduced to Oswald by de Mohrenschildt. In September, 1963, Ruth Paine drove from her sister’s house in Virginia to New Orleans to pick up Marina Oswald and bring her to Dallas to live with her, where Lee also stayed on weekends. Back in Dallas, Ruth Paine conveniently arranged a job for Lee Harvey Oswald in the Texas Book Depository, where he began work on October 16, 1963.

Ruth, along with Marina Oswald, was the Warren Commission’s critically important witness against Oswald. Allen Dulles, despite his earlier firing by JFK, got appointed to a key position on the Warren Commission.  He questioned the Paines in front of it, studiously avoiding any revealing questions, especially ones that could disclose his personal connections to the Paines. For Michel Paine’s mother, therefore Ruth’s mother-in-law, Ruth Paine Forbes Young, was a close friend of his old mistress, Mary Bancroft, who worked as a spy with Dulles during WW II. Bancroft and he had been invited guests at Ruth Paine Forbes Young’s private island off Cape Cod.

Ruth and Michael Paine had extensive intelligence connections. Thirty years after the assassination, a document was declassified showing Ruth Paine’s sister Sylvia worked for the CIA. Her father traveled throughout Latin America on an Agency for International Development (notorious for CIA front activities) contract and filed reports that went to the CIA. Her husband Michael’s step-father, Arthur Young, was the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, a major military supplier for the Vietnam War, and Michael’s job there gave him a security clearance.

From late September through November 22nd, various “Oswalds” were later reported to have simultaneously been seen from Mexico City to Dallas. Two Oswalds were arrested in the Texas Theater, the real one taken out the front door and an impostor out the back.

As Douglass says:

“There were more Oswalds providing evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than the Warren Report could use or even explain.”[xxxi]

Even J. Edgar Hoover knew that Oswald impostors were used, as he told LBJ concerning Oswald’s alleged visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. He later called this CIA ploy, “the false story re Oswald’s trip to Mexico . . . their (CIA’s) double-dealing,” something that he couldn’t forget. [xxxii]

It was apparent to anyone paying close attention that a very intricate and deadly game was being played at high levels in the shadows.

We know Oswald was blamed for the President’s murder. But if one fairly follows the trail of the crime, it becomes blatantly obvious that government forces were at work. Douglass and others have amassed layer upon layer of evidence to show how this had to be so.

Who Had the Power to Withdraw the President’s Security?

To answer this essential question is to finger the conspirators and to expose, in Vincent Salandria’s words, “the false mystery concealing state crimes.”[xxxiii]

Neither Oswald, the mafia nor anti-Castro Cubans could have withdrawn most of the security that day. Sheriff Bill Decker ordered all his deputies “to take no part whatsoever in the security of that [presidential] motorcade.”[xxxiv]  Police Chief Jesse Curry did the same for Dallas police protection for the president in Dealey Plaza. Both “Chief Curry and Sheriff Decker gave their orders withdrawing security from the president in obedience to orders they had themselves received from the Secret Service.” The Secret Service withdrew the police motorcycle escorts from beside the president’s car where they had been on previous presidential motorcades as well as the day before in Houston and removed agents from the back of the car where they were normally stationed to obstruct gunfire.

The Secret Service admitted there were no Secret Service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza to protect Kennedy. But we know from extensive witness testimony that, during and after the assassination, there were people in Dealey Plaza impersonating Secret Service agents who stopped policeman and the public from moving through the area on the Grassy Knoll where some of the shots appeared to come from. The Secret Service approved the fateful, dogleg turn (on a dry run on November 18) where the car, driven by Secret Service agent William Greer, moved at a snail’s pace and came almost to a halt before the final head shot, clear and blatant security violations.  The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded this, not some conspiracy theorist.[xxxv]

Who could have squelched the testimony of the many doctors and medical personnel who claimed the president had been shot from the front in his neck and head, testimony contradicting the official story?

Who could have prosecuted and imprisoned Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent personally brought on to the White House detail by JFK, who warned that he feared the president was going to be assassinated? (Douglass interviewed Bolden seven times and his evidence on the aborted plot to kill JFK in Chicago on November 2 is a story little known but extraordinary in its implications.)

The list of all the people who turned up dead, the evidence and events manipulated, the inquiry squelched, distorted, and twisted in an ex post facto cover-up clearly point to forces within the government, not rogue actors without institutional support.

The evidence for a conspiracy organized at the deepest levels of the intelligence apparatus is overwhelming. James Douglass presents it in such depth and so logically that only one hardened to the truth would not be deeply moved and affected by his book, JFK and the Unspeakable.

But there is more from him and other researchers who have cut the Gordian      knot of this false mystery with a few brief strokes.

Oswald, The Preordained Patsy

Three examples will suffice to show that Lee Harvey Oswald, working as part of a U.S. Intelligence operation, was set up to take the blame for the assassination of President Kennedy, and that when he said in police custody that he was “a patsy,” he was speaking truthfully. These examples make it clear that Oswald was deceived by his intelligence handlers and had been chosen without his knowledge, long before the murder, to take the blame as a lone, crazed killer.

First, Kennedy was shot at 12:30 P.M. CT. According to the Warren Report, at 12:45 P.M. a police report was issued for a suspect that perfectly fit Oswald’s description. This was based on the testimony of Howard Brennan, who said he was standing across from the Book Depository and saw a standing white man, about 5’10” and slender, fire a rifle at the president’s car from the sixth-floor window. This was blatantly false because photographs taken moments after the shooting show the window open only partially at the bottom about fourteen inches, and it would have been impossible for a standing assassin to be seen “resting against the left windowsill,” (the windowsill was a foot from the floor), as Brennan is alleged to have said. He would have therefore had to have been shooting through the glass. The description of the suspect was clearly fabricated in advance to match Oswald’s.

Then between 1:06 and 1:15 P.M. in the quiet residential Oak Cliff neighborhood of Dallas, Police Officer J.D. Tippit was shot and killed. Supposedly based on Brennan’s description broadcast over police radio, Tippit had stopped a man fitting the description and this man pulled a gun and shot the officer. Meanwhile, Oswald had returned to his rooming house where his landlady said he left at 1:03 P.M., went outside, and was standing at a northbound bus stop. The Tippet murder took place nine-tenths of a mile away to the south where a witness, Mrs. Higgins, said she heard a gunshot at 1:06 P.M., ran outside, saw Tippit lying in the street and a man running away with a handgun whom she said was not Oswald.

Oswald is reported to have entered the Texas Theater minutes before the Tippit murder. The concession stand operator, Warren Burroughs has said he sold him popcorn at 1:15 P.M., which is the time the Warren Report claims Tippit was killed. At 1:50 P.M., Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested in the Texas Theater and taken out the front door where a crowd and many police cars awaited him, while a few minutes later a second Oswald is secretly taken out the back door of the movie theater. (To read this story of the second Oswald and his movement by the CIA out of Dallas on a military aircraft on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, documented in great detail by James W. Douglass, is an eye-opener.)

The official narrative of Oswald and the Tippit murder begs credulity, but it serves to “show” that Oswald was a killer.[xxxvi]

Despite his denials, Oswald, set up for Kennedy’s murder based on a prepackaged description, is arraigned for Tippit’s murder at 7:10 PM. It was not until the next day that he was charged for Kennedy’s.

The Message to Air Force One

Secondly, while Oswald is being questioned about Tippit’s murder in the afternoon hours after his arrest, Air Force One has left Dallas for Washington with the newly sworn-in president Lyndon Johnson and the presidential party. Back in D.C., the White House Situation Room is under the personal and direct control of Kennedy’s National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, a man with close CIA ties who had opposed JFK on many matters, including the Bay of Pigs and Kennedy’s order to withdraw from Vietnam.[xxxvii]

As reported by Theodore White, in The Making of the President 1964, Johnson and the others were informed by the Bundy controlled Situation Room that “there was no conspiracy, learned of the identity of Oswald and his arrest …”[xxxviii]

Vincent Salandria, one of the earliest and most astute critics of the Warren Commission, put it this way in his book, False Mystery:[xxxix]

This [announcement from the Situation Room to Air Force One in flight back to Washington, D.C] was the very first announcement of Oswald as the lone assassin. In Dallas, Oswald was not even charged with assassinating the President until 1:30 A.M. the next morning. The plane landed at 5:59 P.M. on the 22nd. At that time      the District Attorney of Dallas, Henry Wade, was stating that “preliminary reports indicated more than one person was involved in the shooting … the electric chair is too good for the killers.” Can there be any doubt that for any government taken by surprise by the assassination — and legitimately seeking the truth concerning it — less than six hours after the time of the assassination was too soon to know there was no conspiracy? This announcement was the first which designated Oswald as the lone assassin….

I propose the thesis that McGeorge Bundy, when that announcement was issued from his Situation Room, had reason to know that the true meaning of such a message when conveyed to the Presidential party on Air Force One [and to a separate plane with the entire cabinet that had turned around and was headed back over the Pacific Ocean] was not the ostensible message which was being communicated. Rather, I submit that Bundy … was really conveying to the Presidential party the thought that Oswald was being designated the lone assassin before any evidence against him was ascertainable. As a central coordinator of intelligence services, Bundy in transmitting such a message through the Situation Room was really telling the Presidential party that an unholy marriage had taken place between the U.S. Governmental intelligence services and the lone-assassin doctrine. Was he not telling the Presidential party peremptorily, ‘Now, hear this! Oswald is the assassin, the sole assassin. Evidence is not available yet. Evidence will be obtained, or in lieu thereof evidence will be created. This is a crucial matter of state that cannot await evidence. The new rulers have spoken. You, there, Mr. New President, and therefore dispatchable stuff, and you the underlings of a deposed President, heed the message well.’ Was not Bundy’s Situation Room serving an Orwellian double-think function?[xl]

Oswald’s Prepackaged Life Story

Finally, Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty adds a third example of the CIA conspiracy for those who need more evidence that the government has lied from the start about the assassination.

Prouty was Chief of Special Operations in the Pentagon before and during the Kennedy years. He was the liaison between the Joint Chiefs and the CIA, working closely with Director Allen Dulles and others in supporting the clandestine operations of the CIA under military cover. He had been sent out of the country to the South Pole by the aforementioned CIA operative Edward Lansdale (Operation Northwoods) before the Kennedy assassination and was returning on November 22, 1963. On a stopover in Christchurch, New Zealand, he heard a radio report that the president had been killed but knew no details. He was having breakfast with a U.S Congressman at 7:30 AM on November 23, New Zealand time. A short time later, at approximately 4:30 PM Dallas time, November 22, he bought the Christchurch Star 23 November 1963 newspaper and read it together with the Congressman.

The newspaper reports from the scene said that Kennedy had been killed by bursts of automatic weapons fire, not a single shot rifle, firing three separate shots in 6.8 seconds, as was later claimed for Oswald. But the thing that really startled him was that at a time when Oswald had just been arrested and had not even been charged for the murder of Officer Tippit, there was elaborate background information on Oswald, his time in Russia, his association with Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans, etc. “It’s almost like a book written five years later,” said Prouty. “Furthermore, there’s a picture of Oswald, well-dressed in a business suit, whereas, when he was picked up on the streets of Dallas after the President’s death, he had on some t-shirt or something…

“Who had written that scenario?  Who wrote that script…So much news was already written ahead of time of the murder to say that Oswald killed the President and that he did it with three shots…Somebody had decided Oswald was going to be the patsy…Where did they get it, before the police had charged him with the crime?  Not so much ‘where,’ as ‘why’Oswald?”[xli]

Prouty, an experienced military man working for the CIA in the Pentagon, accused the military-intelligence “High Cabal” of killing President Kennedy in an elaborate and sophisticated plot and blaming it on Oswald, whom they had begun setting up years in advance.

The evidence for a government plot to plan, assassinate, cover-up, and choose a patsy in the murder of President John Kennedy is overwhelming.[xlii]

Five years after JFK’s assassination, we would learn, to our chagrin and his glory, that the president’s younger brother, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, equally brave and unintimidated, would take a bullet to the back of his head in 1968 as he was on his way to the presidency and the pursuit of his brother’s killers. The same cowards struck again.

Their successors still run the country and must be stopped.

Epilogue by James W. Douglass

“John F. Kennedy was raised from the death of wealth, power, and privilege. The son of a millionaire ambassador, he was born, raised, and educated to rule the system. When he was elected President, Kennedy’s heritage of power corresponded to his position as head of the greatest national security state in history. But Kennedy, like Lazarus, was raised from the death of that system. In spite of all odds, he became a peacemaker and, thus, a traitor to the system….

“Why? What raised Kennedy from the dead? Why did John Kennedy choose life in the midst of death and by continuing to choose life thus condemn himself to death? I have puzzled over that question while studying the various biographies of Kennedy. May I suggest one source of grace for his resurrection as a peacemaker? In reading his story, one is struck by his devotion to his children. There is no mistaking the depth of love he had for Caroline and John, and the overwhelming pain he and Jacqueline experienced at the death of their son Patrick. Robert Kennedy in his book Thirteen Days has described how his brother saw the Cuban Missile Crisis in terms of the future of his children and all children. I believe John Kennedy was at least partially raised from the dead of the national security state by the life of his children. The heroic peacemaking of his final months, with his acceptance of its likely cost in his own death, was, I suspect, partly a result of the universal life he saw in and through them. I think he believed profoundly the words that he gave in his American University address as his foundation for rejecting the Cold War: ‘Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.’”[xliii]

*

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

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

Notes

[i] History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy, E. Martin Schotz, Kurtz, Ulmer, & DeLucia Book Publishers, 1996.

[ii] JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died & Why It Matters, James W. Douglass, Orbis Books, 2008[1][2], p. 8 & p.212.

Destiny Betrayed, James DiEugenio, 2nd Edition, Skyhorse Publishing, 2012, pp. 17-33.

The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret Government, David Talbot, Harper Collins, 2015, pp. 375389.

MORI DocID: 1451843 p. 464, p. 473 of “The CIA’s Family Jewels,” 16 May 1973, The National Security Archives.

[iv] Investigation into the condition and circumstances resulting in the tragic death of Dag Hammarskjold and of members of the party accompanying him (United Nations General Assembly document,) Judge Mohamed Chande Othman, September 5, 2017, p. 49 and 50, Dag Hammarskjöld Plane Crash Recent Developments, UN Association, Westminster Branch UK.

[v] Edward Curtin interviews Greg Poulgrain on The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen Dulles, Global Research, July 22, 2016.

Chapter 2 – JFK, Dulles and Hammarskjöld of The Incubus of Intervention.

Greg Poulgrain, JFK vs Allen Dulles: Battleground Indonesia, Simon & Schuster, 2020.

[vi] Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., American Values, Harper Collins, 2018, p. 117.

[vii] Dallas Mayor During JFK Assassination Was CIA Asset, Who.What.Why, August 2, 2017.

[viii] Peter Kornbluh confirmed this in a phone conversation with the author in May 2000. See The ULTRASENSITIVE Bay of PigsNewly Released Portions of Taylor Commission Report Provide Critical New Details on Operation Zapata, National Security Archive Briefing Book No. 29, May 3, 2000.

[ix] Averell Harriman interviewed in Charles Stevenson, The End Of Nowhere; American Policy Toward Laos Since 1954 , 1972, p. 154.

[x] Richard Reeves, President Kennedy: Profile of Power, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 222.

[xi] Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962, FOIA documents at National Security Archive.

[xii] Pierre Salinger, P.S.: A Memoir, St. Martin’s Press, 1995, p. 253.

[xiii] Talbot, op. cit., p. 453.

[xiv] John Kenneth Galbraith, A Life in Our Times, Houghton Mifflin, 1981, p. 388.

[xv] American University Commencement Address, President Kennedy, June 10, 1963.

[xvi] President Kennedy Radio and TV Address to the American People on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, July 26, 1963.

Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space, and Under Water, signed at Moscow August 5, 1963, entered into force October 10, 1963.

[xvii] See James K. Galbraith, “Exit Strategy,” Boston Review, October/November 2003.

[xviii] Pierre Salinger, With Kennedy, Doubleday & Co., 1966, p.198.

[xix] See Norman Cousins, The Improbable Triumvirate: John F. Kennedy, Pope John, Nikita Khrushchev – An Asterisk to the History of a Hopeful Year, 1962-1963, W.W. Norton & Co., 1972.

[xx] Jean Daniel, “Unofficial Envoy – An Historic Report from Two Capitals,” The New Republic, December 14, 1963.

[xxi] Kenneth P. O’Donnell and David F. Powers, “Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye;” Memories of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Little Brown, 1972, p.25.

[xxii] See Operation Mockingbird, the only FOIA-released-by-CIA documents at The Black Vault.

Carl Bernstein, “THE CIA AND THE MEDIA – How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up.” Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

[xxiii] James F. Tracy, “The CIA and the Media: 50 Facts the World Needs to Know,” Global Research/ratical.org, 2018.

[xxiv] Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters, New Press. 1999.

See Also: James Petras, “The CIA and the Cultural Cold War Revisited,” Monthly Review, November 1999.

[xxv] See Vincent J. Salandria, “The Warren Report?Liberation, March 1965.

[xxvi] Zapruder Film in slow motion (1:33).

[xxvii] Gerald D. McKnight, Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why, Univ. Of Kansas Press, 2005, review by Jim DiEugenio.

[xxviii] Douglass, op. cit., p. 46.

[xxix] See James and Elsie Wilcott: CIA Profile in Courage, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 144-148, 421-422.

[xxx] Douglass, op. cit., p. 47-48.

[xxxi] See Oswald’s Doubles: How Multiple Lookalikes Were Used to Craft One Lone Scapegoat, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 286-303, 350-355, 464-470, 481-483.

[xxxii] Douglass, op. cit., p. 81.

[xxxiii] Vincent Salandria, The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes, presentation at the Coalition on Political Assassinations, November 20, 1998.

[xxxiv] Dallas Deputy Sheriff Roger Dean Craig, When They Kill A President, 1971.

[xxxv] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 270-277 and endnote 75 of James Douglass’ 2009 COPA Keynote Address.

Secret Service Final Survey Report for the November 21, 1963, visit by President Kennedy to Houston, cited in    

Appendix to Hearings before the HSCA, vol. 11, p.529.

[xxxvi] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 287-304.

DiEugenio, op. cit., pp. 391-2.

[xxxvii] Talbot, op.cit., pp. 407-8.  &  NSAM 263 (document 194), Foreign Relations of the United States, Vietnam v. IV, Aug-Dec’63.

[xxxviii] Theodore White, The Making of the President, 1964, Atheneum, 1965, p. 33.

See also , Let Us Begin Anew: An Oral History of the Kennedy Presidency, Gerald S. Strober, Debra Strober, Perennial, 1993, pp. 450-451.

[xxxix] False Mystery, Essays on the JFK Assassination by Vincent Salandria, rat haus reality press, 2017

[xl] Bundy Continued to Shape Hawkish Policies, in Vincent J. Salandria, “The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: A Model of Explanation,” Computers and Automation, December 1971, pp. 32-40.

[xli] David T. Ratcliffe, Understanding Special Operations: 1989 Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty, rat haus reality press, 1999, pp. 214-215.

[xlii] See The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection at The National Archives.

[xliii] James Douglass, “The Assassinations of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy in the Light of the Fourth Gospel,” Sewanee Theological Review, 1998


More articles on JFK’s assassination by the author:

“The Assassination and Mrs. Paine”. The Last Link to the Murder of JFK. Review and Analysis by Edward Curtin

By Edward Curtin, July 06, 2022

Oliver Stone Documents the Past to Illuminate the Present. “JFK: Destiny Betrayed”

By Edward Curtin, March 30, 2022

JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass by Oliver Stone

By Edward Curtin, January 17, 2022

There Is a Direct Link Between JFK, 9/11 and COVID-19: Edward Curtin

By Edward Curtin and Geopolitics and Empire, November 10, 2021

Bob Dylan’s Explosive Song “Murder Most Foul”, History of the JFK Assassination and “The Interview”

By Edward Curtin, November 22, 2020

Unspeakable Memories: The Day John Kennedy Died

By Edward Curtin, November 22, 2020

Consult the author’s archive for more articles.


He is the author of Seeking the Truth in a Country of Lies

To order his book click the cover page.

“Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies is a dazzling journey into the heart of many issues — political, philosophical, and personal — that should concern us all.  Ed Curtin has the touch of the poet and the eye of an eagle.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“Edward Curtin puts our propaganda-stuffed heads in a guillotine, then in a flash takes us on a redemptive walk in the woods — from inferno to paradiso.  Walk with Ed and his friends — Daniel Berrigan, Albert Camus, George Orwell, and many others — through the darkest, most-firefly-filled woods on this earth.” James W. Douglass, author, JFK and the Unspeakable

“A powerful exposé of the CIA and our secret state… Curtin is a passionate long-time reform advocate; his stories will rouse your heart.” Oliver Stone, filmmaker, writer, and director

Contradictions on Trump’s attempted assassination pile up, with serious security breaches and officials claiming an investigation is needed to determine whether it was a matter of incompetence or malice.

To begin with, according to the ABC News,

“law enforcement officials investigating the assassination attempt on Donald Trump told lawmakers Wednesday that 20 minutes passed between the time U.S. Secret Service snipers first spotted the gunman on a rooftop and the time shots were fired at the former president.”

How can one explain that?

Moreover, it is a well-established fact now that onlookers alerted the authorities about the presence of an armed man on a nearby roof. One witness  reported that to the BBC shortly after the incident.

In addition, local officials in Pennsylvania are complaining that the Secret Service, in an attempt to deflect blame, is throwing them “under the bus”. According to one local police officer:

“The Secret Service came out here more than a month ahead of time and met with all the local agencies. They tell us exactly what to do, exactly what they want and exactly how they want it. It’s all on them.”

More intriguingly, several witnesses describe a second shooter, and there seems to be plenty of cell phone footage indicating that – while the Secret Service insist there was only one. According to a Times of India story,

“an audio forensic analysis conducted by experts from the National Center for Media Forensics at the University of Colorado in Denver suggests the possibility of a second shooter in the incident”.

A CNN story in turn reports that “forensic analysis suggests that as many as three weapons were fired at the Trump rally.”

Stephen Bryen, security expert, takes the second shooter allegation seriously, and, in his Substack newsletter, he is calling for a “solid FBI investigation with Congressional oversight” on the matter. He adds that

“there is a general consensus that security at the Trump Rally was poor”, and adds: “if the Secret Service actually approved all the security measures …we wonder, like millions of others no doubt, how could they overlook the rooftops.”

Bryen is no fringe figure – he is a former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, who writes for Newsweek, the Jewish Policy Center, and others.

Cory Mills, a member of the United States House of Representatives, takes the matter a bit further, saying an investigation on the Secret Service is needed to determine whether this was merely incompetence or rather malice, with an intent to neutralize Trump.

Cory Mills is a former military, and was a member of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) 20 in Iraq. He is also a defense contractor, who has earned a Master of Arts in international relations and conflict resolution from American Military University. Again, this is also no fringe figure, and his allegations raise eyebrows.

Given all the above, it is no wonder suspicions abound – the fact that Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle is very close to the Biden couple certainly doesn’t help.

According to the New York Post, she “landed her role thanks largely to a close relationship with first lady Jill Biden.” In any other country, by the way, after such a scandal, the Secret Service director would have been fired already or would have resigned. One thing that hampers further scrutiny, however, is an American cultural trait, namely the distaste for “conspiracy theories” (which is rather ironic in a country where conspiracies abound). Here, some context is needed.

Most scholars concede that sometimes conspiracy theories (CT) are proven to be at least partly correct. A “true” or ideal CT is supposed to always be false – meaning that its narrative does not describe reality. However, what happens when new data changes the “official” story? For instance, nowadays it is known that in 1962 the US Department of Defense proposed a false flag operation (the Operation Northwoods), calling for CIA operatives to actually commit terrorist attacks against American civilians and military targets in American cities (with bombings and hijackings) and then using those to justify a Cuban invasion. Then President John F. Kennedy rejected the plan, but the proposal existed, and no one denies it.

It is thus not clear at all how a “correct” conspiracy theory (one which later happens to be proven true) differs from a false one. Was it a CT when critics argued that the US government had lied about the real motivations which led it to invade Iraq? Other authors define “conspiracy theories” in a more neutral manner as any hypotheses that try to explain an event by invoking a “conspiracy” – namely, a secret plan carried out by a group of people.

One should also be cautious as to avoid equating a mere CT (about anything) and a conspiratorial way of understanding society and history in general. The latter (conspiracism), implicitly holds that nothing ever happens by chance but rather everything (especially tragedies) happens by design. Conspiracies do exist but not everything is a conspiracy. On the other hand, in face of a major politically charged event, when various contradictions pile up, it would be naïve to readily dismiss everything as a “coincidence” (I would describe it as a “coincidence theory”).

With Biden’s undeniable senility getting worse, it is becoming increasingly clear he is not fit to run for the presidency again – he can barely participate in a debate or give interviews. Given this, the question then, as I wrote, is how can he govern, or rather how come has he been governing thus? In other words, who has been doing all the governing? Some talk about a “ triumvirate”, referring to Biden’s close advisers Bruce Reed, Mike Donilon, and Steve Ricchetti – the matter is far from being clear, though. One can only imagine the amount of palace intrigue going on amid this “emperor clothes” scenario.

With the ongoing political crisis, any investigation on the Secret Service will be either weaponized by Republicans against Democrats or covered up by the latter, amid a major narrative war and claims about “conspiracy theories”. The crisis is thus also an epistemic one, so to speak.

This state of affairs can only further undermine the legitimacy of American institutions, with serious consequences for the country’s stability. With a suspicious murder attempt on a presidential candidate and an embarrassingly senile incumbent president, the rest of the world holds their breath while the politics within the Atlantic superpower has just gone mad.

*

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.

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

Featured image is by Evan Vucci / Licensed under Fair Use

Business Insider reported that NATO had never faced an adversary of Russia’s calibre after World War II, and it would have been difficult for the alliance to establish air superiority over Russian forces. The warning comes as experts have explained the sombre reality that the F-16 fighter jets, a key aircraft in many NATO air force fleets, provided to Kiev will not be a “magic bullet” that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his Western allies expect them to be.

“Russia could challenge NATO’s historical air dominance,” reported the media on July 13 after explaining that this is a change from the scenario that emerged after the Cold War when the West had a clear advantage. “Russia would be a very different opponent. It has the territory and industry to build and field massive and sophisticated air defenses that an opponent may struggle to destroy.”

“The US and its allies, even with fleets of fifth-generation stealth fighter jets, likely would find it difficult to establish the same level of air dominance they’ve largely had since the end of World War II,” the New York-based outlet said.

According to experts cited by the portal, Western aviation has never had the experience of combating air defence systems at a level similar to that of Russia’s. During the conflict in Ukraine, the Russian military proved that it could establish extremely difficult air defence areas for the enemy with powerful radars, electronic warfare systems and missiles.

“The Russians could attempt a surprising and impactful opening attack,” the article warned. “For example, the Russians could target vulnerabilities like satellites to try to disrupt the space-based communications and navigation NATO airpower depends upon.”

The worry that Russia could establish air superiority over NATO, particularly over the bloc’s 30 European members, became a more serious consideration after Russian forces methodically obliterated Ukraine’s air force. Russia so impressively dismantled the Ukrainian air force that the Kiev regime is desperately seeking F-16 fighter jets from Western allies to replenish its fleet, even though experts are saying that the aircraft is now obsolete and unlikely to survive the conflict.

“As soon as the Ukrainians encountered Russian-controlled air space, the F-16’s value would diminish markedly, as would its likelihood of survival,” Harrison Kass wrote for the National Interest. “In a conflict with a great power, China for example, the F-16 would remain on the backbench.”

This is a telling revelation considering the US still uses over 900 F-16s, NATO members, including Turkey, Greece, Poland, and Romania, use hundreds more, as well as US non-NATO allies Israel, Taiwan and South Korea. In effect, the F-16 would be rendered almost useless against Russia given that the Eastern European country’s military is ranked second, one above China, according to the 2024 PowerIndex.

Kass warns Kiev that the good performance of the F-16 fighter jets in Iraq and Afghanistan does not say anything about their capabilities against Russian air defences.

After stressing that “the F-16 fighting falcon era is coming to a rapid end,” Kass concludes that the US-made fighter jet “will not offer a magic bullet for Zelensky” and will merely “buy a little more time.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that the F-16s supplied to Kiev will be destroyed just like other Western military equipment. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also warned that their appearance in Ukraine will not change anything on the front and that they will be destroyed in the same way as other types of weapons.

Nonetheless, in 2023, several NATO states agreed to supply the Ukrainian armed forces with the fighter jets and launched training programs for Ukrainian pilots. On July 10, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the US and its allies are “underway” in sending the promised F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine.

As Europe and the US are not interested in a viable, pragmatic, and lasting peace agreement in Ukraine which recognises Russian interests in the region and establishes a lasting solution, they are actively prolonging the fighting despite not only the humanitarian consequences but even the weakening of their own military. Whilst NATO members are distracted with training Ukrainian pilots to use fighter jets that are effectively obsolete in any combat with a great power, Russia, as Business Insider has acknowledged, has successfully challenged the air dominance NATO largely enjoyed since the start of the Cold War despite the introduction of fifth-generation fighter jets.

*

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

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 is from InfoBrics

Living in Tents: Gazans Pour Out Their Woes

July 19th, 2024 by The Palestinian Information Center

Across vast agricultural lands and along the coast in central and southern Gaza, tens of thousands of tents have become shelters for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced by the ongoing, bloody Israeli war for the 10th consecutive month.

Once a symbol of the Nakba (catastrophe) and displacement for more than seven decades, the tent has now become a dream for thousands of displaced families in Gaza, despite the harsh living conditions it imposes.

.

.

Read the tweet on X

What is it like to live in a tent? This question might seem devoid of emotions and disconnected from the harsh realities of Gaza amid the Israeli genocide that has taken many Palestinian lives but failed to break their will and determination to cling to their land. However, the  question is crucial to understand the extent of the Palestinian tragedy and resilience.

The Palestinian Information Center (PIC) interviewed some of those that were displaced and are now living in tents to see the harsh situation they are now under.

Quest for a Tent

Whilst all those interviewed speak of the difficulty of living in a tent – suffering the harsh hot summers and cold winters – for many of the displaced the tent has become a dream come true as it is easily hoisted and dismantled quickly. This is important for those displaced who needed to move more than once because of the Israeli army gunfire, tanks, drones and warplanes.

Mohammed Said said he bought a tent for 1,200 shekels ($330) after he could no longer bear living in a “khas,” a makeshift shelter made of wooden sticks covered with nylon or any other available material.

He explained a khas provides no privacy because of the mostly nylon material its made of and its impossible to move when forced to relocate. Thus, he went for a tent, having relocated at least twice already.

Various NGOs provide tents for free, but with demand shooting up some of the tents have started to be sold, forcing people to buy them due to the lack of alternatives. Today tents vary in shape and size, according to how much you want to pay.

Finding a place to set up the tentAfter getting a tent, the second challenge is to find a place to set it up. Such areas are currently limited to around Khan Yunis and Deir al-Balah.

Read the tweet on X

Khaled Al-Masri said he had to move his tent several times to be close to water sources and/or the scarce aid.

“Today, there are camps made up of a group of tents overseen by an association or individuals’ initiatives to provide some aid, ensure water access, and establish shared bathrooms. Other tents are set up randomly on agricultural land and near destroyed homes,” he said.

Life in the Tents

Living in tents are tales of pain and suffering, varying according to the family’s resources, number size, tent location and the supervising entity.

A small family with a tent in an area receiving aid can adapt better and suffer less compared to an extended family with a small tent in an area lacking in services.

With the scorching summer heat, living in a tent among hundreds of others in Gaza feels like a living hell, said  Amani Hamdan.

Hamdan told PIC she was forced to live in a tent on a land of a friend of her husband.  She is joined by her mother-in-law, disabled sister-in-law and her four children.

Read the tweet on X

“We relocated at least seven times from Khan Yunis since our house was bombed. Initially, we had no tent and suffered much until we managed to obtain one, and it’s only advantage is it can be unhooked easily if we need to move again.

Living in a tent is harsh and difficult, a  primitive life. And with no walls, and privacy, our voices reach the people in the tent next door and theirs reach us,” she added.

Suffering in Tents

“We can hardly move around inside the tent, some  sleep on mattresses, some without, part of the tent holds food supplies. The temperature is scorching, forcing us out of the canvas. In winter, we were drenched by rain; now, the heat is unbearable, but we thank God for what we have,” Hamdan added.

“We cook on fire outside the tent, bake bread in a shared oven, share a bathroom, and bathe rarely, needing prior coordination with the other tent partners. The children start their morning search for wood, while my husband travels long distances for water that is sometimes brought by volunteers. Life has become primitive with no kitchen, bathroom, or water faucets.”

What Is a Tent?

After enduring the harsh tent life for months, engineer Mohammed Munir wrote about its meaning, “To burn while sitting inside, to suffocate with no air or cooling. It’s like a greenhouse during the day.”

