A new report this week found America is turning the tide on several major cancers. 

But while older people’s cancer rates are falling, a more worrying trend has emerged— cancers are rising in children and young adults, including blood cancers.

And because the youngsters are so young and historically at such low risk, their diagnoses is often not made until it is too late.

Alizabeth Rhodes, from Michigan, is one of the growing number of American minors to be struck by the disease that normally hits the elderly.

The 16-year-old’s family first knew something was wrong when she started to be exhuasted and lack energy far more than usual.

She was taken to the ER in her home state with ‘non-specific’ symptoms at the age of 16 years — which may have included swollen areas in her neck and armpit and a fever or night sweats.

Tests revealed she had stage four peripheral T-cell lymphoma, or an aggressive type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma where T-cells, a type of which blood cell, start to divide uncontrollably.

By the time it was diagnosed, the cancerous cells had already spread to multiple organs.

She was taken out of school in July 2023, after the cancer was detected, and spent nine months in and out of hospital receiving chemotherapy, radiation and then a bone marrow transplant.

Ms Rhodes is now in remission with doctors describing her as ‘extremely resilient’ — while her family said she was a ‘real fighter’.

But questions remain over why the youngster — who is now 17 and is still yet to return to the classroom — developed the cancer.

Click here to read the full article on DailyMail Online.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Our thanks to Dr. William Makis of COVID Intel for bringing this to our attention.

Featured image is from Facebook via DailyMail Online

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. 

The referendum on the European Union not only showed a deep split in Moldovan society, but the unexpected turn that happened overnight in favour of European integration calls into question the referendum’s legitimacy. Opponents of European integration amounted to 55 percent, but there was a suspicious increase in supporters of EU membership, hinting at falsification in the vote count.

Although the referendum asked whether Moldova should pursue EU membership, in the last few hours of the vote, there was a rapid change, with Moldovans apparently choosing a European future. According to the results of 99.01 percent of ballots counted, 50.29 Moldovans voted “For,” while 49.71 percent voted “Against,” a difference of only 0.58 percent.

The referendum’s legitimacy was also questioned primarily due to the diaspora’s votes. This suggests that Moldovan embassies in the West inflated the number of votes, including at polling stations across the United States where there were no observers.

On October 20, Moldova held presidential elections and a referendum on European integration. The question was asked:

“Do you support changing the Constitution so that the Republic of Moldova can enter the European Union?”

Image: Official portrait of President of Moldova Maia Sandu (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Pro-Western President Sandu won the majority in the first round, but her vote percentage was lower than expected – 42.21 percent – so she will have to go to the second round of elections on November 3. Opponent Alexandr Stoianoglo won 26.15 percent of the vote.

What cannot be overlooked is that Sandu ensured little accountability at polling stations abroad. It was impossible to control the Moldovan diaspora’s voting in the West, while the Moldovan diaspora in Russia had limited voting rights.

231 polling stations were opened abroad in 37 countries, including 60 polling stations in Italy, where about 300,000 Moldovan citizens live. In France and Germany, with a Moldovan diaspora of 100,000 people each, 40 polling stations were opened, and in Great Britain, 17 were opened for 42,000 voters.

However, only two polling stations were opened in Russia, where about half a million Moldovans live. Moldova’s Foreign Ministry claimed there were “security reasons.” Russian media reported that only nine thousand ballots were prepared for the Moldovan diaspora in Russia; thus, most could not vote. The election and referendum results would have been evident if they had opened more polling stations in Russia.

This campaign exposes how systematically and brazenly the West holds Moldova in its grip to keep Sandu in power. In this context, the Moldovan elections have become another training session for the West in organising rigged elections.

At the same time, securing a huge advantage in favour of European integration was impossible because Moldova’s objective economic situation and inflation growth indicate that the course chosen earlier already shows its results – European integration does not bring appropriate benefits and bonuses to the country.

During the past decades, but especially since Sandu, Moldovan authorities have tried to suppress economic activity and cooperation with Moscow. In the last three years, exports to Russia have decreased by almost a third every year. Companies face obstacles in cooperation, and farmers are forced to cut down apple plantations simply because no one else in Europe needs those apples.

There are also gas and energy issues. To avoid importing gas from Russia, Moldovan authorities agreed to import through intermediaries at higher prices, which led to economic problems for companies.

Sandu, who has passports from Moldova and EU-member Romania, plans to continue European integration if she wins the second round of elections. Moldova began the long process of formal accession negotiations in June, and under Sandu, the country aims to join the EU by 2030. Relations with Moscow have soured since Sandu condemned Russia’s special operation in Ukraine, began advocating diversification of energy supplies, and continued to pursue a policy of distancing herself from Russia.

In principle, this referendum vote will not have any impact. In the second round of the election, Sandu will most likely win as she uses all bureaucratic administrative levers to ensure her victory and enjoys the support of European bureaucrats. For the grants Moldova’s current leadership receives from the EU, Sandu will continue the policies they are pursuing.

Before the election, the alternative candidate also said that he had a Romanian passport, so Moldova is in a surreal situation where no national political elite exists. There are two candidates for president, both citizens of an EU-member country. Next year’s parliamentary elections will be more significant for Moldova, but the current political campaign clearly characterises and reveals the very nature of the pro-Western political process that exists in the country.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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.

“Canada is literally arming Nazis in Ukraine who are bombing civilians in Donbass, and I have been there under the bombs. Canada is not there to protect me.” – Eva Bartlett

The following interview took place on October 16. Two Canadian individuals on separate occassions in Canada were stopped after returning to Canada after spending time in Russia, and subjected to intense scrutiny by members of the Canada Security Intelligence Service. It is from the transcript to the recent Global Research News Hour broadcast.

Eva Bartlett is a Canadian independent journalist and activist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and occupied Palestine, where she lived for nearly four years. She is a recipient of the 2017 International Journalism Award for International Reporting, granted by the Mexican Journalists’ Press Club (founded in 1951), was the first recipient of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism, and was short-listed in 2017 for the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism.

Tamara Lorincz is a long-time member of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace.  Tamara is also a member of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom-Canada. As well, she is on the advisory committee of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, World Beyond War and the No to War, No to NATO Network. Tamara was awarded the Rotary International World Peace Fellowship in 2013. In addition to her activism, Tamara is currently a PhD candidate at the Balsillie School of International Affairs at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ontario.

Global Research: Thank you both for appearing on the Global Research news hour this week.

Eva, your encounter was in February of this year, correct?

Eva Bartlett: Yes.

GR: Do you want to briefly explain what happened to you then?

EB: Sure! I have not been back to Canada for four years, mainly because of the COVID policies for the first two years since 2020, when I left Canada. And then because, well, since 2019 I’ve been on the Ukrainian kill list, Myrotvorets, and in 2022 CBC did a smear on my journalism, which throughout 2022 was from the Donbass, under Ukrainian fire, with most of the time Western weapons. And for my crime of doing journalism from the Donbass and how Ukraine’s bombings have brutalized civilians there, the CBC decided to smear me.

But the interesting thing is they drew from the kill list, Myrotvorets’ entry on me. So CBC was very aware of the fact that a Canadian journalist is on the Ukrainian kill list, but they did not address it. They used that information to smear me.

And so then I became concerned if I were to come back to Canada after that, they have just alerted Ukrainian nationalists in Canada of my existence, and then it could be very dangerous for me. However, that said, by February this year, I decided I would risk it because I had not seen my elderly mother for quite a while, four years. And so I went back to Canada and I was met at Toronto’s Pearson Airport.

I went to the passport control. It seemed like they were going to stamp me out, but then I was told to go step aside and I was taken. Had my suitcase, my purse, everything that I was carrying with me, searched item by item. The man doing it was nice enough.

He wasn’t hostile. He asked me a lot of questions, trying to garner as much information from me about who I am, what I do, where I’ve been. And after, I don’t remember, 20, 30 minutes search, then he said, CSIS would like to talk to you.

It’s voluntary, but will you talk to them? And I’m aware of CSIS visiting people’s homes, like that of Ken Stone, and I did not want my brothers exposed to that. So I said, yes, I will talk to him for a short period. We ended up speaking for about 20 minutes, during which time, I don’t remember verbatim his questions, but he started by trying to make himself likeable to me by saying that he had also lived in Gaza.

As it turned out, he lived there when the illegal Jewish colonists were there. So he was part of the occupation in whatever he was doing there. But then he went on to ask me the nature of my journalism, who I knew in Russia.

He named a specific person who I did know and was trying to find out information when I’d last seen him and where, and I told him I’m not going to tell you that information. And then he went on to basically say, this is not verbatim, basically asked me if I’m taking directives from the Kremlin in my journalism. And I replied to him, my journalism is based on what I see and hear on the ground, under Ukrainian shelling.

And then I write about it, nobody tells me what to write. I didn’t get Tamara’s as hostile treatment. He did tell me that CSIS is there to protect me, which I bit my tongue, because quite honestly, I wanted to see my mother.

He came back to me when I was exiting Canada roughly two weeks later, when I was just ready to board my flight. And he repeated that CSIS was there to protect me, to which I replied, Canada is literally arming Nazis in Ukraine who are bombing civilians in Donbass, and I have been there under the bombs. Canada is not there to protect me.

GR: The article that had been written about you, that smeared you, but one of the, I mean, it said that you’d been writing for RT, and I mean, that is correct.

EB: Well, I have written for RT since 2013, when I still lived in Gaza. It was one of the only, it was the only major outlet that would allow me to write on what I was seeing under Israeli bombs and other torture policies against Palestinians.

And RT was the only platform, the big platform that would allow me to write without any sort of censorship, what I was seeing, what Palestinians were enduring. And so over the years since then, I’ve contributed op-eds pretty randomly, sometimes a couple of times a year or more, I don’t remember. And then more frequently in recent years, because again, it’s grown to be a massive platform.

And the way it works is I pitch, they say yes or no, whether it’s newsworthy or not, and nobody tells me what to write. So the implication that just because it’s published on a Russian media platform, therefore its propaganda is just, it’s a ludicrous accusation that the West is using, along with these intimidation tactics of arresting and intimidating journalists, they’re using that to try to silence unpopular narratives. In other words, narratives that are contrary to their lies, frankly, and narratives that are about actually ending wars and bringing peace.

GR: Tamara, you got the same kind of treatment earlier this month. Do you want to elaborate?

Tamara Lorincz: Yes. So I would like to begin by saying that I went to Russia from September 16th to October 2nd.

I was invited to attend the Eurasian Women’s Forum. This was a big gathering of women, almost 2,000 from 126 countries in St. Petersburg. I also attended the BRICS Women’s Meeting, again, with thousands of women.

And I also attended a peace conference in St. Petersburg on peace, nature, and cooperation in the Arctic and Baltic regions. So I was going to Russia on a peace mission. And I was also going in the spirit of people-to-people diplomacy.

I wanted to learn more about the country. I was in St. Petersburg for a week, and then I was in Moscow for a week. And I scheduled meetings because I’m an academic.

I also scheduled meetings with professors at other universities and had a number of really good exchanges with students and with professors. So that’s why I went to Russia. And on my way back, when I arrived at the Toronto International Airport, I went quickly through passport control.

I didn’t have anything to declare. I got my passport approved and going through passport control. And I was walking out of that area, and there was another security guard.

Usually, the security guards just quickly have a look at your declaration form. But this one took me aside, and he asked me more questions about my travel itinerary. And then he said, well, where are you coming from? I said, from Turkey.

And he goes, where else have you been travelling from today? And I said, Russia. And then he started asking me the question, why was I in Russia? He goes, well, that’s very interesting, started to ask me more questions. And then he wrote on my declaration, BIO, I think, border inspection.

And when I picked up my luggage and wanting to leave the airport to get back home because I hadn’t been home in two and a half weeks, this Canadian Border Services agent was there at the exit. And as I was trying to go through, he said, no, you need to come with me. And so I went to another area of the airport that was a large securitized room.

I was the only one in that area required to go through this secondary examination. So I was on a plane with about 300 people coming from all over the region, all over the Middle East, Eastern Europe. And I’m the only one in this area being questioned by this border agent.

And that’s because I was in Russia. And so he asked me a lot of questions. I was there trying to answer questions, giving as minimum information as I could.

But he also went through all of my belongings, just like he did with Eva, inspecting every single article and all of my bags. The thing that he was interested in was my no to NATO literature. And I had a couple of banners with me and he wanted to have me unfurl them and was looking at that.

And then when he had gone through all of his questioning, examining all of my bags, he asked if he could have copies of my no to NATO literature. And then as I was leaving that area, there was a CSIS agent waiting for me. And I don’t recall them saying, you don’t need to answer the questions.

I decided I would have an interview with CSIS. And one of the reasons why is because I follow CSIS actually on social media. And I know CSIS is lying about Canadian foreign policy, particularly this war in Ukraine.

So I decided to try to harness the interview as best as I could to say that I really objected to CSIS lying to Canadians about Russia and about the war in Ukraine, and that the CSIS is really a threat to Canadian security. By not being honest and by not helping to end this war in Ukraine, that’s a nuclear risk for all of us. He also was interested in why I was going to Russia, what my intentions were, who I was talking to, my opposition to NATO.

He kept saying that Canada needs to maintain a friendly relationship with the United States because our economy depends on it, and things like this. The most troubling thing was that he did say to me that CSIS had been following me, surveilling me for a long time, and that I was well known by CSIS, and that there are agents that are covering all regions of Canada. And he’s the agent that is overseeing southwestern Ontario, and he’s been following my activities.

So it’s very troubling. Why is CSIS wasting time on peace activists instead of spending time and helping to end wars and build peace with all countries?

GR: I’m wondering about the larger context, because I don’t think CSIS is acting alone. They’re coordinating with other groups, warning us of disinformation from Putin propagandists.

Could you inform us more of what you know of these groups and individuals who warn us of Kremlin trolls like yourself?

TL: This is one of the things that I raised with the CSIS agent. I said that Canadian intelligence services are not operating alone. Canada operates as part of the Five Eyes Alliance, dominated by the United States intelligence services, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand.

And what CSIS is sharing on social media are the same things that the CIA in the United States is sharing on social media too. So they are trying to control the narrative about this war in Ukraine, but they’re lying to the Canadian public about what is going on. For instance, I brought copies of access to information documents that I have to Russia to show, for instance, in a meeting that I had with the Canadian embassy in Moscow, that definitively the Canadian military has been training and arming neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine, and they’ve known it for years.

So I have these records from inside the Department of National Defence that shows that our military knew that these groups that they were training under Operation UNIFIER had Nazi ideology, but we continue to support them and train them for years. These are the groups that were shooting and shelling into the Donbass with our weapons. And so I have these documents, I’m showing the diplomats in Moscow, and then this is what I showed the CSIS agents.

So I put the question to them directly, why is Canada arming and training neo-Nazis in Ukraine? And then why are you lying about it on social media saying that we’re not doing it? It’s CSIS that is deceiving the Canadian public, and this is what is so troubling. Canadians should be outraged, and there should be a national inquiry into this.

GR: Eva, would you like to comment on this as well? And also, you could bring in the fact that you yourself are in the sights of Ukrainian kill list, and how is that you all coordinate to CSIS web of influence, if you will?

EB: This Myrotvorets is not unique to Ukraine, and it is posted on various servers, including Western servers.

The fact that CBC was made aware, I refer to CBC because CSIS would have known that CBC did this smear. Because like Tamara said, if they are following her, and they stopped me, then I can assume they’re also following me and my activities. And I’ve been very outspoken about the CBC smear, not because my feelings were hurt, but because it was so disingenuous and dishonest.

They took away from the importance of what I and colleagues are doing on the ground in Donbass reporting on Ukraine’s crimes against civilians. And instead, they tried to depict me as a crazy person, Russian disinformation agent type of thing. And that’s what this, as I might have said earlier, this policy of harassment against journalists and activists, and also this Myrotvorets kill list.

But by the way, the irony is Myrotvorets means peacemaker in Ukrainian. But that’s what this list is about. It’s about silencing dissent, but it is a real kill list.

As much as people try to debate otherwise, when people are killed or die of suspicious means, they are marked as liquidated on this list. So CBC was made aware of this. They did nothing to expose it.

And CSIS would have to be aware of it, and also they did nothing. In fact, when presumably the same man that questioned Tamara was speaking with me and kept saying, we’re here to protect you, and asking about my activities, I said to him, are you aware of the CBC entry on me? I’m of the opinion you’re not here to protect me. And he feigned innocence and ignorance about the list and the threat it poses to journalists and activists and civilians around the world.

And doing nothing, as Tamara pointed out, instead for years, covertly or overtly even arming neo-Nazis in Ukraine and whitewashing their crimes. So it does come back to, as we keep saying, to silencing any sort of dissenting voices, because they need to control the narrative. And frankly, they’re failing at it.

I mean, even prior to 2022, certain Canadian media were reporting on the presence of these neo-Nazi elements within the Ukrainian armed forces. After 2022, they ceased reporting on it, and they’re trying to basically say, anybody who points this out are crazy, and this is a figment of your imagination. So they’re trying to basically erase history, because then justify arming Ukraine, and then they can vilify Russia as if nothing happened prior to 2022, and as if Azov and IDAR don’t exist.