 “A tent means living on the ground, separated only by fabric, coexisting with all the insects of the earth as if you are now their guest,” He wrote on Facebook.

Read the tweet on X

 

“Normal activities become complicated, like taking a nap or a bath, walking comfortably, sitting peacefully, feeling safe, or sleeping without back pain from the hard ground, all of our dreams are now out of reach.

A tent means no privacy, speaking in whispers inside your tent while your neighbor hears you. With tents set up on sand and agricultural land, it means living with all types of insects and with no hygiene,” Munir concluded.

The Meaning of a Tent

“A tent means having no wall to lean on, no private life,” Sama Hassan wrote.

 “Displacement means not to live in safety or stability. We first moved from Gaza City to the north in search of ‘fake’ safety until the missiles to land on us. We then fled to southern Gaza in the first Friday of the war and stayed in Khan Yunis for two months, then moved to Rafah when the city was invaded in early December 2023.

 With each relocation, I lost a thread of my privacy, becoming more displaced and homeless like thousands in Gaza. A tent is harsher than a shared room in a stranger’s house as the bathroom is either within the tent, set up primitively, or shared, half a kilometer away, established by a charity. If a woman needs to use it at night, she must wake a man to escort her,” she ended by saying.

Life in a tent is hard for women, who must fully dress as they usually do when they go out of the house. She maintains dressed at all time despite the heat, lack the freedom of movement. In the tent, fires are lit, cooking is made, washing dishes, with large water containers placed in the corner.

Bathing in a tent involves women surrounding the one washing with thick blankets, like forming a small tent within the main tent, with the woman hurrying before the others tire of holding the blankets.

If living in a tent is already insufferable, doing so amid the ongoing Israeli genocide and bombings is even more so, because the strikes continue targeting as what happened to us in Rafah and Khan Yunis. This is beyond words.

In recent months, Israeli bombs have burned tents and killed dozens, leaving survivors to search for the remains of their loved ones before finding a new place to set up another tent if one is available, continuing their struggle.

*

This article was translated and edited from the Palestine Information Center’s website by Dr Marwan Asmar who writes in https://crossfirearabia.com.

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The US military announced Thursday that the floating pier, aimed ostensibly at delivering aid to Gaza’s starving population, will be dismantled. The official end of this two-month farce graphically exposes the complicity of American imperialism in Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians, which has claimed an estimated 186,000 lives, and will claim many more in the coming weeks and months due to malnutrition.

Since the floating pier was installed and declared operational on May 16, just 8,500 tons of aid have been delivered via the route. This equates to about 420 truckloads of aid. Announced with great fanfare by President Joe Biden in March, the pier ended up taking two months to deliver 80 percent of the 500 truckloads of aid that arrived in Gaza each day prior to the launching of Israel’s genocidal onslaught on October 7.

The pier was only in service for 25 days during its two-month presence off the Gaza coast due to bad weather and repeated repairs. The total cost of the operation was $230 million.

undefined

Overhead image of the connection of the Gaza Pier shortly after completion by US military forces on May 16, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

 

With breathtaking cynicism, Deputy Commander of US Central Command Brad Cooper asserted during his announcement of the end of the pier that it was “mission accomplished.” Perhaps he revealed more than he intended. The remark underscores how Washington was never concerned about averting a famine that was already imminent in March, when Biden presented the plan for the pier. Rather, the goal was to make a token gesture to widespread anger over the imperialist powers’ involvement in the genocide.

From the outset, aid organisations denounced the ineffectual approach of maritime aid deliveries. A statement was signed by 25 non-governmental organisations in March criticising the use of air drops and maritime deliveries by states “to create the illusion that they are doing enough to support the needs in Gaza.”

If US imperialism and its European allies were genuinely concerned about the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding before the world’s eyes in Gaza, they could have demanded Israel fully open land crossings into Gaza and guarantee the unhindered access of aid workers. What’s more, they could have forced this measure by halting their uninterrupted supply of high-powered weaponry to Israel, without which the Zionist regime could not continue its genocidal onslaught. But American imperialism is incapable of such actions, because it backs the genocide to the hilt as a demonstration of the ruthless measures it is prepared to employ in the rapidly emerging world war between the major powers.

The flow of 2,000-pound bombs, one of which can destroy an entire city block, has continued unabated. The Biden administration has supplied some 14,000 of these weapons of mass murder since Israel’s bombardment began.

Since Biden announced the deployment of the pier, Israel has continued to deliberately target aid workers and hit facilities run by the United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the main agency responsible for the delivery of aid. On April 1, the Israel Defence Forces bombed two vehicles carrying aid workers from World Central Kitchen, killing seven. Despite compelling evidence showing that Israel’s strike was deliberate, no calls came from the United States or any other imperialist power for an independent investigation or unimpeded access to Gaza for aid workers.

On May 6, just under two weeks before the pier went into operation, the IDF began its long-planned onslaught on Rafah, closing the two main border crossings for aid deliveries into the enclave. The offensive drove upwards of a million people out of Gaza’s southernmost city and reduced aid deliveries to a trickle, further compounding the already horrendous food crisis.

In a July 9 briefing, UN special rapporteurs declared that famine had spread throughout the Gaza Strip.

“We declare that Israel’s intentional and targeted starvation campaign against the Palestinian people is a form of genocidal violence and has resulted in famine across all of Gaza,” they explained in their statement. “We call upon the international community to prioritise the delivery of humanitarian aid by land by any means necessary, end Israel’s siege, and establish a ceasefire. … Thirty-four Palestinians have died from malnutrition since 7 October, the majority being children. Inaction is complicity.”

On July 12, an Israeli air strike in a supposed “safe zone” west of Khan Younis killed four aid workers from the Al-Khair organisation. A day later, 92 people were killed by an IDF strike on a camp in the al-Mawasi “safe zone.” UNRWA’s Gaza headquarters was “flattened” on July 15 in another strike, according to UNRWA head Philippe Lazzarini.

It has become virtually impossible to move aid inside Gaza due to ongoing bombardments and the deliberate targeting of aid workers. Speaking to Ireland’s The Journal, Maher Haboush from Gaza City explained that he and his family have been displaced 10 times since Israel’s bombardment began.

“I lost 16 kilos before the war; this is famine, and now a new level has started. When I go to the market, I can’t find items to feed my children,” he said.

UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Martin Griffiths warned that 1 million Gazans, about half the population, would face the threat of starvation and death by the middle of July. Waiting until famine is officially declared before taking action “would be a death sentence for hundreds of thousands of people and a moral outrage,” he added.

Image: Yazan al-Kafarna is one of the latest to die of hunger and malnutrition in Gaza since the start of the war on 7 October (Screengrab/X)

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, created by the UN, declares a famine when 20 percent of households have an extreme lack of food, 30 percent of children have acute malnutrition, and at least two adults or four children per 10,000 people die daily.

Disease is also on the rise. A report from Gaza’s health ministry Thursday confirmed the presence of polio in waste samples from Gaza. An Oxfam report stated that Israel has reduced water supplies to Gaza by 94 percent, producing “a deadly health catastrophe.” The level of water available in Gaza is “less than a single toilet flush” per day per person, the report added. The report pointed out that Israel has destroyed or damaged five water sanitation sites every three days since October 7, reducing water production in Gaza by 84 percent. The IDF has also destroyed 70 percent of water sewage pumps and all waste water treatment plants.

US imperialism views the inhuman crimes perpetrated by the Zionist regime as a price worth paying to advance its geopolitical interests in the region against Iran. Washington views the Gaza genocide as a key component in this strategy, which is aimed at consolidating American imperialist hegemony over the energy-rich Middle East. It has sanctioned a vast intensification of Israeli strikes into southern Lebanon to kill several leading commanders of Iranian-backed Hezbollah and will back an all-out war by Israel in Lebanon to the hilt.

Israel’s Prime Minister and war criminal-in-chief Benjamin Netanyahu is due in Washington next Wednesday, when he will deliver a progress report to Congress on the implementation of the genocide. He is scheduled to meet with Biden, and sources Thursday indicated that attempts are being made to arrange a meeting with the fascist ex-President Donald Trump, the current front runner in the US election. Amid rampant starvation and the spread of disease in Gaza, Netanyahu’s visit clearly expresses the complicity of the entire American political establishment in the genocide against the Palestinians.

The World Socialist Web Site and Socialist Equality Party are organizing a demonstration in Washington on July 24, not to appeal to the war criminals but to lay the basis for the building of an international anti-war movement led by the working class. This is the only way to stop the genocide and the rapidly evolving third imperialist world war.

*

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

Featured image: Construction of the floating pier, April 26, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

A contronym is a word having two definitions that contradict each other. Two examples are the word bolt, which can mean to lock with a bolt and to flee, and clip, which means to attach and to detach.

There are many such words and there is also a system of thought based on them. It has no name except for the one I give it here, admittedly an awkward one: The Contronymal Circus. Like words that are their own antonyms, this system of thought confuses and traps, as it is meant to do.

Language is of course slippery and equivocal, with words often connoting multiple meanings. But language is also conditioned by history; even my phrasing it that way is an example of using words in a loose and sloppy way, for “history” doesn’t exist and can’t do anything, people make history, use and shape words for their own designs, even as language then uses them as well.

To say I am making a moot point is an example of my point: Is it arguable or irrelevant to consider? Is that clear?

Image source

The American oligarchic political system that is endlessly debated and fixates people’s attention is a contronymal system that contains positive and negative poles that cancel each other out while keeping the believer frozen and frustrated. Once you are in it, you are trapped because there are no outside references, the simulated system of thought is your cage. Biden vs. Trump is an example of this cage.

The great Irish writer James Joyce was born in 1882 in Ireland that was historically subjected to colonial domination by Great Britain. He realized early on that the English language bequeathed to him was not neutrally aesthetic but through usage was politically charged and that words meant one thing to the colonizers and another to the colonized. In The Portrait of the Artist As A Young Man, his autobiographical novel, he has Stephen Dedalus say about his conversation with his condescending Jesuit English-born dean of studies:

The language in which we are speaking is his before it is mine. How different are the words home, Christ, ale, master on his lips and on mine! I cannot speak or write these words without unrest of spirit. His language, so familiar and so foreign, will always be for me an acquired speech. I have not made or accepted his words. My voice holds them at bay. My soul frets in the shadow of his language.

For language constitutes “reality” as much as describes it. It is political. Therefore, all cultures of resistance need to reclaim language, which includes not just individual words and their meaning, but phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and narrative structures. When ruling elites can impose language usage on the ruled, they can control their thinking, their sense of “reality,” and their belief in what is possible.

This is why poets are so central to the resistance of oppressed people, and by oppressed people I include residents of the United States who may not describe themselves with that term. For when language is corrupted and thought twisted in sinister ways, all efforts to resist the colonizers of the mind are self-defeating.  Double-binds are not reserved for personal relationships but pertain equally to politics and culture. There is a reason why public discourse about politics (and most everything) in the U.S.A. is so circular in nature, so self-defeating, always ending in a dead-end as the system of oligarchic rule rolls along and even strengthens.  Think Bush vs. Gore, Obama vs. McCain, Hillary Clinton vs. Trump, Biden vs. Trump, Trump vs. someone. Think of what has happened to reading, writing, and speaking skills throughout the society at every level. Functional illiteracy is widespread. Ignorance may not be bliss even when it’s folly to be wise, for the inability to grasp the contradictory nature of the story you are thinking in has no happy ending.

In the words of the Palestinian writer Edward Said:

“As one critic has suggested, nations themselves are narrations. The power to narrate, or to block other narratives from forming and emerging, is very important to culture and imperialism, and constitutes one of the main connections between them.”

The French thinker, Jean Baudrillard, cast this language conundrum in terms of simulacra and simulation, simulacra between copies of copies that have no originals. He said:

Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double, the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of the territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it. It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory – precession of simulacra – that engenders the territory….

Like a narrative structure that is a contronym – self-contradicting – there is no dialectical tension because the system has swallowed it. There is no critical negativity, no place to stand outside to rebel because the simulacrum encompasses the positive and negative in a circulatory process that makes everything equivalent but the “positivity” of the simulacrum itself.  You are inside the whale: “The virtual space of the global is the space of the screen and the network, of immanence and the digital, of a dimensionless space-time.”

What I am trying to say is difficult to grasp because it is so twisted. To use language to untwist this example of what the poet William Blake called the “mind-forged manacles” that is the essence of explicit or implicit propaganda is hard, because it involves uncovering the words used and the narratives we imbibe to understand our worlds. It involves grasping the presuppositions of a counterfeit system. It is much harder by the day because language has been radically reduced to slogans and words to images of images. Artificial Intelligence is further reducing all reality to illusions. We are caged in a system of contradictions, a narrative of contronyms through which we must see.

At the end of Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, Joyce, the great wordsmith and experimenter with form who would go on to write Ulysses and Finnegan’s Wake, has Stephen Dedalus declare that he will leave Ireland to go and “forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race.”

It is time for us to leave as well, to abandon a way of thinking that offers us the false choice of the evil of two lessers in a corrupt system. We have been sold a counterfeit bill of goods, one forged in the devious minds of deans of deception who make Stephen’s interlocuter look like an obnoxious amateur.

*

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

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

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

Featured image source

Europe at the ‘Hot Gates’! $300 Billion of Seized Russian Financial Assets

By Dr. Jack Rasmus, July 19, 2024

Recently, NATO countries began the process of transferring the seized and previously frozen $300 billion Russian assets to Ukraine. The $300 billion, it is argued, will ‘buy time’ for Ukraine to continue the war in 2025—much like the lives of the 300 Spartans in mythology supposedly bought time to mobilize a larger force.

Escaping the “Enshittification” of the Internet. Cory Doctorow

By Michael Welch and Cory Doctorow, July 19, 2024

Nowadays, internet platforms like Facebook provide great business for users. But with time, they abuse users in various ways in order to satisfy and attract more business customers. At a certain point, they claw back on benefits for the business-people as well and incur more profits for themselves, leading to the demise of the original platform.

The Road to Change: “Managing Chaos, Adventures in Alternative Media”. Greg Guma

By Greg Guma, July 19, 2024

Shortly after helping to launch the Citizens Party, a new coalition linked with Barry Commoner’s 1980 environmental campaign for US President, I circulated a memo about next steps. 

Second Cold War in Full Swing as Europe, Becomes ’80s-style ‘Continent of Missiles’. Drago Bosnic

By Drago Bosnic, July 19, 2024

During the (First) Cold War, Europe was at the center of a possible confrontation between US-led NATO and Soviet-led Warsaw Pact. By the 1980s, the two sides deployed thousands of medium and intermediate-range weapons, both ballistic and cruise missiles.

U.S. Government ‘Saddled’ with COVID Vaccine Injury ‘Mess’ — While Vaccine Makers Avoid Liability

By Michael Nevradakis, July 19, 2024

As early as January 2022, National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers were aware of at least 850 peer-reviewed case reports and/or research articles about COVID-19 vaccine reactions, according to emails obtained by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

Haaretz Is Hamas Propaganda Now! IDF Ordered Hannibal Directive

By Caitlin Johnstone, July 18, 2024

Are mainstream Israeli media outlets now guilty of antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theories, or is it no longer an antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theory to say that this happened?

Revealed: America’s Secret Special Forces Flights to Israel from UK Base on Cyprus

By Matt Kennard, July 18, 2024

The US Air Force has been sending unmarked planes from Britain’s base on Cyprus to Israel since it began bombing Gaza, it can be revealed. The planes are all C-295 and CN-235 aircraft, which are believed to be used by American special forces. Declassified has found 18 of these aircraft which have gone from the sprawling British air base on Cyprus, RAF Akrotiri, to Israel’s coastal city Tel Aviv since October 7.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

 

 

 

Shortly after helping to launch the Citizens Party, a new coalition linked with Barry Commoner’s 1980 environmental campaign for US President, I circulated a memo about next steps. It urged leaders of the Vermont chapter to focus on Burlington. The state’s largest city “can be extremely fertile ground,” I wrote in March 1980. Fiscal crisis, cronyism between the Democratic mayor and business leaders, youth unrest, skyrocketing rents — the city’s problems made it ripe for a political upheaval. 

“In a three-way race, even a mayoral candidate might be elected,” I predicted.

At the time Bernie Sanders was beginning to organize low-income residents of Burlington’s Franklin Square housing project. He wanted to persuade college students, the elderly and low-income renters to press for affordable housing and tenants’ rights. He wasn’t yet thinking about running for local office.

I was still editing the Vanguard Press, but also beginning to plan a possible run for mayor. As I explained to a Washington Post reporter decades later, I knew that in a mayoral election, “if leftists had any chance of pulling off an upset, only one of them could be on the ballot.”

Even after Bernie announced, some urged me to go for it; they saw Sanders as a veteran candidate, good at reducing his ideas to plain English, but more a voice for change in statewide or national races. On Halloween night, however, three of his friends sat him down in a laundry room for a frank talk about his future.

In a way, it was an intervention, one that had a profound effect on Vermont history.

As journalist Marc Fisher retold the story during Sanders’ second presidential race, they said that he had no political future if he kept going on as he had.

“Sanders readily conceded that, having run for Vermont governor, twice, and for US Senate, twice, never winning more than 6 percent of the vote, he risked getting stuck on the fringe, perceived as a joke.”

He also had trouble connecting with the people around him.

“Without a steady job, he drove around the state in his Volkswagen Bug trying to sell teachers the films he had cobbled together about socialist Eugene V. Debs and other radicals.”

As he entered a second decade of campaigning, Bernie wanted another shot at running for governor. His friends were adamantly opposed. Richard Sugarman, a philosopher professor who taught existentialism and Jewish thought at the University of Vermont, joined with the others in urging him to give up on fruitless statewide races and instead run in Burlington, a place where he had a chance to win…

Read more in Managing Chaos: Adventures in Alternative Media, available July 22, 2024.

***

Managing Chaos: Adventures in Alternative Media

It is an eye-witness account that explores the unique, tumultuous history of Pacifica radio and alternative media in America. Filled with episodes from an eclectic career, Greg Guma’s new book discusses the evolution of radio and television, the impacts of concentrated media ownership, the rise of the alternative press, his complex relationship with Bernie Sanders, his work in Vermont before and during a progressive revolution that changed the state’s power structure, and decades later, what happened while he managed the original listener-supported radio network. Here is another excerpt:

Challenge or Folly?

We rode to Houston Media Source, the city’s public access center, on an ancient school bus chartered for the occasion. It was Sunday, October 30, 2005, and the Pacifica National Board was still considering who to choose as the network’s next CEO.

During the trip, I struck up a conversation with Ursula Ruedenberg, coordinator of Pacifica’s Affiliates Program. Ursula had been active in the “Save Pacifica” movement and afterward took on the tough job of convincing community radio stations that it was all right to rejoin the new and improved network. Curious about my Vermont connections, she fondly recalled her days with Bread and Puppet, the legendary theater group based in the Green Mountains since the 1970s. I had my own memories of those days, weekends camping in Glover, the Domestic Resurrection Circus, and later work with the Schumanns and Robin Lloyd on films and a book, Bread &. Puppet: Stories of Struggle and Faith from Central America.

Sitting nearby was Sarv Randhawa, a nuclear plant regulator who represented KPFA on the national Board. Sarv was intrigued by my relationship with peace movement icon David Dellinger, a friend who had died just the year before. I had admired Dellinger since the 1960s, and worked with him from the late 1970s onward in Vermont on peace campaigns, Toward Freedom, and prison justice.  We talked about nonviolence and Dave’s ability to overcome differences with love and mutual respect. Pacifica needed that kind of energy to live up to its potential, he believed.

While the Board met in the center’s large studio, Georgia and I waited at opposite ends of the labyrinthine building. I caught a glimpse of her, but the headhunters were determined to keep us apart. Struggling to relax, I drew on my training in Buddhist meditation to drop my expectations and simply “be” in the moment. After a while a wiry man entered the waiting room and introduced himself as Steve Brown.

I knew the name from emails that were part of my research. A successful entrepreneur who reportedly made millions through direct marketing, he was — depending on whom you asked — either greatly misunderstood or completely malevolent, a defender of diversity or a racist demagogue, an untapped resource or as dangerous as Karl Rove. Whatever the truth, his ideas were certainly provocative.

That August, for example, he had proposed eliminating most of the national office, including the CFO and other staff, and turning most of its functions over to local business managers or committees. “If we dumped most of the national office tomorrow,” he wrote, “what would we give up — other than the need for us to feed it $6.3 million (he was off by a few million) a year? Getting that money back would make the budgetary woes of all our stations disappear in a flash.”

But Brown’s real fire was saved for the situation at WBAI, where he served on the local station board, and especially for its Program Director Bernard White and the Justice and Unity Coalition (JUC), a cadre-style, black-led group with a majority of local board seats and a hard-edged anti-racist agenda. As he saw it, White had “unethically used the station’s resources to consolidate his own power” and bore most of the responsibility for several years of lost listenership and economic decline. And the JUC let him do it, he charged, using underhanded means to maintain control and foist a narrow agenda on the station.

Of course, JUC and White had equally harsh words for Brown, who they described as a racially obsessed liar and purveyor of stereotypes, intent on purging Black programmers and taking WBAI back to the “good old days.” Aware of this, I wondered whether it was safe even to be seen talking with him. But he just wanted to wish me good luck, offer a business card, and volunteer some advice if I got the job. Compared to his emails, the casually dressed 68-year-old seemed mild, almost stuffy.

Ushered into the dimly-lit studio at last, I struggled to remain calm. A serious examination of the organization’s mission was in order, I suggested; after almost 60 years it was about time. I also stressed that Pacifica, one of few independent voices for change in a time of fear and Bush doublespeak, had both a responsibility and an opportunity to challenge mainstream media’s myopia and distortions. But it was letting internal battles and provincial thinking get in the way.

To make a fundamental difference, the network would have to offer the country what founder Lew Hill had imagined for KPFA — dialogue and debate, a celebration of honest differences, not a series of self-righteous monologues that preached more than they persuaded. That was the terrain of self-appointed electronic prophets, right-wing pundits and evangelists who capitalized on mass insecurity to market extreme views and create a distorted reality. Pacifica would have to do better, becoming again a relevant, popular and entertaining voice for political change and social transformation.

Dave Adelson posed the most pointed question. A KPFK delegate and L.A.- based neurophysiologist who had devoted years to Pacifica and been at the center of the “take back” fight, he remained unconvinced. “Well, you’ve essentially said you can drive a car,” he challenged, “but this place is more like a semi truck. How do we know you can drive something like that?”

Whatever their size or shape, organizations are much the same, I replied, and I had led and studied them for more than 30 years. The same can be said of people. Whatever their political differences, they want to be heard, appreciated, and inspired. The leadership challenge would be to listen, resist taking sides in factional disputes, and, at the same time, clarify what makes this a unique organization.

Two more things are worth mentioning. WBAI board member Ray LaForest, a Haitian immigrant and union organizer, asked how long I was willing to remain in the job. Three years was my limit, I announced. If I could accomplish anything useful, it would happen by then or not at all. What I left out was my belief, based on past experiences, that leading a politically-charged organization for much longer can be counter-productive.

Fear about the use of power, especially among progressives, tends to breed suspicion over time and turn support into jaded opposition. In a country where narcissism is a widespread disorder, public figures are often idealized in the early stages. But along with that comes the urge to degrade in the long run, often sparked when the “hero” inevitably disappoints. Intensified by the machinery of mass communication and social media, such a desperate urge can turn even assassination into a form of spectacle.

Not that I was in danger of being murdered. But judging from Pacifica’s recent history, character assassination wasn’t out of the question if I overstayed my welcome.

The second point was that even if the job was offered, I wasn’t ready to accept it. Before making a decision, I needed to talk personally with members of the staff and Board. What I found out might well influence my decision.

Before the ride back to Bush airport, I heard that the board had voted. But the outcome wouldn’t be made public. “Put me out of my misery,” I joked. All the headhunters would say was, “Hang in, the vote was close and they’re hoping to get closer to consensus. It’s not over yet.”

That wasn’t completely accurate. As I learned later, Eva Georgia had narrowly prevailed. But the decision wouldn’t be binding until background checks were conducted.

Back in Vermont, I refocused on Vermont Guardian, the print and online news operation we had launched less than two years before. For my partner Shay Totten, a brilliant reporter and editor who I had known since the late 90s, it was the fulfillment of a dream — a statewide news organization that would reflect “the Vermont Way.”

For me, it was a return to editing a Vermont weekly after a quarter century. Before the election of Bernie Sanders and emergence of the Vermont Progressive Party, the Vanguard Press was the Champlain Valley’s strongest alternative voice in years, hosting a crew of hungry young journalists, activists and thinkers who shook up the status quo. The Democratic mayor, Gordon Paquette, recognized the threat, and, after the newspaper published an article criticizing his decision to ban rock music in local venues, he decided to counter-attack. Paquette sued the paper and its editors for libel. The case centered on the allegation that he was drunk on the night when he attended a Supertramp concert in Memorial Auditorium and found some concertgoers too rowdy for his taste.

After we published the story, Paquette tried to force a retraction and get the names of our anonymous sources. When we refused he sued, which led to even more bad press. Convinced that the paper – and specifically its senior editor – was out to get him, the goal was to make the price so high that the Vanguard would be forced to back off. We didn’t. In early 1981, on the verge of Bernie’s first victory, discovery and depositions were still pending.

Shortly after that election the case was quietly dropped.

Throughout Sanders’ years as mayor we were sometimes coalition allies, but also opponents at times on development and peace issues. At one point he presided over my arrest (with others) outside an armaments plant.

After four terms, Sanders retired, and prepared for his next chapter, national office. He was defeated by Republican Peter Smith in a 1988 congressional bid, but came back two years later and won. That led to eight terms in Congress — before moving on to the US Senate. He didn’t lose another race until his first campaign for president in 2016. Meanwhile, I went on to edit other publications, defend immigrant rights in New Mexico, run a bookstore in Southern California, and launch another newspaper.

In our mission statement for Vermont Guardian, Shay Totten and I noted that although the state had recently “led the way toward social and political progress” — a statement that could be read as a reference to environmental leadership, Town Meeting votes, gay marriage, Howard Dean presidential run, or the rise of Vermont’s Progressive Party, Ben and Jerry’s and Sanders, to name just a few — its newspapers had largely been gobbled up by large corporations.

Vermont Guardian would “reinvigorate the credo that journalism speaks for the individual, checks abuses of power, and stands vigilant in the protection of democracy and free speech,” we pledged. It would be the state’s “editorial town commons, a place where Vermonters can share ideas and forge solutions.”

Despite our bold words and good intentions, however, the business was struggling by the end of 2005. It made me ask: Like the national administration we often criticized, were our grand ambitions really a form of folly? In a post-Thanksgiving editorial, I considered the consequences of ignoring harsh realities.

Those responsible for the Vietnam War insisted on “staying the course” due to a combination of overreaction, illusions of omnipotence, and a shortage of reflective thought. The ingredients that created the Iraq War were much the same — exaggerating “national security” imperatives, assuming that the world’s “only remaining Superpower” couldn’t possibly lose, and refusing to consider that an invasion could spark global resistance, potentially on a scale that would be impossible to contain.

But describing the Iraq debacle as mere folly was too simple. One addition was incompetence, since those eager to save face later claimed the war began due to a “massive intelligence failure,” pointing to years of so-called evidence that Saddam Hussein’s regime posed a serious threat to Iraq’s neighbors and the West. But even such semi-critics endorsed the idea that the US should pursue “regime change.” In other words, they had grandly assumed the right to transform a country, to replace its power structure and “democratize” it.

Folly, incompetence, delusions of grandeur? It was hard to choose. In the case of the Bush administration it clearly wasn’t just a mistake. It was a conscious decision that looked more like a step toward tyranny.

What was the true history of the Iraq War? The evidence was still coming in. But we already knew that it began long before Congress voted, and before the 9/11 attacks so often used to justify an open-ended “war on terror.” Were lies told? Certainly. It stood to reason, since many of the war’s architects were admirers of philosopher Leo Strauss, a great believer in the usefulness of lies.

Secrecy and deception, a veritable culture of lies, are necessary, Strauss argued, to protect “the wise” — those with a natural right to rule — from the vulgar masses, who would otherwise be ungovernable and rise up against them. He called such tactics “noble” lies. “Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,” Strauss wrote. “Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people.”

And the lessons? Well, people often deceive themselves, overreact to perceived threats, exaggerate, or fail to distinguish between fears, hopes and reality. That is folly, and it is both human and forgivable. But when deception is willful and rationalized as somehow justified or “noble,” perhaps because an enemy must be stopped “by any means,” the line between good and evil has been crossed.

Looking at Pacifica, its warring camps seemed to be letting fear cloud their judgment, or purposely distorting the picture to achieve bitter victories. More to the point, if offered the job, could I overcome such deep-seated animosities and change its culture? Or was I just trading one form of folly for another? No easy answers leapt to mind.

Nevertheless, on December 21, 2005, those became more than academic questions. After almost two months and endless hours of teleconference debate, Pacifica’s national board had reached a decision. It seemed impossible, but the “old white guy” from Vermont was being offered the dream job from hell. The catch was that I had ten days to decide. And two weeks to get to Berkeley.

Only later did I learn how this came to pass, and how frustrating a dream job can be.

*

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

Greg Guma is author, historian, and former CEO of Pacifica Radio. He chronicled Vermont history in The People’s Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution and Restless Spirits & Popular Movements. His recent book, Prisoners of the Real, looks at the costs of expedient answers, authoritarian strategies, and a preoccupation with control and toward liberated groups that offer new opportunities and real choice.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

During the (First) Cold War, Europe was at the center of a possible confrontation between US-led NATO and Soviet-led Warsaw Pact.

By the 1980s, the two sides deployed thousands of medium and intermediate-range weapons, both ballistic and cruise missiles.

The most prominent US Army unit equipped with such weapons was the 56th Artillery Command, deploying battalions armed with MGM-31 “Pershing I/Ia” and “Pershing II” nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. The former had a range of 740 km and carried a single warhead with a yield of up to 400 kt, while the latter’s maximum range was reported to have been 1770–2400 km, with a single 80 kt warhead. The US Army also deployed the GLCM (Ground Launched Cruise Missile), officially designated as the BGM-109G “Gryphon”, a subsonic cruise missile with a range of 2780 km and a single W84 thermonuclear warhead (yield of up to 150 kt, or approximately 10 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb).

It should be noted that the “Gryphon” was essentially a land-based version of the infamous “Tomahawk” cruise missile that the US Navy continues to use and upgrades on a regular basis (the latest variant being the Block 5). The Soviet Union had a plethora of missiles to match the US military, but the most prominent was the unrivaled RSD-10 “Pioneer” (NATO reporting name SS-20 “Saber”) solid-fueled ballistic missile with a range of up to 5800 km and the only IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missile) capable of using three MIRV (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles) warheads. These had a yield of 150 kt each or roughly 10 (30 altogether) times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. There was also the version with a single 1 Mt warhead that was around 67 times more destructive. At least 728 such IRBMs were made and you can imagine they would’ve turned Europe into a radioactive glass desert for the next several eons.

The USSR obviously had a massive advantage, but this would’ve hardly mattered given that both sides would’ve simply destroyed each other.

Thus, the INF (Intermediate Nuclear Forces) Treaty was signed in 1987, prompting both sides to dismantle and destroy all of their medium and intermediate-range missiles.

However, on August 2, 2019, the US unilaterally withdrew its signature, just like it did with all other crucial arms control treaties in the last 20-25 years.

Just two years later, in 2021, meaning before the SMO (special military operation), the US Army reactivated the aforementioned 56th Artillery Command in Germany. Its units are equipped with the previously banned medium and intermediate-range missiles and the 56th is also planning to induct new platforms, such as the “Dark Eagle” hypersonic missile, although this weapon is yet to be delivered, as it’s still going through a rather rocky development.

However, while the US is having a lot of trouble with hypersonic missiles, an area in which it has been eclipsed even by North Korea, the Pentagon was quick to reinduct weapon systems that are already in the US military, albeit in other branches.

It takes years to convert such weapons from sea to land-based platforms and after nearly half a decade, the US Army officially adopted the “Typhon” Weapon System last year. It can fire the land-based SM-6 multipurpose and “Tomahawk” cruise missiles.

The latter can hit targets at ranges of approximately 1600 km. Their ability to carry the W80 thermonuclear warheads means that the old GLCM is effectively resurrected, while the very usage of the name “Typhon” indicates that the missile is a successor to the “Gryphon”.

After the latest NATO summit in Washington DC, the US and Germany announced the definite deployment of these weapons in Europe, a move that will bring unprecedented escalation.

According to Deutsche Welle, on the sidelines of the NATO summit,

“the two countries said that the ‘episodic deployments’ are in preparation for longer-term stationing of long-range capabilities that will include SM-6, ‘Tomahawk’ and developmental hypersonic weapons with longer range than the current capabilities in Europe”.

These statements indicate several important things.

First of all, the announcement of the end of “episodic deployments” means that these weapons are already in Germany and that their deployment will officially be made permanent in 2026, which is a mere formality that will simply legalize the current state of things.

Second, the announcement doesn’t mention the “Typhon” platform, but this is already implied by the reference to its primary weapons, the SM-6 and “Tomahawk”.

Third, the aforementioned “developmental hypersonic weapon” is most likely the “Dark Eagle”.

The Russian military has already taken all this into account and prepared a broad and adequate response.

Apart from the existing hypersonic weapons it fields, by far the most advanced in the world, Moscow is also developing a plethora of other weapon systems that leave these American equivalents in the dirt.

Back in April, it tested an unnamed type of IRBM that will essentially inherit the RSD-10 “Pioneer”.

At the time, I argued that the missile in question was most likely the RS-26 “Rubezh”, a highly advanced maneuverable IRBM that can also carry hypersonic warheads or up to four standard MIRV ones with a yield of 300 kt each. These are approximately 20 (80 altogether) times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. With a range of up to 5800 km, it covers the entirety of Europe and even large parts of the US if deployed in the Russian Far East. Needless to say, the ability of NATO to shoot down such weapons is highly questionable, to put it mildly.

The US-led political West is essentially turning back the clock to a time when the world was on the edge of an abyss virtually every single day for nearly half a century. Worse yet, it can be argued that the current situation is even more dangerous, as the balance of power in Europe was destroyed by American expansionism.

The NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict is the most obvious consequence of this, as Moscow was forced to intervene after Washington DC stated that it would station missiles on Ukrainian soil. 

Similar hostile actions are already underway in (formally) new NATO members such as Finland, where the US is now deploying units in at least 15 bases. This is without even considering the Pentagon’s virtually direct involvement in fighting Russian forces in Ukraine or America’s support for terrorist groups within Russia. If this continues, it’s only a matter of time when the Kremlin will lose its patience with US/NATO belligerence.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

“We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”

Lily Tomlin, (the telephone operator on Saturday Night Live, September 18, 1976) [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

 

An amazing window of opportunity opened up with the dawn of popular internet activity.

Suddenly, we could explore new insights far more effortlessly than before the internet when television, radio and the newspapers were the knowledge based weapons of choice. And as we have seen, markets and the rights of property owners shape and drive the actual information laying about for the masses to digest.

New platforms started to appear on the landscape of the world wide web. They managed a lot of information. They connected us to friends in far away places. Does anyone even remember using postal mail anymore?

But that window is closing. Nowadays, internet platforms like Facebook provide great business for users. But with time, they abuse users in various ways in order to satisfy and attract more business customers. At a certain point, they claw back on benefits for the business-people as well and incur more profits for themselves, leading to the demise of the original platform. [2]

The process somewhat resembles Walmart, the retail giant which based on its global size outsells local competitors with lower prices. When they close, they are the last market standing and then close up extras. Giants can essentially eliminate the competitors to the detriment of everyone else. Amazon behaves in a similar way. [3]

These giant firms are active on the internet as well, where they are no longer constratined by competition.

We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re google.

This process is known in tech circles by the common name “Enshittification.” Applications abound in Facebook, Uber, and so on. Is there a way of reversing this condition and making internet platforms more accountable to us, the common people?

Cory Doctorow believes there is! He sees the process as resulting from encouraging digital monopoly platforms to exploit both users and business customers while leaving them locked in with trace amounts of utility to keep them locked in. He also sees a means by which it can be reversed by seizing the means of computation and building a new internet suitable for confronting a world plagued by environmental collapse, genocide and rising fascism.

The talk on this week’s Global Research News Hour was from the well attended talk he presented at Knox United Church in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, on the second of May, 2024. His talk was sponsored by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Manitoba Branch, and radio station CKUW.

Cory Doctorow (craphound.com) is a science fiction author, activist and journalist. He is the author of many books, most recently THE BEZZLE (a followup to RED TEAM BLUES) and THE LOST CAUSE, a solarpunk science fiction novel of hope amidst the climate emergency. His most recent nonfiction book is THE INTERNET CON: HOW TO SEIZE THE MEANS OF COMPUTATION, a Big Tech disassembly manual. Other recent books include RED TEAM BLUES, a science fiction crime thriller; CHOKEPOINT CAPITALISM, nonfiction about monopoly and creative labor markets; the LITTLE BROTHER series for young adults; IN REAL LIFE, a graphic novel; and the picture book POESY THE MONSTER SLAYER. In 2020, he was inducted into the Canadian Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg.

The programme is also broadcast weekly (Monday, 1-2pm ET) by the Progressive Radio Network in the US.

The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

  1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3DYN_86Xss
  2. https://www.wionews.com/trending/what-is-enshittification-the-term-for-decay-of-online-platforms-is-facebook-going-through-it-689212
  3. https://www.salon.com/2014/02/23/worse_than_wal_mart_amazons_sick_brutality_and_secret_history_of_ruthlessly_intimidating_workers/

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

As the issue of Ukraine’s NATO membership has been debated so extensively recently, it is useful to recall that in 2011 NATO had noted with concern the extremely low acceptability of this membership among the people of Ukraine.

This can be seen in a NATO document titled ‘Post Orange Ukraine: Internal dynamics and foreign policy priorities’ prepared by the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance in October 2011.

Source: NATO

This document states very clearly,

“The greatest challenge for Ukrainian-NATO relations lies in the perception of NATO among the Ukrainian people. NATO membership is not widely supported in the country, with some polls suggesting that popular support of it is less than 20 per cent.”

Further this document notes that NATO bombing of Belgrade was particularly unpopular in Ukraine.

Despite efforts being made to improve the perception of NATO among the people of Ukraine, this document noted, “for many Ukrainians the image of NATO still evokes a sense of fear.”

It is not just membership; most Ukrainians appeared to also oppose other kinds of close relations with NATO. As this document writes,

“A majority of Ukrainians supports neither membership of NATO nor even closer cooperation with the Alliance.”

If this was the view of the people, what was the view of the democratically-elected government led by President Yanukovych at this point of time (when the document being quoted here was prepared in October 2011)?

This document tells us –Mr. Yanukovych made it clear that Ukraine no longer needs NATO membership (membership of Ukraine was accepted as a policy decision at the 2008 NATO summit).

The document states — In June 2010, the President signed a bill which commits Ukraine to a ‘non-bloc policy which means non-participation in military-political alliances’. What is more, there was also support of important opposition leaders for this. Some opposition leaders believed that Ukraine’s foreign policy had become more balanced.

So if the people, the government and the leading opposition figures were not for NATO membership, the matter should have ended there.

However the NATO document did not express its happiness or optimism with this growing agreement in Ukraine for opposing NATO membership.

Instead the document expressed the likelihood that this neutrality would end or should end. More precisely, the document stated,

“There is no consensus in Ukraine whether maintaining a balanced approach between the West and Russia is possible in the long run. It can be argued that these two vectors are at least partly contradictory, and that Ukraine would eventually need to clearly choose its path.”

Further this document stated even more clearly that the doors of NATO remain open for Ukraine.

No reasons for taking this position are given in the document, although common sense would suggest the contrary– that a longer-term policy of neutrality would be very useful for the stability and progress of Ukraine. Serious doubts are expressed in the document regarding the continuation of the neutrality path by Ukraine despite growing agreement among the Ukrainians that they need neutrality and balance.

Others have also pointed out the lack of support for the policy of NATO membership or closer relations with NATO in Ukraine. Prof. Glenn Diesen of the University of South-Eastern Norway (USN) has written in his recent essay titled ‘Destroying Ukraine with Idealism’ (this can be read at the author’s substack or at Brave New Europe website, July 17 2024),

“The Western public is rarely informed that every opinion poll between 1991 and 2014 demonstrated that only a very small minority of Ukrainians ever wanted to join the alliance (NATO).”

In addition all the time senior western diplomats, academics and other experts who are known for their commitment to peace have been warning against the eastwards expansion of NATO in general and making Ukraine a member of NATO in particular.

John Matlock, top expert on Soviet affairs in the US Foreign Service who was later US ambassador in Moscow stated around the time of the invasion of Ukraine by Russia,

“There would have been no basis for the present crisis if there had been no expansion of the alliance (NATO) following the end of the Cold War.” He further added, “What Putin is demanding is eminently reasonable.” As is well-known the main concern of Russia at that time was that there should be no NATO membership of Ukraine.

Earlier the former British ambassador of UK to Russia, Roderic Lyne had warned in 2020 that it was a huge mistake to push the NATO membership for Ukraine. He stated even more ominously,

“If you want to start a war with Russia, that’s the best way of doing it.” (R.Lyne, the UC interview series : Sir Roderic Lyne by Nikita Gyazin, Oxford University Consortium, 18 December 2020).

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that Russia would interpret the possibility of Ukraine’s NATO membership as a declaration of war. (A. Welsh—Angela Merkel opens up on Ukraine, Putin and her legacy, Deutsche Welle, 7 June 2022).

Earlier 50 foreign policy experts of the USA including former senior military officers, diplomats and senators had signed a letter titled “NATO expansion a policy error of historical proportions.”

So we had a situation around year 2013-14 in which Ukrainian people, government and opposition leaders were against Ukraine’s membership of NATO and prominent western experts and leaders known for desiring peace had serious concerns regarding the high costs and undesirability of NATO membership of Ukraine.

In this situation the USA and close allies instigated a coup in 2014 to oust the democratically elected government of Ukraine and install a regime that would follow the dictates of the USA. As the leaked Nuland-Pyatt phone conversation revealed, the USA was planning a regime change, who would be in positions of power, who would be kept out, how some justification for coup would be found. (BBC Ukraine Crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call, 7 February 2014).

The general prosecutor of Ukraine Vikror Shokin later complained that since 2014,

“the most shocking thing is that all the (government) appointments were made in agreement with the US.” (Newsweek, Does Ukraine have kompromat on Joe Biden, 8 August, 2023).

A Entous and M.Schwirtz reported in The New York Times (The Spy War—How the CIA secretly helps Ukraine fight Putin, 25 February, 2024) that on the first day following the coup, Ukraine’s new spy chief contacted the CIA and M16 to establish a partnership for covert operations against Russia (ultimately leading to 12 CIA spying bases along the Russian border). This kind of thing could not have been started so quickly without previous planning.

Hence what is clear beyond doubt is that the NATO membership did not have roots among the people of Ukraine and support for this still pending membership was imposed from outside after creating conducive conditions for this with a coup and all the follow-up changes.

Further while it has been frequently alleged that Russia attacked in early 2022 without provocation, a top advisor to former French President Sarkozy named Henri Guaino wrote in the French newspaper Le Figaro in May 2022 that the US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership in November 2021 “convinced Russia that they must attack or be attacked.” This expert warned European countries under the strategic leadership of the USA against sleepwalking into a war with Russia. This article, which was extensively quoted in another widely read article published in the New York Times in the same month ( C.Caldwell—The war in Ukraine may be impossible to stop, and the US deserves much of the blame, May 31, 2022).

*

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

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

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

[This story was first published on January 30, 2014.]

Izzy was born a healthy beautiful little girl who was always happy and very fun loving.

I remember when Izzy got sick like it was yesterday. She was 18 months old at the time. Our day care centre had flooded that week with the heavy rain and was closed for the remainder of the week, so I decided to use this opportunity to get her immunizations up-to- date.

Capture4

Everything seemed fine, but 2 days later Izzy’s eyes started to look swollen and red spots started to appear, so I took her to our local doctor who diagnosed foot and mouth and conjunctivitis.

The next morning I woke up to her crying and frothing at the mouth and her face was covered in a red rash.

I raced her to the Royal Children’s Hospital’s emergency and by the end of the day she was admitted onto an empty wing in case whatever she had might be contagious.

At 11.00pm the doctor phoned our room from his home. He had been researching all day and informed us that Izzy was having a severe allergic reaction to her vaccination which was causing Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. I can remember our conversation so clearly! He just kept saying how sorry he was. I had never heard of SJS and was not sure why he was so sorry, but it was freaking me out. I got onto my iPad and looked it up. As soon as I saw the mortality rate, I turned it off.

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome is a rare, serious disorder in which one’s skin and mucous membranes react severely to a medication or infection. SJS is most often from medicine containing Ibuprofen such as Nurofen, or from sulphur-based treatments, from many antibiotics, or from anti-seizure medicine, and more rarely from vaccinations as in Izzy’s case, whose reaction was to the DTaP vaccine. What is unnerving is that one can have these medications for years without any problems and then for some unknown reason one’s body will react in this way due to having been hyper-sensitised, this irrespective of one’s age.

Capture5

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome often begins with flu-like symptoms, followed by a painful red or purplish rash that spreads and blisters, eventually causing the top layer of one’s skin to die and shed. My daughter was basically burning from the inside out and her skin came off. She had to be intubated and placed in an induced coma to ensure her oesophagus didn’t close up, as with burn patients.

Izzy spent the next two weeks in the ICU at the RCH in Melbourne while they worked on saving her life.

One night they called and told me to come straight in as they didn’t think she would make it through the night. I have never felt so sick with fear. I stayed by her side, pleading to the heavens to let her live, even if that meant that I had to be willing to sacrifice her eye sight in exchange for her life.

It was like my prayers were heard and accepted. She was eventually moved to the burns ward for the next 3 months and nursed back to health. She had to learn to walk and to eat again. Thankfully, her skin grew back with minimal scarring. Her corneas were however stuck as if glued to her eyelids.

Capture8

They required an intensive operation at the Eye and Ear Hospital to separate the eye from the lid without piercing the cornea. Amazingly, the corneal specialists managed to do this successfully.

Two months later she accidentally poked her glasses into her eye and perforated it. This required an emergency corneal transplant. I cried throughout the day for Izzy and also because the cornea was donated by a little child who had died that day. That a suffering family in their time of despair had the generosity to give such a gift to someone to someone was so beautiful. I think of them often and wish they knew that a part of their child was making such a great difference to my little girl.

Izzy has however sustained irreversible scarring to the corneas and as such is now blind and can only see high-contrast colour and movement. She wears protective glasses 24/7 so as not to damage her eye again.

Capture23

Her right eye is still stuck down to the eyelid and she won’t have any vision from it until operated on, sometime in the near future. The operations won’t be without risk, as operating on the eye could inflame the left eye and take what little sight she does have. Essentially, we are between a rock and a hard place with this one.

Izzy is on daily immune suppression medication for her transplant. She has had so many operations I have lost count, but she continues to be a brave, smiley and happy girl. In addition to all of this she suffers from photophobia (intolerance to light) and Dry-Eye Syndrome which requires constant ointment and drops in her eyes for the rest of her life. She is in constant pain as her eyes feel gritty, as if she had sand in them all the time.

It has been a real struggle dealing with this and just getting through each day, but I stop feeling sorry for myself when I see how amazing Izzy is and how she just gets out there and tries everything, wanting to be just like her older sister.

Capture22

*

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

Our thanks to Dr. William Makis for bringing this to our attention.

All images in this article are from VIN

FBI Releases Questionable Timeline of Shooting

July 19th, 2024 by John Leake

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The counter-sniper who ultimately shot Crooks HAD to have seen the shooter when he took aim from the roof’s ridge. The kill shot hit Crooks when his head was positioned 3-5 feet downslope of ridge.

The FBI just released the following timeline of the Trump and Crooks shooting.

5:10 p.m. Crooks first identified as a person of interest.

5:30 p.m. Crooks spotted with a rangefinder.

5:52 p.m. Crooks spotted on the roof by USSS.

6:02 p.m. Trump takes the stage.

6:12 p.m. Crooks fires first shots. Crooks shot 26 seconds later.

Bottom graphic: Fern on YT.

As I noted in my earlier post, Puzzling Features of Crooks Crime Scene, at the instant Crooks was shot, his head was positioned a significant distance downslope of the roof’s ridge.

 

The position of his body marks the position at which he was shot in the head.

 

Using Crooks’s body length and the rifle for approximate scale, his head appears to be 3-5 feet downslope from the roof’s ridge.

This post-mortem photograph suggests that Crooks was trying to crawl backwards, back down the slope, at the instant he was shot. In order to aim his rifle down the opposite slope and towards Trump, his elbows had to have been positioned considerably closer to the ridge—especially considering the ridge is equipped with an elevated vented ridge. Note in the following diagram that Trump’s head was significantly lower than the elevation of the roof’s ridge.

A video filmed by a bystander on the ground and published by TMZ captured Crooks’s final seconds. Due the camera angle and the angle of the ridge axis relative to the photographer, it’s difficult to say from this perspective exactly how far Crooks is from the ridge. However, to reiterate, his elbows had to have been very close to the protruding vented ridge.

 

Altogether, it strikes me as a logical deduction that the counter-sniper who ultimately shot Crooks HAD to have seen Crooks at the instant the shooter rested his rifle on the vented ridge and took aim at Trump. It must have taken at least a few seconds for Crooks to acquire his target and take careful aim at it from this position.

The TMZ video shows Crooks fixed in this position for at least five seconds before his first shot can be heard. Because he is fixed in this prone position when the video starts, it’s likely he was already in this position for an additional few seconds before the camera rolled.

In the world of professional counter-snipers, five seconds is an eternity.

Two counter-sniper teams—with two riflemen on the north barn and two riflemen on the south barn—were scoping the ridge when Crooks opened fire.

 

Given that the team on the north barn may not have been able to see the entire east side of the ridge, the obvious choice was to assign each of the four riflemen to scope a particular section of the ridge. The two riflemen on the south barn could indeed see the ridge behind which Crooks popped up to take aim.

It’s very hard for me to believe that at least one of the riflemen did not see Crooks aiming his rifle in time to shoot him before he fired. According to the FBI, even after Crooks completely gave away his position by firing from it, it still took the counter-sniper 26 seconds to return the fatal shot. Something must have caused the counter-snipers to hesitate.

NOTE: My objective with this post is NOT to draw definite conclusions about motives for this security failure, but to raise questions that should be posed to the FBI

POSTSCRIPT: Some commentators have suggested that Crooks fired his first burst from a position on the roof far enough east to obscure his position from both sniper teams, and then moved laterally (to the west) across the roof in order to reposition himself for the second burst that can be heard a few seconds later. I doubt the few seconds between bursts afforded enough time for him to move laterally across the roof, assume a second prone position, and aim for the second burst. He could not easily slide across the roof seams, but would have had to do a series of crab movements to his right while holding his rifle with one hand, then reassume a prone position, then reacquire the target and aim for the second burst. As the TMZ video fades in to capture his position when he was shot, he is already in a fixed prone position and you can hear his first two shots. He does NOT change his position prior to firing the second burst about four seconds later. About ten seconds after his second burst, one can hear a distant snap and the bystander says, “Oh, he’s down.” Even if Crooks did move laterally across the roof before firing the second burst, why didn’t the counter-sniper shoot him before he was able to fire the second burst?

*

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

2500 years ago, the myth goes, 300 Spartans faced a much larger military force from the East at Thermopylae, a small mountain pass in ancient central Greece. Thermopylae is the Latin word for ‘Hot Gates’, as the area featured hot springs. In European history the ‘hot gates’ battle ended with the 300 Spartans annihilated.

The Persians had opened a second front to the rear of the Spartan line which then collapsed, wiping them out to the man. The ‘hot gates’ was thus a defeat, although in later mythology it was spun as a strategic victory that bought time for the Greeks to mobilize to fight another day.

Having bought time at Thermopylae is debatable, however, given that the battle of the ‘hot gates’ lasted only three days! That’s not much of a delay. The Greeks then took another year to mobilize. Three days didn’t matter that much. So the loss of 300 Spartans at Thermopylae was really a waste of a valuable elite battalion of troops—and Thermopylae was by no means a ‘strategic victory’ that it is spun in western mythology to have been.

Two and a half millennia later Europe is again at the ‘hot gates’! And 300 is once more the magic number!

300 today refers to the $300 billion of Russian financial assets that were seized by NATO countries in 2022 as part of US and EU sanctions imposed on Russia in February that year. According to European Central Bank director, Christine LaGarde, no less than $260 of the $300 billion is held in Europe, most of which is in Belgium near Brussels which is NATO’s home base. Another $5 billion was frozen in the USA. The rest distributed among banks of other G7 countries and friends.

Recently, NATO countries began the process of transferring the seized and previously frozen $300 billion Russian assets to Ukraine.

The $300 billion, it is argued, will ‘buy time’ for Ukraine to continue the war in 2025—much like the lives of the 300 Spartans in mythology supposedly bought time to mobilize a larger force.

Ukraine’s $200 Billion Per Year Price Tag

In the roughly two years since the Ukraine War began in February 2022, it’s estimated the USA has provided Ukraine with $200 to $220 billion in military and economic aid. European NATO countries provided at least another $100 billion or more depending on how one estimates the market value of former Soviet Union weapons that were given to Ukraine. Then there’s the IMF’s at least $18 billion to prop up Ukraine’s currency, along with the billions more in private loans and investments from private sources.

This past spring 2024, the US Congress passed a package of another $61 billion for Ukraine and Europe scrapped up another $5 billion. That combined amount is estimated to fund Ukraine’s war through the end of 2024.

Screenshot from The Guardian

Add all the foregoing items up and that’s roughly $200 billion a year cost to NATO countries to have funded the war in Ukraine. About half is in the form of weapons and another half to keep the Ukrainian economy afloat since Zelensky himself has estimated Ukraine’s economy and institutions need about $8B/mo. to keep going.

But that still leaves the question how NATO and the West can fund Ukraine’s war costs and keep its economy afloat into 2025 and beyond, since it is clear the US and NATO countries have no intention of agreeing to end the conflict anytime soon. On the contrary, the events of the past year in particular indicate a NATO strategy of continuing incremental escalation by providing Ukraine ever more lethal NATO weaponry, more NATO technical assistance on the ground, and NATO approval of increasingly provocative tactics by Ukraine—like missile strikes deep into Russia, attacks on Russian ballistic missile defense radars, use of cluster bombs on Russian civilian populations, and soon to be announced ‘no fly’ zones along Ukraine’s western border.

As a further indicator of US and NATO plans to continue the war longer term, the major NATO governments also recently signed long-term, minimum 10 year bilateral defense agreements with Ukraine. That’s designed to lock in whatever governments replace the current pro-war elites currently running the USA, UK, France and Germany.

undefined

Sullivan with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv, November 4, 2022 (Licensed under CC0)

According to the Wall Street Journal, the US-Ukraine bilateral security agreement would “establish a long term U.S. commitment to military aid” for Ukraine requiring “future U.S. administration to work with Congress to provide funding and military support for Kyiv.” Or as chief neocon in the Biden administration, Jake Sullivan, put it: the US-Ukraine bilateral security agreement was “not just for this month, this year, but for many years”.

In yet another indication of a likely continuing war beyond 2024, both NATO and Russia are now lining up allies in preparation for what looks like a protracted, and possibly wider, conflict. Russia’s answer to NATO signing bilateral defense agreements with Ukraine has been to conclude agreements with China, North Korea, Vietnam, Iran and various countries in Central Asia, including even Afghanistan, to provide contract troops in exchange for Russian military aid.

In this regard, recent events are eerily similar in that regard to what took place in the summer of 1914 in Europe as both sides lined up allies in anticipation of the coming conflict called World War I.

Short of a Russian complete military victory brought on by the collapse of the Ukrainian forces and a NATO decision not to directly enter the conflict despite it—the latter a very unlikely proposition in the event of an imminent Russian military victory—the Ukraine war will drag on well into 2025.

All of which again raises the question how to pay for it after current funding from NATO runs out after December 2024.

Recently, the process how to fund and continue the war was begun—a process that involves the transfer, in whole or part, of Russia’s $300 billion assets in the West that were frozen in 2022.

The $300 Billion for Ukraine

In April the US Congress passed a law that allows President Biden to seize the $5 billion of Russian assets in US banks, or in real property form, convert it to dollars and put it in a Ukraine Defense Fund also created by the law. Biden then pressed the European NATO countries to do the same with their $260 billion share.

The Biden proposal was for the US to raise $50 billion immediately (from various US investors) for Ukraine. Private bonds would be issued per the Biden plan, bought by (US?) investors, and the $50 billion put in the Ukraine defense fund created by Congress and distributed to Ukraine. The World Bank would act as distributor of the funds. Ukraine would pay the interest on the bonds every year. The catch per the Biden plan was if Ukraine defaulted in the payments, then the Europeans would be liable to reimburse the investors. What a deal! American investors would make the money and Europeans potentially get stuck with the bill. Even they choked on it. So the Europeans came up with their own plan.

While details reportedly are still to be worked out in coming weeks, the Europeans’ plan would raise $54 billion in funds “from existing EU programs for Ukraine”. It’s not clear if that’s from private investors if the EU would issue new bonds specifically for Ukraine aid and EU governments and banks then buy them. If so, the EU issuing its own bond represents a further trend toward creating a fiscal union alongside the Euro currency/European Central Bank monetary union. The EU plan also reportedly required the US to assume a share of the risk and pay lenders if Ukraine defaulted and didn’t make payments. Lenders, in the meantime, would be paid interest on the $260 billion annually. That was estimated around $4 billion a year. The Europeans also wanted language that assured European military contractors got their share of Ukraine spending of the funding, not just the US.

Both the Biden and EU plans remain highly opaque in terms of details. Europeans admitted the details will take weeks to resolve. But there remain interesting gaps in the deal, presumably to be worked out before year end. Questions like:

  • Is the $54 billion raised from private investors as well as governments?
  • Will Ukraine get all the $54 billion up front or in tranches; if latter, how many tranches for how many years?
  • Will Governments (EU and/or US) assume liability to lenders if payments aren’t made.
  • Are there subsequent $54 billion disbursements to follow? Some US media have suggested the deal includes further $54 billion distributions to Ukraine’s economy over three years. Is the $54 billion to prop up Ukraine’s economy, paying government salaries, purchases and pensions through 2027? Or does it include for weapons as well? If latter are separate, how much will that cost?
  • What’s the lenders’ guaranteed annual interest rate of return on the bond and loan if private funding—not just government—is part of the European deal?
  • If the interest profits on the $260 billion seized assets is only $4B/yr, who pays lenders the difference? Current interest on the $260B in EU banks was virtually risk free. But repayment of the interest on the loan by Ukraine carries a major element of risk. Won’t the lenders demand a much higher interest rate than before? Private lenders involved certainly won’t buy the Bond at normal market interest rates.
  • When the bond matures in ten years, how will Ukraine return the principal if it only covers interest payments each year. Where will Ukraine get the cash to pay off principal, whether annually or at maturity? Especially if it loses the war.

Bottom line, it appears somehow Ukraine will get at least $50 billion. To spend on what is unclear. Unclear also is whether the government will issue the bond that private investors will buy or will it be a private bond back by government if not paid. However, the $50 billion is structured, Ukraine will still have to pay back the principal ($300B presumably). Where’s it to get the money? It’s economy is a basket case and in a debt death spiral. Which means, in the end, the $260 billion in Europe will likely also have to be seized to pay the bondholders and investors at maturity of the bond.

Biden and the Americans wanted to just seize the full amount and give it to Ukraine (as Biden did with the US share of $5 billion Russian assets in US banks). Europeans balked at that and propose a financial sleight of hand solution: create the fiction that the interest on the $260 billion will cover annual interest payments to the lenders and somehow Ukraine can pay back the $260 billion principal in the end.

So why are the Europeans so reluctant to jump in with both feet and do what the Biden administration has done and wants them to do as well—grab the $260 billion outright instead of using the $260 billion as collateral with which to raise a Euro bond to provide Ukraine with funding? The explanation is the Europeans are worried about the legality of just distributing the seized funds. (As if skimming the interest and profits were somehow not illegal but seizing and distributing the principal $260 billion was!)

Blowback from Diverting the $300 Billion

What the Europeans are really worried about is if they steal the assets too quickly, Russia will no doubt respond in kind. There are still a lot of EU bank assets—cash, securities and real property—in Russia. What’s to stop Russia from seizing that in turn? America has little at risk in Russia in that sense. Europe has a great deal.

Russia reportedly is already freezing and seizing assets of Deutschebank and Commerzbank for sanctions related reasons. There are many European companies still operating in Russia. What’s to stop Russia from taking over their assets—financial and real property?

Screenshot from Reuters

Then there’s the potential impact on the European currency, the Euro, and deposits in EU banks by many countries of the global South. Outright seizing of assets raises the question: whose assets in EU banks are next to be seized? Other countries will take their currency and other liquid assets out of EU banks. That outflow will depress the value of the Euro. The European Central Bank will then have to raise interest rates in Europe to keep the Euro from falling in value. That will slow and already sluggish and stagnant European economy. The consequences of just grabbing and distributing sovereign assets of a country thus carries significant risk of economic contagion, in other words. The Europeans know this. Hence their current plan to work around the outright seizure and distribution of the $260 billion principal, skim the profits from it, and use it all as collateral to fund a loan—i.e. their $54 billion government bond plan.

US neocons are too dumb to foresee (or perhaps even care) of such an impact on the US dollar from their outright seizure of Russian assets. As the arrogant global economic hegemon, the US and Biden administration think they are largely immune to such potential economic blowback from seizing assets of another country. They, of course, are wrong. The Europeans are perhaps more aware of the consequences. American neoliberal elites just don’t seem to care. By the time they do it will be too late. The coming BRICS expansion and alternative global financial structure will have done mortal harm to the USA global dollar and hegemony. There is even talk now of the now expanding BRICS creating an alternative political structure, a kind of BRICS global parliament. Institutional ‘dual power’ is always a sign of revolution and it’s becoming increasingly clear almost the entire global South is now in a state of revolt from the American/G7 empire!

Thermopylae 2.0: Will the $300 Billion ‘Buy Time’

Public opinion within the US and the European members of the G7 is shifting. The recent elections for the European Parliament, followed by the stunning defeat of Macron’s party in France in that country’s National Assembly elections, and the subsequent Conservative Party’s debacle in Britain soon after, are all harbingers of shifting political winds in Europe. Germany’s weak SPD-Greens coalition government is also apparently in trouble as the right wing AfD party continues to gain seats in the legislature and support in public opinion.

Then there’s the dramatic events in the USA in the wake of Biden’s disastrous presidential debate as well as the surge in public voter support for Trump following the recent failed assassination attempt. In USA national elections popular voter support is irrelevant. One person, one vote democracy in America simply does not exist. What matters is the electoral college vote cast by state electors. At least 40 of the 50 states’ electors are already virtually predetermined, locked in for either Biden or Trump. The strategic exception is the seven (maybe ten now) swing states up for grabs by either party. And Trump leads in all; in some cases by double digit numbers.

The recent outcome of elections in Europe and pending in the USA are by no means a guarantee that the NATO funding schemes for seizing the Russia’s $300 billion assets will collapse. the momentum politically is clearly shifting. Zelensky clearly thinks the NATO financing of the war is secured for at least another year as result of both the US and EU latest arrangements to tap the $300 billion. He’s recently bragged publicly that he now has $90 billion ‘in the bag’ which includes the EU’s $54 billion.

But the political momentum on the war is clearly shifting. Public support in the West for NATO elites’ war financing policies is beginning to look like liquefaction of the soil that occurs in earthquakes. What was once solid ground may quickly turn to liquid mud. No building, however tall or solid, can resist when the earth itself moves! The recent election developments in Europe and USA may be the initial seismic shock in the collapse in public and political support in the West for a continuation of the war.

Wars on the scale of Ukraine today are determined by which side can out produce the other in weapons and material; which population is larger; which has the greater number and better trained troops; whose economy is strongest; and whose populace are united behind the effort and most committed to the outcome. And Ukraine is in a disadvantage in all the above categories.

Like the 300 Spartans before them at Thermopylae, the West’s distribution to Ukraine of Russia’s $300 billion of assets will not be able to prevent eventual defeat. The Ukraine war will almost certainly be resolved within the next twelve months—on the ground, not with bank accounts. Like the Spartans at Thermopylae in 480 BCE, time may run out for Ukraine before Europe can even buy some of it with its share of the $300B.

Moreover, the price paid by Europe for its $54 billion war loan to Ukraine may result in a net loss to Europe from the investment. Europe may open itself to all the negative consequences of such a bad investment. As Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), leader of Saudi Arabia, has recently publicly warned: should Europe go ahead and distribute its share of the $300B to Ukraine, Saudi Arabia will withdraw its assets and Euros from European banks. MBS especially warned withdrawal from French banks.

With ‘Project Ukraine’, Europe stands at the ‘Hot Gates’ again. By committing another ‘300’ again, it may realize very little gain militarily at the cost of an historic loss economically.

*

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

This article was originally published on LA Progressive.

Dr. Rasmus is author of the books, ‘Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes’, Clarity Press, 2017 and ‘Alexander Hamilton and the Origins of the Fed’, Lexington Books, 2020. Follow his commentary on the emerging banking crisis on his blog, https://jackrasmus.com; on twitter daily @drjackrasmus; and his weekly radio show, Alternative Visions on the Progressive Radio Network every Friday at 2pm eastern and at https://alternativevisions.podbean.com.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Ava Babili (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) / Flickr)

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

As early as January 2022, NIH researchers were aware of at least 850 peer-reviewed case reports and/or research articles about COVID-19 vaccine reactions, according to emails obtained by Children’s Health Defense.