Yeah, you only got a couple of minutes left. I was wondering if I could get each of you to comment on how we can extract ourselves, because it seems like things are getting worse. What can we do to protect ourselves, to protect yourselves? Because I mean, it’s not just going to be you.

I mean, eventually, they’ll climb the ladder and even go after people like me.

EB: I would say the first step is being aware of your rights and what they are or are not entitled to do. So as I read, CSIS is not entitled to go into your phone.

They can ask you questions. I don’t believe you’re obligated to answer them. But again, the reason I went ahead and answered them is that I didn’t want them to pay my family a visit.

And I also would stress that, again, these are intimidation tactics. So inform yourself of your rights. Get in touch with legal advice if you do think you’re going to be in a position where you will be interrogated and attempted to be intimidated.

And be prepared to have legal advice back you if you actually need it. But absolutely don’t back down, because this is what they want us to do, is to stop reporting and stop speaking out. Again, I stress, and I know Tamara probably will say something, that this is not about ourselves as individuals.

This is about reporting on the truth and stopping the bloodshed that is solely, in my opinion, it’s solely the responsibility of the West because they fomented this war. Me, for example, reporting on the effects of Ukraine’s bombing of Donbass with Western weapons usually could contribute to other people, of course, obviously reporting on it, not just myself. The awareness that this is happening, awareness amongst Western public could contribute to actually stopping the war.

But when they silence voices like ours, then there’s maybe not an impetus from the Western audience to put any sort of pressure on their governments to stop funding Ukraine and bring about a peace talk with Russia so that peace can reign again.

TL: Yes. So CSIS is trying to use intimidation tactics, you know, in order to silence and suppress peace voices and peace activists.

So the, you know, the antidote to this is raising our voices even louder, is speaking up, is calling for peace and diplomacy. You know, this is why I went to Russia to engage in people diplomacy and why I’m urging, you know, all Canadians to go to Russia to educate themselves, to find ways to build peace, and not just Russia, our other so-called enemies. If you look at CSIS’s latest national report, it identifies, you know, China, Iran, North Korea as adversaries and threats to Canada.

So, you know, these are other countries that we need to find ways to build peace with. And, you know, I just want to urge people to find creative ways to engage in peacemaking because we need to prevent a broader war with Russia, a broader war in the Middle East, and, you know, peace is just so essential.

Apesar das sanções em andamento contra a Rússia pelo “Ocidente coletivo” liderado pelos Estados Unidos, os países da União Europeia, bem como o confronto quase direto com o bloco da OTAN na Ucrânia, a Rússia continua a expandir sua influência econômica e política no mundo.

Um dos eventos mais marcantes deste ano acontecerá na cidade de Kazan (Federação Russa) de 22 a 24 de outubro, e em particular a XVI “BRICS SUMMIT”.

Além disso, para aqueles que ainda não sabiam, vamos lembrar que o “Fórum Municipal Internacional dos Países BRICS” é uma plataforma importante para a troca de experiências e ideias entre representantes de governos regionais e municipais dos países BRICS, bem como para a construção de comunicações comerciais eficazes com empreendedores da Rússia e outros países parceiros.

Uma reunião de líderes estaduais ocorrerá na cúpula acima mencionada. No momento, sabe-se que os convidados esperados, além do anfitrião da cúpula, Vladimir Putin, também devem incluir o Presidente da República Popular da China Xi Jinping, o Primeiro-Ministro da Índia Narendra Modi, o Presidente do Brasil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, o Presidente da República da África do Sul Cyril Ramaphosa, o Presidente dos Emirados Árabes Unidos Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, o Presidente do Irã Masoud Pezeshkian, o Presidente do Egito Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, o Primeiro-Ministro da Etiópia Abiy Ahmed Ali e o Príncipe Herdeiro Saudita Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud.

Apesar do fato de a Turquia ainda não ser um membro pleno do BRICS, um dos participantes inesperados da cúpula para toda a comunidade ocidental e a OTAN será o Presidente da Turquia Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Sua presença reafirmará as intenções já expressas da Turquia de se juntar ao BRICS como seu membro, conforme declarado anteriormente por Erdogan.

No total, representantes de mais de 30 países, bem como alguns chefes de organizações internacionais, já confirmaram sua participação no próximo fórum.

É necessário lembrar que a partir de 1º de janeiro de 2024, além do Brasil, Índia, China, Rússia e África do Sul, Egito, Irã, Emirados Árabes Unidos, Arábia Saudita e Etiópia se tornaram membros plenos do BRICS. Esta lista só se expandirá em um futuro próximo.

“Não poderíamos ignorar o crescente interesse no BRICS por parte de muitos países. Até o momento, mais de três dúzias de países, ou mais precisamente 34 países, já expressaram seu desejo de se juntar às atividades de nossa associação de uma forma ou de outra. Portanto, uma discussão ativa foi lançada com todos os participantes do BRICS sobre as modalidades da nova categoria de estados parceiros, que devem ser aprovadas em Kazan”, disse Putin

A participação na adesão ao BRICS é muito promissora. Para não ser infundado, você pode simplesmente prestar atenção aos números: o “produto interno bruto” (PIB) combinado da associação BRICS é de mais de 60 trilhões de dólares, e a participação total no produto bruto mundial excede com confiança o valor correspondente do chamado “Grupo dos Sete” (Big Seven) e continua a crescer. Por exemplo, veja, 1992, o “Grupo dos Sete” – 45,5 por cento. E no mesmo ano, os países BRICS, 1992, – 16,7 por cento do PIB mundial. E agora, 2023, nossa associação é de 37,4 por cento, e o “Grupo dos Sete” – 29,3 por cento. A lacuna está aumentando, e aumentará, isso é inevitável. Esta já é uma dinâmica absolutamente clara. Além disso, na última década, mais de 40 por cento do crescimento do PIB global de toda a dinâmica econômica mundial veio dos estados BRICS.

Atualmente, a lista de potenciais candidatos ao BRICS inclui Azerbaijão, Argélia, Bangladesh, Bahrein, Bielorrússia, Bolívia, Venezuela, Vietnã, Honduras e Zimbábue. Indonésia, Cazaquistão, Cuba, Kuwait, Marrocos, Nigéria, Nicarágua, Palestina, Paquistão, Senegal, Síria, Tailândia, Turquia, Uganda, Chade, Sri Lanka, Guiné Equatorial, Eritreia e Sudão do Sul também querem se juntar à associação interestatal.

Olhando para esta lista impressionante, podemos dizer com segurança que o sistema ocidental unipolar, que leva em conta apenas seus próprios interesses pessoais, já se tornou bastante chato para todos, uma vez que um membro da OTAN, a Turquia, já se candidatou para se juntar ao BRICS, o que também atesta diretamente a crescente atratividade desta associação para outros países e fará do BRICS um “novo centro de poder” no cenário mundial.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

*

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

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

In this publication, I have made the case that there is over a century of evidence that sudden infant death syndrome (all of which is comprehensively detailed here) is linked to excessive vaccination of infants.

In that article, I provided extensive references for the following points:

• SIDS “mysteriously” clusters at 2 to 4 months of age—which is also when children happen to receive the vaccines most strongly associated with causing SIDS (e.g., the TDwP pertussis vaccine). Many doctors and patients noticed this, but it has been relentlessly dismissed by the medical industrial complex.
• As far back as 1933, case reports were produced of children experiencing brain damage and then infant death shortly after the TDwP shot. (e.g., a 1978 report that studied 15 million TDwP injections linked numerous cases of the vaccine to brain damage and death).
• In 1979, the CDC also completed its own analysis 1980 of 23 deaths within 28 days of DTwP vaccination, 12 (52.2 %) occurred within 24 hours, and 18 (78.3 %) occurred within one week. In 16 of the 23 deaths, autopsy findings were consistent with SIDS. Of the 16 SIDS deaths, 6 (37.5 %) occurred within 24 hours, and 12 (75 %) occurred within one week.
• A 1982 study that was inspired by observing 4 cases of SIDS within 19 hours of the TDwP vaccine that then studied 200 randomly selected SIDS cases. They found most of infants had been vaccinated prior to death (6.5% within 12 hours of vaccination, 26% within 3 days, 37% within a week, 61% within two weeks, and 70% within 3 weeks), with death typically following brief periods of irritability, crying, lethargy, upper respiratory tract symptoms, and sleep disturbance. Additionally, their autopsy findings were relatively consistent (e.g. petechiae of lung, pleura, pericardium, and thymus; vascular congestion; pulmonary edema; pneumonitis; and brain edema).
• In 2014, mass graves were unearthed for Irish orphans who coincidentally had been test subjects for the early diphtheria vaccine in the 1930s.
• In addition to there being countless cases of children receiving those vaccines and dying suddenly later in the night, many cases also exist of two twins both dying within 24 hours of the vaccine (e.g., the earliest was in 1946, while this article reviews 13 cases of simultaneous twin SIDS deaths)—something which is almost impossible to have occurred by chance. Additionally, in many cases (e.g., this 1987 one, this 2007 one, this 2010 one, and this 2013 one) of twins who died after vaccination and were found dead lying on their backs.

Note: I believe the immediate twin deaths were likely due to them both receiving a hot vaccine lot (which as I show here, was a longstanding problem with the TDwP vaccine—for example, in 1978-1978, 11 babies in Tennessee were found to have died within 8 days of a TDwP vaccine, 9 of whom received the same lot—leading the US government to privately acknowledge the deaths may have been due to the vaccine and the manufacturer issuing a memo to spread future lots throughout the country so hot lots would no longer cluster in an area and cause identifiable SIDS outbreaks). One of the truly remarkable things about these events was that the FDA rejected the manufacturer’s proposal to put SIDS on the warning label for the vaccine (although since that time it has been implemented).

• In 1957, an Australian MD (Archie Kalokerinos) worked with the Aboriginal community (who were poorly treated in Australia and had abysmal living conditions resulting in a 10% infant mortality rate—compared to 2% in the neighboring regions). He realized this death was largely due to widespread vitamin C deficiencies (as their native diets had been destroyed by colonialism). In many cases, he was able to rescue infants on the verge of death in minutes by giving them vitamin C. Likewise, he showed that vitamin C deficiency also explained the children’s widespread epidemic of pneumonia, severe ear infections, severe infant irritability, and a frequent inability to feed. He eventually ignited national controversy by successfully defending an Aboriginal woman accused of killing her child by proving the bruising on the child’s body was due to scurvy (vitamin C deficiency) rather than child abuse, and when he at last convinced the authorities to start giving vitamin C to Aboriginal children, all of these conditions dropped dramatically. Most importantly, he found that much in the same way an illness (e.g., pneumonia or sepsis) rapidly depleted vitamin C levels (which is essentially why IV vitamin C is so helpful for treating sepsis), vaccination would severely exacerbate an existing vitamin C deficiency. This was best shown by a vaccination campaign killing 50% of the children in one Aboriginal community (you read that correctly 50%), and that giving vitamin C to animals before vaccinating them prevented them from dying.

Note: in addition to this, a large body of evidence links TDwP vaccination to childhood ear infections (e.g., numerous studies have found that vaccinated children are 3-50 times more likely to get them).

• Japan’s decision to delay the scheduled DTwP vaccination by 20 months resulted in an 85-90% reduction in the instances of SIDS.
• When SIDS cases at morgues are examined, they cluster at precisely 2, 4, or 6 months of age (rather than spread throughout the 2 to 6 month period).
• Prior to the mass vaccination programs in America, SIDS was very rare (to the point few were even aware crib death occurred), but rapidly spiked (to the point a new diagnosis category had to be made) after national mass vaccination and before long became the leading cause of death in the first 12 months of life. For instance, between 1953 to 1992 in Olmstead County, Minnesota, the rate of SIDS went from 0.55% to 12.8% of live births (going from 2.5% to 17.9% of total infant deaths), with 85% occurring within the first 6 months of infancy. In contrast, during that same time, almost every other childhood disease was continually decreasing.
• A 2011 study showed there is a direct correlation between how many vaccines a country gives their children and their infant mortality rate.
• While the rates of SIDS steadily increased, once the TDwP vaccine was replaced with the safer TDaP vaccine between 1991-1996, it began to decrease. This reduction is commonly attributed to the Back to Sleep campaign, but this ignores the fact that the decline began before the campaign. That many infants (e.g., the twins) have been found dead lying on their backs, and that prior to the TDwP vaccine, sleeping on the back wasn’t an issue.
• When cases of SIDS are analyzed in VAERS, they cluster next to vaccination (e.g., 75% occur within 1 week of vaccination and comprise almost all infant deaths associated with vaccination).
• The National Vaccine Injury Act was passed in response to growing public outrage over DTwP deaths due to NBC airing a national story on the dangers of this vaccine (something which would never air in the more corrupt media of today):

.

Click here to watch the video

.

• That documentary and the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act resulted in a safer DTwP vaccine (DTaP) being made (which still causes SIDS but not as frequently). Unfortunately, the DTwP vaccine is still used in Africa. When extensively studied, it was found to make children 5 times as likely to die (3.93 for boys and 9.98 for girls).
  Note: while some died shortly after vaccination, the primary cause of their deaths was chronic immune suppression which made them more vulnerable to the numerous deadly infections existing in that region.
• When COVID happened, many in the vaccine safety community predicted the lockdowns would lead to a massive drop in SIDS cases (since children were skipping their non-essential vaccine appointments). As I show here, this indeed was what happened (and likewise happened shortly after in Florida once large numbers of parents opted out of routine vaccination). To this day, no explanation has ever been provided for this mysterious decline in SIDS.

How Vaccines Cause SIDS

Presently, the following is known about vaccines and SIDS:

• The more vaccines are given concurrently, and the more premature an infant is, the more likely they are to die after vaccination (e.g., I summarized 4 studies showing the former and 14 showing the latter here).
• In many cases, this death can be observed to be preceded by intermittent cessations of breathing and a slowed heart rate. In many cases, when children are in the NICU (which is often the case for premature infants), their breathing can be observed to become interrupted following vaccination (e.g., I summarized 12 studies that observed this here).
• Those results inspired investigators to begin testing respiration function in infants at home with home monitoring systems, and from that, it was observed that TDaP frequently led to intermittent interruptions of breathing.

All of this, in short, suggests that vaccination can interrupt the automatic breathing mechanism and that when this happens at home (rather than in a hospital where it can be flagged by the monitors and the infant saved with CPR), those babies die.

Presently, I believe this occurs because vaccines, due to their impairment of the physiologic zeta potential, often cause microstrokes in the brain that can be easily detected by basic neurologic evaluations (discussed further here). These microstrokes result from a critical threshold being passed, which helps to explain why premature infants (who are smaller) are less able to tolerate standard vaccine doses, and why more vaccines being given concurrently are more likely to cause this to happen.

As it happens, the most vulnerable area of the brain to these microstrokes is the region that allows the eyes to move outwards. In turn, a loss of smooth outwards tracking of the eyes is one of the most common vaccine injuries (e.g., this happened to many people I know following COVID vaccination).

As it so happens, the region of the brain that controls respiration is very close to the part of the brain that controls outward eye tracking movements (marked as a 6 for CN-VI in the below image):

.

.

In turn, there have been many cases of inward deviated eyes proceeding respiratory interruptions, including one documented one where both eyes turn inwards (indicating a more severe compromise of the blood supply) which was then followed by SIDS.

In addition to these findings, numerous autopsies in SIDS cases have been conducted which have found the following:

Abnormal neuropathologic findings were acute congestion, defective blood–brain barrier, slight infiltration of the leptomeninx by macrophages and lymphocytes, perivascular lymphocytic infiltration, diffuse infiltration of the pons, mesencephalon and cortex by T-lymphocytes, microglia in the hippocampus and pons, and in one case of necrosis in the cerebellum.

Histological examination revealed polivisceral stasis, and mild cerebral edema. Acute pulmonary edema mixed with areas of acute pulmonary emphysema were recorded. Myocardial interstitial oedema was also detected. Histological examination of the cardiac conduction system was unremarkable. Small intraparenchymal hemorrhages on the spleen and adrenal glands were observed. Pulmonary mast cells were identified and quantified, and a great number of degranulating mast cells with tryptase-positive material outside were observed (Fig. 2). Data resulting from quantitative analysis recorded a numerical increase in pulmonary mast cells in fatal anaphylactic shock (average mast-cell count 12471/100 mm2 ) compared with that of the traumatic control group (traumatic death) whose average mast-cell count was 3657/100 mm2.

These findings are consistent with a heightened inflammatory response, microstrokes occurring, and leaky blood vessels (a characteristic result of scurvy and, thus the vitamin C deficiency described by Archie Kalokerinos MD).