As early as January 2022, National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers were aware of at least 850 peer-reviewed case reports and/or research articles about COVID-19 vaccine reactions, according to emails obtained by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

In one email (name and agency redacted), NIH researchers were told the federal government was “saddled” with the “mess” of dealing with those injured by the COVID-19 vaccines, due to the liability shield enjoyed by vaccine manufacturers.

The emails, part of a 309-page batch of documents released to CHD on June 21, originated from a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) request to NIH researchers for input on a report highlighting several injuries common among people who received the vaccines.

CHD requested the documents via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the NIH in November 2022. When the NIH hadn’t responded by April 2023, CHD sued the agency.

In an October 2023 settlement, the NIH agreed to produce up to 7,500 pages of documents at a rate of 300 pages per month.

The batch of documents released in June — which include emails to Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research — revealed that by fall 2021, key NIH researchers were aware of scientific studies on serious adverse events, including persistent neurological symptoms, following COVID-19 vaccines.

As with prior releases of the NIH documents, June’s tranche also included several emails from vaccine-injured individuals to NIH researchers, seeking help for their symptoms — with one person asking, “Why aren’t you studying vaccine injuries?”

‘Tinnitus … Was a Freight Train in My Head for the First Four Months’

On Jan. 10, 2022, NIH researcher Dr. Avindra Nath was forwarded an email from someone whose name is redacted, with the subject line: “Followup [sic] Jan 4th Meeting” (pages 281-289).

The original email, dated Jan. 9, 2022, was sent to FDA officials including Marks and Dr. Janet Woodcock, principal deputy commissioner of food and drugs, who apparently participated in a meeting on this topic on Jan. 4, 2022.

The Jan. 9, 2022 email included a list of “persistent symptoms following the Covid vaccines” and the names of researchers who were studying these conditions, which included dysautonomia, neuropathy, tinnitus, multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS), myocarditis, blood clots and parasthesias.

The email was accompanied by a spreadsheet listing approximately 850 “peer-reviewed case reports/research articles about Covid vaccine reactions.”

Source

Regarding dysautonomia — a nervous system disorder that disrupts automatic bodily functions — the email stated that the condition is “grossly under diagnosed” and “is not diagnosed in ERs or ICUs” but in “autonomic specialty labs.”

The email noted that such labs are less likely than hospitals to file reports with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and added that there “likely are issues with identifying this syndrome if only looking through VAERS or similarly reported databases.”

As a result, the email suggested

“it would be reasonable to approach autonomic specialists / long covid specialists about their observations.”

A 2011 Harvard study found that less than 1% of all adverse events are reported to VAERS.

The Jan. 9, 2022, email also noted unusual trends regarding diagnoses of neuropathy — a set of neurological symptoms that includes numbness and tingling in the hands or feet, and a burning, stabbing or shooting pain in affected areas.

According to the email,

“Historically, neuropathy presents in the predominantly male population aged 59+. However as discussed previous [sic], neuropathy in our case is predominantly female, aged 29-40.”

As with dysautonomia, the email noted that neuropathy is “likely to be inadequately reported through the VAERS and BEST [Biologics Effectiveness and Safety] systems because of the circumstances previously mentioned for dysautonomia.”

The Jan. 9, 2022 email also acknowledged that tinnitus was a common post-vaccination injury, noting, “Our findings are that this is not just J&J [the Johnson & Johnson, or Janssen, COVID-19 vaccine] … not by a long shot.”

According to the email,

“This symptom is more proportionate to the general neuro symptoms by brand as previously reported in our patient led survey of 500 participants.”

The email’s author also noted that,

“in my case yes, I have tinnitus now and it was a freight train in my head for the first four months.”

‘Is It Reasonable to Dismiss … 20 New Symptoms … in a Single Person Post Vaccine?’

According to the email, myocarditis and blood clots were already “acknowledged by the FDA and CDC” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

“Every person in our groups that have one of these two conditions, also have accompanying neuro issues like those of us who are not currently acknowledged by the FDA and CDC,” the email said.

The conditions included postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), “brain fog/memory loss, and inflammation (MCAS)” — mast cell activation syndrome.

“Even the perfectly healthy very fit young males with the lasting myocarditis are struggling with the POTS and inflammation/brain fog/memory loss. Makes me suspect that somehow these all are a result of the same mechanism of action,” the email stated.

The Jan. 9, 2022, email also acknowledged parasthesia — a condition that causes a burning, prickling sensation — and MIS, a condition in which numerous organs become inflamed, as concerns.

The email openly questioned why more wasn’t being done to connect these conditions in the vaccinated, to the COVID-19 vaccines themselves, noting that vaccinated people were frequently demonstrating multiple rare symptoms:

“While we understand that correlation does not equal causation, we also find a strong correlation with the change in our blood that mirrors long-haul, and symptomology that mirrors long-haul.

“Because of this, I have to ask what is the process by which Covid PASC [post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, or long COVID] symptoms have been so readily tied back to Covid, whereas the same symptoms due to the Covid vaccines have not?

“Also, while it may be coincidental to have one or maybe two strange symptoms pop up, is it reasonable to dismiss 10, 15, 20 new symptoms that occur in a single person post vaccine.”

‘Insanely Challenging for These People Suffering … to Walk This Path Alone’

In the Jan. 10, 2022, email to Nath an NIH researcher wrote,

“The FDA has asked once again for us to provide any input from those who have experience with this disease. Very prompt responses and more active engagement on their part lead me to believe they will now examine these problems with some effort.”

The author also asked Nath if he knew researchers “who could fill in the gaps” and asked him if he would “kindly be willing to discuss with Peter Marks?”

“The gov has conveniently absolved the drug companies of any liability, and the federal government is now saddled with the responsibility of figuring out this mess,” the email continued. “I am happy to orchestrate a meeting of the minds with NDR [non-disclosure] agreements if that would get the discussion started in a way that is similar to how previous new diseases have been investigated.”

The email also noted talks with public health officials in Germany and France.

“It has been insanely challenging for these people suffering to have to walk this path alone. They grow more and more desperate by the day. Knowing there is someone, somewhere looking into this makes a big difference for these people to just hang on.”

Even though public health agencies were aware of this information and were discussing vaccine injuries in early 2022, official government advice to the public continued to claim the COVID-19 vaccines were “safe and effective,” including statements by Dr. Anthony Fauci in November 2022.

And in testimony before Congress in February, Marks dismissed the COVID-19 vaccine injury reports filed with VAERS, stating that numerous false reports are submitted to the database — a claim some experts have disputed.

As of today, the CDC continues to recommend the COVID-19 vaccines “for everyone ages 6 months and older, including people who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or might become pregnant in the future.”

NIH Researchers Aware of Vaccine Injury Studies in Fall of 2021

The June 2024 tranche of NIH documents also revealed that, at least as early as fall 2021, researchers with the agency were aware of scientific studies and surveys highlighting serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination.

In a Sept. 2, 2021, email (pages 109-121), Farinaz Safavi, M.D., Ph.D., of the NIH Division of Neuroimmunology and Neurovirology was sent the results of the “Covid Vaccine Persistent Symptoms Survey” conducted by React19, a group advocating on behalf of COVID-19 vaccine injury victims.

Source

The version of the survey included in the email was accurate as of Aug. 31, 2021, and contained the results of 382 questionnaires submitted by people “suffering persistent neurological symptoms after receiving the Sars-CoV2 Vaccine in the United States.”

According to those results, 71% of respondents said they had no preexisting health conditions prior to the symptoms they developed following their COVID-19 vaccination, and 94% said they had never previously experienced a reaction to other vaccines.

The most commonly reported symptoms included paresthesia, tinnitus, heart palpitations, tachycardia, chest pain, visual disturbance or loss, muscle twitching, joint pain, muscle aches, brain fog, fatigue and anxiety attacks.

Almost all respondents said these symptoms began less than two weeks following vaccination.

In a Nov. 15, 2021, email (pages 300-305), Nath was sent a scientific paper, “Neurological side effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations,” authored by Austrian researcher Josef Finsterer, M.D., Ph.D.

According to this paper,

“The most frequent neurological side effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are headache,” Guillain-Barré syndrome, venous sinus thrombosis and transverse myelitis.

“Safety concerns against SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are backed by an increasing number of studies reporting neurological side effects. … Healthcare professionals, particularly neurologists involved in the management of patients having undergone SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, should be aware of these side effects and should stay vigilant to recognize them early and treat them adequately,” the paper concluded.

Nath received a review copy of this paper, which has since been published in Acta Neurologica Scandinavica.

And in a May 17, 2021, email (pages 292-299), Nath was sent a preprint of “Sudden Onset of Myelitis after COVID-19 Vaccination: An Under-Recognized Severe Rare Adverse Event,” co-authored by William E. Fitzsimmons, doctor of pharmacy, and Dr. Christopher S. Nance.

According to the preprint,

“Myelitis has been reported as a complication of COVID-19 infection. However, it has rarely been reported as a complication of COVID-19 vaccination.”

The paper focused on the example of one of Fitzsimmons’ patients, a 63-year-old previously healthy male who developed myelitis after his second dose of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine — and treatment that was effective in his case.

Other emails apparently sent by Fitzsimmons highlighted the injuries and the progression of treatment of this 63-year-old man (pages 145-150).

‘A Blood Clot as a Cause of Your Paralysis Would Make the Most Sense’

In an email chain to Nath beginning Sept. 20, 2021, (pages 228-233) with the subject “Paralyzed after J&J Covid Vaccine,” the author (whose name is redacted) said that less than 24 hours following vaccination, the patient “lost bladder control.” He later developed a blood clot and erectile dysfunction, before becoming paralyzed.

In a response that day, Nath told the patient,

“The temporal association of the symptoms with the vaccine does make is [sic] suspect, but I do not know of any way how to sort it out.”

In a follow-up email that day, Nath said,

“A blood clot as a cause of your paralysis would make the most sense, however, proving cause and effect related to the vaccine in a single patient is virtually impossible.”

In a Dec. 13, 2021, email to Nath (pages 234-236), another vaccine injury victim, who “was healthy prior to vaccination,” described injuries following both doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, including paresthesia, tachycardia, severe tinnitus, intractable insomnia and “POTs-like symptoms.”

“I have been diligent and determined in seeking care near and far, but have continued to face skepticism, half-interest, and an inability to know how best to treat,” this person wrote.

And in a series of emails beginning Jan. 24, 2022, (pages 246-247), a “woman who was completely healthy before taking the Pfizer vaccines” told Nath about a series of neurological symptoms and inflammation she experienced following her second dose, in addition to symptoms like tinnitus, insomnia and brain fog.

“Why isn’t the NIH doing research on this?” she asked in a follow-up email on Jan. 25, 2022.

*

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

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”

Featured image is from CHD


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Article first published by Global Research on May 23, 2023. Minor revisions on June 15, 2024

***

 

****

 

Absolutely stunning,

An Astute Intelligence Op.  A++.

The election of Zelensky in 2019 was intent upon acquiring the ethnic Russian vote in Donbass. 

A Russian Jew transformed into a Nazi?

See the video below. 

 

Blackwater is in Donbass with the Azov battalion, by Manlio Dinucci

June 15, 2024. Zelensky arrives in Switzerland for the Ukraine Peace Conference.

On June 15-16, 2024, delegates from 90 countries will be meeting at the Bürgenstock resort near Lucerne, in the context of a Peace Conference organized by the Swiss government to which Russia was not invited.

***

 

Zelensky is Jewish. He supports the Nazi Azov Battalion, the two Nazi parties, which have committed countless atrocities against the Jewish community in Ukraine.  

He belongs to a Russian-Jewish family. He was brought up as a native Russian speaker, who prior to entering politics in 2019 was not fluent in Ukrainian. 

And the Western media in chorus are endorsing the Zelensky proxy regime without bating an eyelid. The Kiev regime is upheld as a democracy. 

Video

And now this Jewish-Russian proxy president wants to “ban everything Russian”, including the Russian language (his mother tongue), the Russian media, the teaching of Russian in the schools.

He has been instructed by Washington to lead Kiev’s Neo-Nazi government, which is portrayed by the U.S. mainstream media including the NYT as a democracy. 

Zelensky also plans to ban Russian composers including Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev, Shostakovich,  Borodin, Glinka, Rimsky-Korsakov, and many more.

Are Russian films also slated to be banned?

Ironically if this were to be carried out, it  would include Zelensky’s movies (featured in Russian) (produced prior to him becoming president in 2019). These include “Servant of the People”, 2016 (in Russian on Netflix). Below is the Trailer of his Film entitled “8 First Dates”. 

Trailer of Zelensky’s Film entitled “8 First Dates”

Russian Books

He has ordered the removal of 100 million books by Russian authors, including Tolstoy, Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Gorky, from Ukraine’s libraries.

Meanwhile, the Kiev neo-Nazi regime (supported by US-NATO) has endorsed the writings of Stepan Bandera as well as Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf

 

 

Military Training of Young Children to fight the Russians

From the outset in 2014 as well as under president Zelensky’s government, the Azov battalion is supported by US and Canadian military aid channelled to the Ukraine National Guard via the Ministry of Internal Affairs. 

The Azov battalion is not only involved in para-military operations in Eastern Ukraine, it is running a Summer Camp military training project for young children and adolescents as part of a broader Nazi indoctrination program.

The Azov Battalion promotes Nazism. It actively coordinates the Neo-Nazi Summer School: 

© vk.com/tabir.azovec

 

Zelensky Betrays His Family

Zelensky has also betrayed his family. Many of his relatives were victims of the Nazi holocaust.  

In a twisted irony, days before he assumed office [May 2019], “he …laid flowers on the grave of his grandfather, Semyon Ivanovich Zelensky (image right), who fought in the Soviet Union’s Red Army during World War II”.

It was May 9 — Victory Day in Ukraine — and a day of “thanksgiving,” he wrote in a Facebook post.

“[Semyon] went through the whole war and remain[s] forever in my memory one of those heroes who defended Ukraine from the Nazis,” he wrote.

“Thanks for the fact that the inhuman ideology of Nazism is forever a thing of the past”

Thanks to those who fought against Nazism — and won.”  (quoted in Washington Post, emphasis added)

High Treason.

My Grandfather: “one of those heroes who defended Ukraine from the Nazis”. 

What a liar and a criminal.

Sponsored by America and Europe, Zelensky is leading a Neo-Nazi government, he is promoting Nazism in Ukraine

And the Western media in chorus are endorsing the Zelensky proxy regime without bating an eyelid. The Kiev regime is upheld as a democracy. 

 

 

Ottawa, House of Commons, September 22, 2023

And at Canada’s House of Commons (September 22, 2023), a standing ovation for the Neo-Nazi President of Ukraine.

Are Canada’s MPs totally ignorant or are they embracing an unfolding US-Canada-NATO “Neo-Nazi Consensus”? 

 

This what happened in the aftermath of Zelensky’s Address


It is worth noting that David Pugliese of The Ottawa Citizen has carefully documented the Neo-Nazi features of the Kiev Regime. His report (which no doubt was read by several of Canada’s Members of Parliament) was published in 2021 during the Zelensky presidency (May 2019-)

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 23, 2023

*** 

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

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

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

July 19th, 2024 by Global Research News

Video: Detailed Analysis of Trump Assassination Attempt

Dr. Peter McCullough, July 16, 2024

Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump. Secret Service Has Some ‘Splainin to Do

John Leake, July 15, 2024

Rod RosensteinRussiaGate 2.0: Donald Trump Has Opted for “Real Peace” Negotiations with a “Foreign Adversary”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 16, 2024

Why Is the West Preparing for War? Paul C. Roberts

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, July 12, 2024

The Convulsed Republic: The Shooting of Donald Trump

Dr. Binoy Kampmark, July 14, 2024

The Slow-Motion Assassination

Matt Taibbi, July 15, 2024

US Secret Service Director Cheatle’s Statement Regarding Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump. Analysis

John Leake, July 17, 2024

Why Russia Will Defeat NATO in Ukraine

Mike Whitney, July 17, 2024

Presidential Candidate Donald Trump Barely Escapes an Assassination Attempt

Peter Koenig, July 15, 2024

Response to Substack Authors Who Claim Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged

John Leake, July 16, 2024

Trump’s Alleged Shooter — Parking His Car on a Saturday Morning

Karsten Riise, July 17, 2024

13 Nations Sign Agreement to Engineer Global Famine by Destroying Food Supply

Hunter Fielding, June 18, 2024

Further Thoughts on the Near Assassination

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, July 16, 2024

Warning Signs About Secret Service Emerged Months Before Trump Assassination Attempt

John Solomon, July 15, 2024

NATO “Terrorist Attacks” against Russia. Trying to Push Russia into Direct Confrontation? Will Moscow “Keep its Cool” or Retaliate?

Drago Bosnic, July 15, 2024

Dr. Charles Hoffe Denounces the Covid Vaccine: “Biggest Disaster in Medical History”. Confronts College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC

Lee Turner, July 8, 2024

False Flag Operation, The Lie becomes the Truth: “Israel is the Victim of Palestinian Aggression”. According to the ICC, “There Never Was A Genocide”.

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 17, 2024

Lessons for the US Secret Service: When the CIA Tried to Assassinate Fidel Castro More Than 638 Times

Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 15, 2024

The French Fraudulent Disaster Elections. Peter Koenig

Peter Koenig, July 9, 2024

Why Does Zelensky Suddenly Want Russia at the Next ‘Peace Summit’?

Drago Bosnic, July 17, 2024

China and Japan Ignite Asian Hypersonic Arms Race

July 19th, 2024 by Gabriel Honrada

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 Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

 

Introduction. 

An aerial view of the Bürgenstock resort on Mount Bürgenstock.

The Ukraine Peace Summit in Switzerland, June 15-16, 2024 was an outright failure. 

Sponsored by the Swiss Government (15-16 June, 2024) it resulted in a  chaotic public relations ploy rather than a peace initiative. Russia had not been invited to attend. 

The fundamental issue, which was carefully avoided is that the dominant Nazi faction within the Kiev government exerts its power in the realm of intelligence, internal affairs, national security and the military.

It’s a proxy regime in liaison with its U.S.-NATO sponsors.

Amply documented, the 2014 EuroMaidan US Sponsored Coup d’Etat was carried out with the support of the two Nazi factions: Svoboda and Right Sektor headed by Dmytro Yarosh.

In Part I of this article the issue of Holocaust Denial is addressedOur governments –which claim to be firmly committed to social democracy– are actively supporting and financing a coalition government which is supportive of Ukraine’s Nazi movement which collaborated with Nazi Germany’s occupation forces during World War II. The evidence is overwhelming. 

Specifically, the German penal code prohibits “Denial of the Holocaust” as well as the “dissemination of Nazi propaganda”.

We are dealing with something far more serious than Nazi “hate speech”, namely the relationship of the German Government with the Kiev regime’s Nazi Movement.

See the legal procedures of the European Parliament pertaining to Holocaust Denial

See also the Resolution of the UN General Assembly, dated January 2022 quoted in the above document.

Unquestionably, the German Government of Chancellor Scholz’s decision to support the Kiev regime’s Nazi Movement constitutes a criminal act under German law., namely the violation of. the Penal Code.

While Western governments are actively repressing the protest movements against Israel’s act of genocide, —with mass arrests on charges of antisemitism—, these same governments are supporting Ukraine’s Nazi movement which actively participated and collaborated with Nazi Germany in the genocide directed against the Jewish population of Ukraine. (1941-1944)

Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2024

This article addresses the following issues

Part I: The Role of the Ukraine’s Neo Nazi Parties and their links to Nazi Germany 

Part II: Adolph Hitler is “The Torchbearer of Democracy” in Ukraine

 

 

The Role of Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Parties and their Links to Nazi Germany 

by 

Michel Chossudovsky 

April 21, 2024

 

 

Introduction

The Neo-Nazi parties of Ukraine’s so-called coalition government are actively supported by “the international community” namely our governments.

The Nazi faction within the Kiev government exerts its power in the realm of intelligence, internal affairs, national security and the military. It’s a proxy regime in liaison with its U.S.-NATO sponsors.

Amply documented, the 2014 EuroMaidan US Sponsored Coup d’Etat was carried out with the support of the two Nazi factions: Svoboda and Right Sektor headed by Dmytro Yarosh

Dmytro Yarosh (Centre) EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat

Andriy Parubiy founded in 1991 the Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda [Freedom], together with Oleh Tyahnybok. The name Social-National Party was chosen with a view toreplicating the name of Hitler’s Nazi (National Socialist) party.

Parubiy was subsequently appointed Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament (Verkhovna Rada).

According to Andriy Parubiy: Adolf Hitler was “the torchbearer of democracy”. (See Part II below)

The two Neo-Nazi parties of Ukraine’s so-called coalition government are actively supported by “the international community” namely our governments.

Amply documented, the 2014 EuroMaidan US Sponsored Coup d’Etat was carried out with the support of the two Nazi factions: Svoboda and Right Sektor.

The U.S. Congress has allocated more than 60 billion dollars in military aid, which will in large part be managed by Kiev regime’s Nazi faction which exerts its power in the realm of intelligence, internal affairs, national security and the military, in liaison with its U.S.-NATO sponsors. 

Nazism and the History of World War II

These are not “Neo-Nazi” entities. The term “Neo” (“New”) is misleading. They are full-fledged Nazi parties, historically aligned (going back to World War II) with the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) of Stepan Bandera(OUN-B)

According to the WW II Holocaust Museum:

“Before World War II, the 1.5 million Jews living in the Soviet republic of Ukraine constituted the largest Jewish population within the Soviet Union, and one of the largest Jewish populations in Europe. … The number of Jews in the Ukrainian Soviet Republic (UkrSSR) rose to 2.45 million people [from 1939-1941]”

Amply documented the OUN-B and its National Insurgent Army (UPA) were actively involved in the massacres of Jews, Poles, Communists and Roma in major cities including Odessa and Kiev.

At the outset of Operation Barbarossa, (June, 22 1941) in coordination with the death squads (Einsatzgruppen) of Nazi Germany, members of the OUN-B were instrumental in the killings in the City of Lviv, Western region of Galicia, resulting in the massacre and deportation of more than 100,000 Jews:  

The Lviv pogroms were the consecutive pogroms and massacres of Jews in June and July 1941 in the city of Lwów. (Lviv, Lvov) in German-occupied Eastern Poland/Western Ukraine (now Lviv, Ukraine). The massacres were perpetrated by Ukrainian nationalists (specifically, the OUN), German death squads (Einsatzgruppen), and urban population from 30 June to 2 July [1941].”

While Stepan Bandera had announced the creation of a Nazi Ukrainian State, which pledged “to work with Nazi Germany”, Adolf Hitler disapproved of the proclamation. Despite Bandera’s “house arrest”, the members of OUN-B actively collaborated with the Wehrmacht’s occupation forces (1941-1944).

In Ukraine: “..up to a million Jews were murdered by Einsatzgruppen units, Police battalions, Wehrmacht troops and local Nazi collaborators” (emphasis added)

On September, 1 1941, the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian newspaper Volhyn wrote, in an article titled Let’s Conquer the City, namely Lviv:

“All elements that reside in our land, whether they are Jews or Poles, must be eradicated.

We are at this very moment resolving the Jewish question, and this resolution is part of the plan for the Reich’s total reorganization of Europe.

The empty space that will be created, must immediately and irrevocably be filled by the real owners and masters of this land, the Ukrainian people”.(emphasis added)

The map below is the territory under Nazi Germany occupation (1942) extending from Galicia to Kiev and Odessa.

It indicates cities with Jewish ghettoes, the locations of major massacres.

In this regard, the Janowska concentration camp was established in the outskirts of Lviv in September 1941.

Lviv had a Jewish population of 160,000. The Janowska camp combined “elements of labor, transit, and extermination”.

“By the time Soviet forces reached Lviv on 21 July 1944, less than 1 per cent of Lviv’s Jews had survived the occupation(emphasis added)

Video: War and Peace: “Made in America”

Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux. 

Our governments are aligned and supportive of Ukraine’s Nazi Movement which collaborated with Nazi Germany and was actively involved in crimes against humanity (1941-1944).

What are the implications?

 

to leave a comment, access Rumble

to make a donation to Lux Media, click the Red Button

Video War and Peace Made in America

View on Youtube 

Vidéo (en français): Guerre et Paix; Made in America 

 

 

Holocaust Denial? 

The OUN-B was complicit in the crimes of Nazi Germany. Our governments –which claim to be firmly committed to social democracy– are actively supporting a Ukrainian Nazi movement which collaborated with Nazi Germany’s occupation forces during World War II. 

That is  the unspoken truth which is embedded in our history, casually ignored by  both the media and Western Europe’s “Classe politique”.

By ignoring the World War II legacy of Stepan Bandera’s OUN-B and casually describing him as an anti-Soviet Nationalist, both the mainstream media as well as our governments, are complicit in what might be described as “Holocaust Denial”.

Specifically, the German penal code prohibits “Denial of the Holocaust” as well as the “dissemination of Nazi propaganda”. We are dealing with something far more serious than hate speech, namely the relationship of the German Government with Ukraine’s Nazi Movement.

See the legal procedures of the European Parliament pertaining to Holocaust Denial

Unquestionably, the German Government of Chancellor Scholz’s decision to support Ukraine’s Nazi Movement constitutes a criminal act under German law., namely the violation of. the Penal Code.



Who is Practicing Antisemitism?

While Western governments are actively repressing the protest movements against Israel’s act of genocide, —with mass arrests on charges of antisemitism—, these same governments are supporting Ukraine’s Nazi movement which actively participated and collaborated with Nazi Germany in the genocide directed against the Jewish population of Ukraine.

Sounds contradictory?

My question is: Who are the Anti-semites? The answer is obvious. Our governments, which are financing the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.

From a legal standpoint, this is a criminal act on the part of Western governments.

Moreover, the funds allocated by the US Congress (April 2024) to Ukraine ($60 billion +) and Israel ($22 billion +), are in blatant violation of the Genocide Convention. (See below)

The Genocide Convention

Article I defines the responsibility of contracting parties to prevent and to punish

The Contracting Parties [member States of the U.N.] confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II of the Convention defines Genocide as

any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III, section (e) defines the acts which are punishable including

(e) Complicity in genocide.(which applies to Western governments which are supporting Israel)

Article IV

“Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III [Article III (e)] shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

“Complicity in Genocide” (Art. III). Our Governments “Shall be Punished” (Art. IV) ?

Articles I, III and IV

By endorsing Israel’s act of genocide against the People of Palestine, our governments which are “contracting parties”) are “complicit” according to Article III (e) of the Genocide Convention.

Under Articles III and IV, Western governments (“constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials”) which endorse Israel’s act of genocide are subject to punishment under the Genocide Convention.

Is Netanyahu Antisemitic?

Western governments are not only supporting Israel’s act of genocide, they are in collusion with Prime Minister Netanyahu who has an extensive criminal record(charges of corruption according to the NYT)

While the genocidal actions taken by his government against the People of Palestine are of a criminal nature under the Genocide Convention, they are also considered as an act of anti-semitism directed against the People of Palestine.

The Semite people of the Levant, Mesopotamia and the broader Middle East share a common history, culture and similar languages, broadly including Arabs, Jews, Assyrians, Arameans, Phoenicians.

Bear in mind that Aramea (similar to Arabic and Hebrew) was the language of communication at the outset of Christianity. It was the language of Jesus Christ.


Produced by Oliver Stone

For carefully documented details on the crimes committed by the OUN on behalf of Nazi Germany, view the movie (executive producer Oliver Stone). click below


Flash Forward: Collaborating with Today’s Nazis 

There is ample evidence of collaboration between the Kiev Neo-Nazi regime and NATO member states, specifically in relation to the continuous flow of military aid as well as the training and support provided to Ukrainian forces, not to mention the Nazi Azov Battalion. 

In turn, the Azov battalion –which is the object of military aid, has  also been involved in the conduct of Summer Nazi training Camps for children and adolescents.

See:

Ukraine’s “Neo-Nazi Summer Camp”. Military Training for Young Children, Para-military Recruits, By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 08, 2023

The Azov battalion’s Summer Camps are supported by US military aid channelled to the Ukraine National Guard via the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The MIA coordinates the “anti-terrorism operation” (ATO) in Donbass.

Today these children -who have been duly indoctrinated- are adolescents who are being drafted to serve in the Armed Forces and/or the Azov Battalion.

© vk.com/tabir.azovec

Neo-Nazi Parties are Illegal 

While Neo-Nazi parties are outlawed in a number of European countries including Germany where symbols and Nazi slogans are illegal, the governments of NATO-EU member states are routinely supporting Nazism in Ukraine.

The following image is revealing, from Left to Right:

  • the Blue NATO flag

  • the Azov Battalion’s Wolfangel SS of the Third Reich,  

  • Hitler’s Nazi Swastika (red and white background)

are displayed which points to collaboration between NATO and Ukraine’s Nazi regime.

Our Message to Western Governments

Who are the Anti-semites? The answer is obvious. Our governments, who are financing the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.

Collaborating with a Nazi regime is a criminal act under international law.

Providing 60+ billion dollars of military aid to a Nazi government is illegal. It’s the criminalization of the US Congress.

Supporting Israel’s Genocide against the People of Palestine is a Crime against Humanity. Our governments are in violation of the Genocide Convention.

By endorsing Israel’s act of genocide against the People of Palestine, our governments (which are “contracting parties”) are “complicit” according to Article III (e) of the Genocide Convention.

Under Articles III and IV, Western governments (“constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials”) which have endorsed Israel’s act of genocide are subject to punishment under the Genocide Convention.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, May 5, 2024

 

 

 

 

 

Adolph Hitler is Ukraine’s “Torchbearer of Democracy”

According to Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament (2016-2019)

 

Michel Chossudovsky 

September 7, 2017

(minor revisions of 2017 article)

No Outrage or Media Coverage by Ukraine’s Staunchest Allies.

Kiev Regime Speaker of the House “Is Not a Nazi”. Ukraine is “A Flowering of Democracy” according to the NYT

On September 4, 2018 the Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) Andriy Parubiy’s intimated that Adolf Hitler was “the torchbearer of democracy”.

His statement was broadcast on Ukraine’s ICTV channel. Parubiy described Adolf Hitler as a true proponent of democracy claiming that the Führer  “practiced direct democracy in the 1930s.” (Tass, September 5, 2018).

“I’m a major supporter of direct democracy,… By the way, I tell you that the biggest man, who practised a direct democracy, was Adolf Aloizovich [Hitler]”. (quoted by South Front)

 

This controversial statement, with some exceptions was not picked up by the Western press. Lies by omission.

Not a single US, Canadian or EU News media took the trouble to cover the story.

Why? Because the Kiev regime (including its Armed Forces and National Guard) is integrated by Nazi elements which are supported by the US and its allies.

Parubiy has been given red carpet treatment by Western governments. He is casually portrayed as a right wing politician rather than an avowed Nazi.

Embarrassment or Denial?

The US Congress, Canada’s Parliament, the British Parliament, the European Parliament,  have invited and praised M. Parubiy.

 

Parubiy with Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (Obama Adminstration)

Received by the Canadian Parliament

 Parubiy  with President of the European Commission for Democracy through Law, Gianni Buquicchio, June, 2017 

Max Blumenthal on Parubiy’s meeting with members of the American Foreign Policy Council, July 2, 2018

“At a packed meeting in the Senate, the Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal asked organizers whether it was appropriate for Congress and the American Foreign Policy Society to be coddling the founder of two neo-Nazi parties. The response his questions elicited ranged from bizarre to deeply troubling.”

June 15, 2018, two of the most influential Republicans in Congress, House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senator John McCain, meet Parubiy in Washington. (Max Blumenthal report)

The Opposition Bloc faction in Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, has demanded public condemnation as well as the resignation of the Chairman of the Rada Andriy Parubiy..

Who is Andriy Parubiy? Why Do Western Politicians Love Him?  

Parubiy founded in 1991 the Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda [Freedom], together with Oleh Tyahnybok, who currently heads the Svoboda party. The name Social-National Party was chosen with a view to replicating the name of Hitler’s Nazi (National Socialist) party

 

Dmytro Yarosh (Centre) EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat

Parubiy was ‘Commandant’ of the volunteer rebel forces together with Dmytro Yarosh  (head of the Right Sector, image above) and Oleh Tyanhnybok.

These neo-Nazi insurgent forces were involved in the ‘Euromaidan’ coup d’Etat in early 2014, which led to the overthrow of president Viktor Yanukovych. All three neo-Nazi leaders are followers of Ukraine’s Nazi Stepan Bandera (see image below), who collaborated in the mass murder of Jews and Poles during World War II.

 

Nazi Rally supportive of Stepan Bandera. 