Furthermore, many also associated SIDS with the brain inflammation vaccines (particularly DTwP) that would frequently cause (e.g., there is a characteristic piercing cry infants with brain inflammation will frequently utter). One of the particularly interesting aspects of this was that once the DTwP vaccine entered the market, a variety of behavioral changes were observed in the generations that followed (e.g., autism, flat affects, being more disconnected ADHD, sociopathic behavior). I can personally attest to having witnessed many of those cases myself. Remarkably, many of these personality changes are identical to what had previously been observed in patients who had encephalitis.

Note: the damage the vaccines (particularly DTwP) have done to the collective consciousness of American society are profound, and one of the most widely read articles I wrote here was an attempt to clearly synopsize the data for what happened.

Shaken Baby Syndrome 

In 1971, the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome was created, which essentially argued that abusive parents/caretakers who violently shook their babies would cause diffuse bleeding and swelling in their brains. This diagnosis has been incredibly controversial because the evidence linking it is weak and inconsistent (e.g., the symptoms are non-specific), and in recent years, the medical consensus has gradually turned against the diagnosis (e.g., see this 2016 article and this 2017 review showing there is a severe lack of evidence substantiating this condition), resulting in more and more courts dropping convictions for shaken baby syndrome.

If we look at the Wikipedia article on it (which represents the generally recognized consensus on the topic), there are a few passages that need to be highlighted:

Episodes of colic are greatest at 6 to 8 weeks of age, and studies have shown a peak in SBS incidence during this time as parents may perceive these episodes as excessive crying.

There is a strong association between crying and SBS, where studies indicate 1-6% of parents have shaken their babies to stop crying.

Effects of SBS are thought to be diffuse axonal injury, oxygen deprivation and swelling of the brain^] which can raise pressure inside the skull and damage delicate brain tissue, although witnessed shaking events have not led to such injuries.

Diagnosis can be difficult as symptoms may be nonspecific. Symptoms may include altered mental status, trouble breathing, and vomiting. As a result, about 31% of true SBS cases may go unnoticed initially. However, imaging can provide valuable information about a potential SBS diagnosis. Imaging must be performed within at least 24 hours of the suspected injury to detect brain edema characteristic of SBS

While the findings of SBS are complex and many, they are often incorrectly referred to as a “triad” for legal proceedings; distilled down to retinal hemorrhages, subdural hematomas, and encephalopathy.

SBS may be misdiagnosed, underdiagnosed, and overdiagnosed and caregivers may lie or be unaware of the mechanism of injury. Commonly, there are no externally visible signs of the condition. Examination by an experienced ophthalmologist is critical in diagnosing shaken baby syndrome, as particular forms of ocular bleeding are strongly associated with AHT.

In 2012, Norman Guthkelch, the neurosurgeon often credited with “discovering” the diagnosis of SBS, published an article “after 40 years of consideration,” which is harshly critical of shaken baby prosecutions based solely on the triad of injuries. Again, in 2012, Guthkelch stated in an interview, “I think we need to go back to the drawing board and make a more thorough assessment of these fatal cases, and I am going to bet … that we are going to find in every – or at least the large majority of cases, the child had another severe illness of some sort which was missed until too late. Furthermore, in 2015, Guthkelch went so far as to say, “I was against defining this thing as a syndrome in the first instance. To go on and say every time you see it, it’s a crime… It became an easy way to go into jail.’’

Note: the unrelating encephalitis cry (which many parents of vaccine injured children notice begins after vaccination) was one of the first things that made me aware of the fact vaccines weren’t safe, as if you feel into it, you can tell rather than being unhappy, something is wrong with the infant. Remarkably, in the book Peter Hotez (one of the world’s leading proponents of vaccination) wrote to debunk the link between vaccination and autism, he stated that prior to his daughter becoming autistic, she had a piercing cry that could be heard throughout the neighborhood—which again illustrates how blind the medical things are to obvious things right in front of them (e.g., the association between shaken baby syndrome and infants crying is widely assumed to be due to the crying provoking the parents into shaking them to death in an attempt to quiet them).

In turn, over the years, many physicians (besides just Archie Kalokerinos) have argued that shaken baby syndrome was a misdiagnosis for SIDS. For example:

This 2004 rapid response published in the BMJ which noted:

• A review where 9 children with the classic signs of shaken baby syndrome (subdural hemorrhages and retinal petechiae) had no suspicion by their doctors of having been abused that in the past.
• The symptoms attributed to shaken baby syndrome were previously diagnosed as Barlow’s disease and attributed to a lack of vitamin C.
• In the past, these signs of a clinical vitamin C deficiency in the mother were cited as a reason to terminate pregnancies (as the children would be at a risk of complications throughout life).
• Low vitamin C raised histamine levels (which causes vessel bleeding).
• When 437 outwardly normal adults in New York were tested, 3% were found to have dangerously low vitamin C levels and very high histamine levels.

This 2006 paper noted that:

• The children in the original paper used to create the diagnosis of “shaken baby syndrome” all had the characteristics of infantile scurvy (vitamin C deficiency).
• That the histamine release trigged by the inflammation induced by vaccination could create the blood vessel leakage observed in those cases.
• That children in Japan (where vaccination is delayed) mysteriously are “shaken” at 4-7 months of age rather than at 2-4 months of age in the United States.
• That many bleeds that “result from shaking” were observed in children who could not have possibly been shaken (e.g., because they were still in the uterus or had just been born).

This 2006 paper reviewed two cases of children with all the classic signs of shaken baby syndrome who had never been shaken, were vitamin C deficient, and had their symptoms emerge following vaccination (which in turn was followed by respiratory arrest).

A physician who reviewed numerous cases of shaken baby syndrome found that in over half the cases, it was preceded by vaccination, signs of a vaccination injury and intense crying. He also noted that contrary to what the shaken baby syndrome experts claimed, there were a variety of medical conditions (besides shaking a baby) which could cause the classic signs of shaken baby syndrome.

A few hours ago, I found out about Robert Roberson’s case, which is presently being covered in the national media (including many liberal outlets) because it is viewed as an extremely unjust execution by the State of Texas (which is well-known for not granting clemency or stays of execution to convicted murders). His final appeal before his execution tomorrow night was denied.

If you view a brief video made about the situation, it should be clear why many (including the detective who originally convicted him) are extremely upset about this execution:

Specifically:

• He appears to be a very nice and remorseful individual.
• The basis of convicting him for the murder was that he did not show immense remorse when he brought his dead daughter to the hospital and hence everyone who saw him (e.g., the hospital workers) assumed he must have killed her. However, it was later learned that in additionally to being developmentally delayed (he only made it to 8th grade) he was also autistic (both of which I would argue was likely due to a DTwP vaccine injury) and hence had a flat affect, which made him not overtly demonstrate remorse (as autistic people often have difficultly externally showing how they feel).The expert who’s testimony convicted Roberson (for Shaken Baby Syndrome) convicted another individual whose conviction was overturned and hence there is a clear precedent to not execute Roberson.
• Many major issues were discovered in his trial that should have resulted in his case being thrown out or retried (but nonetheless were ignored by Texas).The basis for his murder conviction (shaken baby syndrome) is a diagnosis no longer supported by the evidence or supported by experts (e.g., the AAP, which previously zealously supported the diagnosis,  has now backed off it, and the expert who popularized the diagnosis shortly before his death stated “I am doing what I can so long as I have a breath to correct a grossly unjust situation.”), and to date, at least 32 parents and caregivers in 18 states have been exonerated after being wrongfully convicted under the shaken baby hypothesis.
• Many existing medical conditions could have explained his daughter’s death (e.g., in the 5 days before her death, she had continual vomiting, coughing, and diarrhea). Likewise, when she was seen ato the ER for this, her doctor inappropriately prescribed two drugs (which now have warnings for being given to children due to the drugs causing breathing difficulties and death) then shortly after went to sleep, stopped breathing and died (which the father—who had slept with her in his arms because he was worried about her—noticed when he woke up next to her and she had turned blue). Likewise, she had many signs of pneumonia and sepsis that numerous medical experts have since testified were the actual cause of her death. Sadly however, her ER doctor did not recognize this and instead simply gave her an opioid to reduce her symptoms, which was at lethal levels in her blood at the time she died (likely triggering respiratory arrest—and now has a blackbox warning against giving it to children for this very reason) along with an anti-nausea drug which was also found at dangerously high levels and no longer given to children because it can cause respiratory arrest.A recently discovered CT scan determined she had only suffered a minor impact to the head (which an expert agreed was like from falling out of bed, as the father had said happened shortly before she passed out and never woke up) that could not account for the brain changes observed (which means there had to have been a disease process directly affecting the brain).
• An “expert” who testified at his trial asserted he sexually abused his daughter (without providing evidence to substantiate her claim and rather simply asserted her hatred of pedophiles) was subsequently discovered to have lied about her certification (she wasn’t actually an expert in the area).
• He will be the first person to ever be executed for shaking his baby to death.

I then looked at the medical history of the case and discovered:

Days after her birth, Nikki had the first of many infections that proved resistant to multiple antibiotics, including chronic ear infections that persisted even after she had had tubes surgically implanted. She also had a history of unexplained “breathing apnea” that caused her to suddenly stop breathing, collapse, and turn blue.

In other words, beyond her doctor missing an emergent pneumonia diagnosis (and instead prescribing lethal medications), she also had two classic signs of vaccine injury—recurring ear infections and recurring episodes of apnea (breathing cessation)—the exact same thing that has been observed repeatedly to result from vaccination and cause SIDS (along with the general immune suppression observed in the African DTwP studies.

Conclusion 

In my eyes, one of the most evil things about the medical industrial complex is when individuals are criminally prosecuted for the harm pharmaceutical drug companies cause to protect their market share. For example, in a previous article, I highlighted the immense amount of evidence (which has been known since the first clinical trials) that antidepressants can cause violent and psychotic behavior, which typically results in violent suicides, but sometimes results in grisly murders or mass shootings (many of which when you hear the “murders” side of the story are incredibly sad).

However, while courts outside the United States have been willing to exonerate individuals who killed someone they deeply cared about while on an antidepressant (many of these stories are absolutely heart-wrenching), the pharmaceutical industry effectively captured the US court system (e.g., the FDA intervened in cases, and Pfizer put out a prosecutor manual to help prosecutors convict “Zoloft murders”).

In turn, I believe shaken baby syndrome represents a similar miscarriage of injustice. On one hand, it is immensely fortunate this unscientific diagnosis is being overturned by a wealth of scientific evidence. However, it is nonetheless extremely unfortunate that Robert Roberson (who has now spent 20 years on death row) may be executed tomorrow at 7 pm central time—especially since his daughter’s death was a clearcut case of medical malpractice.

For this reason and because of how much this case upsets me (e.g., I can only imagine what this whole thing has been like for Roberson), I am reaching out through my network to bring attention to this case and humbly request that you share this article with anyone you know who may be able to bring attention to his situation, and, as the Innocence Project suggests, do any or all of the following:

1. Call Gov. Abbott at 361-264-9653
2. Sign the petition to stop Mr. Roberson’s execution.
3. Share Mr. Roberson’s case on all social media channels using our social media toolkit.
4. Use your voice — create an Instagram post, reel, or TikTok to share the background of Mr. Roberson’s case, the reasons he’s innocent, and all the missteps in this miscarriage of justice, and urge your followers to sign our petition.

Additionally, please share this thread on Twitter (which can be viewed here) we are making go viral.

Vaccines have been linked to sudden infant deaths for nearly a century, but the truth was covered up with the now-debunked "shaken baby syndrome."

Tragically, a loving Texas father is set to be executed tomorrow, wrongfully blamed under this false diagnosis.

His dying wish is… pic.twitter.com/Pk7oyKXRSr

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) October 17, 2024

I sincerely thank you for your help on this matter, and I again apologize for the rushed nature of this article.  One of the most tragic things about SIDS is that since babies can’t speak, it’s often difficult for anyone besides their mother to recognize vaccine injuries, let alone the trauma of a sudden death.  Fortunately, this is beginning to change as the sudden adult deaths from the COVID-19 vaccines were so unmistakable. They began making others become open to the possibility things like SIDS could also be linked to vaccines, and it is my sincere hope we are nearing a tipping point to stop tragedies like this from continuing (especially given how many on the left also oppose him being executed for “Shaken Baby Syndrome”).

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign has clarified that she does not believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza after an incident at a rally suggested that she did.

At a campaign event at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, a protester interrupted Harris and said she invested “billions of dollars in genocide” and pressed her about the massive child casualties in Gaza, repeatedly describing the Israeli onslaught as a genocide.

Addressing the students, Harris said, “What he’s talking about, it’s real. That’s not the subject that I came to discuss today, but it’s real, and I respect his voice.”

A spokesperson for Harris’s campaign said Sunday that the comments made by the protester “don’t reflect the position of the Biden-Harris administration or the vice president’s stance.”

The spokesperson added that Harris “didn’t agree with defining the war as a genocide, and she has not expressed such a stance in the past, as this is not her position.”

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that its “plausible” Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian population of Gaza. There have been massive civilian casualties in the onslaught, and Israeli forces have purposely targeted children.

A group of 99 American healthcare workers who volunteered in Gaza said in an open letter to Harris and President Biden that each one of them “treated pre-teen children who were shot in the head or chest on a regular or even a daily basis.” The American healthcare workers also estimated that over 118,000 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza, or about 5% of the population.

Despite the mass slaughter, the Biden administration maintains Israel is not committing genocide since that would mean US officials are supporting genocide.

Harris also angered pro-Palestine groups over the weekend when discussing the situation in Gaza by labeling the October 7 Hamas attack on southern Israel the “most tragic” part of the conflict.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.

Featured image: Official portrait of Vice President Kamala Harris. (From the Public Domain)

A cartoon drawn by Robert Minor, a political cartoonist who was also a member of the American Communist Party, has been rediscovered by a new generation who have avidly shared it on various social media platforms. It portrays three hulking figures representing China, India and Africa who tower over three cowering, horsewhip-wielding figures who represent US, French and British imperialism.

A Soviet soldier can also be observed grinning in the background. Considered an incendiary image in its time for inciting hatred against “the white race”, many of those who share the image today are not invoking the original intended goal of international communism liberating oppressed non-whites, and instead are drawing parallels with the developing multi-polar world envisioned by BRICS which seeks to break free from the neocolonial stranglehold held by the West on the conduct of international trade and development.

.

Cartoon captioned “On the International Slave Plantation” on the front page of the Daily Worker, June 27, 1925. (Credit: Robert Minor).

.

When the cartoon appeared on the front page of the Black American newspaper The Negro Champion, which dubbed it “The Big Three”, Joseph Wise, the Staff Correspondent of the International Labor News Service, referred to it as a “vicious cartoon” and Minor as “the notorious communist cartoonist”.

Wise complained that the “entire contents of the publication are designed to arouse race prejudice and antagonism and to array the peoples of China, India and Africa against the white race.”

The editor of The Negro Champion, Lovett Fort-Whiteman (1889-1939), was a functionary of the Communist International (Comintern) who was the lead organiser of the American Negro Labor Congress. Fort-Whiteman would die from malnutrition in a Stalinist gulag in 1939 after he was accused of being a Trotskyist.

Victor A. Olander, the secretary-treasurer of the Illinois State Federation of Labor, to whom Wise would refer to in his syndicated article, saw Fort-Whiteman as a Soviet proxy whom he likened to a man “carrying a flaming torch through dry grass.” Yet, while Olander criticised the cartoons which appeared in The Negro Champion of ignoring “economic and political issues almost entirely” while making “a direct appeal to racial antagonism”, he was ignoring the fact that race lay firmly at the heart of economic relations in the United States, a state of affairs which applied to the globe because the Chinese, Indians and Africans were at the time victims of long-term colonial exploitation of their lands and human resources.

In 1925, China was still in its “Century of Humiliation” which lasted from 1839 to 1949.

India was Britain’s most prized colony, and most of Africa was ruled by the French, British and Portuguese.

Even after the ostensible process of decolonisation, the Western-run global economic institutions have maintained a grip on the economies of the Global South through the Bretton Woods institutions. The policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have typically indebted nations regardless of whether those policies were encouraging of socialist-orientated development economics or were inspired by neoliberalism.

Former colonial powers also continued to wield economic power in regard to their former vassal states. The economic relations between France and its former colonies, as well as the extractivist rationale for the creation of the European Union in relation to the minerally-rich African continent affirm the racial context of global economic relations.

The quest of the Western world to maintain global economic hegemony is no less the case when it comes to post-Soviet Russia and China.

There has been an enduring project aimed at pressuring Russia to surrender its sovereignty so as to enable to West to have unfettered access to and control of its vast resources, while China’s rise in economic power has caused apprehension on the part of the United States.

A closer examination of the relations between the West and these two powers reveal a racial subtext which few are willing to admit.

In the provocatively titled “Slavs and the Yellow Peril are ‘niggers, brutes and beasts”, in the eyes of the Western Empire”, Jeff J. Brown explained that:

Westerners cannot write about their racial superiority and the perceived subhumaness of non-Westerners, like they were able to do so freely until the 1950s. But it is still manifestly the fundamental principle that drives America’s “exceptionalism” and the West’s “shining beacon on a hill” superiority, thus legitimizing ongoing Western genocide, wars, government overthrows and economic and resource exploitation, through the “benign, invisible hand” of capitalism, across Planet Earth.

This attitude was reflected in the writings of the late Zbigniew Brzeziński, a hugely influential US foreign policy theoretician, who wrote the following in his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives:

To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.

Japan may once have had the opportunity of breaking away from Western economic domination through its Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, a plan which boldly proclaimed “Asia for the Asiatics”. But the extreme cruelty and intense chauvinism that it deployed in its quest to expand its empire alienated its neighbours in east Asia and the Pacific.

Japan’s chief competitor for the allegiance of the countries in this area, the United States, militarily defeated it and incorporated it into its post-war alliance of nations. But the new global hegemon, now involved in an ideological war with the Soviet Union on a global scale inherited the attitudes and methods of its Anglo-Saxon predecessor in enforcing the compliance of states to the dictates of resource control.

An excerpt from an editorial written for the New York Times on August 5^th, 1954, the year after “Operation Ajax”, a regime change endeavour in Iran which was orchestrated by the American Central Intelligence Agency with help from the British Secret Intelligence Service, will suffice:

Underdeveloped countries with rich resources now have an object lesson in the heavy cost that must be paid by one of their number which goes berserk with fanatical nationalism.

The coup overthrew the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh which had nationalised its British-controlled oil industry and replaced him with the pliant Shah who ruled Iran as a dictator. It would, of course not be the last such endeavour where American economic interests were threatened by independent thinking political leaders.

Minor’s cartoon may resonate strongly with those who can relate it to the growing Eurasian world and development of BRICS at the heart of which are Russia, China, and India. The developing multipolar world order which is being characterised by the phenomenon of de-dollarisation and various geopolitical confrontations such as Russia withstanding the “shock and awe” sanctions regime imposed on it by the West and the ejecting of France from a number of Sahelian countries, in a sense represent a movement away from the so-called “international slave plantation”.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Adeyinka Makinde.

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: China’s Belt and Road Initiative will be given new momentum with new RCEP trade pact. Photo: iStock

Another of the alleged documents, which multiple outlets have been told appear authentic, confirm U.S. spying on Israeli military forces and shows “a strike on Iran” is “almost certainly” coming.

***

“We have not observed indications that Israel intends to use a nuclear weapon.”

That sentence is the concluding line from an allegedly leaked (or hacked) U.S. intelligence document posted online this week and later reported on by Axios, CNN, and other outlets.

As Axios reported on Saturday,

“U.S. officials are extremely concerned about a potentially major security breach after two alleged U.S. intelligence documents about Israel’s preparations for an attack on Iran were published by a Telegram account affiliated with Iran.”

The Associated Press and independent investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein both cited government sources who said the documents appeared to be authentic. While U.S. officials have yet to comment publicly on the material, reporting confirmed an investigation into their authenticity and how they came to be in the public domain was underway.

Since a barrage of missile strikes aimed at military targets in Israel by Iran on Oct 1, a retaliatory strike in response to Israel’s assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and other attacks, the world has been waiting for Israel’s promised military response.

NEW: A set of classified U.S. intelligence documents purporting to show information about Israel’s plans to strike in Iran have been confirmed as authentic in a report by CNN (https://t.co/8AVOexA1Y8).

Drop Site News has also been reviewing these documents since they were posted… pic.twitter.com/VKOEq9qcbo

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) October 19, 2024

Assuming the documents are authentic, what they show is that U.S. intelligence—as is well known and despite being close allies—keeps a close and clandestine eye on Israeli military operations.

CNN cited an unnamed U.S. official who called the documents being made public “deeply concerning,” though the outlet did not publish the documents in full. The documents, according to CNN,

are marked top secret and have markings indicating they are meant to be seen only by the US and its “Five Eyes” allies — Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

They describe preparations Israel appears to be making for a strike against Iran. One of the documents, which says it was compiled by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, says the plans involve Israel moving munitions around.

Another document says it is sourced to the National Security Agency and outlines Israeli air force exercises involving air-to-surface missiles, also believed to be in preparation for a strike on Iran. CNN is not quoting directly from or showing the documents.

It has long been known that Israel has a nuclear weapons program and maintains a nuclear arsenal, but it remains both Israeli and U.S. government policy never to acknowledge or confirm the existence of either. In one of the documents, the U.S. specifically references Israel’s ability to deploy a nuclear weapon, though it categorizes the threat of doing so in this case as low.

Here are the docs. Looks like it’s just US observations while spying on Israeli drills. Biggest thing I think is the acknowledgment of Israel having nuclear weapons. https://t.co/c1AoQUYbvj pic.twitter.com/QHEedOEhV7

— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) October 20, 2024

Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, recently banned from X for posting an internal opposition research dossier that the Trump campaign had compiled on JD Vance, posted images of both documents to his substack page, as he excoriated major outlets for refusing to do.

“As with the J.D. Vance Dossier, which the entire media knew about but refused to publish, it appears the media has once again lost its nerve – and its sense of what’s news,” Klippenstein wrote.

According to Klippenstein’s assessment:

The intelligence report includes a rundown of the various aspects of Israeli military activities that the U.S. is monitoring to inform its judgments and conclusions: weapons handling, air defense, ground forces, Navy, Air, Special Forces, and even Israel’s Nuclear Forces. But even then, only the weapons handling and special forces categories are identified as having a “medium” predictive ability in regards to determining Israel’s action; the rest are designated “low” predictive ability.

The second intelligence report is titled “Israel: Air Force Continues Preparations for Strike on Iran and Conducts a Second Large-Force Employment Exercise.” The document details Israeli activities during an evident “mission rehearsal” (in U.S. lingo) that could be indicative of how Israel will strike Iran. Citing imagery analysis and other sources, the NGA report notes that the Israeli Air Force is already conducting covert drone operations over Iran (evidently doing its own spying), and how, as part of Israeli Air Force activity, has been handling air-launched ballistic missiles and other weapons.

Defending release of the full documents, he explained that both provide “insight of enormous public interest as we stand at the precipice of a broader conflict” and contained “information that directly bears upon U.S. obligations and actions. It is for that reason that I’ve decided to publish the basic documents.”

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Jon Queally is managing editor of Common Dreams.

Featured image source

According to an article on The Sun:

Dale said: “My wife persuaded me to do an early morning HIIT class at our local gym.

“We started doing the warm up and I felt more tired than I normally would.

“I managed one set of circuits doing burpees and squat thrusts and that sort of thing and my wife looked over at me and said, ‘You’ve already stopped, I thought you were fitter than this’.

“At the start of the second circuit, I thought this doesn’t feel right at all.

“I felt like I needed some fresh air and took myself out of the environment.

“My chest was starting to feel a bit tight, which developed into a bit of pain.

“Being a bloke, I thought I’ve already been a wimp leaving the class so if I leave it five minutes, the pain will wear off.”

However, after waiting 15 minutes for the tightness to subside, Dale’s chest pain grew worse – prompting Sophie to drive him to their local hospital. 

Within two minutes of arriving, Dale went into cardiac arrest while sitting in the A&E waiting room.

Dale said: “They started CPR on me and put me onto a machine that does CPR mechanically which forces your heart to start beating.

*

My Take…

The mRNA-induced sudden cardiac deaths haven’t decreased much since 2021, in case you were wondering.

We are still almost at all time highs.

.

.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

Featured image is from The Sun

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. 

Remdesivir Papers: Drug Used to Treat Service Members Led to Death

By Michael Nevradakis, Brad Miller, and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 21, 2024

What has been revealed in the “Remdesivir Papers” will shock you to the core. This compilation of documents, released by a military whistleblower, contains damning information on the hundreds of deaths and adverse events related to the clinical trials of a COVID antiviral.

Small US Military Groups Visit Ukraine Regularly to Learn From Conflict. Zelensky’s “Victory Plan” Described as a “Shopping List”

By Ahmed Adel, October 22, 2024

According to Defense One, a “small element” of soldiers is flying in and out of the conflict-torn country to learn lessons, Gen. Darryl Williams, commander of US Army Europe and Africa, said during a roundtable with media at the Association of the United States Army’s annual meeting in Washington.

Welcome to BRICS+ : The Economic Power of the Multipolar World

By Prof. Maurice Okoli, October 22, 2024

The developing world arrived in Kazan, the capital of Republic of Tatarstan, driving by economic transformation proposals backed by the numerical strength of participants to portray their collective weight of influence to boost de-dollarization and a new global financial payment system, design a new mechanism for a long-term economic integration and complex architecture.

Lights Out for the City on the Hill. “Dismantling the West’s Commitment to Personal Liberties”

By Stephen Karganovic, October 21, 2024

There are many solid reasons for the deep state cabal’s virulent hatred of Dr. Fuellmich. He was the spoiler who in 2020 had the temerity to found the Covid pandemic research committee, just as the social control experiment was gaining momentum.

Partners in Crimes: Israel’s Crimes Are America’s Crimes

By Chaitanya Davé, October 21, 2024

When America saw Israel’s capacity in defeating Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967 war, America’s support for Israel increased drastically and got solidified. Billions of dollars in military and economic aid started flowing into the Jewish state.

“Victory Plan” as a Tool to Realize Ethnocratic Fantasy in Ukraine

By Uriel Araujo, October 21, 2024

The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky failed to gather much support from European allies last week but he nonetheless announced his quite grandiose “Victory Plan” yesterday during his delivery to Ukraine’s Parliament.

“There will be no new Middle East,” Interview with Javad Masoomi

By Dr. Javad Masoomi and Steven Sahiounie, October 21, 2024

During the presidency of Donald Trump, the United States realized the fact that the region is on the verge of accepting Iran as a major power. As a result, with the “Ibrahim Peace” plan, he moved in the direction of standing against Iran’s supremacy in the region by uniting the Arabs and the Zionist regime. This was supposed to be completed with the corridor plan called “IMEC”.

Army units stationed in Europe, from platoons to headquarters, are learning from the battlefield in Ukraine as Kiev makes a new push to acquire equipment, US officials confirmed. It is through the so-called “Victory Plan” that Ukraine hopes to acquire new equipment, however, it appears that the plan has received mixed reaction from allies.

According to Defense One, a “small element” of soldiers is flying in and out of the conflict-torn country to learn lessons, Gen. Darryl Williams, commander of US Army Europe and Africa, said during a roundtable with media at the Association of the United States Army’s annual meeting in Washington.

Under the command of Lt. Gen. Curtis Buzzard, who was named head of the Allied effort coordinating aid to Ukraine, soldiers assess the situation on the ground and gather critical information about the conflict.

“He’s [Curtis Buzzard] able to get insights on the environment in terms of the number of drones that they’re flying,” Williams said. “Learning is taking place as we speak, at the tactical level, the operational level, to inform the strategic level.” 

According to the report, a spokesman for the US Army in Europe said that the team rotating through Ukraine is limited to working inside the US embassy and does not provide advice to the Ukrainian government.

The lessons learned from this team are shaping how the Army approaches its “Transformation-in-Contact” equipment strategy. In an eight-month effort, the Army is flooding certain units with new drones, counter-drone technology and communications equipment that are not necessarily part of any registered program, connecting drone operators to mortars, artillery and loitering munitions, all in response to what is happening in the Ukraine conflict.

“Over the last few years, based off of the fight that’s in the Ukraine, and just with us being right there with the enemy at the doorstep…we’ve been able to extract a lot of lessons learned that’s kind of drove us to kind of think about how we do agile and adaptive command and control,” Command Sgt. Maj. Dennis Doyle of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment said.

Earlier, US Space Force Major General Devin Pepper said the US should benefit from the Ukrainian conflict by studying how Kiev uses various capabilities and technologies on the battlefield.

However, Maj. Gen. Ron Ragin, commander of the unit responsible for helping manage aid transfers to Ukraine, the 21st Theater Sustainment Command, believes that not all lessons are about new tech. Senior Ukrainian officers told him that if they could have done things differently before the war, they would have invested in ammunition production and stockpiles, created multiple locations for maintaining equipment, and strengthened storage and command-and-control infrastructure.

“I’m using those lessons from our Ukrainian partners that are currently under strain and in contact to inform how I approach the priorities that Gen. Williams has given us,” Ragin said. “So I’m working with not only the acquisition community but also with the joint material enterprise to make sure that we’re taking the lessons learned from Ukraine and applying it to how we move forward in the future.”

In effect, Ukraine’s immense failures in its conflict with Russia are being used as opportunities for the US to learn from. This is a far cry from the early days of the war, when Washington believed that Ukraine would win because of Western support and the sanctions regime imposed on Russia. Recently, several Western media outlets admitted that the Ukrainian Army is losing territory daily and that the West recognises that the situation for Ukraine will only get worse.

Under such conditions, it is unsurprising that the so-called Victory Plan of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been described as more like a “shopping list” while Western countries have given mixed reactions to it.

Even Ukraine’s greatest backer, the US, was muted and noncommittal to Zelensky’s Victory Plan, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin saying, “It’s not my position to publicly evaluate his plans.”

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, despite leading the country providing the second most aid to Ukraine, stood by his refusal to supply Taurus long-range cruise missiles, adding,

“We are taking care that NATO does not become a party to the war so that this war doesn’t culminate in an even bigger catastrophe.”

Meanwhile, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán described Zelensky’s plan as “more than frightening” in a Facebook post.

The refusal by major Western countries to back the Victory Plan signals Zelensky’s failure to galvanise support behind it. In effect, the Ukraine proxy has become nothing more than a disposable army used in the vain attempt to weaken Russia, whose failures are an opportunity for the US military to learn from. 

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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 Mises Wire

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Akbar E. Torbat is the author of “Politics of Oil and Nuclear Technology in Iran,” Palgrave Macmillan (2020). Farsi translation of the book is available here. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

The developing world arrived in Kazan, the capital of Republic of Tatarstan, driving by economic transformation proposals backed by the numerical strength of participants to portray their collective weight of influence to boost de-dollarization and a new global financial payment system, design a new mechanism for a long-term economic integration and complex architecture. For much of its significant collective activities these past several years, BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) has been viewed and described from perspectives of supporting the economic development in the Global South, Southeast Asia and Africa.

Unpacking some of the official statements and positions over proposals awaiting discussions at the summit indicate the brightness of multipolar world. These past 30 years Russia is steadily building its market economy and its related institutions. Transitioning to a market economy is not easy, while China, India and many potential BRICS members have arguable variations in political, economic and cultural capabilities. Notwithstanding some level of disagreements and divergencies of ideas, China and Russia have consistently asked its partners to create an alternative to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to counter political pressure from Western nations ahead of the BRICS summit this late October.

Arguably Western countries tightly control the global financial system, and that the group, which represents 37% of the global economy, therefore it beholds on BRICS to create an alternative. Some BRICS experts have underlined in reports that the IMF and the World Bank are unsuccessfully performing their roles. Top BRICS finance and central bank officials, a few weeks before the summit meeting, acknowledged the urgent necessity to form new conditions or even new institutions, similar to the Bretton Woods institutions, but within the framework of the community, within the framework of BRICS+. For instance, Russia had its forex reserves in dollars and euros frozen and its financial system heavily hit by sanctions by the West after it invaded Ukraine in February 2022. As expected, Russia has been cut off from international capital markets. In addition, Russia has also experienced delays in international transactions with its trading partners, including BRICS member countries, as banks in these countries fear punitive actions from Western regulators.

Image: New Development Bank’s logo in the HQ of the bank in Shanghai (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Beyond that the New Development Bank proposed setting up a joint investment platform which will use a new digital form of transactions among members. That has been the critical reason why Central Bank officials and Finance Ministers of BRICS+ are pushing to implement stringent measures including BRICS Bridge payments system, which would link member countries’ financial systems, but progress has been slow. As already known, the only financial institution the BRICS countries have established so far is the New Development Bank, created in 2015 to finance infrastructure and sustainable development projects in BRICS members and other emerging economies.

Mihaela Papa, director of research and principal research scientist at the Center for International Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and co-author of the 2022 book: “Can BRICS De-dollarize the Global Financial System?” has argued that BRICS+ needs to strategically innovate to show practical influence in their operations.

“With BRICS doubling its membership in 2024, new members are expected to support existing BRICS agendas,” she said in a critical written interview with Bloomberg News. “A key question is whether they can innovate together.”

The core principles of BRICS have resonated with the Global South. The BRICS ‘brand’ is linked to positive economic prospects and growth, as well as the ambition to diversify global leadership, promote development, and modernize multilateral institutions. BRICS has actively engaged Global South countries through outreach efforts, emphasizing non-ideological and mutually beneficial economic cooperation. 

BRICS’ risk management credentials have grown since early 2022. Countries in the Global South have observed the freezing of Russia’s reserves while facing the consequences of a stronger US dollar. This led many to question their heavy reliance on the dollar, which BRICS seeks to address. States applying to join BRICS cite reasons like strengthening South-South trade and financial cooperation, supporting multilateralism, and enhancing their global role. While BRICS members have differing views on major geopolitical conflicts, their solidarity and cultivation of non-Western narratives increase the association’s hedging value.