Confirmed by [former] Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, key organizations in the Ukraine including the Neo-Nazi party Svoboda were generously supported by Washington: “We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals. … We will continue to promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”

The Western media has casually avoided to analyze the composition and ideological underpinnings of the government coalition. The word “Neo-Nazi” is a taboo. It has been excluded from the dictionary of mainstream media commentary. It will not appear in the pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post or The Independent. Journalists have been instructed not to use the term “Neo-Nazi” to designate Svoboda and the Right Sector. (see Michel Chossudovsky, March 7 2014)

In 2014 Andriy Parubiy was appointed (by the Kiev government) Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU). (Рада національної безпеки і оборони України), a key position which overseas the Ministry of Defense, the Armed Forces, Law Enforcement, National Security and Intelligence. While he was dismissed a few months later (August 2014),

Parubiy together with Dmytro Yarosh  played a key role in shaping Ukraine’s National Guard as a Nazi Force using Nazi insignia. Despite his dismissal by Poroshenko he continues to exert influence in military and intelligence affairs.  As Chairman of the Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) Parubiy is entitled (ex officio) to attend all meetings of the RNBOU.

 

The Azov National Guard

 

While the media failed to cover Parubiy’s statement concerning Adolph Hitler’s commitment to democracy,  they nonetheless have expressed “concern” regarding the influx of US, Canadian military aid, which might fall in the wrong hands, according to Canada’s National Post. (2015 report)

Fake News Coverup of America’s Neo-Nazi Ally. Lies through omission.

According to a New York Times March 2014 report published in the immediate wake of the Maidan coup:

The United States and the European Union have embraced the revolution here [Ukraine] as another flowering of democracy, … .” ( After Initial Triumph, Ukraine’s Leaders Face Battle for Credibility,  NYTimes.com, March 1, 2014, emphasis added)

The grim realities are otherwise. What is at stake is the unbending US-EU-NATO support of Nazism in Ukraine.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Secret Service’s explanations for the security failures surrounding the assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump at a rally on Saturday aren’t adding up, according to security experts and former Secret Service agents.

Emerging details from official accounts and leaks to the media have raised serious questions about how a 20-year-old gunman was able to get within rifle range of Trump. Many key questions hinge on the responsibilities delegated to local police, who U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle confirmed during a Monday interview with ABC News were inside the building the shooter fired from, though nobody was stationed on the rooftop. 

Cheatle explained a decision was made not to put anybody on top of the building because the “sloped” roof made it unsafe, but security experts and former Secret Service agents who spoke with the Daily Caller News Foundation emphasized not having someone on the roof was a “big failure” and didn’t believe Cheatle’s explanation was sufficient.

“Let’s just say the local law enforcement officers [and] the Secret Service agree that it’s just not safe to keep someone up there for a couple of hours,” former Secret Service agent Anthony Cangelosi told the DCNF. “Then the question is, well, how do we maintain its integrity otherwise? It’s not like you just throw your hands up and say ‘can’t do that.’”

Cangelosi said there is no “justifiable reason” for failing to cover the roof, suggesting they should have found solutions like putting another platform up or getting an officer on a lift. 

Peter Yachmetz, retired FBI agent and principal security consultant at Yachmetz Consulting Group, pointed out that the shooter was moving around on the “unsafe” roof prior to the incident.

“The slope didn’t affect him,” Yachmetz told the DCNF.

Click here to read the tweet on X

Law enforcement reportedly spotted the shooter on the roof 30 minutes before shots were fired, WPXI reported Monday. After the incident, a witness described watching a man climbing onto the roof and trying to warn a police officer, claiming officials responded with confusion. 

“The reality is, regardless of the spin, that particular roof should have been under constant surveillance and or posted,” former secret service agent Tim Miller told the DCNF.

Click here to read the tweet on X

“In this particular instance, we did share support for that particular site and that the Secret Service was responsible for the inner perimeter,” Cheatle told ABC News Monday during an interview. “And then we sought assistance from our local counterparts for the outer perimeter. There was local police in that building — there was local police in the area that were responsible for the outer perimeter of the building.”

However, a local law enforcement official told The New York Times Tuesday that the local forces were in an adjacent building, not the one the shooter was firing from.

The discrepancies in their accounts only add to the uncertainties surrounding who was responsible.

CBS News reported Monday that there were three snipers stationed inside the building shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks fired from, citing a local law enforcement officer. One of the snipers saw Crooks looking through a rangefinder in the minutes before he fired and radioed command post, according to CBS News.

The Butler Township Police Department declined to confirm the report to the DCNF, stating that there is an ongoing investigation by the FBI.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe declined to offer additional comments Tuesday, telling the DCNF he is “backing away from media requests for comment and opinions.”

“There are too many questions being posed that I do not have first hand knowledge of and too many fingers being pointed,” he said. “I am in charge of the Deputy Sheriffs and no other law enforcement agency. My Deputies performed their duties at their assigned areas and went above and beyond after the shooting started and ended in the their actions to help people and assist police in clearing the nearby buildings.”

Slupe previously confirmed to CNN that an armed Butler Township officer encountered Crooks before he shot at Trump, but retreated down the ladder after Crooks pointed his gun at him. He told KDKA-TV there was a security failure, but noted “there is not just one entity responsible.”

“The Secret Service plays a key role in protecting, in this case, former President Trump, but they don’t act alone,” he told the outlet. “The Secret Service receives support from local police departments.”

Click here to read the tweet on X

Pennsylvania State Police, however, did confirm they had no members “inside the building or staging in it.”

“The Pennsylvania State Police provided all resources that the United States Secret Service (USSS) requested for former President Trump’s rally in Butler on Saturday, July 13th, including approximately 30 to 40 troopers to assist with securing the inside perimeter,” Pennsylvania State Police Lieutenant Adam Reed told the DCNF. “Among PSP’s duties at the rally, the Department was not responsible for securing the building or property at AGR International.”

Reed said he could not say when an officer witnessed the shooter, as it was not a state trooper who saw him.

Click here to read the tweet on X

Former secret service agent Jeffrey James explained to the DCNF that protection “works in a series of concentric circles.” Typically, there is an inner circle of secret service agents, a second circle that mixes both agents and local law enforcement, and an outer ring that is largely state and local partners.

If the agent in charge of the site told a local law enforcement officer on the outer perimeter that the building is his responsibility, then anything that happens is on the officer.

“But if that agent didn’t find one of the local law enforcement partners and give very clear, direct directions…then it’s going to be the responsibility or the fault of that agent for not delegating that,” he told the DCNF.

It’s unclear what instructions the Secret Service gave to local law enforcement.

Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger told The Washington Post Tuesday that “Secret Service was in charge” and that “it was their responsibility to make sure that the venue and the surrounding area was secure.”

“For them to blame local law enforcement is them passing the blame when they hold the blame, in my opinion,” Goldinger told The Washington Post.

However, the Secret Service released a statement on Tuesday pushing back against assertions that they were blaming local law enforcement for the tragedy that unfolded on Saturday. “Any news suggesting the Secret Service is blaming local law enforcement for Saturday’s incident is simply not true,” the statement posted to the Secret Service’s X page said.

“I am having difficulty reconciling the answer the Director gave in her ABC interview with the official statement made on social media,” Patrick Yoes, national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said in a press release on Tuesday. “Our goal is to provide whatever assistance the Secret Service needs to perform their mission and to do so with mutual respect, trust, and accuracy.”

A RealClearPolitics report suggested Sunday that resources were diverted away from Trump’s rally to an event where First Lady Jill Biden was speaking. Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications for the United States Secret Service, denied this was the case.

Questions also remain about why Crooks was not taken out sooner. Cangelosi explained to the DCNF that counter-snipers can face challenges due to their distance from the target.

“With counter snipers, you’re usually so far away, it’s not usually clear whether an individual is an imminent threat, ” Cangelosi said. “It’s harder to discern. Once they discern whether that person is a threat to life or serious bodily injury, they can take the shot.”

Yachmetz questioned why drone coverage was not utilized.

“A drone strategically placed a few thousand feet above could have oversaw the entire venue,” he said.

“In my opinion, a detailed, in-depth very specific investigation must be conducted of all procedures [and] this entire matter by a non-biased outside investigative group (possibly of retired agents),” Yachmetz told the DCNF, emphasizing the investigation must not be “politically motivated.”

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer announced Monday that Cheatle would testify at a committee hearing on July 22. President Joe Biden said Sunday that he directed an “independent review” of the events.

The FBI told the DCNF it has “nothing additional to provide at this time beyond previously-issued statements.” The Bureau said Monday that it gained access to Crooks’ phone and “has conducted nearly 100 interviews of law enforcement personnel, event attendees, and other witnesses.”

Trump suffered a wound to his ear, and two were killed, including Crooks and 50-year-old ex-volunteer fire chief, Corey Comperatore. Two other attendees were also wounded in the attack.

The Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment.

*

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

Wallace White and Owen Klinsky contributed to this report. 

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Are mainstream Israeli media outlets now guilty of antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theories, or is it no longer an antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theory to say that this happened?

A new report from the Israeli outlet Haaretz titled “IDF Ordered Hannibal Directive on October 7 to Prevent Hamas Taking Soldiers Captive” confirms what independent outlets like The Grayzone and Electronic Intifada have been getting smeared as antisemitic conspiracy theorists for saying this entire time: that many of the Israeli deaths on October 7 were the result of an IDF policy of deliberately firing on their own people to prevent them from being taken hostage by Hamas.

Citing a “very senior IDF source,” Haaretz reports that Israeli troops responding to the Hamas attack were told “Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza,” and that “it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.”

This acknowledgement flies in the face of everything the imperial media and Western officials have been saying since October about these claims. Just last month State Department spokesman Matthew Miller acted as though journalist Sam Husseini was a raving lunatic for asking about the possible implementation of the Hannibal Directive on October 7. The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal notes that he was actually smeared as a “manipulator” by Haaretz itself back in November for his reporting on the evidence of IDF fire being behind many deaths during the attack.

So I guess at this point we need to ask, which is it? Are mainstream Israeli media outlets now guilty of antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theories, or is it no longer an antisemitic Holocaust denialist blood libel conspiracy theory to say that this happened?

*

A new report published in The Lancet medical journal titled “Counting the dead in Gaza: difficult but essential” highlights the fact that many times more people tend to be killed indirectly by things like starvation and disease as a result of recent conflicts than from direct military violence. The report says that as a “conservative” estimate of four such indirect deaths for every one direct death, a direct death count of 37,396 could wind up placing the actual total death count as a result of this onslaught at around 186,000. This would be about eight percent of the total population of Gaza.

The Lancet notes that the number of reported direct deaths is “likely an underestimate” since thousands of bodies remain uncounted beneath the rubble in Gaza, and since Israel has destroyed Gaza’s infrastructure for counting the dead. So the real number of direct deaths is almost certainly much higher than 37,396, which means the real number of indirect deaths which could be conservatively inferred from this number would sit well into the hundreds of thousands. 

And that’s just if the direct killing stopped today. The real death toll is only going up.

*

Foreign reporters now making their way into Rafah for the first time since the Israeli assault on the city began are now describing the place as a “flattened wasteland,” a “maze of rubble,” and “unrecognizable.” 

As Dr Assal Rad noted on Twitter, these reports come just days after the US State Department’s deputy spokesman Vedant Patel told the press “We continue to believe that any major military incursion into Rafah we would be opposed to, but yet, we have yet to see any kind of incursion to take place thus far.”

 

If a military operation which turns a city into a flattened, unrecognizable wasteland of rubble isn’t considered a “major military incursion”, I think it’s fair to say that nothing would be.

*

It’s so surreal how Americans watched undeniable evidence that the president doesn’t run America during the first presidential debate, and then went right back to arguing about who should be president as though this never happened.

I mean, they watched it happen. Right in front of their faces. They saw clear, unequivocal evidence that the person who’s supposedly calling the shots in their country has a brain which does not work, which means the shots are necessarily being called by someone else. And yet here they are, still arguing over who should be president as though they didn’t just see the very premise of this argument exposed as complete nonsense.

It’s like if a wife was talking to her husband, and then he told her “I’m not actually your husband, I’m a space alien,” and then he took off his mask and showed her his flying saucer, and then after he put his mask back on she asks him what he wants for dinner and reminds him they’re having drinks with the Millers on Friday.

Inside Joe Biden there are two wolves fighting: a deranged imperialist wolf who wants to commit genocide and start World War Three, and a demented incontinent wolf who just wants to be welcomed into the sweet embrace of death.

A liberal will tell you you’re crazy and unrealistic for saying revolution is the only path to meaningful change, and then say the only real path is to make sure their party never, ever loses an election in a system that’s arranged to ensure both parties lose half the time.

*

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The US Air Force has been sending unmarked planes from Britain’s base on Cyprus to Israel since it began bombing Gaza, it can be revealed.

The planes are all C-295 and CN-235 aircraft, which are believed to be used by American special forces. 

Declassified has found 18 of these aircraft which have gone from the sprawling British air base on Cyprus, RAF Akrotiri, to Israel’s coastal city Tel Aviv since October 7.

Akrotiri is the key node in the international effort to arm and provide logistical support for Israel’s assault on Gaza.

Flight path of an unmarked US Air Force plane that flew from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv on 26 June. (Screengrab: Radarbox)

But the UK government has always refused to divulge any information about US activities at Akrotiri, which is known to include transporting weapons to Israel.

Asked in May how many US Air Force (USAF) flights had taken off from the base since October 7, defence minister Leo Docherty said:

“The Ministry of Defence does not comment on the operations of our Allies.”

But Declassified discovered the unmarked planes that flew from Akrotiri to Israel from November to June have a serial number showing they are operated by the USAF. Most of these journeys had the flight number GONZO62.

Six more unmarked C-130 planes have gone from Akrotiri to Tel Aviv since the bombing of Gaza began, which are believed to be USAF, but it was not possible for Declassified to locate their operator.

The C-130 can carry 128 combat troops and almost 20 tonnes of cargo.

The new information could further implicate British ministers in war crimes in Gaza. In November 2023, a US military official revealed that American special forces were stationed in Israel and “actively helping the Israelis”.

A spokesperson for the UK Ministry of Defence would only tell Declassified:

“In response to the situation in Israel and Gaza, we are working with international partners to de-escalate the conflict, reinforce stability and support humanitarian efforts in the region. Any use of UK bases will be in line with these objectives.”

Fort Liberty

Most of the unmarked planes show that they were recently at Fayetteville, North Carolina, which is home to Fort Liberty, the largest US Army base by population with nearly 50,000 active-duty soldiers.

Formerly called Fort Bragg, it is home to the 1st Special Forces Command (Airborne) which “assigns, equips, trains, certifies, and validates [Army Special Operations Forces] Soldiers and units to conduct global operations”.

The Pentagon says this unit is “the most adaptable and capable enabling force in the United States military.”

The planes, the C-295 and CN-235, are produced by Airbus and believed to be used by 427th Special Operations Squadron which has been described as USAF’s “most secretive squadron” and is based at Fort Liberty.

After a reporter filed a Freedom of Information Act request, the Air Force told him the unit supports “training requirements…for infiltration and exfiltration” – a reference to the covert deployment and extraction of special forces behind enemy lines. 

The aircraft’s primary military roles include maritime patrol, surveillance, and air transport. It can carry 70 military personnel or 48 paratroopers.

In February 2023, an unmarked CN-235 went to eastern Europe to support President Joe Biden’s trip to Ukraine and Poland. 

This plane arrived at the USAF base in Britain, RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk on February 17, where it spent the night before leaving for Poland the following day. 

One journalist noted:

“Sporting a single-tone slate grey livery, this rare, secretive [Air Force Special Operations Command] aircraft wore no identifiable national markings, air arm/unit insignia or serial number details.”

But the serial number of the US plane at RAF Mildenhall was eventually located and is the same as the plane that has flown from Akrotiri to Israel five times since March, including as recently as June 26. 

Aerial view of Pope Airfield in Fayetteville, North Carolina, where records have placed the covert US Air Force planes. (Screengrab: Google Earth)

Aerial view of Pope Airfield in Fayetteville, North Carolina, where records have placed the covert US Air Force planes. (Screengrab: Google Earth)

Transport Flights

Declassified has also found 26 marked USAF planes have arrived at RAF Akrotiri since the bombing of Gaza began. These have included 16 huge C-17 military transport aircraft from US bases in Germany, Spain and Kuwait.

The C-17 is capable of transporting 134 personnel and many types of military equipment, including Abrams tanks and three Black Hawk helicopters. The US military notes that its role is to “rapidly project and sustain an effective combat force close to a potential battle area”.

Respected Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in October 2023 that over 40 US transport aircraft had already flown to RAF Akrotiri carrying equipment, arms and forces. It is unclear where they got this figure from. 

Haaretz reported that the planes were loaded with cargo from strategic depots belonging to the US and NATO in Europe. Around half the US flights were said to be “delivering military aid”.

Declassified has found that during the six days from February 4 to 9 there was a flurry of USAF activity at RAF Akrotiri when six C-17s arrived from Ramstein air base in Germany. All soon returned to their bases.

On June 24, a US-operated C-17 was sent from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv, before flying on to Ramstein. It is possible this plane was transferring weapons to Israel. 

USAF planes arriving at Akrotiri since October 7 have also included five C-130 planes coming from the US base Incirlik at Adana in Turkey. The UK government has refused to disclose what they had onboard.

The US Department of Defense did not respond to a request for comment.

*

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

Matt Kennard is Head of Investigations at Declassified UK. He was a fellow and then director at the Centre for Investigative Journalism in London. Follow him on Twitter @kennardmatt

Featured image: Flight path of an unmarked US Air Force plane that flew from RAF Akrotiri to Tel Aviv on 26 June. (Screengrab: Radarbox)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

It’s no secret that the Neo-Nazi junta and (for now) former president Donald Trump don’t exactly see eye to eye. However, as the latter’s chances for a second term are now going through the roof, it could be argued that the Kiev regime is in a quiet (or perhaps not so quiet) panic mode.

It should be noted that Trump certainly isn’t pro-Russian, as his staunch political opponents in both parties like to point out. However, he fully realizes that the puppet regime in Ukraine was installed by the exact same people who have been doing everything in their power to prevent him from winning the upcoming election. The latest evidence suggests that this also includes the recent assassination attempt. As I’ve argued already, foreign involvement in this is also quite probable.

Image: JD Vance (From the Public Domain)

Vance poses for a professional portrait in a suit and red tie. Behind him the flag of the U.S. is partly visible on his left and the flag of Ohio on the right.

And while this hypothesis may seem too farfetched, especially so soon after the assassination attempt, the Neo-Nazi junta’s desperation shouldn’t be taken lightly. Its frontman Volodymyr Zelensky has had a very rocky relationship with several of Trump’s closest associates, including his running mate, JD Vance.

Namely, in an interview he gave to CNN on the second anniversary of the special military operation (SMO), Zelensky didn’t have anything nice to say about Vance. In fact, the former comedian insisted that Vance, who served as a combat correspondent in the US Marine Corps, is “clueless” about the ongoing NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. It seems the fatigues Zelensky has been wearing since the SMO started gave him the illusion that he’s an actual military commander.

“I’m not sure he understands what’s going on here and we don’t need any rhetoric from people who are not deeply in the war,” Zelensky told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, adding: “To understand, he needs to come to the frontline to see what’s going on, to speak with the people … to understand.”

As an employee of CNN, the infamous neoliberal mouthpiece and the flagship of the mainstream propaganda machine, Collins essentially led Zelensky to criticize Vance, as he was one of the staunchest opponents of the $60 billion “aid” package that the United States provided to the Kiev regime in late April. Vance was certainly aware of the Neo-Nazi junta’s massive issues with endemic corruption, while also understanding that much of that money was also being funneled back into the US so that the no less corrupt Democrats could get their “fair share” of the spoils. In addition, Trump’s running mate also expressed the belief that the so-called “aid” wouldn’t change the real situation on the ground, a fact that Zelensky never takes too kindly and always insists that “Ukraine is winning”.

Zelensky certainly never dreamed that his comments on Vance could actually make the Kiev regime’s relations with Trump all the more sour, so he soon resorted to damage control after his closest henchmen panicked that tens of billions in US “aid” could soon dry out. The lavish lifestyle of the Neo-Nazi junta elite is quite expensive and includes high-level prostitutes, supercars, seaside resorts, villas and other perks of “freedom and democracy”. During a press briefing held on July 15, Zelensky insisted that he is “ready to work with Trump” if the latter is elected in November. Obviously, this was a last-ditch (albeit ill-timed) effort to make sure that the aforementioned American “aid” continues flowing into the coffers of the perpetually corrupt Kiev regime.

“If Mr. Donald Trump becomes a president, we will work. I am not afraid of this,” Zelensky stated, adding: “Most of the Democratic party supports Ukraine, [but] there are varying positions among Republicans, some of whom are more right-wing and radical. The Republican Party is different, but its majority supports Ukraine and the people of Ukraine. We have bipartisan support and we have strong relations with the US politicians representing the Republican Party.”

We can only expect that such “damage control” just made things worse, as it’s quite clear who these “more right-wing and radical” Republicans are. Zelensky is certainly not referring to actual warmongers and war criminals such as Lindsey Graham, infamous for calls to “take Putin out” and the excitement that “the Russians are dying”, Michael McCaul who wants Americans to die for Taiwanese semiconductors or John Bolton, one of the worst warhawks in Washington DC who openly called for a coup in Russia. This is without even considering the fact that the frontman of a literal Neo-Nazi regime and a man who thinks Stepan Bandera is a “hero”, is suddenly so “worried” about “right-wing and radical” pro-Trump Republicans.

The obsessive panic about Trump and Vance can also be seen in the European Union, where senior officials are already preparing for doom and gloom scenarios of the Kiev regime’s total defeat at the hands of the advancing Russian military. Not to mention that many of them are convinced that they’ll also be forced to face Russia all by themselves, a daunting prospect given just how ineffective and weak the EU has become (if it’s ever been anything but). One unnamed official was quite direct and said that “this is a disaster for Ukraine”. Having to deal with Trump was “a major trouble already”, but it seems that Brussels is particularly afraid of Vance, as his appointment “raised further questions about a potential new administration’s commitment to Ukraine and the transatlantic alliance”.

Politico claims that “Vance has made his views on Ukraine clear”, because in 2022, he told Steve Bannon in an interview that “[he doesn’t] really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another”. In February 2024, Vance also refused to meet the Neo-Nazi junta’s delegation at the Munich Security Conference, telling Politico that “the US needed to reassess its support for Ukraine”. He also criticized the EU for its “dependence on the US for military spending”, particularly Germany, accusing it of “failing to meet the NATO defense spending target of 2% of GDP”. However, the Kiev regime officials believe something could be “worked out with Vance”. Maria Mezentseva, an MP from Zelensky’s party and deputy chairwoman of the EU integration committee, said Vance should be invited to Ukraine.

“I think we should bring him,” she told Semafor, adding: “That’s how we usually succeed to change someone’s mind.”

Mezentseva’s assessment may seem overoptimistic, but it’s not without reason, as it has indeed been the case that many who were previously skeptical about the Neo-Nazi junta ended up “changing their mind” after visiting the country.

Whether this was the result of some “monetary encouragement” or something else is unknown, but it obviously worked often enough to give the Kiev regime the said overconfidence. We don’t yet know much about Vance and his convictions to say with certainty whether he’d budge or not. However, we do know that Trump is unlikely to do so, particularly if the Neo-Nazi junta’s possible involvement in his assassination attempt is revealed. This perfectly explains the panic in both Kiev and Brussels, as well as the Deep State’s readiness to eliminate Trump. After all, he said he will “totally obliterate it”.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

‘There was crazy hysteria, and decisions started being made without verified information’: Documents and testimonies obtained by Haaretz reveal the Hannibal operational order, which directs the use of force to prevent soldiers being taken into captivity, was employed at three army facilities infiltrated by Hamas, potentially endangering civilians as well

Gaza Division operations and airstrikes in the first hours of October 7 were based on limited information. The first long moments after the Hamas attack was launched were chaotic. Reports were coming in, with their significance not always clear. When their meaning was understood, it was realized that something horrific had taken place.

Communication networks could not keep up with the flow of information, as was the case for soldiers sending these reports. However, the message conveyed at 11:22 A.M. across the Gaza Division network was understood by everyone.

“Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza” was the order.

At this point, the IDF was not aware of the extent of kidnapping along the Gaza border, but it did know that many people were involved. Thus, it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.

This was not the first order given by the division with the intent of foiling kidnapping even at the expense of the lives of the kidnapped, a procedure known in the army as the “Hannibal procedure.”

Documents obtained by Haaretz, as well as testimonies of soldiers, mid-level and senior IDF officers, reveal a host of orders and procedures laid down by the Gaza Division, Southern Command and the IDF General Staff up to the afternoon hours of that day, showing how widespread this procedure was, from the first hours following the attack and at various points along the border.

Haaretz does not know whether or how many civilians and soldiers were hit due to these procedures, but the cumulative data indicates that many of the kidnapped people were at risk, exposed to Israeli gunfire, even if they were not the target.

At 6:43 A.M., at which time rocket barrages were launched at Israel and thousands of Hamas operatives were attacking army strongholds and the division’s observation and communications capabilities, the division’s commander Brig. Gen. Avi Rosenfeld declared that “the Philistines have invaded.”

This is the procedure when an enemy invades Israeli territory, upon which a division commander can assume extraordinary authority, including the employment of heavy fire inside Israeli territory, in order to block an enemy raid.

Click here to read the full article on Haaretz.

*

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

Featured image source

This interview was recorded a July 2, 2024. It was intended to be published prior to the NATO Summit. 

Due to temporary technical problems the programme was not recorded in the Lux Media Studio. Our thanks to Lux Media for their support. 

***

.

NATO is not an Alliance. It is an organisation under the command of the Pentagon, and its objective is the military control of Western and Eastern Europe.

US bases in the member countries of NATO serve to occupy these countries, by maintaining a permanent military presence which enables Washington to influence and control their policies and prevent genuine democratic choices. 

NATO is a war machine which works for the interests of the United States, with the complicity of the major European power groups, staining itself with crimes against humanity.

These wars are financed by the member countries, whose military budgets are increasing continually to the detriment of social expenditure, in order to support colossal military programmes like that of the US nuclear programme which costs 1,300 trillion dollars.

To exit the war system which is  exposing us to increasing dangers, we must leave NATO, affirming our rights as sovereign and neutral States.

In this way, it becomes possible to contribute to the dismantling of NATO and all other military alliances, to the reconfiguration of the structures of the whole European region, to the formation of a multipolar world where the aspirations of the People for liberty and social justice may be realised.

We propose the creation of a NATO EXIT International Front in all NATO member countries , by building an organisational network at a basic level strong enough to support the very difficult struggle we must face in order to attain this objective, which is vital for our future.

Excerpts from the Florence Declaration. Florence, April 7, 2019

 

US Secret Service Director Cheatle’s Statement Regarding Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump. Analysis

By John Leake, July 17, 2024

The barn roofs are higher than the roof of the building from which Crooks fired. That at least one of the counter-snipers could see him is evidenced by the fact that the counter-sniper ultimately shot Crooks in the head.

Video: At NATO Summit, Biden Introduces Zelensky as Putin. Gets “His Countries Mixed Up”, “Political Plagiarism” and More…

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 17, 2024

What would happen if Biden were to get his targeted  countries or his weapons systems mixed up. Biden’s mental acuity cannot be categorized as “fraudulent”. What is deceitful and fraudulent is the outright conduct of “political plagiarism” (1988). 

‘Brain Dead’ and Dangerous, NATO Proceeds

By Patrick Lawrence, July 18, 2024

It is now five years since Emmanuel Macron, in one of those blunt outbursts for which he is known, told The Economist, in a reference to the collective West, “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.” The French president thereupon shocked officials across the Continent.

Are You Gloating at the American Political “Turbulence” or Ashamed? The Various Coups and Assassinations in the Global South

By Rima Najjar, July 17, 2024

The United States, often through the CIA, has been involved in various coups and assassinations in the Global South. These actions have had profound and lasting impacts on the region.

Why Does Zelensky Suddenly Want Russia at the Next ‘Peace Summit’?

By Drago Bosnic, July 17, 2024

With everything set up for a major escalation, the last thing one would expect is to see Zelensky suggest that Russia should be invited to the next “peace summit”. The news about it went under the radar because everyone’s focus was on the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, but at a press conference in Kiev, Zelensky did exactly that, leaving many confused and dumbfounded.

Dutton’s Quixotic Proposal: Nuclear Lunacy Down Under

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, July 18, 2024

Needing to find some electoral distraction to improve the Liberal-National coalition’s chances of returning to office, Dutton has literally identified a nuclear option. Certainly, it is mischievous, throwing those wishing to invest in the problematic Australian energy market into a state of confusion. The business of renewables, as with any investment, is bound to also be shaken.

American Democracy’s Theater of the Absurd

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, July 17, 2024

Since the end of the Cold War and the Clinton administration coming to power in 1992, the United States has undergone a systemic decay in its political body. Policies increasingly favor the interests of an oligarchic and powerful elite more often than not at the expense of the public.

‘Brain Dead’ and Dangerous, NATO Proceeds

July 18th, 2024 by Patrick Lawrence

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

It is now five years since Emmanuel Macron, in one of those blunt outbursts for which he is known, told The Economist, in a reference to the collective West, “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.” The French president thereupon shocked officials across the Continent. “That is not my point of view,” Angela Merkel responded augustly. “I don’t think that such sweeping judgments are necessary.” Heiko Maas, the German chancellor’s foreign minister, added imaginatively, “I do not believe NATO is brain dead.”

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) celebrated its 75th anniversary last week, 32 presidents and prime ministers assembling in the same Washington auditorium where earlier leaders, 12 of them then, signed its founding treaty on April 4, 1949. Joe Biden presided over the anniversary proceedings, of course. And with this in mind, let us credit the French leader for his prescience in diagnosing the condition of NATO’s cerebral matter. As Joe Lauria put it in a Consortium News commentary at the summit’s conclusion last Thursday, this is an organization whose members are collectively losing their minds. 

It is important to understand what Macron did and did not mean with this remark. He was not, as might be easily misinterpreted, declaring the North Atlantic Treaty Organization purposeless or obsolete: That was Donald Trump’s line, and Trump was then three years into his presidency. Macron, indeed, was reacting to Trump’s complaints about the alliance as a budgetary sinkhole and his, Trump’s, consequent failure to point the other members in the imperium’s desired direction, as all American presidents had since NATO’s launch as the Atlantic world’s premier Cold War military institution. 

undefined

For the first time, a photo at the Washington summit captures all 32 NATO member states’ delegation groups together (9th of July 2024) (From the Public Domain)

Specific to the occasion of his interview with The Economist, Macron was unhappy about the mess then unfolding in northern Syria. Some readers may recall it: Trump had ordered American troops withdrawn—albeit an order diplomats, Army officers, and spooks soon subverted—and Turkey, a NATO member, had immediately piled in to attack Kurdish militias based in the region.

“You have no coordination whatsoever of strategic decision-making between the United States and its NATO allies. None,” Macron told The Economist. “You have an uncoordinated aggressive action by another NATO ally, Turkey, in an area where our interests are at stake. There has been no NATO planning, nor any coordination.’’

And then the French leader’s punchline:

“We should reassess the reality of what NATO is in light of the commitment of the United States.’’

Macron’s “brain dead” remark was not the thought of any kind of peacenik, then. The man who now advocates sending French troops into Ukraine is a committed militarist. What interests me about Macron’s apparently bold utterances, again and again, are the contradictions you find in them. In this case, he was angry at Donald Trump for failing to let the Europeans pretend they had a say in alliance policy while taking the occasion to assert his then-new, now-familiar call for Europe to cultivate its  “strategic autonomy.”

This is the kind of thing—the self-doubt, the smoldering resentments, the fraying unity—that prompted President Biden to make revitalizing NATO a priority when he took office three and some years ago.

“Who’s going to be able to hold NATO together like me?” was prominent among his boasts in his July 5 interview with ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos. “You’re going to have now the NATO conference here in the United States next week. Come listen. See what they say.”

The anniversary summit has come and gone. And two realities are now upon us. The other alliance leaders in attendance didn’t say anything of consequence—not a single statement of note. It was boilerplate and pabulum, start to finish. Two, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is nicely reunited—“Together Again,” as the old Buck Owens song goes—but there can be no doubting now that it is brain dead. 

Here is something frightening to consider. This is Larry Johnson’s take on the question that occupied minds during the July 9–11 gathering. Johnson, who now commentates regularly, is a former CIA officer and also served previously in the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. Don’t let the vulgar imagery throw you; it is indicative of the prevailing mood: 

“The hot political event this year is the NATO Summit in Washington. All Western world leaders showed up, not to discuss NATO’s future, but to see if Joe Biden survives the meetings without dumping a load in his Depends or keeling over dead. Sort of the same reason people attend a car race—i.e., they are waiting for the crash. Nothing like a fiery car wreck to get the adrenaline pumping.”

We need to think about what it means when NATO members meet and what is on their minds are not the various crises into which they have led the world over the past many years but whether the man whose authority lies effectively beyond question will manage to deliver an address coherently. We can laugh at President Biden’s public displays of ineptitude, and there were some of these, per usual, as he addressed the summit and then gave a press conference afterward. But I didn’t say funny: I said frightening. And this is what NATO has become during Biden’s three and a half years as the alliance’s de facto commander-in-chief. 

Image: President Joe Biden shakes hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during the NATO Summit in Washington, D.C., July 11, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

undefined

Yes, Biden introduced Volodymyr Zelensky to the summit as “President Putin.” Yes, he confused his vice-president with the nonexistent “Vice-President Trump.” But it seems time now to look beyond ridicule. It is certainly time for the mainstream media to cut out the everybody-makes-mistakes nonsense. Biden has made himself a sad figure these past few weeks, a character reading a little out of Shakespeare and a little out of Sophocles. But the NATO summit faces us with the bitter reality that Joe Biden has become, above all, dangerous. Is there another way to think about a man listing into senility while directing an inordinately powerful military alliance whose members know how to defer and follow but do not know how to think? 

I was struck last week by the sparsity of the coverage American media dedicated to the summit. Some stories on Biden making it to the end of his presentations—the summit address, the presser that followed—without blowing it too badly. Markedly fewer given to the substance of the gathering. It seemed to me a tacit suggestion that nothing new was said or determined during the July 9–11 sessions. It was simply more of the same, and more of the same does not make good copy in the news biz. 

Let us consider what the same comes to, and then what it means that more of the same is on the way. To preview my conclusions, NATO has just committed the West’s post-democracies to an era of institutionalized war, global violence, and disorder—this with, by design, no plan to end it.

The same threat of annihilation familiar to those who recall the Cold War will prevail once again. Spending on armaments will take automatic priority over the well-being of the societies paying for this profligacy. Russia and China will be normalized as permanent enemies. The West’s estrangement from the non–West will be an established fact of life. The Deep State, an entrenched trans–Atlantic phenomenon now, will ally with liberal authoritarian elites to enforce this regime and suppress all those who question or challenge it. 

There is no overstatement here. This is precisely the project America’s neoconservative cliques outlined when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and a decade of American triumphalism ensued. You will find all of this in the subtext of Biden’s keynote address as the 75th events opened. The remarkable thing now is the degree of denial required of NATO’s leaders as they profess adherence to this agenda in a world radically transformed in the ensuing three decades. 

After praising the “remarkable progress” of European members that are spending ever more on weaponry—what a terrific thing—Biden went straight into the proxy war the alliance wages in Ukraine against the Russian Federation. Among his various assertions:

“Ukraine can and will stop Putin,” “Make no mistake, Russia is failing in this war,” “We’ve built a global coalition to stand with Ukraine.” “An overwhelming bipartisan majority of Americans understand that NATO makes us all safer.” And then one of my favorites, a recurring theme and a real Bidenism: “And Putin wants nothing less—nothing less than Ukraine’s total subjugation. And we know Putin will not stop at Ukraine.”

The high officials listening greeted all of these statements with enthusiasm. None of them bears even a remote relationship with the truth. In an interview with Andrew Napolitano taped for Judging Freedom, conducted after the summit ended July 11, John Mearsheimer, the foreign policy scholar, called Biden’s speech “poppycock, full of deluded statements.” But exactly. Reading the transcript of these remarks, all the intervals of applause noted in brackets, NATO seemed to me too Soviet for words at this point. I thought of those Cold War Life magazine photos of the Russian Duma when votes were taken, all hands raised uniformly in assent. 

This is the trans-Atlantic alliance as it has become. It operates on the basis of fantastic conjurings, and no member questions them. You have read absolutely no mainstream media challenging these silly fabrications and none analyzing NATO’s purpose or policies with any seriousness. This is what I mean by frightening. This is what makes NATO as it is now dangerous. Its stated purpose makes no sense and its unstated purpose is as noted above. 

And here is the diabolic truth it is important not to miss: Biden and everyone in his summit audience knows Ukraine is losing its war, knows Moscow has no designs on Europe, knows there is no “global coalition” standing with the alliance. These are simple facts beyond dispute, matters of record. But Biden’s speech was not meant for the other leaders present and the other leaders present did not applaud for Biden: Biden’s true audience was the public in the trans–Atlantic post-democracies, and the applause he received amounted to their instructions in the necessity to approve. 

NATO summits as performance, as exercises in mass propaganda conducted entirely in the open: I confess I cannot fully register the implications of an organization as powerful as the Atlantic alliance operating this emptily and cynically. NATO has a purpose all right, but its political figureheads, generals, and bureaucrats must make one up for public consumption, its actual purpose—global dominance at whatever cost—being too objectionable to profess.  

As to more of the same, the anniversary summit appears to mark a turn in the eastern alliance toward complete abandonment of the pretense of NATO as a defensive organization in favor of increasingly aggressive, provocative postures. Antony Blinken, speaking in the course of the proceedings, termed the thought of Ukraine’s membership in the alliance “inevitable and irreversible,” awaiting the Kiev regime across “a well-lit bridge.” I read this two ways. One, Biden and his policy cliques are doing what they can, which is limited, to reassure Ukraine in anticipation of a possible Trump victory in November. 

Two and closer to the ground, as Kiev continues to lose on the battlefield, NATO now intends to signal that settlement talks are out of the question and the alliance will plunge deeper into the morass however deep the morass eventually proves. To wit: John Helmer, a long-serving and highly reliable Moscow correspondent who now publishes Dances with Bears, reported last week,

American, British, and Canadian troops in NATO’s forward bases in Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania are being told to prepare for deployment to the Ukraine next year. They are also being warned to expect to fight under heavy Russian artillery, missile, guided bomb, and drone strikes.

Note the nations from which these troops will be dispatched to the Ukrainian front. They are all former Soviet satellites nursing quite understandable but lethally unbalanced cases of anti–Russian paranoia. This is how aggression is sometimes engendered in the long-term war against Russia. Ukraine relies on the same visceral anti–Russian animus by way of the neo–Nazi units that lead its military. 

“And here with us—and here with us today are countries from the Indo–Pacific region,” Biden said midway in his address. “They’re here because they have a stake in our success and we have a stake in theirs.” I do not like this remark one bit. I read it as a barely veiled confirmation of a swell of hints and innuendo last year to the effect that NATO intends to expand its purview to East Asia, so following the U.S. in its gradually escalating confrontation with China. 

undefined

The NATO Summit at the Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C., July 11, 2024 (From the Public Domain)

As if on cue, Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s outgoing sec-gen, subsequently launched into an utterly inappropriate attack on China for “oppressing its own people,” for “crushing democratic voices,” for “more assertive behavior in the South China Sea,” for “threatening neighbors, threatening Taiwan,” and so on down the list of complaints Blinken and the Biden regime’s policy cliques favor when addressing the Chinese. 

NATO in Asia is now to be taken with the utmost seriousness. It is NATO now and the NATO to come—brain dead NATO, NATO everywhere with no legitimate business anywhere. Shortly after Stoltenberg delivered himself of his preposterous tirade, Biden hung the Presidential Medal of Freedom around his neck.

*

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

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a media critic, essayist, author and lecturer. His new book, Journalists and Their Shadows, is out now from Clarity Press. His website is Patrick Lawrence. Support his work via his Patreon site

Featured image: 2024 Washington summit logo (Licensed under Fair Use)

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was linked to significantly higher mortality rates than the Pfizer vaccines, based on a preliminary analysis of individual health data for the Czech Republic. Scientists call for more research.

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was linked to significantly higher mortality rates than the Pfizer vaccines, based on a preliminary analysis of individual health data for the Czech Republic.

Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, with support from pathologist Clare Craig conducted a vaccine brand comparison by analyzing record-level, or individualized data, for the Czech Republic’s over 10 million people.

Kirsch obtained the data through a Freedom of Information Act request by a Czech citizen.

The data on vaccinated people included vaccine manufacturer, vaccination date, and the lot number and code for each person.

Kirsch was able to analyze people’s medical records over time, tracking which people received one, two or three doses of a vaccine by a given manufacturer, and whether they died within the following year.

He calculated and compared the overall mortality rate in the Moderna group with the Pfizer group and found that at all ages, there were more deaths in the Moderna group.

He also found that the difference in death rates was statistically significant across every age group studied. However, the percentage increase in risk increased as people got younger. His analysis covered people in their mid-40s through late 90s, according to his graphs.

Kirsch reported, for example, that people ages 46-69 who received two doses of Moderna’s vaccine had over a 50% higher risk of death within one year compared with those who received two Pfizer shots.

He also wrote that the data show the Pfizer vaccine is “also completely unsuitable for public use,” but there was not enough data to determine its link to all-cause mortality.

“Unless the drug makers can explain to the world how this new data from the Czech Republic actually proves that all their vaccines are equally safe, the Pfizer, Moderna, Jannsen, and AstraZenecavaccines should be immediately halted as too unsafe to use,” Kirsch wrote.

Critics: More Research Needed, But Preliminary Analysis ‘Valuable’

Kirsch’s analysis was not formally written up or peer-reviewed. However, he included a critique by University of Pennsylvania biostatistician Jeffrey Morris, Ph.D., whom Kirsch asked to comment.

Morris said the analysis did not account for possible confounding variables.

Kirsch countered that there was no confounding factor that could explain the difference and challenged researchers or governments to explain.

Denis Rancourt, Ph.D., all-cause mortality researcher and former physics professor at the University of Ottawa in Canada, who has done extensive country-by-country analyses of the link between vaccine rollouts and all-cause mortality also told The Defender there were systematic limitations to Kirsch’s analysis.

For example, he said, the Czech Republic had major spikes in excess mortality over time during the COVID-19 period, a lot of which were unrelated to the vaccines because they happened in complex ways before the vaccination campaigns.

This suggests there are other mechanisms of mortality — like COVID-19 treatment protocols, lockdowns or other issues, Rancourt said.

There is also variability in how different manufacturer’s vaccines were rolled out. For example, one manufacturer’s vaccine may have been rolled out earlier versus later during a spike in an all-cause mortality wave related to several different factors. In Kirsch’s analysis, that death would be attributed to a vaccine, even though it may have been caused by factors unrelated to the vaccine.

According to Rancourt, there is a significant temporal element that Kirsch’s analysis doesn’t accounted for. At what point during an all-cause mortality wave people are vaccinated and when they die, and when and how rapidly vaccines from a particular manufacturer are rolled out must all be taken into account in a proper analysis.

“One must do a full temporal analysis to control for this systematic error,” Rancourt said. “This was not done.”

However, he also said Kirsch’s analysis is “very useful and important data.” Despite his methodological critiques, Rancourt said. “I think it’s highly valid what [Kirsch] is doing. He’s done a first analysis that shows a result that is worth looking into.”

Kirsch called the Czech government data “the mother lode.” “We have never had data like this before,” he said and shared comments from other researchers who also commented on the value of the data.

“The patient-level data from the Czech Republic is astonishing and very disturbing,” Dr. Paul Marik said.

“I am amazed that it took the authorities four years to release individual-level data,” data scientist Tomas Fürst, Ph.D., from the Czech Republic told Kirsch. “If we had this type of data earlier, we would have been able to avoid the biggest mistakes of the pandemic response. All governments should immediately release this data.”

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender, “One of the most important takeaways from this research is that we are seeing important signals in the data about a very serious safety issue and we need more data to investigate it further.”

“But we don’t have that data — governments do and they ought to release it for analysis,” he said.

Debating Potential Biases and Alternative Explanations

Kirsch did his analysis based on the assumption that Pfizer was harmless so that it could therefore act as a placebo group, Craig explained on her Substack.

“It is an excellent placebo group because confounders around health and socioeconomic variables are accounted for because the brands were distributed randomly,” she said.

Kirsch addressed several counter-arguments, or what he called “attack vectors” through which critics might attack his findings.

The most plausible counter-explanation, he said, would be that there was a vaccine distribution bias where Moderna and other vaccines were given exclusively to people with high comorbidities.

However, he said there was no evidence that Moderna was given to people at higher risk of death or that there were any criteria for vaccinating people with one vaccine or the other. Therefore, he said, it could be assumed the vaccines were assigned by convenience, “removing the majority of biases.”

Craig agreed, “Unless someone can provide compelling evidence of Moderna having been given to those more likely to die in every age group and throughout the time period then this is compelling evidence that it was more deadly,” she wrote.

However, Rancourt noted that vaccines are not rolled out randomly. “Different manufacturers get rolled out at different times and are even used for different groups of people,” he said. “So there is no reason to assume that the two manufacturers were proportionally rolled out synchronously.”

Instead, the differences in the rollouts should be accounted for in the analysis.

Kirsch also said the differences couldn’t be explained by vaccine efficacy, because the COVID-19 fatality rates were quite low.

The findings also demonstrate “biological plausibility,” Kirsch wrote, because both vaccines have the same mRNA active ingredient, the doses are significantly different. Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot contains 30 micrograms per dose and Moderna’s contains 100 micrograms per dose.

Other Research Showed Similar Findings

Kirsch noted that his findings concord with other research into this issue.

The Fraiman paper, which re-analyzed the Phase 3 Pfizer and Moderna trials, found Moderna’s vaccine similarly had a 50% higher rate of serious adverse events of special interest than Pfizer

Kirsch also pointed readers to a different analysis he did of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which found that Moderna caused 30% more deaths per dose than Pfizer.

Rancourt said Kirsch’s findings reported today also showed agreement with an analysis Rancourt did with Joseph Hickey, Ph.D., of the VAERS database.

In that paper, they also found that fatal vaccine toxicity varied by manufacturer, with Janssen’s shot being the most fatal, followed by Moderna’s and then Pfizer’s. The paper included details about toxicity, dose number and manufacturer.

*

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

Brenda Baletti, Ph.D., is a senior reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.

Featured image is from CHD


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Puzzling Features of Crooks Crime Scene

July 18th, 2024 by John Leake

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

The following still images from aerial video footage of the dead would-be assassin on the rooftop strike me as puzzling.

 

Note the large flow of blood downslope of his body in the following closeup. The position of his body marks the position at which he was shot in the head.

 

I initially wondered if the photo was taken after law officers checked Crooks’s body to make sure he was dead, then separated the weapon from his body, and then left the scene. Perhaps initial responders were told to leave the roof to minimize contamination of the crime scene, and to wait in the parking lot below for the coroner and crime scene investigators to arrive.

However, I still believe it is worth trying to ascertain if it was Crooks who tossed the weapon far to his left after he finished shooting. It appears that the weapon’s magazine is still seated in the weapon. Did the responders check to make sure the chamber and magazine were empty, and then reinsert the magazine?

The position of Crooks’s body—a few feet below the roof’s ridge—suggest that he was trying to crawl in reverse, back down the roof, but was unable to keep his head low enough to avoid getting shot by a counter-sniper.

I wonder if he believed—or was led to believe—that if he made a show of tossing his rifle far to the side, the counter-snipers would refrain from shooting him to preserve him as a witness.

Obviously, the time to shoot Crooks was the second he aimed his weapon from the roof’s ridge, not after he’d finished shooting and was crawling in retreat back down the roof’s slope.

*

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

All images in this article are from CD

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Over the last couple of days the news cycle has been overwhelmingly dominated by a sniper’s attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a large campaign rally in western Pennsylvania, with the presidential candidate fortunate enough to escape with only a minor wound to his ear.

Image is by Evan Vucci / Licensed under Fair Use

The photo of the former president holding his arm high even while streaks of blood trickled down his face has become an iconic global image somewhat recalling the historic scene of six U.S. marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima, and it fully solidified his front-runner status. Within a day or two, billionaire hedge-fund manager Bill Ackman endorsed Trump as did industrialist Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, with the latter promising to contribute a mammoth $45 million per month to a pro-Trump political committee.

Meanwhile, the ongoing efforts of various influential Democrats to pressure President Joseph Biden into dropping out of the race on grounds of mental incapacity completely vanished from the news, swamped by the dramatic account of Trump’s narrow escape from death. With the media no longer focusing on Biden’s problems, the chances that the DNC might be able to replace him with a stronger candidate may have been lost, further increasing Trump’s odds of regaining the White House this November.

I’ve only casually followed the story of this attempted assassination without spending much time investigating the details of the incident or the considerable number of conflicting theories floating around on the Internet. But various people have asked me for my opinion, so I might as well provide it, though my views should not be accorded any more weight than they deserve, especially since I lack any military expertise.

According to the media accounts, a young 20-year-old gunman named Thomas Matthew Crooks was somehow able to enter the vicinity of the Trump rally armed with an AR-15 rifle. He set himself up on the rooftop of a nearby building and fired several shots, one of which wounded Trump in the ear while another killed a bystander in the crowd, after which he himself was shot dead by counter-sniper fire from security personnel.

Allowing an armed gunman such an opportunity to potentially kill a leading presidential candidate obviously involved extremely serious lapses in security by the Secret Service agents guarding Trump and this has naturally provoked widespread suspicions that some sort of plot had been responsible. There have also been claims circulating on social media that bystanders noticed the gunman and alerted authorities, but instead of ordering the sniper shot or at least securing the candidate and taking him to safety, the security personnel waited until the prospective assassin had fired his potentially fatal shots before taking any action.

At the very least this is obviously a huge black-eye for our Secret Service and the other police agencies that were on the scene, supposedly protecting Trump.

Given the extremely strong emotions that Trump arouses in both his supporters and his opponents, it’s hardly surprising that this very strange and suspicious official story quickly inspired numerous conspiratorial narratives, which have widely circulated among both Trump-backers and Trump-haters.

For more than eight years, most American elites have expressed a seething hatred of Trump, doing everything they could to frustrate his presidency, ensure his defeat in 2020, and then prevent him from regaining the White House in 2024. Soon after a mob of outraged Trumpists stormed the DC Capitol on January 7, 2021, I published an article pointing to the overwhelming evidence that the American media and our Internet giants, assisted by numerous dishonest former intelligence officers, had combined to steal the 2020 election from Donald Trump: American Pravda: Our Disputed Election.

Last year I discussed the extraordinary efforts of those same biased media outlets to hide the massive corruption scandal engulfing Joseph Biden and his family, doing so both prior to the 2020 vote and now leading up to the 2024 election.

More recently as Trump’s efforts to regain the presidency moved forward, his bitter Democratic enemies launched a series of outrageous political prosecutions hoping that felony convictions and possible imprisonment would destroy Trump’s popularity with voters. But instead Trump’s polling numbers continued to rise, and his Republican renomination became assured.

Having failed at every step to block Trump’s rise, his political enemies were left with few available options. Their dilemma eventually led Tucker Carlson to publicly speculate that they would finally conclude that orchestrating Trump’s assassination was their best chance of preventing his triumphant return to the White House.

So now with Trump leading in the polls and the desperate Democrats fearful that Biden would be no match for him in November, a sniper was allowed surprisingly easy access to the candidate at a rally, and if the trajectory of the bullet he fired had been an inch or two different, Trump could easily have been killed. Under these circumstances, only the most oblivious would fail to be highly suspicious of what happened.

Did Trump’s bitter enemies conspire to have him killed by an assassin’s bullet, as had happened more than half-century ago to President John F. Kennedy and his younger brother Robert? While that is certainly possible, unless much stronger evidence emerges, I will remain extremely skeptical.

Assassinating a former president who is leading in the current polls is a very serious undertaking, and Trump’s lucky survival has drastically strengthened the support he enjoys both from the voters and from the billionaire donor class while his security will also surely be massively increased. I think it quite unlikely that any future sniper will have as easy a time gaining access to him at a rally or anywhere else. As Emerson said, “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.”

So if Trump’s enemies had decided to have him killed, I doubt they would have selected an untrained 20-year-old nursing home worker as their assassin, a choice that resulted in the failure that occurred. Surely a far more professional sniper would have been employed, a sniper who never would have missed his target. Arranging for the Secret Service agents and the local police to stand down and provide an opening entailed enormous political risks, and what good would that do if the gunman selected couldn’t shoot straight? If any powerful organization or individual had been behind the assassination plot, Trump would be dead and Americans would be arguing about a successful rather than a botched assassination.

The dozens of security personnel who left Trump vulnerable are now being denounced as grossly negligent in the media, and if any of them had been given suspicious orders responsible for that debacle, they will surely soon come forward and defend themselves by explaining what had happened and implicating those responsible. If none of them do so, then the likelihood of any anti-Trump plot begins to dissipate, and the explanation of sheer incompetence becomes the most plausible theory.

One claim I’ve seen is that the gunman was wearing some sort of military-themed shirt and casually carrying his rifle in plain sight, leading most onlookers to assume that he was a member of one of the various different organizations tasked with ensuring Trump’s safety. This seems like exactly the sort of stupid bureaucratic mistake that can easily occur when multiple government agencies are involved in a common project.

Meanwhile, some anti-Trump circles have naturally promoted their own contrary conspiracy theories. They have suggested that the attack was a daring false-flag operation organized by Trump or his close allies, intended to only slightly wound the candidate and thereby greatly bolster his political campaign, just as has now happened.

However, I think this scenario is even less plausible than the other one. Once again, we must realize that the shooter selected for this dangerously lethal operation was an untrained 20-year-old firing from a distance of 400 feet, a sniper who hit Trump’s ear rather than his head. Thus, any such plan to boost Trump could very easily have ended up killing him instead, and it’s difficult to believe that any rational Trump supporter would have taken such a gigantic risk.

Perhaps some of these conspiracy advocates believe that the wound itself was somehow faked, and that all the Secret Service agents who saw the injury at close range and hustled Trump away were conspirators in the plot. But lacking any evidence, these sorts of theories grow ever more complex and unlikely.

My own reconstruction of what happened is different and much simpler.

When I first heard that Trump had survived an attempted assassination, my surprise was not that it had occurred but that there hadn’t already been a dozen or more previous attacks. I doubt that any political figure in modern American history has ever been so massively demonized by our mainstream media as Donald J. Trump during the last eight or nine years. He’s been vilified as a fascist, a Hitler, a traitor, a Russian stooge, a rapist, a racist, a swindler. Trump was endlessly portrayed as a fiend absolutely determined to destroy American freedom and democracy, someone who represented our country’s deadliest human enemy.

Our media creates our reality and for most of the last decade, hundreds of millions of Americans have been completely blanketed by these unrelenting waves of ferocious anti-Trump propaganda, so surely many thousands of them would have been unbalanced enough to consider saving our country by taking the law into their own hands and patriotically risking their own lives to eliminate that deadly human menace. The media had spent all these years painting a very bright target on Trump’s back, and I’ve been astonished that until a couple of days ago no American had yet taken aim at it.

Consider an analogous case from a few years ago. For many years, anti-immigration activists loudly proclaimed that our country was being “invaded” by hordes of hostile Mexican immigrants. Therefore, I was hardly too surprised that in 2019 a very patriotic but somewhat dim-witted 21-year-old named Patrick Wood Crusius took that heated political rhetoric a little too literally and decided to shoot as many of those foreign invaders as he could, killing a couple of dozen Hispanics at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas. I strongly suspect that the young gunman who tried to kill Trump acted out of roughly similar motives.

Finally, I was generally pleased to see that Trump named Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate. Although I’m not exactly thrilled with many of Vance’s positions, notably his extremely aggressive rhetoric regarding Iran and the Middle East, he seemed like the least bad choice among the several names under consideration, and we have to settle for what we can get.

Back in January 2013, Prof. Amy Chua and others had invited me to the Yale Law School to give a talk on my Meritocracy analysis of elite university admissions, and Vance, then using his previous name of Hamel, had been the young law school student who met me when I arrived and guided me around. Now, less than a dozen years later, he’s certainly come up a great deal in the world, being on the verge of becoming one of the youngest vice presidents in our national history, someone just a heartbeat away from sitting in the Oval Office. It’s very nice to know that he’s fully aware of some of the highly-controversial matters of great importance to our national future.

*

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

Dutton’s Quixotic Proposal: Nuclear Lunacy Down Under

July 18th, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Scroll down for the complete text of U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle statement 

***

U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle issued a statement in which she asserted the following:

Secret Service personnel on the ground moved quickly during the incident, with our counter sniper team neutralizing the shooter and our agents implementing protective measures to ensure the safety of former president Donald Trump. 

The “counter sniper team” consisted of the riflemen posted on the two barns (with white roofs) behind the stage. With that in mind, consider the following photograph.

From their vantage point on the barn roofs, the counter snipers could plainly see that there were NO SENTRIES on the building to the north. They could also see the bystanders on the ground to the left of the building, frantically gesturing towards the roof for minutes prior to Crooks reaching the ridge and firing the shots.

The barn roofs are higher than the roof of the building from which Crooks fired. That at least one of the counter-snipers could see him is evidenced by the fact that the counter-sniper ultimately shot Crooks in the head.

There is simply no exculpatory explanation for this incident. Obviously, not a single sentry was posted on the building. Note the higher building just behind and slightly to the left of the building from which Crooks fired. This was a painfully obvious location to post a sentry who could have secured the rooftops and observe the event from a perfect vantage point.

Cheatle has zero credibility. The totality of circumstances indicates that security was deliberately withdrawn from the building, thereby granting a would-be assassin easy access to its rooftop with a clear line of sight to the stage on which Trump spoke.

It will be interesting to see if the local police remain silent or if media outlets like CNN continue to quote unnamed “law enforcement” sources making dubious statements that raise more questions than they answer.

I suspect that local law enforcement officials have been given the strong impression that this is a matter for federal agents, meaning there is nothing to be gained by discussing it with the media.


Statement From U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle

I would like to start by extending my deepest condolences to the family and friends of Corey Comperatore, who was killed during the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump’s life in Butler, Pennsylvania, Saturday, as well as those who were injured during this senseless act of violence.

Secret Service personnel on the ground moved quickly during the incident, with our counter sniper team neutralizing the shooter and our agents implementing protective measures to ensure the safety of former president Donald Trump. 

Since the shooting, I have been in constant contact with Secret Service personnel in Pennsylvania who worked to maintain the integrity of the crime scene until the FBI assumed its role as the lead investigating agency into the assassination attempt. I have also been coordinating with the protective detail for former President Trump and have briefed President Biden on the details of the incident.  

The Secret Service is working with all involved Federal, state and local agencies to understand what happened, how it happened, and how we can prevent an incident like this from ever taking place again. We understand the importance of the independent review announced by President Biden yesterday and will participate fully. We will also work with the appropriate Congressional committees on any oversight action.

The incident in Pennsylvania has understandably led to questions about potential updates or changes to the security for the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. The U.S. Secret Service, in conjunction with our Federal, state and local law enforcement and public safety partners, designs operational security plans for National Special Security Events (NSSE) to be dynamic in order to respond to a kinetic security environment and the most up-to-date intelligence from our partners.

I am confident in the security plan our Secret Service RNC coordinator and our partners have put in place, which we have reviewed and strengthened in the wake of Saturday’s shooting. The security plans for National Special Security Events are designed to be flexible. As the conventions progress, and in accordance with the direction of the President, the Secret Service will continuously adapt our operations as necessary in order to ensure the highest level of safety and security for convention attendees, volunteers and the City of Milwaukee. In addition to the additional security enhancements we provided former President Trump’s detail in June, we have also implemented changes to his security detail since Saturday to ensure his continued protection for the convention and the remainder of the campaign. 

The Secret Service is tasked with the tremendous responsibility of protecting the current and former leaders of our democracy. It is a responsibility that I take incredibly seriously, and I am committed to fulfilling that mission. 

*

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

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

 

 

Global Research: 

Zelensky Now Wants Russia because Donald Trump has formulated a Peace Plan which obliges the Kiev regime to enter into peace negotiations with Russia

Trump’s national security advisory team has prepared a balanced plan.

if the Kiev regime does not enter into peace talks with Moscow, the U.S. would (under a Trump presidency) immediately suspend the flow of US weapons to Ukraine:

“Under the plan drawn up by [General Keith] Kellogg and Fred Fleitz, who both served as chiefs of staff in Trump’s National Security Council during his 2017-2021 presidency, there would be a ceasefire based on prevailing battle lines during peace talks, Fleitz said.

This plan has been endorsed by Donald Trump.  Moreover Trump has also confirmed:

“that if reelected, he would swiftly bring an end to the war in Ukraine by speaking with Putin.

“I will have that war settled between Putin and Zelensky as president-elect before I take office on January 20.

I’ll have that war settled,” Trump said on June 27 during a debate with Biden, adding

“I’ll get it settled fast, before I take office.” (Quoted by Newsweek)

 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 18,2024

Incisive analysis by Drago Bosnic:

***

Understanding the Kiev regime’s political decisions can be quite challenging, partially because those decisions are actually made in Washington DC. However, there are moments when understanding the darkest corners of quantum mechanics is far easier than figuring out what exactly the Neo-Nazi junta wants. Just last month, the political West and its puppets in Kiev openly talked about conducting large-scale terrorist attacks all across Russia, including against public schools. These threats were soon followed by real acts of blatant terrorism, with missile strikes on crowded beaches in Sevastopol and an attempt to start religious unrest in Russia through the use of Islamic radicals who brutally murdered both civilians (including an Orthodox Christian priest) and local law enforcement in the southern republic of Dagestan.

The combined death toll of these terrorist attacks was approximately 30 people. The death of a single person to terrorists is most certainly an immeasurable loss, much less 30, but this was still far from the much deadlier Crocus City Hall massacre, also conducted by Islamic radicals who were sent by the SBU/GUR and their NATO handlers. Moscow’s retribution was swift, with hypersonic missiles raining down on both the Neo-Nazi junta’s intelligence services HQs and later NATO personnel fantasizing about setting up so-called “no-fly zones” over Western Ukraine. The situation on the frontlines also kept deteriorating as the Kiev regime forces continued suffering heavy losses in both manpower and equipment, while Russian long-range weapons rained down on various military targets across the NATO-occupied country.

One such large-scale strike was used to stage a false flag in Kiev, where a children’s hospital was hit by a US-made SAM (surface-to-air missile) which then suddenly “transformed” into a “Russian Kh-101 long-range cruise missile”. This was a perfectly timed PR “victory” for Zelensky as he was heading to Washington DC for a NATO summit. The Neo-Nazi junta frontman used the usual buzzwords, “condemning Russian terrorists for attacks on kids”. Interestingly, he failed to explain how it was possible for the Kremlin to accomplish this when the Kiev regime forces regularly “shoot down” 300% of all Russian missiles, including hypersonic ones. And to say nothing of the usual trope about Moscow perpetually “running out of missiles”, but also “using them against children” and “residential areas”.

This was followed by yet another pompous announcement of a new counteroffensive that’s supposed to “turn the tide” and drive out the “evil Russians”. Thus, with everything set up for a major escalation, the last thing one would expect is to see Zelensky suggest that Russia should be invited to the next “peace summit”. The news about it went under the radar because everyone’s focus was on the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, but at a press conference in Kiev, Zelensky did exactly that, leaving many confused and dumbfounded.

“I believe that Russian representatives should be at the second summit,” he stated on July 15, adding that “preparatory work for another summit is underway”.

This is the first time in well over two years that the Neo-Nazi junta hinted that it’s ready for direct “peace talks”. Previously, Zelensky was vehemently opposed to even basic contact with the Kremlin as long as President Vladimir Putin is in power. Thus, the previous “peace summits” were not much more than glorified fairs aimed at creating the narrative that “the world supports Ukraine”. Seeing through this, China refused to participate, leaving the summit nothing more than a NATO echo chamber of endless praise for the political West’s “values” and its non-existent “moral high ground”, based entirely on a fantasy world that exists only in the numerous outlets of the mainstream propaganda machine. Thus, the latest offer seems quite unusual (if not even outright strange), particularly considering the timing and other factors.

It still remains unclear what the endgame is, especially because Zelensky is yet to reveal whether the laughable “peace formula” is still his “red line”. If that’s the case, then he’s just wasting his breath, as Moscow has already flatly refused to even consider such demands, which is perfectly understandable and expected given the fact that the “plan” boils down to Russia’s capitulation. What’s more, getting even China onboard is highly unlikely if the political West continues down the path of perpetual escalation. Interestingly, at least one prominent analyst already predicted that Zelensky will sue for peace several weeks ago, albeit through third parties. However, although the idea of peace is certainly a welcome one, the motivation behind such initiatives needs to be carefully analyzed, especially when dealing with the political West.

With the Kremlin conducting a massive program of remilitarization, including a large-scale reshuffling in the Ministry of Defense, and also (re)building old geopolitical alliances, the Kiev regime is increasingly isolated geopolitically and even militarily. NATO cannot produce as many weapons as the Neo-Nazi junta says it needs, while Moscow made sure it has reliable allies with a massive stockpile of conventional weapons, particularly long-range missiles and artillery. In the meantime, the political West is backing off in the Black Sea after the Russian military sent a very clear message about what will happen to NATO ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets aiding terrorist attacks within Russia. On the other hand, even American citizens are sick and tired of others wasting their money and resources.