Therefore, it does not matter whether BRICS, or the unification of China, India, Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Mexico, Iran and Turkey, will be more viable or not. The main thing is that the process of searching for new models by the states dissatisfied with the United States policy has started, which means the end of the dominance of the United States in all spheres of international relations. At some point, the West, headed by the United States, will have to negotiate new models of international economic and other relations, based on new international treaties that ensure equality of all states.

A multi-year study at Tufts University published in July 2023, for instance, found that the

“BRICS countries connect around common development interests and quest for a multipolar world order in which no single power dominates. Yet BRICS consolidation has turned the association into a potent negotiation force that now challenges Washington’s geopolitical and economic goals.”

Moreover, de-dollarization would undermine the effectiveness of US sanctions, relying on the SWIFT system, as BRICS seeks alternative financial systems, potentially making SWIFT obsolete. As for a common BRICS currency, it is currently not under priority consideration. The time has not come yet. The introduction of BRICS currency has to be treated with uttermost caution, without any haste, as the members’ economies by their structure, effectiveness, should be approximately equal, or would have the same problems, even more than the problems that arose in the European Union, when a common currency was introduced for those countries, whose economic levels were comparable.

Western analysts and experts have highlighted potential divisions and weaknesses in the association, including significant economic instabilities, disagreements among the members over security reforms and over territorial issues especially between China and India. There are existing conflicts between Egypt and Ethiopia too. As many countries join BRICS, as also fresh contradictions would arise within the association in future.

Despite their rivalries, China and India have been deepening their cooperation through BRICS. The demand for BRICS membership is high, skepticism about its ideological direction and benefits is also increasing. Argentina has withdrawn, Saudi Arabia is undecided, Indonesia is not ready, and Mexico is uninterested.

After Soviet’s collapse in 1991, Russia abandoned Africa paving the pathways for China’s entry. For the past three decades, China has exerted its economic power in the continent, as part of its remote dream to become global economic power. Against this backdrop, BRICS platform is important to China to strengthen its economic power. China has seemingly capitalized on Russia’s economic weaknesses in former Soviet republics, passionately consolidating its economic tentacles and beyond that one should be really critical to examine how China is transiting strategically into Europe. Its primary goal is to expand economic influence and access to European markets.  As the situation stands, Russia and European Union are at logger-head due to ‘special military operation’ in neighboring Ukraine.

Obviously, with prospects of strengthening the association, Russia stands to gain significantly especially this time of shifting geopolitical situation. At the group’s 10th parliamentary forum in July 2024, Putin particularly noted that “openness, fairness and equality are the principles that unite BRICS countries.” In this sense, interaction with the countries in the regions of Asia, Africa and Latin America will undoubtedly bolster Russia’s global political status and overcome restrictions or sanctions. Southeast Asian and African countries view BRICS as a significant player in the evolving global landscape. They see it as an opportunity to strengthen their economic positions, diversify partnerships and assert their interest on the world stage. The growing interest from south east Asia and Africa in joining BRICS reflects a broader desire for a multipolar world where emerging economies can collaborate more effectively on the world stage. 

The principal feature, especially in official statements and in media reports, it should not be perceived as an anti-Western association. It’s simply non-Western, with a focus on attaining common goal of sustainable development and prosperity for members on the basis of multilateral Global South. Therefore, supporting business activity and enterprise is considered a priority for leaders of all BRICS countries. 

As always with much fortitude, Russia is consistently convincing China and India to support building common consensus to enlarge BRICS, which seeks to shape a multipolar global order in place of the fading era of Western dominance. Founded 15 years ago by Brazil, Russia, India and China as BRIC, the group, with the addition of South Africa in 2011, became BRICS. And with this year’s entry of five additional countries, it has become BRICS-plus, accounting for nearly half the world’s population and 40 percent of global trade. Reiterating here that BRICS, originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India, and China, has expanded to include South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. 

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

First published on July 12, 2022

**

Author’s Update

Undercover Economic and Social Warfare? 

The following article published on July 12, 2022 focusses on the “Covid-19 Zero Tolerance” lockdown and its economic and social consequences. 

Starting in Shanghai in April 2022, the Covid-19 zero tolerance project extended its grip to major urban areas across China.

Socially oppressive measures were adopted against millions of people in large cities. People were confined to their apartments in high rise buildings. 

China’s zero tolerance model was conducive to “confining the labour force” as well as “paralyzing the workplace”, not to mention transportation, the closing down of schools, universities, cultural activities, sports events, etc. 

The COVID-19 zero tolerance lockdown applied nationwide is based on “fake science”. 

It constitutes a de facto act of “economic warfare”. It is broadly based on the same concepts as the March 11, 2020 covid-19 pandemic “lockdown” applied in more than 190 members states of the UN under the auspices of the WHO. 

It has created social havoc. It has contributed to undermining China’s economy. 

It has created chaos in supply lines within the domestic economy as well as the destabilization of China’s buoyant commodity export economy.

The justification to close down major urban areas, put forth by China’s National Heath Commission  (on July 11, 2022) was based on the following data for Mainland China:  

• A total of 352 new domestically transmitted COVID infections recorded on July 10,
• 46 new symptomatic cases, 
• 306 new asymptomatic cases.

46 new symptomatic cases out of a population of 1.45 billion people does not justify closing down China’s major urban areas. (July 10)

The most recent data of Covid positive cases using unreliable PCR and related tests is as follows. 

November 28, according to the WHO: 19,130 so-called confirmed cases out of a population of more than 1.4 billion people.

The Chinese government has now acknowledged that:

There was no scientific basis for implementing zero tolerance, which consisted in applying socially repressive measures against millions of people.

There is no public health concern behind these measures.

The number of “confirmed cases” released by the WHO are low and SARS-Cov2 (confirmed by the WHO and the CDC) is not a “dangerous virus”.

The process of economic and social destabilization initiated in March (see article below) extended its grip beyond Shanghai to several major industrial cities including the southern city of Guangzhou and Shenzhen, China’s major exporting hub to the World Market.

According to Nomura, more than 20% of China’s GDP is currently under lockdown.

The Shanghai stock market collapsed on November 24, 2022.

We are dealing with a very complex process of Worldwide economic and social destabilization. Who are the actors behind this process?

In view of China’s leading role as a major commodity producer (with sizeable exports to all major regions of the World), the crisis in China will inevitably have repercussions in Europe, North America, not to mention the Global South.

What is unfolding is an engineered disruption of the global economy. Read carefully. Who is behind it.

Michel Chossudovsky, August 23, 2022, November 29, 2022, January 3, 2023

***

“Economic Warfare” Directed against China?

The Shanghai “Covid Zero Tolerance Mandate”

By Michel Chossudovsky

July 12, 2022

click the Translate Website option on the top right hand side of top banner of our home page to read this article in Chinese

点击我们主页顶部横幅右上角的“翻译网站”选项，阅读这篇文章的中文

Read article in Chinese Here

***

Starting in late March early April 2022, the Chinese government ordered a Covid zero tolerance lockdown mandate pertaining to Shanghai, a port city of 26 million people:

“The official story put out by the city of Shanghai, and not denied by the Chinese Communist Party, is so extreme as to invite ridicule.

A new “zero tolerance” policy for COVID-19, which is a bogus non-existent disease in the first place, was imposed on all Shanghai citizens, first on the East side of the Huangpu River from March 28 [2022], and then for the entire city from April 1^st     

Supposedly all citizens will be tested for COVID-19. According to media reports, only 26,087 new cases of COVID-19 have been found, and of those, only 914 were symptomatic…  (Emanuel Pastreich)

The confinement of Shanghai’s labour force was carried out under a “Covid zero tolerance mandate”: “At least 38,000 medical workers from across China have been deployed to aid Shanghai … in the fight against the Omicron variant…” (Global Times)

Omicron is the Buzzword: Omicron and its BA.5 Sub-Variant

China’s Health authorities have confirmed that “Nucleic acid [namely the PCR ] tests are central to its strategy”. 

George Gao Fu is an Oxford graduate. For several years, he was fellow of the Wellcome Trust which is linked to Big Pharma.  Gao Fu is a professional colleague and “longtime friend” of Anthony Fauci:

“George F. Gao, head of China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention, received the email from Anthony Fauci on March 28, 2020. [a few days after the lockdown in the US]. 

As Fauci faced criticism for his handling of the pandemic, Gao reached out again.

“I saw some news (hope it is fake) that [you] are being attacked by some people. Hope you are well under such a irrational situation,” Gao wrote April 8, 2020.

Three days later, Fauci replied and thanked his longtime friend for his “kind note.”

“All is well despite some crazy people in this world,” Fauci wrote, the newspaper reported.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci is a “Double Speak”

From the outset, Fauci has persistently warned of the imminent dangers of the SARS-CoV-2 (including its variants and sub-variants), while acknowledging in his peer reviewed article in the New England Journal of Medicine that:

“The overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968)…” (See Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted, NEJM)

Careful timing: the article was published by the NEJM on March 26, 2020 two weeks following the March 11, 2020 Global Covid-19 pandemic “Lockdown” imposed on 193 member states of the United Nations.

Dr. Fauci’s NEJM peer reviewed analysis (which is barely mentioned by the media) is in sharp contrast with his frenzied statements on network TV.

On March 28, 2020 (2 days following the publication of his peer reviewed article) he stated that “Covid Could Kill as many as 200,000 Americans”

Is this Relevant to China?

Anthony Fauci is Dr. Gao Fu’s Mentor. The same policy framework is being applied.

China’s  Zero Tolerance Covid Mandate is a “copy and paste” of the March 11, 2020 lockdown (based on “fake science”) sponsored by Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates et al under the auspices of the WHO (in close consultation with the World Economic Forum).

China’s Zero Tolerance Covid mandate is predicated on a fear campaign.

The Devastating Economic Impacts of the Shanghai Lockdown

On July 10, 2022, China’s Health authorities announced that several major urban areas have been instructed to implement the Zero Tolerance COVID-19 mandate as a means to combating  the “highly-transmissible Omicron BA.5 subvariant”  

The labour force has been confined in a large number of industrial cities thereby leading to economic and social chaos as well as a dramatic decline in economic activity. According to Reuters:

The BA.5 [subvariant] lineage, spreading fast in many other countries, has been detected in cities such as Xian in the province of Shaanxi and Dalian in Liaoning province, … It was first found in China on May 13 in a patient who had flown to Shanghai from Uganda, the China Center for Disease Prevention and Control said, with no local infections linked to the case that month.

Did that “patient” from Uganda take the PCR test upon his return to China? Variants and sub-variants cannot under any circumstances be detected by the PCR test. (The original SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected by the PCR test).

The study by China’s CCDC  focussing on the detection of genetic sequences based on a PCR nasopharyngeal swab is misleading.

A large number of urban areas have literally been closed down. There is absolutely no scientific or public health justification for these measures: 

“In the central province of Henan, the town of Qinyang has almost completely locked down its nearly 700,000 residents from Sunday, with one person in each household allowed a trip every two days for groceries.

Authorities in Wugang, another town in Henan, have told its 290,000 residents not to leave home in the next three days, except for COVID tests.

Four major districts in the northwestern city of Lanzhou, in the province of Gansu, and the southern cities of Danzhou and Haikou in Hainan province, are under temporary curbs for several days, with a total of 6 million people affected.

The city of Nanchang in southern Jiangxi province, with 6.3 million residents, shut some entertainment venues on Saturday, although the duration of the curbs was not specified.

In the northwestern province of Qinghai, the city of Xining kicked off a mass testing campaign on Monday after one person tested positive on Sunday.

Mass tests also began on Monday in several major districts of the southern metropolis of Guangzhou.“

On July 11, 2022 China’s National Heath Commission confirmed the following data for Mainland China:  

• A total of 352 new domestically transmitted COVID infections recorded on July 10
• 46 new symptomatic cases, 
• 306 new asymptomatic cases

46 new symptomatic cases out of a population of 1.45 billion people does not justify closing down China’s major urban areas.

• This decision borders on ridicule.
• It has no scientific basis.
• Is there a hidden agenda?
• The Chinese Communist Party has acquiesced?
• Are there divisions within China’s leadership? 

Both the Western and Chinese media are totally silent on the matter.

The impacts of these measures put forth by China’s National Health Commission and China’s CCDC have precipitated China’s supply chains into jeopardy.

“Covid Tolerance Zero” has contributed to destabilizing Shanghai’s financial sector as well as its buoyant export economy. It has also contributed to undermining domestic transport and commodity supply lines.

China’s QR code

The Covid Zero Tolerance Mandate has created social havoc and hardship for millions of people, requiring the imposition of PCR tests on a regular basis using QR green, yellow  and red color codes as a means of social control. 

The  Washington based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) applauds:

“One area of real success, and that may have application in other countries, is the rapid development of an online “health code” system (健康码).

This innovative app tracks an individual’s travel, contact history, and biometric data (for example, body temperature) directly through one’s smartphone.” (emphasis added)

.

Impacts on the Global Economy

Since mid April 2022 (coinciding with the lockdown of Shanghai), the Yuan (CNY) declined abruptly against the US dollar (USD). 

The volume of commodity trade in and out of the Port of Shanghai (and other major port cities) has subsided, which inevitably has a bearing on the availability of “Made in China” commodities Worldwide. 

“Made in China” is the backbone of retail trade which indelibly sustains household consumption in virtually all major commodity categories from clothing, footwear, to hardware, electronics, toys, jewelries, household fixtures, food, TV sets, mobile phones, etc. Ask the American consumer: The list is long.  

Importing from China is a lucrative multi-trillion dollar operation. It is the source of tremendous profit and wealth in the US, because consumer  commodities imported from China’s low wage economy are often sold at the retail level more than ten times their factory price.

Global commodity trade at wholesale and retail levels is in crisis. The potential impacts in all major regions of the World are devastating. World-wide scarcities of essential consumer goods are coupled with inflationary pressures. 

These developments also affect China’s sovereignty as a nation state with a weakened economy, not to mention its Belt and Road initiative. 

In the context of the current crisis, including Washington’s “Pivot to Asia”, there are serious geopolitical implications which have a direct bearing on the confrontation between China and the US. 

China is a Capitalist Country

Most analysts and historians fail to understand that starting in the early 1980s, China has become a full fledged capitalist country. There are powerful US business interests including Big Pharma, major hi-tech companies, banking institutions which are firmly entrenched inside China. 

The United States has faithful allies within China’s business establishment as well as among academics, scientists, medical doctors who tend to be “pro-American”.

China’s Academy of Sciences (中国科学院), China’s business schools (e.g. Beijing, Dalian, Guangzhou) going back to the early 1980s have ties with Ivy League institutions. Many of them have joint MBA programs, e.g. Shanghai’s  Fudan University School of Management with MIT. Stanford has a campus in China as well an agreement with Beijing University, etc.  

Another example is Tsinghua University’s School of Journalism’s graduate program which is funded by Bloomberg together with several Wall Street banking institutions.

The interests of powerful Chinese business interests (specifically within the pharmaceutical industry) including China’s billionaires (Forbes List 2022, Forbes New Billionaires) are represented at the highest levels of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership. 

Needless to say there are profound divisions within China’s CCP leadership. 

Featured image is from OffGuardian

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

Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression

By Michel Chossudovsky

Product Type: PDF File

Pages: 164 (15 Chapters)

Price: $11.50 

Download PDF Free of Charge

As a means to reaching out to millions of people worldwide whose lives have been affected by the corona crisis, we have decided in the course of the next few weeks to distribute the eBook for FREE.

Price: $11.50. FREE COPY Click here to download.

For more details click here

*

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.

Recentemente, tem havido uma série de narrativas sobre a possibilidade de a Ucrânia ter armas nucleares. Por um lado, Kiev afirma que precisa adquirir poder de dissuasão. Por outro lado, os meios de comunicação ocidentais afirmam que a Ucrânia já tem capacidade para produzir as suas próprias bombas atômicas. No final, todas estas narrativas parecem irreais, uma vez que é consenso entre ambos os lados do conflito (Ocidente e Rússia) que Kiev não deveria ter tais armas.

Segundo o jornal alemão Bild, as autoridades ucranianas garantiram que Kiev já tem capacidade para construir armas nucleares, podendo até produzir uma bomba “dentro de algumas semanas”. Fontes anônimas supostamente familiarizadas com a questão nuclear na Ucrânia disseram aos jornalistas alemães que Kiev e o Ocidente deveriam pensar menos nas linhas vermelhas russas e mais nos seus próprios interesses, aproveitando a alegada capacidade do país para produzir armas nucleares para melhorar a defesa ucraniana.

“Temos o material, temos o conhecimento. Se a ordem for dada, precisaremos apenas de algumas semanas para ter a primeira bomba (…) [Kiev e o Ocidente] deveriam pensar menos nas linhas vermelhas da Rússia e mais nas nossas”, disseram.

O relatório foi publicado pouco depois de uma declaração controversa do presidente ucraniano, Vladimir Zelensky, sobre a alegada “necessidade” de a Ucrânia obter armas nucleares ou ser membro da OTAN. Segundo Zelensky, a Ucrânia sofreu uma espécie de preconceito histórico ao abrir mão das armas nucleares logo após a sua independência. A única forma de resolver este “problema” e garantir a segurança da Ucrânia seria, disse ele, através da restauração da capacidade nuclear ou, se não for possível obter tais armas, através da adesão à OTAN – com a qual Kiev estaria supostamente protegida pelo guarda-chuva nuclear americano.

“Quais das grandes nações, as nações nucleares, sofreram? Todos? Não, apenas a Ucrânia (…) Falando com Donald Trump, eu disse-lhe: ‘Qual é a saída para nós?’ e nos servirão como proteção, ou precisaremos estar em algum tipo de aliança. Não conhecemos nenhuma aliança eficaz, exceto a OTAN”, disse Zelensky.

A polêmica em torno da declaração de Zelensky foi tão grande que ele imediatamente tentou retratar-se, afirmando que nunca tinha considerado a possibilidade de ter armas nucleares, confiando na adesão à OTAN como a única alternativa para o seu país.

“Às vezes criamos problemas para nós mesmos. Então, nunca falamos que estamos nos preparando para criar uma arma nuclear ou algo assim (…) Por isso eu disse que não tenho alternativa a não ser a OTAN. Esse foi o meu sinal, mas não fabricamos armas nucleares”, disse ele.

Não só isso, Zelensky também comentou recentemente sobre um suposto plano de “dissuasão não nuclear”, com o alegado objetivo de transformar a Ucrânia num centro de atividades contra a Federação Russa, supostamente forçando Moscou a negociar uma “rendição”. Para obter tal capacidade estratégica, Zelensky solicitou ao Ocidente uma lista de armas de longo alcance, incluindo vários mísseis estratégicos, mas não mencionou qualquer equipamento nuclear, conseguindo assim mudar o foco do seu discurso nuclear anterior.

“Propomos colocar em solo ucraniano um pacote de dissuasão que forçaria a Rússia a participar em negociações de paz reais ou permitiria a destruição dos seus alvos militares (…) É a abordagem da paz através de ameaças… trata-se de um pacote de mísseis apropriado”. Zelensky comentou sobre o assunto.

O próprio presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, reagiu às declarações absurdas de Zelensky dizendo que a Federação Russa nunca permitiria que a Ucrânia tivesse armas nucleares. Além disso, alertou que, apesar de ser apenas uma retórica provocativa por parte de Kiev, esta é uma medida perigosa, uma vez que Moscou responderia adequadamente contra qualquer ação ucraniana neste sentido.

Por seu lado, os países ocidentais permaneceram em silêncio face às palavras de Zelensky. No entanto, esta falta de respostas oficiais indica uma clara desaprovação. Parece óbvio que a OTAN não dará à Ucrânia qualquer autorização para produzir armas nucleares. Permitir tal medida seria um suicídio estratégico, não só porque provocaria uma resposta russa apropriada, mas também porque minaria o plano da aliança de manter Kiev como um mero proxy no conflito, sem qualquer soberania real.

Nenhum dos lados está interessado em que a Ucrânia tenha armas nucleares. Se Kiev der um passo no sentido da aquisição de tais armas, é provável que o Ocidente abandone o regime neonazista de uma vez por todas, uma vez que a OTAN não quer envolver-se num conflito nuclear apenas para proteger a Ucrânia.

É muito provável que os responsáveis ​​entrevistados pelo Bild estivessem a blefar quando falaram sobre a produção de armas nucleares, uma vez que a Ucrânia não parece ter capacidade industrial militar para atingir este tipo de objectivo no momento atual. Mas mesmo que tal capacidade existisse, Kiev nunca seria autorizada a dar um passo nessa direção, uma vez que a própria OTAN condenou a Ucrânia a ser um mero proxy nesta guerra.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês : Ukraine’s narrative about nuclear weapons unrealistic, InfoBrics, 21 de Outubro de 2024.

Imagem :  InfoBrics

*

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

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

Throughout the decades of the Cold War, whilst the blocs were competing, two major attractions worked powerfully to the advantage of the West. Firstly, the comfort and prosperity that it was able to provide to its citizens, which its Eastern rivals could hardly match.

The second feature that in the eyes of the world gave the West a huge competitive edge was the comparatively better performance of its institutions in securing individual liberties.

The twin advantages of prosperity and the impression that the West valued freedom neutralised successfully most of the theoretical critique of the capitalist social and economic model.

The West’s ostensible commitment to personal liberties acted as a powerful magnet. As a political weapon it thus served its purpose effectively. So long as scrupulous adherence to the rule of law and respect for individual rights were seen as their distinguishing characteristic, Western societies were perceived as a desirable alternative to the competing systems, which often disregarded strict legality and did little to reduce arbitrariness.

That state of affairs prevailed until roughly the 1990s, when the Western bloc reached the pinnacle of its global might and was widely perceived as triumphant over its adversaries. Since then throughout the Western world the social gains which brought a modicum of comfort and safety to the common people are being systematically dismantled. The sense of legal security that for decades was enjoyed by citizens of Western societies proved equally evanescent. Lawless abuse and vulnerability to the powers that be, phenomena normal elsewhere but long absent from the practice of Western societies and largely faded from the memory of their citizens, are reappearing with a vengeance. On both the domestic and international levels, the “rule of law” has rapidly morphed into its unrecognisable caricature. That metamorphosis has became jokingly known as the “rules based order.”

With scant internal opposition or even public awareness, the core countries of the collective West became infected with the contagion of arbitrariness in the interpretation of inherent human rights and application of legal principles erected to protect them. The transformation, which in historical terms took place with lightning speed, has been spearheaded by a ruthless and duplicitous political cabal which directs the flow of events from behind the scenes. It was implemented with the connivance of a judiciary that is utterly corrupt and cowardly in the fulfillment of its professional duties.

Breakdown of legality is generally a precursor of worse things to come, which almost invariably takes the form of increasingly egregious abuse of power. That can be illustrated with disturbing but by no means isolated examples of the emerging state of affairs in the countries of the collective West that used to be envied for their freedom. Readers will recall the famous line, “they hate us for our freedom.” That false assertion made in 2001, whilst doing nothing to advance the cause of freedom, introduced an orgy of destruction and mass slaughter.

A striking representation of the breakdown of the legal order is the illegal kidnapping and incarceration in Germany on fabricated embezzlement charges of German-American lawyer, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich. The German judicial system is fully complicit in this appalling travesty. There are many solid reasons for the deep state cabal’s virulent hatred of Dr. Fuellmich. He was the spoiler who in 2020 had the temerity to found the Covid pandemic research committee, just as the social control experiment was gaining momentum. The committee did outstanding work under the leadership of Dr. Fuellmich to expose the sordid motives and homicidal objectives of the orchestrators of the bogus medical emergency. That was a major blow to them, the more so because it was delivered successfully under conditions of nearly total informational blockade. Dr. Fuellmich’s ultimate, and perhaps overambitious, naively conceived goal of a medical Nuremberg to bring the culprits to justice unfortunately could not be achieved. But the very thought of it must have given rage to those he intended to be prosecuted.

“This agenda has been long planned,” Dr. Fuellmich summarised his Committee’s findings. “It’s ultimately unsuccessful precursor was the swine flu some 12 years ago, and it is cooked up by a group of super-rich psychopathic and sociopathic people who hate and fear people at the same time, have no empathy, and are driven by the desire to gain full control over all of us, the people of the world.”

The time came however for the psychopaths to get their sweet revenge, and the operation was not exceedingly difficult because they happen to control the mechanisms of power. Eleven months ago Dr. Fuellmich was imprisoned in Germany on the false allegation made by a former colleague, who may have been infiltrated by security agencies into the Covid Committee, that he misused the organisation’s assets for personal benefit.

A charge that under German law is a misdemeanour and for which there is no precedent of lengthy pre-trial incarceration resulted in imprisonment that has now lasted for over 400 days, under Abu Ghraib conditions, except that it is in Germany and not in Iraq. For a shocking portrayal of those detention conditions, see here. And see here for the disgraceful procedural deficiencies of the trial itself, which currently is in progress. The proceedings are stained by practices incompatible with the image of Rechtsstaat that is misleadingly cultivated by Germany, along with the rest of the collective West regimes associated with it.

The lawless persecution of Dr. Fuellmich in reality is for the “offence” of performing a remarkable public service by uncovering and documenting the fraudulent nature and sinister background of the Covid “pandemic.” It is, however, but the tip of the iceberg in the collapse of the rule of law in societies that portray themselves as its champions. The breakdown of legality and its dire impact on the elementary freedoms of citizens, rendering them utterly defenceless before the demands of unaccountable Power, can be illustrated by additional examples.

In Ireland, the entire Burke family of Christian believers who refuse to bend their knee to the dictates of gender ideology is being targeted for vindictive persecution. One of the sons, Enoch, who is a school teacher, has so far spent over 400 days in solitary confinement, like Dr. Fuellmich in Germany. His “offence” is that in formerly Christian and Catholic Ireland he refuses to use the pronoun preferred by one of his students who claims other than his biological gender. Enoch Burke is a law breaker because he holds that acquiescence to the gender identity charade would be a violation of his religious principles. In fact, Enoch Burke is being punished for refusing to debase himself as a professional educator and as a free human being by confessing falsely, under the duress of his persecutors, that 2 + 2 = 5. Nothing short of such  a recantation of his conscientiously held beliefs would satisfy his country’s legal and educational overseers, who have manifestly gone berserk. He therefore remains in an Irish prison, despite  being assured of instant release if only he signalled submission to their lunatic demand. For an insight into the broad official scope of that lunacy, see here.

Enoch’s brother Simeon, who has completed his law studies with honours, is being excluded from admission to the Irish Bar for reasons that have not yet been revealed with full clarity but which appear to be related also to his firmly held religious world-view, identical to his brother’s.  In contemporary Ireland that seems to disqualify one from working in a professional capacity. For good measure, Enoch and Simeon’s father, Enoch Burke Sr., has also been punished, for objecting to LGBT symbols on Irish postal vehicles. For his insolence, taxpayer Burke was informed that henceforth he may come to the local post office if he wishes to pick up his mail, but that it will no longer be delivered to his home address.

As in the Fuellmich case, the collective and exemplary punishment meted out to the Burke family is being kept out of the public eye as much as possible. Political and even religious figures refuse to take a stand or comment on it, and the controlled media studiously avoid discussing the subject.

Not to round off this complex picture of civilizational decline but merely to supplement it with another unsettling detail, the institution of thought crime portrayed in George Orwell’s novel, once considered no more than literary fiction, appears now to be enshrined in British law. For the present it appears to be a pilot programme, perhaps a precursor to even more frightening things to come. It operates as a prohibition of prayer within a designated exclusion perimeter around abortion “clinics” in Great Britain. The incriminating prayer would presumably be for the souls of children that departed this world due to the medical attention that they received in those establishments. The private performance of such unauthorised religious offices is now prohibited as it may cause “harassment and distress” to the employees of the “clinics” and their clients. And ominously, according to the Home Office, “anyone found guilty of breaking the law will face an unlimited fine.” One wonders if the European Court of Human Rights would have anything to say about such open-ended punishment schemes. Was anything of the sort ever before recorded in the annals of civilised jurisprudence?

Interaction between the thought police, who of course are merely “following orders,” and citizens suspected of mentally violating the “law” may be watched here by all who cherish their liberty and human integrity.

Wretched British jurisprudence (sceptics should also take a look here (or watch below)) can now boast its first successful prosecution of a thought crime violator. British Army veteran Adam Smith-Connor was recently found guilty of silently praying for his aborted son inside an abortion “clinic” buffer zone. For that he was sentenced conditionally to two years in prison and fined £9000 in costs for His Majesty’s court’s expense and trouble in prosecuting him. The courts still are not imposing “unlimited fines,” as the Home Office prescribes, but for a retired person like Smith-Connor, who must support a family, arguably even that is a considerable sum.

And Smith-Connor, be it noted, is far from being the only victim of abortion-related thought crime harassment in the United Kingdom.

Also for the record, the theme here is not one’s personal position on Covid, transgenderism, or abortion. The central issue in every one of the cited instances, and others of a similar sort too numerous to mention, is the evident crumbling in the collective West of the legal order. That makes it possible to impose on peaceful citizens draconian punishments wholly disproportionate to the alleged conduct they have been accused of. To what limits will the severity of punishment extend, or is it potentially as “unlimited” as the threat of monetary assessment the British Home Office is prepared to impose on those undertaking to silently pray in public for unborn babies?

The famed “City on the Hill” that many had been tricked into believing was illuminating mankind from on high is now forlorn and largely deserted. Its lights are getting progressively dimmer, life in it increasingly intolerable. Its deceived inhabitants and ardent admirers are dispersing in every direction. Word is out that a new City of great luminosity and magnetic attraction is being erected elsewhere, and that its architects will soon meet, in Kazan.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

Featured image: Dr. Reiner Fuellmich (Youtube screenshot, 2020)

Rethinking Srebrenica

By Stephen Karganovic

Rethinking Srebrenica examines the forensic evidence of the alleged Srebrenica “massacre” possessed by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. Even though the ICTY created more than 3,500 autopsy reports, many of these autopsy reports were based on bone fragments, which do not represent complete bodies. An examination of the matching femur bones found reveals that there were only about 1,900 complete bodies that were exhumed. Of these, some 1,500 autopsy reports indicated a cause of death consistent with battlefield casualties. Only about 400 autopsy reports indicated execution as a cause of death, as revealed by ligatures and blindfolds. This forensic evidence does not warrant the conclusion of a genocide having taken place.

Karganovic examines the events that took place in Srebrenica in July 1995 in a wholistic manner instead of restricting it to a three-day event. The ten chapters cover:

1) Srebrenica: A Critical Overview;

2) Demilitarization of the UN Safe Zone of Srebrenica;

3) Genocide or Blowback?;

4) General Presentation and Interpretation of Srebrenica Forensic Data (Pattern of Injury Breakdown);

5) An Analysis of the Srebrenica Forensic Reports Prepared by the ICTY Prosecution Experts;

6) An Analysis of Muslim Column Losses Attributable to Minefields, Combat Activity, and Other Causes;

7) The Genocide Issue: Was there a Demonstrable Intent to Exterminate All Muslims?;

8) ICTY Radio Intercept Evidence;

9) The Balance Sheet; and

10) Srebrenica: Uses of the Narrative.

• ASIN:‎ B0992RRJRK
• Publisher: ‎Unwritten History, Inc.; 2 edition (July 8 2021)
• Language: ‎English

Click here to purchase. 

What has been revealed in the “Remdesivir Papers” will shock you to the core.

This compilation of documents, released by a military whistleblower, contains damning information on the hundreds of deaths and adverse events related to the clinical trials of a COVID antiviral.

Besides the compromise on the fundamental issue of informed consent, these files reveal concerning truths related to the methodology and processing of the product testing data among servicemembers.

Brad Miller gives viewers an in-depth analysis of this subject matter on “Defender In-Depth.”

The evidence presented in the video is of utmost significance.

Our thoughts are with Service Members, victims of Remdesevir.

“Writing for American Thinker, author Stella Paul once said, “Remdesivir may be the most despised drug in American history, earning the nickname ‘Run Death Is Near’ for its lethal record during COVID.”1

The Remdesivir Papers captures the essence of her statement for service members and veterans across the country.”

***

The fraud was known from the very outset when Remdesevir was launched in the months following the March 2020 Lockdown.

No action was taken to withdraw Remdesevir produced by Gilead Sciences Inc  a Company which was headed Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who became Secretary of Defense (2001-2006) under the GWB administration

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky’s July 5, 2020 article entitled:

LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesivir

focussed on the suppression of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) while promoting Remdesivir. 

“The studies respectively on Gilead Science’s Remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were conducted simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH)”. Was there a conflict of interest?

Below is the revised version of the article published as a Chapter in Professor Chossudovsky’s eBook under the title:

. 

Corrupt Science: “There Is No Cure”

Suppression of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), A Cheap and Effective Drug 

from the eBook, The Worldwide Corona Crisis. Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky 

***

There was an ongoing battle to suppress hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of COVID-19. The campaign against HCQ was carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer-reviewed “evaluation” published on May 22 by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US-based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago-based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

.

Screenshot from The Lancet

.

While the blame was placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the scientific community nor the media has acknowledged) is that the study was coordinated by Harvard professor Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), which is a partner of the Harvard Medical School.

When the scam was revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra, who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, apologized:

“I have always performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. However, we can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards.

It is now clear to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly sorry.” (emphasis added)

Mandeep R. Mehra, MD, MSC (official statement on BWH website)¹

But that “truly sorry” note was just the tip of the iceberg. Why?

The studies respectively on Gilead Sciences’ remdesivir and on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were conducted simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH).