At this moment, Americans are more likely to go against their own government rather than any other foreign adversary. A similar (if not worse) sentiment is felt all across the G7, which Zelensky openly blames for his troops’ inefficiency. This is without even considering the fact that the Russian military is regularly hunting down the best NATO gear, further exacerbating the Kiev regime’s already precarious position (which is one of the reasons why its neighbors are also heavily militarized). The crisis of America’s political system is also causing side effects that are highly negative for the Neo-Nazi junta, particularly if Trump (if elected) tries to use the attempt on his life as a viable exit strategy for the United States. And last (but not least), the chances of Russia accepting such a deal are slim to none, as the Kremlin has zero reasons to trust NATO/the Kiev regime.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Parking his van in Deby, the town of the Trump rally – close, but not right up to, because it was full of visitors’ cars.

Strange that he even could get one of the last parking spots – because other visitors had reported they had to park far away.

On foot, he carried a ladder (I believe 5 foot) which he had bought at Home Depot that same Saturday morning and brought with him in his van. Also on foot, he openly carried the AR-15-style rifle of his father’s with plenty of ammunition. He had just bought 50 rounds of ammunition extra. Yeah, when on a picnic, you sometimes buy some necessities in the last minute.

Perhaps whistling a joyful tune, he met a police officer on his way, and then continued. Several witnesses saw him walking, carrying his rifle. It was a nice morning.

Arriving at the scene, he put his ladder up on the wall of factory building and climbs up to the roof of the factory building, only 140m from Trump. A police officer noted the ladder, climbed it too, but just as the officer was trying to crawl up on the roof, he pointed his rifle at the police officer and told him to get lost – which the officer duly did and nothing else happened.

All the officer could report was to have been threatened with a rifle by a man moving into position from where he could get a clean shot at Trump – no need for fuzz from the police. Fuzz came, however, soon after as lots of bystanders saw him crawling on the roof with his rifling, approaching the middle point of the roof from where there was full sight to Trump. He didn’t care, and proceeded undisturbed as if he had some kind of “deal” with higher powers, either divine powers or deep state powers.

A law enforcement counter-sharpshooter positioned behind Trump followed it all. The law enforcement sharpshooter posted on social media, that the sharpshooter had him on his scope at least 3 minutes before he fired on Trump, but that orders were not to shoot before the assassin shot. Meanwhile, Trump was speaking joyfully, no need to disturb Trump either to get Trump away from the scene at least until the situation was resolved.

Why?

The 20-year old had registered early as a Republican voter – but on 20 January 2021, on the exact day of President Biden’s inauguration, he sent a highly symbolic $ 15 to a Democratic “action group” – clearly indicating that he was against Trump and (at least morally) supported others who were against Trump. This seems clearly motivated by the 6 January 2021 incident just two weeks earlier.

A loner, somewhat bullied by others, but having intelligence and empathy. Good with computers. High school degree. Worked like his parents in social care, giving meals to the elderly. Never anything to report on. Didn’t try to shoot anyone he knew, or to shoot “as many as possible”. If he had any personal thirst a kind of revenge on his local community, it looks rather like becoming a local hero who saved the USA from Trump.

Timing is notable: This event happened exactly as nothing else can stop Trump from becoming the next President, except death or injury. All Democratic efforts to defame Trump, to ruin Trump, to make Trump a felon have failed. All chances of Biden winning a victory in the last minute have also evaporated, as this happened. Even Biden himself and the Democratic party have in a sense sunk into the ground and evaporated.

Either … or…

Either this guy was extremely naïve, and just plain lucky he got so far. Wandering around in the open with a ladder and a rifle, ignoring all witnesses incl. bypassing police, climbing roof in full daylight with lots of bystanders to reach Trump. Fools are sometimes lucky – they do things nobody thought possible, and because nobody thought it possible, they might get far.

Or this guy achieved some kind of contact in the deep state and was carefully selected as a “sleeper agent”, so to be activated by the deep state when all other means to stop Trump had been exhausted. This would explain why no social contacts have been registered. The deep state doesn’t leave traces.

The Secret Service team close around Trump are loyal to the task. They have worked with Trump since 2016, and they have extremely close personal relationships together, knowing each other’s family etc. But leadership on the scene was criminally bad. Bad planning. Lack of coordination. Procedures not okay. Priority number one is to secure the protectee before any injury happens. As somebody said: “Maximum attention on securing the Protectee”. But while Trump was speaking, Secret Service people ran behind Trump with weapons unholstered – nobody caring to secure Trump’s immediate safety before Trump was already hit just millimeters from his skull. Awful and disgraceful.

Less than mediocre. Who said that the USSS – the Secret Service – were the best in the world?

The top of Secret Service is guilty. Criminal neglect as a minimum comes to mind. Or whatever your instincts believe. Info has circulated, that the Director of Secret Service had reduced Trump’s security level on request from President Biden, making Trump more vulnerable assassination. Anyway, don’t expect an “independent” FBI investigation to find anything similar to the Truth. But will a Congressional investigation get any further? So far, Congressional investigations have a history of superficiality, parody, drama, and personal profiling – but not of digging into the dark stuff.

*

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

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

On July 13, at a rally near Butler in Pennsylvania, former American president Donald Trump narrowly escaped death after he was grazed by a bullet fired by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks. He fired at least eight rounds from an AR-15-style rifle from the roof of a nearby building outside the rally venue. Several people were wounded, at least one of which subsequently died. The surreal scenes left the audience dumbfounded, with panic ensuing only after the shooter was neutralized. In the last two days, there’s been a lot of speculation about what really happened, ranging from assumptions that it was staged to the Secret Service’s incompetence and even possible complicity. Albeit the latter might seem far too extreme, there’s actual footage of civilians seeing Crooks on the roof from which he took the shot and warning police and security that he’s there.

Shockingly enough, the crowd’s warnings were heeded only after Crooks started shooting. For some reason, the two Counter Sniper teams that were supposed to prevent situations like this failed to do their job, killing Crooks after he took eight shots from a regular rifle. According to an analysis, as well as Trump’s own statement, the only reason he’s alive is because he turned his head slightly to the right to read a chart on illegal immigrants.

However, despite the sheer luck Trump had, this opens up numerous questions about the warmongering elites in Washington DC and their highly likely (if not guaranteed) involvement in the assassination attempt. It should be noted that Trump himself is not exactly the “Second Coming of Christ”, as many believe, simply because it’s extremely difficult (if not impossible) for a single person to change the foreign policy of the United States.

In fact, although Trump has repeatedly warned about this, he didn’t really end Washington DC’s aggression against the world. He surely hasn’t started any new wars, which is commendable, but he also didn’t end those that the US was already involved in and he never conducted the dismantling of the unchecked power of the Military Industrial Complex, despite promises to do so.

Thus, he’s not exactly the “candidate of peace” that he’s usually portrayed as in most anti-establishment media. However, Trump is definitely the next best thing and precisely this is completely unacceptable to the war criminals and plutocrats in Washington DC. This is particularly true when it comes to prolonging the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. Trump has always been against any major US involvement in Ukraine, thinking it was imprudent to “poke the Bear”.

He regularly criticizes the European Union, particularly France and its President Emmanuel Macron, for their suicidal anti-Russian policies in Ukraine, cautioning Paris not to get directly involved. Expectedly, these warnings fell on deaf ears. Apart from realpolitik, Trump has both personal and geopolitical reasons to end American and NATO involvement in Ukraine. Namely, the increasingly unpopular Democrats have been using the unfortunate country as a way to funnel taxpayers’ money back into the US and then their own pockets. This was particularly apparent after the special military operation (SMO) started, with dozens and later hundreds of billions sent through various means (including cryptocurrency) right into the coffers of the DNC and its top leadership. Cutting this flow would’ve made sure that the Democrats run out of their primary source of income.

The DNC-controlled Senate was perfectly aware of this and tried passing laws that would make it an impeachable offense to even try to cut the so-called “Ukraine aid”. All this suggests that the corrupt federal institutions have always been resolutely anti-Trump. This power struggle revealed many uncomfortable truths about the failures of the system in the US, showing that the much-touted “democracy” in America is nothing but a laughable myth. The anti-Trump policies then degenerated not only into so-called “lawfare”, but also reached the point of jeopardizing the territorial integrity of the US, as some “blue” states started banning Trump’s candidacy, with several other “red” states threatening to reciprocate by banning Biden. The double standards of the mainstream propaganda machine were also quite obvious during the several show trial cases launched against Trump.

However, all this only backfired, boosting his popularity and making his opponents more desperate than ever.

The list of those who oppose (although intense hatred is a far more suitable term) Trump is quite long and includes many foreign actors, particularly those with deep ties to the corrupt US federal institutions. One of those is certainly the Neo-Nazi junta.

The Ukrainegate revealed the extent of hostility between Trump and the Kiev regime, with the latter even targeting prominent American journalists who were seen as pro-Trump. Given just how desperate the Neo-Nazi junta is to survive, it’s only a matter of time before speculation about their possible involvement in Trump’s assassination attempt surfaces. The former president himself certainly holds a lot of grudge against the Kiev regime because of all this, as well as the fact that it’s such a burden.

Thus, at some point, Trump might actually say (provided he wins the election) that the Neo-Nazi junta was involved in his assassination attempt.

Agencies such as the infamous CIA-ized SBU and GUR certainly have the capacity to aid in planning and executing such operations. Not to mention they have a clear motive, as they depend entirely on the “aid” he wants to cut. There’s no proof they took part in this, but it’s a possibility that certainly shouldn’t be rejected. However, regardless of whether there has been any involvement on their part, this could give Trump a perfect excuse to cut further financial and military support by saying that “we tried to help, but they tried to kill me”. And given his rather simplified vocabulary (or lack of eloquence, some would say), that might actually be the way he says it. In doing so, Trump would essentially hit at least three birds with one stone.

First, he would get rid of a massive financial burden, while also saving billions that could be used elsewhere.

Second, Trump would kill the largest source of funding for his DNC opponents.

And last but not least, this would give him a unique opportunity for a guaranteed exit strategy that would be far better for America than something along the lines of the humiliating defeat it suffered in Afghanistan, just much worse and more consequential in the long term.

And indeed, if we look at the current situation on the battlefield, the US/NATO prospects in Ukraine look rather grim. The only way to prevent the Kiev regime’s total defeat and collapse is to get directly involved. However, apart from Trump not being willing to do so for personal reasons, geopolitically and militarily speaking, the US (and by extension NATO) is simply unprepared for such a war. Despite years of preparations and decades of militarism, the political West simply has no firepower needed to defeat Russia. Worse yet, America’s sinking strategic capabilities suggest that it’s simply incapable of matching Moscow’s increasingly powerful strategic arsenal, the world’s No. 1 in virtually every category (destructive power, range, means of delivery, etc). More importantly for the planet, the side effect of the combination of these factors could also be the much-needed de-escalation.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

American Democracy’s Theater of the Absurd

July 17th, 2024 by Richard Gale

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Since the end of the Cold War and the Clinton administration coming to power in 1992, the United States has undergone a systemic decay in its political body. Policies increasingly favor the interests of an oligarchic and powerful elite more often than not at the expense of the public. The rise of ultra-liberal policies to create a secular society built upon an amoral technocratic paradigm, which includes the current “woke” movement, critical race theory (CRT), and diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) requirements, have further intensified societal divisions and tribal factions at odds with traditional conservative and family values.

The media, which once served as a pillar of democracy, is today nothing but a tool for social and political manipulation. Since the 1990s, media conglomerates have consolidated power, aligning themselves with either of the two party political ideologies and agendas. This alignment has led to biased reporting and the amplification of divisive rhetoric. The rise of cable news networks such as Fox News and MSNBC has contributed to a polarized media landscape where the public is presented with only one-sided partisan perspectives. This polarization is then further extended to social media platforms, where algorithms prioritize sensational and divisive content, further entrenching cultural divides. As George Orwell famously remarked, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”

Deliberate government tactics to keep the population divided has destroyed social coherence, the sense of unity and shared purpose within a society. Such tactics succeed by keeping people mentally distracted. This strategy of “divide and conquer” ensures that the public remains distracted and disorganized, preventing a unified challenge to the status quo. Identity politics, for instance, has been leveraged to create and exacerbate social divisions. 

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself,” wrote essayist H.L. Mencken in the early 20th century. “Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.”

Mencken’s quote underscores the consequence of a corrupt political system that fosters division only to maintain control. By encouraging cultural fragmentation, those in power divert attention from their failings and prevent unified opposition.

A clear example of this tactic is seen in the handling of racial and ethnic tensions. Political leaders exploit these tensions to rally their base, diverting attention from broader systemic issues such as economic inequality, corporate corruption and federal agency capture. The government’s response to movements like Black Lives Matter is mixed, with some politicians using the movement to stoke fears, race baiting, among certain demographics while failing to address the root causes of racial injustice.

The deliberate use of social issues to create division is not new. As Niccolò Machiavelli observed,

“The wise ruler, whenever he can, will subdue the people by force or by fraud.”

By keeping the population focused on cultural and social battles, the government can operate without substantial public scrutiny or opposition. Power then resorts to manipulation and coercion to maintain control and stability. Particularly in our post-9/11 era, this Machiavellian principle is evident in the draconian policies and practices designed to maintain control over the populace. These measures, masquerading as the need for national security, reflect the use of both force and fraud to subdue and manipulate public sentiment.

The Patriot Act significantly expanded the government’s surveillance capabilities. The Act allowed for the indefinite detention of immigrants, expanded the powers of law enforcement agencies to search personal records without a court order, and increased the ability to monitor phone and email communications. It facilitated government intrusion into the private lives of every American. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) further threatened and undermined constitutional protections and civil liberties including indefinite detention of American citizens without trial. The revelations by Edward Snowden in 2013 highlighted the extent of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance programs, which included the bulk collection of phone metadata and internet communications of millions of Americans. This extensive surveillance infrastructure represents a clear example of subduing the populace by fraud. 

In addition, the rise of digital platforms and social media has introduced new avenues for both surveillance and censorship. Governments and private companies have increasingly collaborated to monitor and control online content, often under the guise of combating misinformation and maintaining public order. This intersection of public and private surveillance mechanisms creates an environment where dissent and alternative viewpoints can be easily suppressed, further aligning with Machiavelli’s notion of subduing the populace by fraudulent means.

The impact of government policies favoring the elite is most acutely felt by the underprivileged and poor. According to a joint investigation conducted by Princeton and Northwestern universities, economic policies since the Clinton administration have prioritized the interests of Wall street and the multinational behemoths of defense, pharmaceutical, chemical and energy industries, leading to increased income inequality and reduced social mobility. The welfare reforms of the 1990s, for instance, aimed to reduce dependency on government assistance have accomplished the opposite by increasing hardships for many vulnerable populations.

The deregulation of financial markets, which culminated in the 2008 financial crisis, tossed the citizens of Main Street into the gutter. Washington’s incompetence led to a housing market collapse, widespread unemployment, and a severe recession. While large financial institutions received substantial bailouts, many ordinary Americans faced foreclosure, unemployment, and financial ruin. As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz noted,

“The gap between what our economic and political systems were supposed to deliver — rising living standards for most citizens — and what they actually delivered became intolerable.”

That is exactly what is happening today, and worse. 

The regulatory capture by private corporate interests over government agencies has further exacerbated social and economic inequalities. Regulatory bodies that are supposed to protect public welfare are now fully co-opted by the industries they regulate. This is especially true of the pharmaceutical industrial complex’s domination of the FDA and CDC. The approval of opioid medications, heavily influenced by pharmaceutical lobbying, has led to an opioid epidemic that has devastated communities across the country. Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, aggressively marketed the drug while downplaying its addictive potential, leading to widespread addiction and overdose deaths. And for years the legislators and officials in our compromised duopoly did nothing. 

Similarly, the revolving door between Wall Street and government agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) undermines regulatory oversight. Former executives from major financial institutions take key regulatory positions, ensuring that policies remain favorable to their former employers. 

The suppression of fundamental democratic principles by those in power is a significant consequence of systemic decay. Voter suppression, gerrymandering, and the disproportionate influence of money in politics undermine fair representation and accountability. These actions prevent the public from exercising their democratic rights and perpetuate the control of a minority elite. The disenfranchisement of marginalized communities through restrictive voting laws is a prime example. Measures such as voter ID laws, purging voter rolls, and limiting early voting disproportionately affect low-income and minority voters. These tactics ensure that the political power remains concentrated among those who support the elite’s agenda.

The influence of money in politics further exacerbates this issue. The landmark Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010 allowed for unlimited corporate spending in elections, amplifying the political power of wealthy individuals and corporations. This decision has led to an influx of “dark money” in politics, where the interests of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt warned,

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself.”

Seventy years later money in politics has broken the very fabric of democracy, creating an oligarchic regime that enslaves the public.

All of this has enormous psychological consequences because someone must be blamed for this decay and rot in Washington. One acknowledged way to relieve stress is to act out, and often with vitriolic aggression. The emergence of ultra-liberal policies regarding race, the “woke” movement, and the emphasis on critical race theory (CRT), and diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) mandates in public spaces and institutions have intensified societal divisions. These policies, while aimed at addressing historical injustices and promoting inclusivity, have accomplished the opposite and sparked equally aggressive backlashes from conservative and traditional value-based communities.

Critical race theory, which examines the intersection of race and law and its impact on racial inequality, has arisen out of nowhere as a flashpoint in American politics. Proponents argue that CRT provides a necessary framework for understanding systemic racism and advocating for social justice; however, CRT’s critics contend that it promotes a divisive view of society, pitting racial groups against one another and undermining the notion of a shared national identity.

The implementation of diversity, inclusion, and equity mandates in workplaces and educational institutions, although perhaps originally with good intentions, has shown itself to be exceedingly undemocratic, unconstitutional, and coercive and counterproductive. Such policies prioritize identity over merit and foster a culture of victimhood and entitlement. This perception is fuelling resentment and polarization, further fracturing social cohesion.

The “woke” movement, purported to represent heightened awareness of social injustices and advocacy for marginalized groups, has likewise accomplished the opposite by increasing societal antagonism. John Stuart Mill observed,

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.”

Woke’s militant and uncompromising approach alienates individuals who feel their values and beliefs are under attack. This alienation is exacerbated by the woke and radicalized LGBTQ+ movements to label dissenting opinions as inherently racist, extremist and even fascist. Consequently all openings for dialogue and constructive debate are stifled. The vilification of opposing views has created an environment where ideological entrenchment and hostility thrive. But this dynamic only benefits those in power by diverting attention from the more dire systemic issues and prevents the formation of a unified front against political corruption and the elite’s dominance over our lives.

Looking back, when did this rot and decay across America take hold? We would argue that it was during the Clinton years that Washington’s draconian policies, either intentional or naïve, had the most profound and far-reaching effects on the nation’s culture, social coherence, and welfare for the underprivileged and poor. Machiavelli’s observation that a wise ruler will subdue the people by force or by fraud remains highly relevant in the context of modern governance. The policies and practices implemented in the US, including the repeal of Glass-Steagall, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, and extensive surveillance measures, illustrate how our government has used both coercion and manipulation to maintain control. These measures have destroyed our civil liberties and democratic principles. As history and contemporary events demonstrate, the balance between security and liberty is delicate, and the government’s use of force and fraud to maintain power is now the greatest enemy to democratic ideals.

*

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

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.

Featured image is from Vox

Video: Detailed Analysis of Trump Assassination Attempt

By Dr. Peter McCullough and John Leake, July 16, 2024

The incident on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania is the first time a would-be assassin has shot at a U.S. president or presidential candidate since John Hinckley shot President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. As such, it is the first assassination attempt in our era in which most citizens are carrying cell phones equipped with video cameras.

Why Russia Will Defeat NATO in Ukraine

By Mike Whitney, July 17, 2024

NATO’s three-day summit in Washington DC achieved the objective for which it was designed, to create a public forum in which all 32 members of the Alliance could express their unanimous support for upcoming attacks on the Russian Federation.

Palestine Solidarity Reaches Unprecedented Heights

By Abayomi Azikiwe, July 17, 2024

The war in Palestine and throughout the regions mentioned did not begin less than one year ago, it has a history of more than a century which some aspects were outlined in the pamphlet “Zionism: The Myths, the Lies, the Crimes”.

COVID Vaccines Linked to Increase in All-cause Mortality, Italian Study Shows

By Dr. Suzanne Burdick, July 17, 2024

A team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

Venezuela to Face Serious Challenges with Unknown Retired Professor Leading the Polls

By Uriel Araujo, July 17, 2024

With the Venezuelan presidential election coming up on July 28, retired diplomat Edmundo González is reported to be leading the polls, even though the former ambassador was unknown to the majority of the population up to a few months ago and never sought elected office.

170 Years of U.S. Aggression Against Nicaragua

By Rick Sterling, July 16, 2024

In this article, I will review the different types of aggression used by Washington against Nicaragua. This is not ancient history; the interference continues to today. The methods change but the purpose remains the same: to subjugate nominally independent countries and use them in the interests of US corporations, elites and government. When nations resist domination and insist on independence, the US goal becomes to prevent them from succeeding. 

Occupied Palestine: The Old Evil. Chris Hedges

By Chris Hedges, July 16, 2024

The Palestinians want their land back. Then they will talk of peace. The Israelis want peace, but demand Palestinian land. And that, in three short sentences, is the intractable nature of this conflict.

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Indonesia’s traditional foreign policy is a careful balance between the United States and China, one that Washington seeks to unsettle without respecting the Southeast Asian country’s historical non-alignment stance. Indonesia aims to uphold its strategic independence while promoting regional stability and prosperity, but this is also being challenged by Washington’s growing militancy against China in the Asia-Pacific region.

Despite China and the US accusing each other of military maneuvers that fuel tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, Indonesia holds major military exercises with the US but maintains China as its main economic partner. This is in the hope of offsetting the risk of pivoting too much towards one great power, especially as both desperately vie for influence in a country with three major maritime chokepoints — the Malacca, Lombok, and Sumba Straits.

The 2023 Super Garuda Shield exercise involved 1,900 Indonesian military personnel, 2,100 from the US, and 1,000 more from Australia, Japan, and Singapore, and “strengthens the US-Indonesian bilateral relationship,” according to US Maj. General Jered P. Helwig. This was the largest such exercise involving Indonesian and US troops.

Although the US will once again participate in the 2024 Super Garuda Shield, Indonesian military spokesman Major General Nugraha Gumilar stressed that the exercise has no intention of consolidating military power against certain countries and reaffirmed that Indonesia is a non-aligned country in terms of regional security, adding that there is defence cooperation with China in military education and officer’s student exchange.

“We have Chinese military officers joining the Indonesian military’s Staff and Command School and the Indonesian Army’s Staff and Command School,” he said.

At the same time, a 2017 United States National Defense University assessment found that Indonesia was among China’s top ten military diplomatic partners from 2003 to 2016. 

Decisionmakers in Jakarta have successfully maintained a balanced policy, but Washington is actively challenging this. Washington seeks to exploit differences Southeast Asian countries have with each other and China because of territorial disputes over the South China Sea and leverages this to turn countries against Beijing.

One example is Indonesian Trade Minister Zulifi Hasan’s announcement in June of the introduction of import duties on Chinese goods to mitigate the effects of the US-China trade war.

“The United States wants to impose a 200% tariff on imported ceramics or clothing. We can also do this to ensure that our small businesses and industries survive and thrive,” the minister said.

Washington’s trade war has led to an oversupply of goods in China’s domestic markets, forcing the redirection of commodity flows to other foreign markets, particularly Indonesia, which threatens Indonesian producers. Recall that in May 2024, the trade confrontation between the US and China reached a new level after US President Joe Biden introduced protective tariffs on a wide range of Chinese goods, which has clearly hurt Indonesia despite its balanced policies.

Yet, even manipulative tactics like this to unsettle Jakarta-Beijing relations cannot work. Indonesia’s president-elect Prabowo Subianto, who will take office on October 20, travelled to Beijing on April 1 at the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping, just some weeks after securing the presidency, signaling his intent to continue Indonesia’s cooperation with China. 

Continued cooperation with Beijing will be lucrative and beneficial for Indonesia, which already has 71 China-funded projects underway, the same number of projects as Pakistan and second only to Cambodia’s 82.  Indonesia–China trade reached over $149 billion in 2022, a 19.8% increase year-on-year, and China’s $8.2 billion was the second-largest source of investment in Indonesia. China pledged an additional $44.89 billion to Indonesia in July 2023 and a further $21.7 billion two months later.

In this way, although the US is seemingly a more important military partner for Indonesia than China, the  country’s main trading partner is clearly China. Nonetheless, the US has caused minor damage in Indonesia-China ties through its trade war, but this is only a hiccup in the grander scheme of trade relations and investments, which are only set to increase year on year.

Given that Donald Trump is expected to enter the White House in January 2025, tensions between Washington and Beijing will heighten further than what Biden took it, and Indonesia, as a country that sees a huge portion of world trade passing through its waters, will become a key battleground for influence. However, it is likely that the status quo in Jakarta-Washington and Jakarta-Beijing ties will continue when Subianto becomes president later this year since he has given no indication of moving away from Indonesia’s traditionally non-aligned position.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

CNN just reported the following:

In the 48 hours before he opened fire on former President Donald Trump, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks made a series of stops in and around his suburban Pittsburgh hometown.

On Friday, he went to a shooting range where he was a member, and practiced firing, a law enforcement official told CNN. The next morning, Crooks went to a Home Depot, where he bought a five-foot ladder, and a gun store, where he purchased 50 rounds of ammunition, the official said.

Then, Crooks drove his Hyundai Sonata about an hour north, joining thousands of people from around the region who flocked to Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. He parked the car outside the rally, with an improvised explosive device hidden in the trunk that was wired to a transmitter he carried, the official said. Then, investigators believe, he used his newly-bought ladder to scale a nearby building, and opened fire on the former president.

IF this is true, it is yet another glaring indication that security was simply pulled from the building located about 130 yards north of where Trump was scheduled to speak.

Naturally the notion of Crooks toting a ladder up to the building without being observed and stopped seems beyond belief. The CNN report mentions nothing about a roof rack on his car, and even a telescoping ladder probably wouldn’t fit in a Hyundai Sonata.

An alternative theory is that the alleged “law enforcement” official quoted by CNN is misdirection—that is, that in fact it was conveyed to Crooks that the ladder would already be in place upon his arrival. Given that the building was the most logical place to post police sentries, one wonders if the ladder was originally erected for police officers who then—for some reason—left their post and left the ladder in place.

IF Crooks brought the ladder with him, he must have visited the building in advance to ascertain the roof height and a favorable place to erect the ladder (on a section of wall conveniently obscured by a cluster of ornamental cypress trees).

The following image is a still from a video taken from a helicopter after Crooks was shot in the head by a counter-sniper.

 

 

The top arrow points to his body. Just below it is his rifle lying a few feet from him. The arrow to the right points to his backpack. The far right arrow points to a ladder. Note the large flow of blood downslope of his body in the following closeup.

 

The aerial video appears to have been taken before any law enforcement officers made it onto the roof. I initially wondered if it was taken right after an officer checked Crooks’s body to make sure he was dead, then separated the weapon from his body, and then (for some reason) left the scene.

However, the totality of elements displayed in the photograph indicates that the most likely explanation is that—AFTER Crooks fired the shots—he tossed the weapon to his left and was trying to crawl backwards to return to the ladder when he was shot in the head.

Note there is no way he could have rested his rifle on the ridge to fire at Trump without being seen by the counter-snipers, who were standing on a higher elevation on the barn roof. In order to retreat hastily back down the slope, Crooks must have failed to keep his head sufficiently low to evade the counter-sniper’s shot.

*

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

All images in this article are from CD unless otherwise stated

Palestine Solidarity Reaches Unprecedented Heights

July 17th, 2024 by Abayomi Azikiwe

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Note: These remarks were delivered at a public forum on the history and current situation in Palestine and West Asia. The pamphlet entitled “Zionism: the Myths, the Lies, the Crimes” was recently published by fighting-words.net. This pamphlet is based on a series of classes delivered by Abayomi Azikiwe and David Sole during 2009 and 2013 in Detroit. The forum on July 15 reviewed some of the points raised in the pamphlet as well as an update on developments in Palestine and West Asia since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood on October 7, 2023. Yvonne Jones, an organizer for the Moratorium NOW! Coalition, chaired the forum.


It is important to review the recent developments in the Gaza Strip, Palestine as a whole and the entire West Asia and North Africa regions in the aftermath of the events of October 7.

The war in Palestine and throughout the regions mentioned did not begin less than one year ago, it has a history of more than a century which some aspects were outlined in the pamphlet “Zionism: The Myths, the Lies, the Crimes”.

Having said this, it is essential to understanding the recent phase of the genocidal war that this settler-colonial history has only further confirmed the arguments put forward in the publication. Immediately after the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood, the United States government and its imperialist allies sought to provide not only a rationale for an escalation in attacks upon the Palestinian people these states transferred weapons to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to injure, displace and kill even more inhabitants of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas, the Resistance movement which has the largest presence in Gaza as the administrative apparatus, has controlled the enclave since 2007.  During that year the Israeli regime ordered the evacuation of the settler-colonial enclaves into the other areas of historical Palestine.

However, this purported withdrawal did not bring peace and stability to Gaza and the West Bank. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) continued their periodic bombing operations and targeted assassinations.

Hamas, through its military wing known as the Al-Qassam Brigades, maintained their right to launch armed attacks on the settler-colonial outposts in other areas of the country. Hamas are not the only resistance organizations which have a presence in Gaza. Reports since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa Flood indicate that at least nine different brigades are involved in the military campaign against the IDF. Another important organization is the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and its military wing known as the Al-Quds Brigades.

Other resistance formations include:

  • the Popular Resistance Committees with its armed wing known as Al-Nasser Saled ad-Din Brigades;
  • Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) whose military structure is called Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades;
  • Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine—General Command (PFLP-GC) with the military wing known as Jihad Jibril Brigades;
  • Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine whose armed forces are the National Resistance Brigades or the Omar al-Qassem Brigades;
  • Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, which could be the military wing of Fatah in Gaza; and
  • Abd al-Qadar al-Husseini Brigade, also said to be an armed unit of Fatah; and
  • the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement. 

With the existence of these organizations on the ground in Gaza it is not surprising that the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) have not been able to subdue the people. The ongoing resistance is remarkable considering the large-scale assault on the Gaza Strip where nearly 39,000 people have been killed, most of whom are women, children, seniors and the infirm. In addition, nearly 90,000 have been wounded and injured. Gaza’s population of 2.3 million remain displaced and imperiled.

The lack of food, clean water, fuel, medical facilities, medicines and other essentials of life is undoubtedly contributing to the toll of those suffering from illnesses and dying daily. Gaza has been described as the largest openair prison in the world even prior to the events of October 7. Since the latest phase of the war, the conditions have worsened as the IDF blocks much needed humanitarian assistance from entering the enclave. The incessant bombing and shelling combined with the enhanced blockade has prompted billions of people around the world describing the role of the settler-colonial regime in Tel Aviv as genocidal.

International Solidarity Has Further Exposed Zionism as an Imperialist Project

Emerging from the horrors of the last nine months has been the mobilization of the largest solidarity movement internationally. Demonstrations erupted in various geo-political regions around the world. In areas close to Palestine in states such as Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, etc., millions took to the streets in condemnation of the Israeli Apartheid regime.

In neighboring Lebanon, the Hezbollah resistance movement has opened another front against Tel Aviv. The Israeli government has relocated hundreds of thousands of its people from the border areas with southern Lebanon.

Resistance forces in Iraq, Syria and Yemen have engaged in military strikes against the State of Israel. Yemen has gone further than any other states by imposing a blockade on vessels conducting trade with the Zionist regime utilizing the Red Sea.

A report from The Cradle published on July 15 emphasized:

“The Armed Forces of Yemen’s Sanaa government, aligned with the Ansarallah resistance movement, announced on 14 July an operation against an Israeli ship in the Gulf of Aden and an attack targeting Israel’s southern port city of Eilat, known in Arabic as Umm al-Rashrash. Sanaa’s forces said the operations were a ‘response to the Al-Mawasi massacre in Khan Yunis, which was committed by the Israeli enemy [on Saturday].’ At least 90 Palestinian civilians were killed in the massacre in southern Gaza. ‘The naval forces, the unmanned air force, and the missile force of the Yemeni armed forces carried out a joint operation targeting the Israeli ship (MSC UNIFIC) in the Gulf of Aden, with a number of ballistic missiles and drones,’ Yemeni army spokesman Yahya al-Saree said in a statement on Sunday. ‘The Air Force launched a number of drones targeting a number of military targets of the Israeli enemy in the Umm al-Rashrash area, south of occupied Palestine. The operation achieved its goals successfully,’ Saree added.” 

In Europe millions more have staged mass demonstrations and other acts of solidarity. In some European states such as France and Germany, solidarity activists defied bans on Palestinian support work as they marched in the central business districts of imperialist capitals such London, Paris and Berlin. (See this)

On the African continent there is much solidarity with the plight of the Palestinians. In the Republic of South Africa, the African National Congress government and the recently established Government of National Unity (GNU), have continued their solidarity. In December, the South African government filed a lawsuit against the State of Israel charging the apartheid regime of violating the Genocide Convention.

In January, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the charges brought by the South African government claiming genocide were plausible. A series of measures were ordered to be implemented by Tel Aviv, yet there has been no change in its military policy.

Solidarity in the U.S. Impacts Presidential Politics

The U.S. administration of President Joe Biden rejected the lawsuit filed by Pretoria saying the legal action had no merit. Biden has continued the decades-long subsidization of settler-colonial rule in Palestine. He is the only U.S. president who has traveled to Tel Aviv during a period of active combat operations.

Biden proposed to Congress and won additional funds to intensify the wars in Palestine and Ukraine. Funds were allocated also to contain China and enhance the militarization of the Southern border.

In the U.S., demonstrations erupted in cities in various regions of the country. Many of these manifestations were initiated and led by Palestinians, Arab and Muslim Americans. In addition, people from other nationalities and oppressed nations joined the Palestine solidarity struggle demanding an immediate ceasefire and the halting of all assistance from the U.S. to Tel Aviv.

African American progressives and several religious entities opposed Biden’s unconditional support for the Zionist state. In the Detroit metropolitan area where the largest concentration of Arab and Muslim Americans live several African American church leaders joined with other clergymen in a Michigan Task Force for Palestine.

The Listen to Michigan campaign led the electoral movement against the foreign policy of the Biden administration in Palestine. Organized in a matter of weeks, the coalition pointed to another form of solidarity during a national election year.

A description of the Listen to Michigan coalition taken from its website says:

“Michigan voters sent Biden a strong message during the Democratic primary that he can count us out for genocide. More than 100,000 multiracial, multi-faith, and anti-war Democrats voted ‘uncommitted,’ in strong opposition to Biden’s funding of war and genocide in Gaza. The very next day, a co-chair for Biden’s re-election bid told NPR that our ‘message has been received.’ What began as a grassroots movement in Michigan swiftly captured the nation’s attention. Our message spread to various Super Tuesday states, inspiring communities from coast to coast to stand up and make their voices heard at the ballot box. These primaries are an early litmus test for how much Biden’s stance on Gaza could hurt his reelection bid; the threat to Biden’s reelection isn’t that anti-war Democrats will vote for Trump, it’s that they won’t vote at all.” 

Later the establishment of encampments on college and university campuses opened a new chapter in the Palestine solidarity movement. These encampments demanded full disclosure and divestment of all holdings held by higher educational institutions in the State of Israel and those who conduct business with the settler-colonial regime.

These encampments often referred to as “Free Universities for Gaza” were met with state-sanctioned repression. Students, staff and professors working in the Palestine solidarity struggle were subjected to threats from university administrators to terminate them.

As the impact of the encampments spread far and wide, many campus administrators ordered police to remove the demonstrators. Over 3,000 students, professors and community activists were arrested and charged with felonies and misdemeanors. In these evictions, police and vigilantes physically attacked the solidarity activists.

In order to justify these repressive acts, the Palestine solidarity activists were slandered as posing a threat to Jewish students and faculty. They were falsely accused of creating a public health and security threat to the campuses.

President Biden along with leading Republican and Democratic politicians echoed these same sentiments labeling the movement organizers as being antisemitic. However, these encampments and building occupations contributed immensely to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign which has existed for several years.

Despite the favored foreign policy status of Tel Aviv, events over the last nine months have illustrated the strength of independent politics. Therefore, we must move forward in our solidarity efforts until the people are liberated in a unified Palestinian state.

*

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

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

All images in this article are from the author

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

With the Venezuelan presidential election coming up on July 28, retired diplomat Edmundo González is reported to be leading the polls, even though the former ambassador was unknown to the majority of the population up to a few months ago and never sought elected office. By his own admission, he had “absolutely no plans to be a presidential candidate… much less to be president” until April this year when he was invited by the Venezuelan opposition to be their presidential candidate after the authorities prevented both María Corina Machado, the former candidate, and her stopgap from running.

The whole issue about María Corina Machado’s would-be candidacy is controversial. It is worth highlighting that by the end of March this year there were no less than 11 opposition candidates in Venezuela – albeit the country is often described as dictatorship. Each and every one of those was able to register as candidates without issues, Machado being the only one refused.

It would be fair to describe Machado as an extremist: for example, she took part in the Pedro Carmona’s 2002 attempted military coup, signing the infamous Carmona Decree. Carmona was a business leader (president of the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce), who acted as de facto president of Venezuela for just one day. During his brief rule, both the Supreme Court and the National Assembly were dissolved, with the Constitution being declared void. There were various arbitrary detentions, including that of then president Hugo Chavez, Maduro’s predecessor. With the support of crowds of demonstrators and the military, Chavez was then restored to office. Carmona is also known to have defended sanctions against his own people.

Last week, the Venezuelan government arrested some people involved in Machado’s campaign (including her campaign manager), under the accusation of having taken part in a violent plot. Considering their record, such accusations should be taken seriously, albeit one is tempted to quickly denounce them as political persecution and nothing else.

Machado in fact faces a 15-year disqualification for her involvement in the whole Juan Guiado’s affair. Her alternate, Corina Yoris (a little known academic who has never held public administration positions) was similarly unable to register due to technicalities. Namely, Yoris own political party was an unregistered one (all she had to do was to find a registered political party and join it).

Then, without many alternatives, the little known academic and retired diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia was named as a kind of temporary replacement. And now he seems to be leading the polls.

In 2021, after the Juan Guaido’s imbroglio, the Venezuelan opposition itself recognized President Nicolas Maduro’s government, as I wrote at the time – although it oscillates between participating in elections and boycotting them. For years, the South American nation has been facing heavier US sanctions and falling oil prices, which contributed to an oil production collapse, export revenue being the cornerstone of the Venezuelan economy. On top of that, Washington plus several European governments blocked Maduro’s government’s access to over $7 billion of state funds held overseas. It did bring about a national catastrophe. In a bizarre situation, control of the nation’s bank accounts (frozen by the US) is given to the opposition, without accountability – unsurprisingly, corruption charges against opposition leaders abound since at least 2019.

Image: Hugo Chavez (Source: CADTM)

Some context is needed. Hugo Chavez, whether one likes him or not, was indeed a very popular president in his country and, contrary to what many believe in the West, he and his Bolivarian Revolution did bring about a number of social advances, pertaining to education, inequality, health and income. Even the 2010 OAS report which denounces Venezuela’s human rights standards acknowledges that “in terms of economic, social, and cultural rights, the IACHR recognizes the State’s achievements with regard to the progressive observance of these rights, including, most notably, the eradication of illiteracy, the reduction of poverty, and the increase in access by the most vulnerable sectors to basic services such as health care.”

According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), poverty rates fell from 49.4% in 1999 to 23.9% in 2012, this being the largest success in poverty reduction among 11 countries in the region. All of this explains the long-lasting cult of Hugo Chavez to this day among sectors of the population. However, the country has been facing serial economic problems for a while, and Maduro’s popularity is clearly declining for a number of reasons.

Besides the aforementioned economic and humanitarian catastrophe, geopolitically-wise, the country faces challenges pertaining to the oil discoveries in Guyana and Suriname, amid the Washington-Beijing trade war. The geopolitical dispute between these two superpowers actually goes beyond trade, encompassing the diplomatic and military realms. The specter of a US intervention still haunts the region, with rising tensions involving Colombia. Venezuela largely counts on both Iran and, indirectly, on China, to counter American sanctions and to project its oil market share. It would not be reasonable to expect the current Venezuelan opposition to have the diplomatic wisdom to pursue a pragmatic foreign policy, given their ideological profile and lack of experience.

Venezuela faces many problems which also include bad policy choices, mismanagement and issues involving freedoms, with a PSUV (the hegemonic party) in crisis. It cannot live on Chavez’s nostalgia forever. One however would be mistaken to assume that the Venezuelan opposition today represented by the likes of María Corina Machado and Juan Guaidó are some sort of “democratic” alternative. They are not and their records speak otherwise. They are part of a violent radicalized minority heavily funded by the US without training in politics or public policy.

There are indeed cultural and social reasons beyond the phenomenon of newcomer Edmundo González leading the polls – if the group behind takes over Venezuelans could face problems similar to the ones one can see today in Argentina, with Javier Milei. And this could have serious impacts on the continent.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

A team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

COVID-19 vaccines were linked to an increase in all-cause mortality in a new peer-reviewed study that analyzed data from the Italian National Healthcare System.

Based on their analysis, a team of Italian researchers verified what they called “the real impact of the vaccination campaign” by comparing the risk of all-cause death among vaccinated and unvaccinated residents of the Italian province of Pescara.

In their univariate analysis, the researchers found the risk of all-cause death to be over 20% higher for those vaccinated with two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to the unvaccinated.

In contrast, prior research done in the same region suggested those with three or four doses had a lower risk of all-cause death.

“We also found a slight but statistically significant loss of life expectancy for those vaccinated with 2 or 3/4 doses,” they said in the report, which they published June 30 in Microorganisms.

Dr. Peter McCullough told The Defender,

“These findings call for an immediate halt of COVID-19 vaccination across the globe and a thorough investigation of what went wrong during the COVID-19 vaccine campaign.”

McCullough wrote on Substack that the paper’s main point is that

“COVID-19 vaccination did not ‘save lives’ as so many in Washington have proclaimed without evidence.”

Alberto Donzelli, one of the Italian study’s authors, told The Defender the study is “an important advance” because it looks at all-cause mortality broken down by vaccination status, and accounts for confounding variables that may have affected earlier reports on COVID-19 vaccination and all-cause mortality.

Very few studies in the world have successfully done that, he said.

McCullough also told The Defender the study’s findings are “cohesive” with those of a recent German study — currently available as a preprint —  which found COVID-19 vaccination was linked to increased all-cause death in 16 German states.

Researchers Undertake Study to Correct for Bias

For their study, Donzelli and his co-authors used the same data analyzed by other researchers in an earlier Italian study on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

The earlier study — which followed up with people two years after the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign — found that those who received one or two doses had a significantly higher risk of all-cause death, while those who received three or more vaccine doses had a lower risk of death.

However, these results were likely distorted due to “immortal time bias,” Donzelli and his co-authors said.

Immortal time bias is a common study design flaw that can throw off statistical estimations between an exposure (such as a COVID-19 shot) and an outcome (such as an increased risk of death), according to the University of Oxford’s Catalogue of Bias.

Donzelli said the bias “afflicts most observational studies on mortality from COVID-19.” So he and his co-authors took the necessary steps to correct for the bias and reanalyzed the same data.

They looked at vaccination records from Jan. 1, 2021, through Dec. 31, 2022, for people ages 10 and up.

They also looked at follow-up data collected from Jan. 1, 2021, through Feb. 15, 2023, for these people, as long as they hadn’t tested positive for COVID-19 on the date of the follow-up.

They also looked at other variables, such as pathologies other than COVID-19, that may have affected people’s health.

“The results are startling,” wrote McCullough, after doing calculations using the report’s data. “COVID-19 specific deaths were not reduced with vaccination, however there was a U-shaped trend of note when COVID-19 deaths were adjusted per 1000 population: unvaccinated 1.98/1000, one dose 0.27/1000, two doses 1.08/1000, and 3/4 doses 3.5/1000.”

Additionally, Donzelli and his co-authors in their multivariate analysis found that those who received one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine had a hazard risk ratio — which is a statistical estimate of risk — of 2.4 for all-cause mortality, meaning they were much more likely to die compared to the unvaccinated.

“Those vaccinated with two doses showed an almost double hazard ratio of death: 1.98,” Donzelli pointed out.

These numbers are significantly worse than what was reported in the original study that hadn’t corrected for the immortal time bias, he said. Correcting for that bias changed the results for those who were vaccinated with three or more doses, too.

The original study authors had claimed that being vaccinated three or more times reduced the risk of mortality more than four-fold. Based on his and his co-authors corrected analysis, Donzelli called the claim “implausible.”

He said of the multivariate analysis,

“Those vaccinated with three or more doses turned out to die at the same rate as the unvaccinated.”

However, taken together with univariate analyses and life expectancy estimates, all COVID-19 vaccine dosing regimens show an overall increase in all-cause mortality.

CDC: COVID Shots ‘Save Lives’

The Defender asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) if it planned to modify its statement that “COVID-19 vaccines save lives” in light of the study’s findings.

A CDC spokesperson told The Defender that the CDC “does not comment on findings or claims by individuals or organizations outside of CDC.” The spokesperson declined to provide studies or data supporting the agency’s claim that the vaccines save lives.

“CDC research has continuously found that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective,” the spokesperson said.

UPDATE: This article was updated to state the researchers found the risk of all-cause death to be over 20% higher for those vaccinated with two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to the unvaccinated.

*

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

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa.

Featured image is from CHD


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Russia Will Defeat NATO in Ukraine

July 17th, 2024 by Mike Whitney

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

NATO’s three-day summit in Washington DC achieved the objective for which it was designed, to create a public forum in which all 32 members of the Alliance could express their unanimous support for upcoming attacks on the Russian Federation. That was the real purpose of the confab. The managers of the event, sought a dramatic display of unity to justify future hostilities with Moscow and to reduce the possibility that any one person would be held responsible for starting World War 3.

The summit was followed by the release of a formal Declaration which strongly suggests that the decision to go war has already been made. As many people know, NATO has green-lighted a policy that allows the firing of missiles at targets inside Russian territory. This policy will also apply to the numerous NATO F-16s that will be deployed to Ukraine sometime in the near future. (F-16s can carry nuclear missiles) Despite overwhelming support for these policies among the members, we must not forget that these are blatant acts of aggression that are forbidden under international law. No amount of public relations hoopla can conceal the fact that NATO is on-track to commit the “supreme crime”.

It’s worth noting, that NATO intends to take a more active role in the conduct of the war. According to National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, the Alliance plans to formally establish a NATO office inside Ukraine that will be used to oversee military operations. In short, the managers of the conflict no longer have any interest in concealing their involvement. This is now a NATO operation. Here’s an excerpt from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

This NATO office will accompany the creation of a NATO command to oversee the war in Ukraine, transitioning the provision of weapons and logistical oversight from an ad hoc group led by the United States to the NATO alliance itself.

Sullivan’s remarks outlined the main agenda items of the three-day summit in Washington, which is expected to signal a major escalation of the conflict with Russia in Ukraine and plans to significantly increase NATO’s capabilities to fight a full-scale war throughout Europe….

He said the summit will also announce “a new NATO military command in Germany led by a three-star general that will launch a training, equipping, and force development program for Ukrainian troops….”

The creation of a NATO office in Kiev and the reorganization of weapons provision, training and military logistics under a direct NATO command marks the end of any pretense that the conflict in Ukraine is not a war between NATO and Russia. It marks a dangerous new phase in the war, raising the prospect of a major escalation. Washington summit will announce plans to set up NATO office inside Ukraine, WSWS

Add all of this to the fact that the Summit Declaration posits that Ukraine is now on an “irreversible” path to NATO membership, and it becomes clear that every effort is being made to provoke Moscow.

Not surprisingly, Russia was thoroughly demonized in the Declaration which follows the familiar pattern we have seen with other enemies of Washington including Saddam, Qaddafi and Assad. Here’s a brief summary of “evil” Russia directly from the text:

Russia remains the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security…

Russia bears sole responsibility for its war of aggression against Ukraine, a blatant violation of international law, including the UN Charter.

There can be no impunity for Russian forces’ and officials’ abuses and violations of human rights, war crimes, and other violations of international law.

Russia is responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians and has caused extensive damage to civilian infrastructure.

We condemn in the strongest possible terms Russia’s horrific attacks on the Ukrainian people, including on hospitals, on 8 July…

We are determined to constrain and contest Russia’s aggressive actions and to counter its ability to conduct destabilizing activities towards NATO and Allies… Washington Summit Declaration, NATO

Washington’s ferocious repudiation of Russia leaves no doubt as to where all this is heading. It’s headed for war.

The authors of this declaration were reiterating the views of the billionaire elites who are determined to roll-back Russia’s battlefield gains, topple the political leaders in Moscow, and splinter the country into smaller, more-manageable statlets. Russia represents the most formidable obstacle to Washington’s overall geopolitical strategy of projecting power into Asia, encircling China, and establishing itself as the preeminent power in the world’s most prosperous region. These strategic objectives are invariably omitted in the media’s coverage, but they are the underlying factors that shape events. Here’s Biden:

In Europe, Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues. And Putin wants nothing less than Ukraine’s total subjugation; to end Ukraine’s democracy; to destroy Ukraine’s culture; and to wipe Ukraine off the map.

And we know Putin won’t stop at Ukraine. But make no mistake, Ukraine can and will stop Putin — (applause) — especially with our full, collective support. And they have our full support. “Ukraine can and will stop Putin.” The White House

It’s all nonsense, but it helps to build the case for war which is Biden’s obvious intention. (Here’s John Mearsheimer’s response to Biden’s claim that Putin wants to conquer Europe. You Tube; :30 second mark)

The truth is that the war was triggered by NATO enlargement, an inconvenient fact that NATO chairman Jens Stoltenberg has admitted on numerous occasions. Some readers might also recall that—during the peace negotiations between Kiev and Moscow in April 2022—Russia’s primary demand was that Ukraine reject NATO membership and declare permanent neutrality. Zelensky agreed to those terms which, in effect, prove that Putin’s action was linked to NATO expansion. There is virtually no proof that Putin wants to conquer Europe. None. Putin simply wants Ukraine to honor its treaty obligations regarding neutrality. Check out this excerpt by Ted Snider at Antiwar.com:

Ukraine.. promised to stay out of NATO. Its non-alignment was enshrined in the foundational documents of the independent state of Ukraine.

Article IX of the 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine states that Ukraine “solemnly declares its intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs.” That promise was repeated in Ukraine’s 1996 Constitution, which committed Ukraine to neutrality and prohibited it from joining any military alliance. But in 2019, President Petro Poroshenko amended the Ukrainian Constitution, committing Ukraine to the “strategic course” of NATO and EU membership.

Given NATO’s past behavior, this was viewed as a direct threat by Russia. When asked in 2023 if Russia still recognizes the sovereignty of Ukraine, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov answered, “We recognized the sovereignty of Ukraine back in 1991 on the basis of the Declaration of Independence, which Ukraine adopted when it withdrew from the Soviet Union… One of the main points for [Russia] in the declaration was that Ukraine would be a non-bloc non-alliance country; it would not join any military alliances… In that version, on those conditions, we support Ukraine’s territorial integrity.” NATO’s 75th Anniversary: The Broken Promises That Led to War, Antiwar.com

The issue, of course, could have been resolved long ago if Washington had acted in good faith, but Washington has not acted in good faith. In fact, Washington is still determined to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia in order to implement its “pivot to Asia” strategy to ensure its future as the world’s only unchallenged superpower. These goals cannot be achieved without escalation, confrontation and a full-blown war. The NATO summit is merely a prelude to a broader and more violent conflict between the nuclear superpowers.

The question we should being asking ourselves is whether NATO can actually win a war with Russia. Can it?

The answer is “No”, it cannot.

Why?

Here’s how military analyst Will Schryver answers that question:

I have done my research — for years, dating back long before 2022…. I repeatedly warned that it (Ukraine) was a war the US/NATO could never win….There is a VAST difference between the “on paper” strength of NATO (including the US) and their actual war-fighting capability. The US could not assemble, equip, field, and sustain even 250k combat effectives in eastern Europe, and any attempt to do so would necessitate the evacuation of every major US base on the planet. The US/NATO not only could not win a war against Russia, but they would be eviscerated in the attempt.

Alerted by the US/NATO destruction of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya, the Russians have spent the past 25 years — and particularly the past two years — engaged in a massive and exceedingly impressive military build up and modernization in preparation for an eventual war against the US/NATO. In the past 2+ years, t hey have methodically destroyed Ukraine’s three successive proxy armies with one arm tied behind their back. Their force generation, combat training, and military industrial production far exceed the entire NATO bloc combined. I appreciate the degree to which military analytical tourists like yourself have been thoroughly propagandized by Hollywood fantasies and the western state-controlled media, but wars are not fought and won by imaginary narratives and flashy superheroes. They are won by raw firepower — a metric by which the tripartite alliance of Russia, China, and Iran now possess supremacy over their hubris-drunken enemies in the rapidly eroding American Empire. There is only one sane option at this point: relinquish empire and make peace with the resurgent civilizational powers of the earth. Otherwise much of modern human civilization itself is at risk of being destroyed, and it will take centuries to recover. Ukraine Can’t Win, Will Schryver, Twitter

There’s also the niggling issue of “magazine depth” which refers to the stockpiles of weaponry and munitions required to outlast and eventually defeat the enemy. Here’s Schryver again:

There is no doubt Israel (just like its great benefactor, the United States) is, in the context of a “big war”, capable of executing several damaging strikes against a potential peer or near-peer adversary. But, throughout the imperial domain, there are fatal weaknesses that exist right now, and which cannot be turned into strengths at any point in the near- or medium-term. The first is what military types call “magazine depth”: munitions stockpiles sufficient to offensively overwhelm, defensively defeat, and strategically outlast the enemy. Neither the United States, nor any of its largely impotent client nations, possess “magazine depth” sufficient to prosecute anything more than a relatively brief campaign against their potential peer adversaries: Russia, China, Iran — and all or any of their lesser-power partners. Magazine Depth, Will Schryver, Twitter

What Schryver is saying is as profound as it is alarming. The United States and NATO will not prevail in a war with Russia because they do not have the industrial capacity, the force generation, the combat training, the magazine depth or the overall firepower of Russia. By every metric, they are the inferior fighting force. Additionally, Russia has already killed or captured hundreds of thousands of the “the best-trained and best-equipped soldiers in the Ukrainian army”. That army has already been effectively annihilated. The troops in the trenches today are poorly trained, unskilled, low-morale rookies who are being slaughtered by the thousands. Does anyone seriously believe that NATO involvement can turn this train around and secure a victory? Here’s more from Schryver:

The Russians have demonstrated that they can routinely shoot down ANY species of strike missile the US/NATO can field against them — not all of them all of the time, but most of them most of the time. And they get better and better at it as time goes on.

Indeed, over the past few months it is increasingly becoming “all of them most of the time”…. As Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported earlier this week:

“We are using air defence systems in a comprehensive manner during the special military operation. This significantly improved their responsiveness and strike range. Over the last six months, we have shot down 1,062 of NATO’s HIMARS rockets, short-range and cruise missiles, and guided bombs.”

No other military on the planet has previously attested this level of capability. The US does not have it, and is at least a decade away from developing it….

The current front-line inventory of US tactical ballistic missiles and sea- and air-launched cruise missiles would present no greater technical challenge for Russian air defenses than what they have already seen and defeated in the Ukraine War. The significance of this battlefield development defies exaggeration. It alters the war-fighting calculus that has been assumed for many decades. Empty Quiver, Will Schryver, Twitter

Some readers may find it hard to believe that NATO would rush into a war without thoroughly researching its prospects for success. But that is precisely what’s happening here. Blustery Uncle Sam foolishly believes that he will win as soon as he “throws its hat in the ring. He can’t accept that the scales are tipped in Russia’s favor and that his entry into the war will be met with a thunderous response. But that is the reality he faces. Here’s Schryver one last time:

NATO would face enormous problems of coordination, doctrine and force generation, even if it could agree an objective. Its troops are not trained for this kind of war and have never operated together…..

(they) would be hard-pressed to field a force more powerful than the reported nine Brigades trained and equipped by the West for the Great Offensive of 2023, which just bounced off the Russian forces without achieving anything of note….

The US has no ground combat units in Europe remotely suited to high-intensity land warfare…. Given enough time, money, political will and organization, most things are possible. But there is no chance… of NATO assembling a force which would constitute anything more than a nuisance to the Russians, while putting many lives in danger…… NATO’s Phantom Armies, Will Schryver, Substack

I am convinced that there is a delusional element within the foreign policy establishment that have convinced themselves that NATO will defeat Russia if they face each other on a battlefield in Ukraine. Schryver’s analysis helps to show why that’s not going to happen.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

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

Featured image is from TUR

Guess Who Are the Real Protagonists of Anti-Semitism

July 16th, 2024 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

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.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

We are witnessing accusations of anti-semitism, in colleges and universities, coupled with police intervention, arrests, prison sentences, for all those who act in solidarity with the people of Palestine.

But there something very fishy going on. 

While Western governments are actively repressing the protest movements against Israel’s act of genocide, —with mass arrests on charges of antisemitism—, those same governments are supporting Ukraine’s Nazi movement which actively participated and collaborated with Nazi Germany in the genocide directed against the Jewish population of Ukraine during World War II


Update. The French Elections. “The Left” Supports the Nazi Regime in Kiev?

Ironically, the only party firmly committed to suspending military aid to the Nazi Kiev regime is Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) which is tagged by people  on the Left as fascist and anti-semitic.

Meanwhile, according to the Kiev Post, Ukraine is rejoicing.

Several of France’s  leftist parties which are part of the NFP socialist coalition are firmly supportive of Ukraine’s Nazi regime.

A message to my friends on the Left: How is it that people who are committed to social democracy and socialism are endorsing a Neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine? 

The World is Upside Down.

The Left is misinformed. Supporting the Nazis in Ukraine, serves the interests of the Global Financial Establishment and the hegemonic interests of the US.

C’est Le Monde à l’Envers 

M. C., July 9, 2024


The following image is revealing, from Left to Right: the Blue NATO flag, the Azov Battalion’s Wolfangel SS of the Third Reich and Hitler’s Nazi Swastika (red and white background) are displayed, which points to collaboration between NATO and the Neo-Nazi regime. 

Western countries have been financing the Nazi Summer Camps 

Ukraine’s “Neo-Nazi Summer Camp”. Military Training for Young Children, Para-military Recruits

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 13, 2024

A Head of State sponsored by the CIA

Video: A Jewish-Russian Proxy President: Zelensky Transformed into a Neo-Nazi.

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Silview Media, June 15,  2024

According to NATO: “the war started in 2014

The Smoking Gun: Who Started the War? Was it Russia or Was it US-NATO? NATO Confirms that the Ukraine “War Started in 2014”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 29, 2024

 

 


How Zionism Feeds Antisemitism | The Nation

Sounds contradictory?

My question is: Who are the Anti-Semites? The answer is obvious.

Our Western governments (including the majority of NATO member states), which are generously financing the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.  

From a legal standpoint, this is a criminal act on the part of our governments, which should be opposed by a vast social movement in all NATO member-states.  

The dominant Nazi faction within the Kiev government regime (which is supported by our governments) exerts its power within the realm of intelligence, internal affairs, national security and the military.

Amply documented, the 2014 US-sponsored EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat was carried out with the support of these two Nazi factions: Svoboda and Right Sektor headed by Dmytro Yarosh, which have committed countless atrocities directed against Ukraine’s Jewish community.

Dmytro Yarosh (Centre) EuroMaidan Coup d’Etat

Andriy Parubiy founded in 1991 the Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda [Freedom]), together with Oleh Tyahnybok. Parubiy was subsequently appointed Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament (Verkhovna Rada).

According to Andriy Parubiy: Adolf Hitler was “the torchbearer of democracy”. 

“I’m a major supporter of direct democracy,… By the way, I tell you that the biggest man, who practised a direct democracy, was Adolf Aloizovich [Hitler]”. (Quoted by South Front)

 

 

Remember Victoria Nuland of F**k the EU Fame

The US Congress, Canada’s Parliament, the British Parliament, the European Parliament, have invited and praised M. Parubiy.

 

Parubiy with Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (Obama Adminstration)

Here is Victoria Nuland with the leader of the Svoboda Nazi Party, Tyannybok.

 

Tyannybok (leader of Neo-Nazi Svoboda Party (left), Yatseniuk (right)

The Holocaust in Ukraine

With the formation of a new government composed of NeoNazis,  the Jewish community in Kiev is threatened.  This community is described as “one of the most vibrant Jewish communities in the world, with dozens of active Jewish organizations and institutions”.

A significant part of this community is made up of family members of holocaust survivors.

“Three million Ukrainians were murdered by the Nazis during their occupation of Ukraine, including 900,000 Jews.” (indybay.org, January 29, 2014).

Ukraine’s Nazi movement collaborated with Nazi Germany in the early 1940s. The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) participated in the killings of Ukraine’s Jewish Population.

The map below is the territory under Nazi Germany occupation (recorded in 1942) extending from Galicia to Kiev and Odessa.

It indicates cities with Jewish ghettoes, as well as the locations of major massacres.

According to the WW II Holocaust Museum:

“Before World War II, the 1.5 million Jews living in the Soviet republic of Ukraine constituted the largest Jewish population within the Soviet Union, and one of the largest Jewish populations in Europe. … The number of Jews in the Ukrainian Soviet Republic (UkrSSR) rose to 2.45 million people [from 1939-1941]”

Amply documented the OUN-B and its National Insurgent Army (UPA) were actively involved in the massacres of Jews, Poles, Communists and Roma in major cities including Odessa and Kiev.

At the outset of Operation Barbarossa, (June, 22 1941) in coordination with the death squads (Einsatzgruppen) of Nazi Germany, members of the OUN-B were instrumental in the killings in the City of Lviv, Western region of Galicia, resulting in the massacre and deportation of more than 100,000 Jews:

The Lviv pogroms were the consecutive pogroms and massacres of Jews in June and July 1941 in the city of Lwów. (Lviv, Lvov) in German-occupied Eastern Poland/Western Ukraine (now Lviv, Ukraine). The massacres were perpetrated by Ukrainian nationalists (specifically, the OUN), German death squads (Einsatzgruppen), and urban population from 30 June to 2 July [1941].”

The members of OUN-B actively collaborated with the Wehrmacht’s occupation forces (1941-1944).

In Ukraine: “..up to a million Jews were murdered by Einsatzgruppen units, Police battalions, Wehrmacht troops and local Nazi collaborators” (emphasis added)

On September, 1 1941, the Nazi-sponsored Ukrainian newspaper Volhyn wrote, in an article titled Let’s Conquer the City, namely Lviv:

“All elements that reside in our land, whether they are Jews or Poles, must be eradicated.

We are at this very moment resolving the Jewish question, and this resolution is part of the plan for the Reich’s total reorganization of Europe.

The empty space that will be created, must immediately and irrevocably be filled by the real owners and masters of this land, the Ukrainian people”. (Emphasis added)

The map below is the territory under Nazi Germany occupation (1942) extending from Galicia to Kiev and Odessa.

It indicates cities with Jewish ghettoes, the locations of major massacres.

In this regard, the Janowska concentration camp was established in the outskirts of Lviv in September 1941.

Lviv had a Jewish population of 160,000. The Janowska camp combined “elements of labor, transit, and extermination”.

“By the time Soviet forces reached Lviv on 21 July 1944, less than 1 per cent of Lviv’s Jews had survived the occupation.“ (Emphasis added)

“By the time Soviet forces reached Lviv on 21 July 1944, less than 1 per cent of Lviv’s Jews had survived the occupation.“  (Emphasis added)

What this means is that our governments —which claim to be firmly committed to social democracy– are actively supporting and financing the Neo-Nazi Kiev regime. 

 

Specifically, the German penal code prohibits “The Denial of the Holocaust” as well as the “dissemination of Nazi propaganda”.

We are dealing with something far more serious than Nazi “hate speech”, namely the relationship of the German Government with the Kiev regime’s Nazi Movement.

Our governments, including the totality of NATO member states have been instructed by Washington to SUPPORT and SPONSOR Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi regime, which came to power in 2014. in the wake of a US sponsored coup d’Etat.


For more analysis on the Holocaust in Ukraine, see:

Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Government Is Supported by the International Community. Adolph Hitler is “The Torchbearer of Democracy” in Ukraine

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2024


NAZISM = ANTI-SEMITISM 

WESTERN GOVERNMENTS WHICH SUPPORT THE NEO-NAZI KIEV REGIME ARE ANTI-SEMITIC 

 

There can be no peace when elected governments are supporting Ukraine’s NAZI Movement.

There can be no peace when US-NATO are actively supporting and financing Neo-Nazism in Ukraine.

NATO = NAZISM 

There can be NO PEACE when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit (scheduled for 9-11 July 2024) has already announced its unbending support for the Kiev Nazi regime.  

NATO is the protagonist of fraud and crimes against humanity.

NATO’S MANDATE IS TO SUPPORT NAZISM AND ANTI-SEMITISM.

ABOLISH NATO, NATO-EXIT.

NO NATO, NO WAR.

For more details see:

Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Government Is Supported by the International Community. Adolph Hitler is “The Torchbearer of Democracy” in Ukraine

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2024

*

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

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

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

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

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

***

Evee Gayle Clobes had her 6-month checkup and scheduled immunizations a day and a half before she passed and was found to be in perfect health, as she was her whole life.

She was giggling, eating solids, and telling me “no” just the night before her passing.

Image

PRELIMINARY autopsy results have been INCONCLUSIVE, the medical examiner stated that no abnormalities were found, no visible reason to the doctor as to why she passed.

She did state that they are running tests to determine if vaccinations were the cause. I do not know what tests exactly yet, but she did agree it was of concern.

Please share Evee’s story.

*

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

Our thanks to Dr. William Makis for bringing this to our attention.