While The Lancet report (May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended “to kill” the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of COVID-19, another important (related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH pertaining to remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Dr. Francisco Marty, a specialist in Infectious Disease and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School, was entrusted with coordination of the clinical trial tests of the antiviral medication remdesivir under Brigham’s contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc²:

… If the results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if they aren’t, it gives us critical information in the fight against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies.”

While Dr. Mandeep Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesivir BWH study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences, Inc:

“He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate” (France Soir, May 23, 2020)³

What was the intent of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of hydroxychloroquine?

According to France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet retraction:

The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, … professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results. (France Soir, June 5, 2020)⁴

Was Dr. Mandeep Mehra in conflict of interest? (That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon)

.

Who Were the Main Actors? 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, portrayed as “America’s top infectious disease expert,” played a key role in smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead’s remdesivir.

Dr. Fauci has been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece for Big Pharma.

Dr. Fauci launched remdesivir in late June (see details below). According to Fauci, remdesivir is the “corona wonder drug” developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc. It’s a $1.6 billion dollar bonanza.

Gilead Sciences, Inc: History

Gilead Sciences, Inc is a multi-billion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now [2020] involved in developing and marketing remdesivir. Gilead has a long history. It has the backing of major investment conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research & Management Co, among others. It has also developed ties with the US government.

In 1999, Gilead Sciences, Inc developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment of seasonal influenza and bird flu). At the time, Gilead Sciences, Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld was responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

Rumsfeld maintained his links to Gilead Sciences, Inc throughout his tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to CNN Money (2005): “The prospect of a bird flu outbreak … was very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences.”⁵

Anthony Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as “a go-between” the US government and Big Pharma. During Rumsfeld’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences, Inc. Anthony Fauci considered that the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would:

“accelerate our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the microbes’ hosts — human beings and their immune systems. One result should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity.” (Washington Post, February 7, 2022)⁶

In 2008, Dr. Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush “for his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives.”⁷

 .

\

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Presidential Medal of Freedom, at ceremonies in the East Room of the White House..

The 2020 Gilead Sciences, Inc. Remdesivir Project

We will be focusing on key documents (and events).

Chronology (February-June 2020)

February 21, 2020: Initial release pertaining to NIH-NIAID remdesivir placebo test trial

April 10: The Gilead Sciences, Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

April 29: NIH released study on remdesivir (report published on May 22 in NEJM)

May 22: The BWH-Harvard Study on Hydroxychloroquine coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra published in The Lancet

May 22: Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) 

June 5: The (fake) Lancet Report (May 22) on HCQ is retracted

June 29: Fauci announcement. The $1.6 billion remdesivir HHS agreement with Gilead Sciences, Inc

April 10, 2020: The Gilead Sciences, Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

A Gilead-sponsored report was published in New England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe COVID-19”. It was co-authored by an impressive list of 56 distinguished medical doctors and scientists, many of whom were recipients of consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Gilead Sciences, Inc. funded the study which included several staff members as co-authors.

“The testing included a total of 61 patients [who] received at least one dose of remdesivir on or before March 7, 2020; 8 of these patients were excluded because of missing postbaseline information (7 patients) and an erroneous remdesivir start date (1 patient) … Of the 53 remaining patients included in this analysis, 40 (75%) received the full 10-day course of remdesivir, 10 (19%) received 5 to 9 days of treatment, and 3 (6%) fewer than 5 days of treatment.” (NEJM, April 10, 2020)⁸

The NEJM article states that “Gilead Sciences, Inc began accepting requests from clinicians for compassionate use of remdesivir on January 25, 2020.”

From whom, from where? According to the WHO (January 30, 2020), there were 86 cases in 18 countries outside China of which 5 were in the US, 5 in France and 3 in Canada.

Several prominent physicians and scientists have cast doubt on the Compassionate Use of Remdesivir study conducted by Gilead, focusing on the small size of the trial. Ironically, the number of patients in the test is less than the number of co-authors: “53 patients” versus “56 co-authors.”

Below we provide excerpts from scientific statements on the Gilead NEJM project (Science Media Centre) published immediately following the release of the NEJM article⁹:

“‘Compassionate use’ is better described as using an unlicensed therapy to treat a patient because there are no other treatments available. Research based on this kind of use should be treated with extreme caution because there is no control group or randomisation, which are some of the hallmarks of good practice in clinical trials.” (Prof Duncan Richard, Clinical Therapeutics, University of Oxford)

 “It is critical not to over-interpret this study. Most importantly, it is impossible to know the outcome for this relatively small group of patients had they not received remdesivir.” (Dr Stephen Griffin, Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Leeds)

 “The research is interesting but doesn’t prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and uncontrolled study.” (Simon Maxwell, Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing, University of Edinburgh)

“The data from this paper are almost uninterpretable. It is very surprising, perhaps even unethical, that the New England Journal of Medicine has published it. It would be more appropriate to publish the data on the website of the pharmaceutical company that has sponsored and written up the study. At least Gilead have been clear that this has not been done in the way that a high quality scientific paper would be written.” (Prof Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine)

“It’s very hard to draw useful conclusions from uncontrolled studies like this particularly with a new disease where we really don’t know what to expect and with wide variations in outcomes between places and over time. One really has to question the ethics of failing to do randomisation – this study really represents more than anything else, a missed opportunity.” (Prof Adam Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol)

To review the complete document of Science Media Centre pertaining to expert assessments, click here.

April 29, 2020: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study on Remdesivir

On April 29 following the publication of the Gilead Sciences, Inc study in the NEJM on April 10, a press release of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on remdesivir was released. The full document was published on May 22, by the NEJM under the title: Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM). 

The study had been initiated on February 21, 2020. The title of the April 29 press release was: “Peer-reviewed data shows remdesivir for COVID-19 improves time to recovery.”

It’s a government-sponsored report which includes preliminary data from a randomized trial involving 1,063 hospitalized patients. The results of the trial labelled Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT) are preliminary, conducted under the helm of Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):

“An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059). (emphasis added)¹⁰

In the NIH’s earlier February 21, 2020 report (released at the outset of the study), the methodology was described as follows:

… A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) …

Numbers. Where? When? 

The February 21 report confirmed that the first trial participant was “an American who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond Princess cruise ship” that docked in Yokohama (Japanese Territorial Waters) (see Chapter II). “Thirteen people repatriated by the US State Department from the Diamond Princess cruise ship” were selected as patients for the placebo trial test.

Ironically, at the outset of the study, 58.7% of the “confirmed cases” worldwide (542 cases out of 924) (outside China) were on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship from which the initial trial placebo patients were selected.

Where and When: The trial test in the 68 selected sites? That came at a later date because on February 19 (WHO data), the US had recorded only 15 positive cases (see table below).

“A total of 68 sites ultimately joined the study—47 in the United States and 21 in countries in Europe and Asia.” (emphasis added)

In the final May 22 NEJM report entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report: 

There were 60 trial sites and 13 subsites in the United States (45 sites), Denmark (8), the United Kingdom (5), Greece (4), Germany (3), Korea (2), Mexico (2), Spain (2), Japan (1), and Singapore (1). Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remdesivir or placebo. Randomization was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrollment.¹¹

The Washington Post applauded Anthony Fauci’s announcement (April 29)¹²:

“The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, …  fall short of the magic bullet or cure… But with no approved treatments for Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard of care for hospitalized patients …

The data shows that remdesivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said. 

“The government’s first rigorous clinical trial of the experimental drug remdesivir as a coronavirus treatment delivered mixed results to the medical community Wednesday — but rallied stock markets and raised hopes that an early weapon to help some patients was at hand.

The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony Fauci, chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which led the placebo-controlled trial found that the drug accelerated the recovery of hospitalized patients but had only a marginal benefit in the rate of death.

… Fauci’s remarks boosted speculation that the Food and Drug Administration would seek emergency use authorization that would permit doctors to prescribe the drug.

In addition to clinical trials, remdesivir has been given to more than 1,000 patients under compassionate use. [Also refers to the Gilead study published on April 10 in the NEJM]

The study, involving [more than] 1,000 patients at 68 sites in the United States and around the world [??], offers the first evidence [??] from a large [??], randomized [??] clinical study of remdesivir’s effectiveness against COVID-19.”

The NIH placebo test study provided “preliminary results.” While the placebo trial test was “randomized”, the overall selection of patients at the 68 sites was not fully randomized. See the full report.¹³

May 22, 2020: The Controversial (Retracted) Lancet Report on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

It is worth noting that the full report of the NIH-NIAID entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report was released on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM, on the same day as the controversial Lancet report on hydroxychloroquine.

Immediately following its publication, the media went into high gear, smearing the HCQ cure, while applauding the NIH-NIAID report on remdesivir released on that same day.

Remdesivir, the only drug cleared to treat COVID-19, sped the recovery time of patients with the disease, … “It’s a very safe and effective drug,” said Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “We now have a definite first efficacious drug for Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon with other drugs, [and drug] combinations.”¹⁴

When the Lancet HCQ article by Bingham-Harvard was retracted on June 5, it was too late, it received minimal media coverage. Despite the retraction, the HCQ cure “had been killed.”

June 29, 2020: Fauci Green Light. The $1.6 Billion Remdesivir Contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc

Dr. Anthony Fauci granted the “green light” to Gilead Sciences, Inc. on June 29, 2020.

The semi-official US government NIH-NIAID-sponsored report (May 22) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) was used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences, Inc. (A final report was released on November 5, 2020)

The report was largely funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

On June 29, based on the findings of the NIH-NIAID report published in the NEJM, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on behalf of the Trump Adminstration an agreement to secure large supplies of the remdesivir drug from Gilead Sciences, Inc. for the treatment of COVID-19 in America’s private hospitals and clinics.

The earlier Gilead study based on scanty test results published in the NEJM (April 10) of 53 cases (and 56 co-authors) was not highlighted. The results of this study had been questioned by several prominent physicians and scientists.

Who will be able to afford remdesivir? 500,000 doses of remdesivir are envisaged at $3,200 per patient, namely $1.6 billion (see the study by Elizabeth Woodworth).¹⁵

The drug was also approved for marketing in the European Union under the brand name Veklury.

If this contract is implemented as planned, it represents for Gilead Sciences, Inc. and the recipient US private hospitals and clinics a colossal amount of money.

According to the Trump Administration’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar (June 29, 2020):

Remdesivir versus Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

Careful timing:

The Lancet study (published on May 22, 2020 and subsequently retracted) was intended to undermine the legitimacy of hydroxychloroquine as an effective cure to COVID-19, with a view to sustaining the $1.6 billion agreement between the HHS and Gilead Sciences, Inc. on June 29. The legitimacy of this agreement rested on the May 22 NIH-NIAID study in the NEJM which was considered “preliminary.”¹⁶

What Dr. Fauci failed to acknowledge is that chloroquine had been “studied” and tested 15 years ago by the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections. And that hydroxychloroquine has been used in the course of 2020 in the treatment of COVID-19 in several countries.

According to the (2005) Virology Journal, “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread.”¹⁷ It was used in the SARS-1 outbreak in 2002. It had the endorsement of the CDC. 

HCQ is not only effective, it is “inexpensive” when compared to remdesivir at an estimated “$3,120 for a US patient with private insurance.”

Concluding Remarks

Endnotes

1 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, May 22, 2020. No Improvement in Death Rate for COVID-19 Patients who Received Hydroxychloroquine. https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press-releases-detail?id=3592

2 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, March 30, 2020. Two Remdesivir Clinical Trials Underway at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. https://www.brighamhealthonamission.org/2020/03/26/two-remdesivir-clinical-trials-underway-at-brigham-and-womens-hospital/

3 Xavier Azalbert & Eric Gyssler, June 5, 2020. From coincidences to coincidences, the Boston connexion serves Remdesivir? https://www.francesoir.fr/politique-monde/coincidences-coincidences-boston-connexion-serves-remdesivir

4 Ibid.

5 Nelson D. Schwartz, October 31, 2005. Rumsfeld’s growing stake in Tamiflu Defense Secretary, ex-chairman of flu treatment rights holder, sees portfolio value growing. https://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/newsmakers/fortune_rumsfeld/

6 George F. Will, February 7, 2002. War and Health. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2002/02/07/war-and-health/c1e5dfb2-c373-45ef-87d1-eb89f0db557c/

7 George W Bush Library, March 30, 2020. https://twitter.com/gwblibrary/status/1244601539227942914?lang=en

8 Jonathan Grein, Norio Ohmagari, et al, June 11, 2020. Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007016#article_references

9 Prof. Stephen Evans & Prof. Adam Finn, April 11, 2020. Expert reaction to a study about compassionate use of remdesivir for patients with severe COVID-19. https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-a-study-about-compassionate-use-of-remdesivir-for-patients-with-severe-covid-19/

10 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, February 25, 2020. NIH Clinical Trial of Remdesivir to Treat COVID-19 Begins. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-clinical-trial-remdesivir-treat-covid-19-begins

11 John H. Beigel, Kay M. Tomashek, et al., November 5, 2020. Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764?query=recirc_mostViewed_railB_article

12 Laurie Mcginley & Christopher Rowland, April 29, 2020. Gilead’s remdesivir improves recovery time of coronavirus patients in NIH trial. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/gileads-remdesivir-improves-recovery-time-of-coronavirus-patients-in-nih-trial/

13 Ibid.

14 Matthew Herper, May 22, 2020. Covid-19 study details benefits of treatment with remdesivir, and also its limitations. https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/22/covid-19-study-details-benefits-of-treatment-with-remdesivir-and-also-its-limitations/

15 Elizabeth Woodworth, August 27, 2020. Remdesivir for Covid-19: $1.6 Billion for a “Modestly Beneficial” Drug? https://www.globalresearch.ca/remdesivir-covid-19-1-6-billion-modestly-beneficial-drug/5717690

16 Mandeep R. Mehra, Sapan S. Desai, et al., May 29, 2020. Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6.pdf

17 Martin J. Vincent, Eric Bergeron, et al., August 22, 2005. Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Ever since its illegal establishment in 1948, Israel is committing killings, ethnic cleansing and even genocide in Palestine. It maintains the world’s biggest open air concentration camp in the West Bank where Palestinians are treated worse than animals.

America was the first country to recognize Israel. Right away, America started helping Israel. The reason being, America then was very dependent on the oil from Saudi Arabia, Iraq etc. and realized that if these countries have peoples’ revolution, their oil supply will be in jeopardy. Then the state of Israel will be very helpful to do regime change in these Arab countries and install a U.S. friendly government.

When America saw Israel’s capacity in defeating Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967 war, America’s support for Israel increased drastically and got solidified. Billions of dollars in military and economic aid started flowing into the Jewish state. Paraphrasing Noam Chomsky, Israel became America’s ‘aircraft carrier’ in the volatile Middle East. In case of instability and revolution in Saudi Arabia or Iraq etc., when America’s oil supply will be adversely affected, America could use Israel as a base and take over these countries or install a friendly government there. That was the thinking then.

The United States has doled out more than $260 billion in combined military and economic aid to Israel since World War-II as per US News, October 10, 2023. Additionally, America has spent $10 billion more for Israel’s missile defense systems like the Iron Dome. Israel has been the highest recipient of US aid for decades—even though, Israel is richer than European countries—while Egypt is the second highest recipient of US aid.

Since 1978, the United States has given out Egypt with over $50 billion in military and $30 billion in economic assistance. One might ask, “why is Egypt getting billions of dollars in aid?”.

Well, Egypt was the main power in the Middle East then who could challenge Israel’s supremacy in that region. This was proven by the Yom Kippur war of October 1973. So, to make Egypt a silent lamb, a power with about 100 million population who will not fight with Israel in any future neighbor countries’ wars, Egypt was promised billions of dollars’ aid every year. Otherwise, why would Egypt sign that treaty? So, basically, Egypt was bribed to sign that peace treaty in exchange for billions of dollars’ aid every year. That is why we see Egypt keeping quiet no matter how much Israel suppresses and kills other Arabs in Palestine or elsewhere.

In its wars with Palestinians, Israel has killed and injured more than hundred thousand Palestinian men, women and children while its own casualties number in very few thousands.

.

.

The big question is, how come Israel gets away with such criminal behavior? The simple answer is: The United States of America.

In the current war in Gaza, United States is pretending to be urging Israel to negotiate an end to this conflict while at the same time is giving Israel billions of dollars in military aid! You can’t have it both ways. United States has been vetoing every resolution in the United Nations for ceasefire! How stupid can one be? You have to be a teenager to believe that United States is working for peace in the Gaza war.

Number of US Vetoes to Protect Israel in UN: Since 1972, the United States has vetoed United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions 53 times to protect Israel and its criminal activities. America’s solid support for Israel has enabled Israel to thwart resolutions condemning violence against protesters, its illegal settlements in the occupied territories and its several invasions in Gaza and its current brutal invasion and killings of more than 42,400 men, women and children in Gaza. And United States calls itself an upholder of human rights! What a shame! Mind you, Israel is getting away with all these criminal activities with full military, economic and diplomatic support from the United States.

Washington DC is Israel Occupied Territory: U.S. Middle East foreign policy is created in Tel Aviv. Thanks to AIPAC, the Israeli lobby and Right-wing Jewish billionaires and multimillionaires in America. And of course, there are many enlightened Jews who are opposed to Israel’s criminal policies in Palestine.

Iraq War of 2003: There is clear evidence that disastrous Iraq War that United States fought was to a great extent for the benefit Israel. Neocons—fanatic Israel supporters like Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton or Richard Perle gang were advisers to the Bush Jr. and Dick Cheney regime.

There were two objectives for the Immoral Iraq War:

1) To conquer and control Iraq’s vast oil resources and

2) to degrade Iraq’s military and its regime so that it could not challenge Israel.

As per oxfordre.com, some 4,400 US troops were killed and 31,000 were wounded while more than a million Iraqi civilians were killed in that disastrous war. According to The Harvard Kennedy School estimate, the Iraq War cost America some $3 trillion. America looks at the Middle East through the prism of Israel and not for the benefit of Americans.

AIPAC CONTROLS U.S. CONGRESS: You would think that the elected leaders of U.S. senate and the congress are brave, well-informed, intelligent and moral men and women. If you believe in this, then you are disillusioned and brainwashed. Totally untrue. These elected men and women—with rare exception–are poorly informed, lack the knowledge of history, suffer from arrogance, superiority complex, morally bankrupt, very corrupt and cowards. They lack an iota of humanity in them. They are all there for personal glorification, advantage and fame. They could care less for American people who are unaware of what is going on in Washington DC.

Once they get elected to U.S. Congress or the Senate, they keep busy raising money for their reelection. That is upmost in their mind. And here comes the AIPAC—American Israel Political Action Committee—,the crooked Israeli lobby that has sabotaged what remains of America’s dwindling ‘democracy’. It tells those who run for election for senate or congress, the lobby will give them $1million  or more if they will vote for all the resolutions favoring Israel and will vote against any legislation that harms Israel. If they pledge to these conditions, they will get good funding for their election and their reelection campaigns in the future.

So, all the aspiring candidates for president, congress and senate and the incumbent candidates for their current office agree and vote for all the legislations favoring Israel and vote against any resolution that harms Israel. Thus, the vast majority of U.S. Congress and Senate members are indebted to the cunning Israeli lobby, AIPAC. They are even afraid of this lobby. If any one of them votes against Israel’s interests, the lobby will target that congressman or senator in their reelection bid when it comes. They will pour millions of dollars in their opponent’s coffer and will likely defeat that candidate who had the audacity to oppose AIPAC’s dictate. Hence, all these elected officials including the presidents are afraid of this lobby.

Lobby’s power was obvious when during his visit to Washington DC and his address to the joint session of US Congress last July, he was greeted with standing ovations by our elected politicians. During his speech to this joint session of congress, he received 52 standing ovations from America’s corrupt and cowardly members. This shows you how gutless and morally lacking our elected politicians are. They greeted this man who had recently killed more than 40,000 innocent men, women and children in Gaza and was continuing that killing. This man, for whom there is a warrant for his arrest by the Internation Criminal Court.

During his visit, he was also greeted with protests over the Gaza war by people who were appalled by Israel’s killings. He called them “Iran’s useful idiots.” At least, Kamala Harris had good sense of not attending this session where Netanyahu gave his speech.  

Other Lobbies:  Then there are other lobbies who have lot of control on America’s elected politicians such as the Defense Lobby, the Big Pharma Lobby, the Billionaires’ Pacs, the Oil industry Lobby and several more. They all control how America’s elected legislators vote by the money power of these lobbies. Morality, fairness or welfare of average American people has no bearing and are the last thing in their mind.

For example, majority of members of US Congress vote to increase America’s defense Budget every year. America spends $916 billion on defense budget, which is more than  9 countries combined who spend $883 billion. Several states in America has defense related industries who employ thousands of workers and brings in lot of revenue for that state. So, these senators and congressmen from these states are deeply indebted to these defense contractors.

These defense industries such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and many others dole out billions of dollars for the reelection of America’s politicians. So, these corrupt elected leaders do the bidding of their paymasters by sanctioning billions of dollars for America’s bloated defense budget every year  even though USSR is gone and there is no more big ‘enemy’ in sight.

All these billions of dollars are squandered manufacturing killing machines. America doles out $3.8 billion to Israel every year and President Biden has approved an aid package recently for $17 billion in additional support for Israel while more than 37 millions of Americans live in poverty in this richest country in the world. What a shame! The empire’s days are numbered and it is—like all the empires of the world—in downward spiral.

In conclusion, the world should know that Israel will be forced to agree tomorrow for two state solution if America bluntly told it to agree with it, stop the war and work for it. Israel’s brutal crimes in Gaza, West Bank and Lebanon have been going on and are continuing simply because it has America’s backing all the way.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Chaitanya Davé is an engineer and a businessman. He has authored three books: CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: A Shocking Record of US Crimes since 1776-2007, COLLAPSE: Civilization on the Brink-2010, CAPITALISM’S MARCH OF DESTRUCTION: Replacing it with People and Nature-Friendly Economy. Author of many articles on politics, history, and the environment. Founder/President of a non-profit charity foundation helping the poor villagers of India, Nepal, Haiti, USA-homeless and other poor countries. He can be contacted at [email protected].

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky failed to gather much support from European allies last week but he nonetheless announced his quite grandiose “Victory Plan” yesterday during his delivery to Ukraine’s Parliament. “The future for Ukraine is, without a doubt, to be a strong part of the global world, to stand as equals with all leading nations, to be a full-fledged member of the European Union and NATO”, he said.

The whole thing of course largely depends on Western willingness to help implement it, thereby dragging the Atlantic Alliance into the conflict, as he reiterated over and over: “For us, it is entirely legitimate to turn to our partners for support in this battle”. Much is being said about the 5 points Zelensky presented, but is worth analyzing the ethno-national premises behind this idea of the “glory of Ukraine” which makes it worth to sacrifice so much and to face (and to impose) the risk of a NATO-Russian conflict:

Claiming that “Russia must lose the war against Ukraine. And this is not a ‘freeze’. And it is not trading Ukraine’s territory or sovereignty”, the Ukrainian leader in his Victory Plan speech said quite eloquently that his country seeks “to live independently, to live freely, sovereignly, on its own land and by its own laws.”

This last bit sounds fair enough and of course normally any state will defend its territorial sovereignty. But it is also true that over the course of history territorial transformations, with gains and losses, take place. And it is also true that today’s Ukraine is a kind of inflated state, territory-wise, due to well-known Soviet policies. Parallelly, Russia has lost lots of its territory.

In fact, in post-Soviet Eastern Europe and the Caucasus region (just as in post-colonial Africa), the overall situation with borders is far from being a settled matter, and is still a kind of unresolved issue, with a number of frozen conflicts and unrecognized countries and/or states who have disputed or limited recognition. Suffice it to mention the cases of (none of them having direct Russian involvement in terms of claims) Transnistria (claimed by Moldova), South Ossetia and Abkhazia (both claimed by Georgia), the Armenian exclave of Nagorno-Karabakh or Artsakh (recently occupied by Azerbaijan).

So Ukraine, within this larger post-soviet context, is not at all alone in that matter, and Crimea and Donbass have been a hot topic for decades. One must keep in mind the fact that the Ukrainian state has been bombing the Donbass region, in what was (until 2022) often described as Europe’s “forgotten war” – one can only imagine what it would do with that region and its inhabitants in a Kyiv victory scenario.

Moreover, consider this: in a survey taken six months before the 2022 conflict erupted, over 40 percent of Ukrainians nationwide, “and nearly two-thirds in the east and south”, agreed with Putin that Ukrainians and Russians are “one people.” For centuries, Ukrainian identity has really been part of a larger Russian identity, and to this day, millions of Ukrainians think of the categories “Russian” and “Ukrainian” as being somehow aligned and compatible – and not fully separated.

Writing in 1994, political scientist Ian Bremmer, predicting the Donbass war, warned that if Kyiv’s nation-building policies alienated too much the country’s “ethnic Russians”, there was potential for internal conflict. Today Nicolai N. Petro (a professor of political science at the University of Rhode Island) warns about minority civil rights problems in the country that “relegate Russian speakers to permanent second-class status.”

And this is part of the core of the issue. In his 2023 academic article called “On peoples, history, and sovereignty”, Chris Hann (a Director Emeritus at the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology in Halle)  makes a distinction between “historical” and “non-historical” peoples – this does not imply, it should be stressed, any kind of “inferiority”: “historical nations” would be merely those that possess a long tradition of statehood and clearly defined national identity. The ethnologist is far from being a “Putin supporter”, but he emphasized that “much of the international coverage of the Ukrainian case naturalizes a Ukrainian people/nation”

Whether one likes Putin or not, when he talks about the relative novelty of the independent Ukrainian state, he is just stating historical facts. In the early nineties, Mark von Hagen, in a paper titled: “Does Ukraine Have a History?”, wrote the following: “today’s Ukraine is a very modern creation, with little firmly established precedent in the national past.” He wrote about the risk of an “overemphasis on [Ukrainian] nationalism and ethnicity to compensate for previous underemphasis.”

Similarly, Kataryna Wolczuk, in chapter two of her 2001 book “The Moulding of Ukraine” writes that: “Ukraine’s history does not lend itself to configuration as linear national history… Post-soviet Ukraine lacks the ‘historical legitimacy’ derived from distinct and ‘identifiable’ institutional traditions and stable territorial boundaries.”

This has been the country’s political elite project in the making since the nineties – and this took a sharper turn in 2014. The problem is that the ethnocratic manner this nation is imagined is problematic to say the least and it is being built in a way that potentially (according to  Nicolai N. Petro, writing for Foreign Policy) simply  alienates and excludes a large part of its population – not to mention neighboring allies such as Poland.

In any case, objectively speaking, whether one likes him or not, Zelensky simply does not seem to be up for the task of being a great statesman. He is rather the inexperienced politician (the “comedian-turned President”), and a de facto dictator who has banned all opposition – and yet at the same time a weak leader who is hostage to armed ultra-nationalists and neo-fascists. For that reason, Ted Snider, writing for Responsible Statecraft, argues quite convincingly he is in no place to negotiate peace either.

All things considered, with today’s Ukrainian leadership and state of affairs, the task of nation-founding with all its territorial ambitions for a Greater Ukraine does not seem to be achievable. And if somehow such a goal were to come through (the way it is envisioned today) it would not really be a desirable outcome in terms of local security and stability or the human rights of a large part of the population of Ukraine and its disputed territories. Without addressing these ethnopolitical issues and the dangers of NATO enlargement, there  is little hope for peace in the region.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image source

The events in the Middle East are moving at an incredible pace. One of the key players in the region is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

To better understand some of the issues of the region, Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed the political analyst, Dr. Javad Masoomi.

Steven Sahiounie (SS): The distribution of power in the world today seems to be undergoing significant changes. In your opinion, what is the role of the Islamic Republic in these changes?

Javad Masoomi (JM): In recent years, the supreme leader of the revolution has emphasized the changes in the world order in the coming years. According to him, which is also emphasized by Western international relations analysts and experts, changes are taking place in the international arena that will change the distribution of power in the world, that is, the security order and power structure in the world. That is, the world is no longer seen as a unipolar one with the superiority of the United States and is moving towards a multifocal order. In this case, each of the regions of the world will have one or more main centers of power that will influence the main developments in that region and the arrangements and relations of that region. In this regard, no region of the world is excluded and its developments are in line with changes in the security and political order.

History narrates that with the fall of the Ottoman Empire during the First World War, the security order of the region was not designed, determined and regulated by regional actors but by foreign superpowers.

In the early years after the end of the First World War, with the “Sykes-Picot” treaty, England and France, as regional regulators in West Asia, regulated the order of the region and its relations. The birth of the fake Zionist government is related to the years when England and France were the regulators of order in the West Asian region.

With the end of the Second World War and the emergence of the United States and the Soviet Union as the two poles of the world, the West Asian region was divided between these two superpowers, like other parts of the world, and as a result, the security order was adjusted according to the wishes of the Soviet Union and the United States. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the West Asian region became the playground of the United States of America, which affected a large part of its relations; but in recent years, there have been changes in the region that have turned the region into the playground of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

SS: President Trump attempted in the past to normalize relations between the Arab countries in the Middle East and Israel. How do you see that plan, and was it successful?

JM: During the presidency of Donald Trump, the United States realized the fact that the region is on the verge of accepting Iran as a major power. As a result, with the “Ibrahim Peace” plan, he moved in the direction of standing against Iran’s supremacy in the region by uniting the Arabs and the Zionist regime. This was supposed to be completed with the corridor plan called “IMEC”. This corridor was supposed to connect India to Israel through the Arab countries and in this way make possible the Zionist regime’s dominance over regional relations with the dependence of the Arab countries on the Zionist economy. This plan failed.

SS: The resistance to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria has been a strong force for decades. Since October 7, the ‘axis of resistance’ has become a major player in the region, and has captured world attention. In your opinion, how do you see the role of Iran?

JM: After the proud operation of Al-Aqsa Storm and the strategic failure of the usurper Israel, the Zionist regime is planning to complete the work of Hezbollah and Hamas in this war. But what is the reason for this? It all seems to come back to conflicts over the security order. Important players in the regions are trying to redesign the security order according to their wishes; but for the United States and its allies, especially the Zionist regime, one thing cannot be tolerated, and that is the collapse of the old world order and American unilateralism.

Earlier, the United States of America made every effort to rule its will in the West Asian region; but against the will of America, for years it has been the axis of resistance as an order maker against the old order and the absolute winner of regional developments. Its examples are in Syria, the attempt of the Western world and the Arab governments to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government was met with a heavy failure.

On the other hand, in Yemen, Ansarullah is considered one of the most important allies of Iran in the region. Also, in Iraq, Iran’s cooperation led to the formation of popular resistance groups against ISIS and this terrorist group was defeated. In Lebanon, Hezbollah plays the main role in protecting Lebanon against the Zionist regime; so far, all developments in the region have gone according to the will of the United States of America, and basically, the formation of a network called “Axis of Resistance” whose main goal is to confront the unilateralism of the United States is considered a significant defeat for the colonialists. This coherent and coordinated network despite independence; with the strategy of Islamic governance, the grassroots people have accepted the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran. So that this type of governance has caused the region to consider Iran as a trans-regional actor and the main center of regional developments for the real realization of human happiness and the fight against oppression and support for the oppressed, which is a vital threat to the interests of the United States and its allies, especially it is considered a Zionist regime.

SS: Israel assassinated the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, in Beirut. Despite his martyrdom, Hezbollah continues their resistance against Israel, and in solidarity with the Palestinian people of Gaza. How do you view events in the region after Nasrallah was martyred?

JM: Some excited supporters of the Zionists interpret the current situation in the region with the idea of the usurper Israel winning to change the balance of power in West Asia, and the fact that the Zionist regime is looking for a new order in the region is clearly seen in the speech of the leaders of this apartheid regime.

In this regard, Benjamin Netanyahu spoke about the new order in the new Middle East and described the assassination of Sayed Hassan Nasrallah as the balance of power in West Asia. Of course, it is not the first time that the leaders of the Zionist regime and the United States promise a new order in the West Asian region.

In 1982, Ariel Sharon, the then defense minister of this regime, envisioned a new order in the Middle East. “Shimon Peres” and “Tom Friedman” also promised a “new Middle East” after the Oslo agreement in 1993. At the beginning of the new century, the Bush administration also believed that a new order was coming, in which a democratic and pro-American Middle East would emerge. But none of these promises came true, and in this context, the “National Interest” magazine, in predicting the future of Netanyahu’s dream to establish a new order in the region, wrote: “There is certainly nothing wrong with dreaming the impossible dream or at least waiting for better days. The problem is that sometimes political leaders take their imaginations too seriously; as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. In the continuation of its report entitled “There will be no new Middle East”, this media emphasized: Israel is definitely not in a position to defeat Iran.

SS: The next BRICS summit will take place in Kazan, Russia from October 22–24, 2024. The summit will be the first to take place after the expansion of the BRICS group to 10 countries. The new members are Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. In your opinion, what changes may come out of this meeting?

JM: It should be noted that the hegemony in the western world, led by America, does not accept this change without resistance and plans and implements its efforts to delay it by creating instability in different regions of the world and even shows unpredictable behavior, however, the change of the old order, it is inevitable, although the exact time of this change cannot be predicted. Of course, there are signs of the new order, such as the economic growth statistics of the member countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS, which indicate the inevitable change of the old world order. The BRICS philosophy is a gathering of the world’s emerging economies, and at the same time, the growth rate of economies such as China, India, Brazil, and South Africa is significantly higher compared to the growth of the current dominant economies in the West. More importantly, China’s average annual growth in the next 10 years is about 5%, while America’s average growth is about 1.5%, so in the next decade, China will become 3.5% bigger than America every year, and by 2035, it will be one of the top 10 economies in the world. At least five economies will be located in the Asia region.As mentioned, the creators and promoters of the idea of a new order in the world were some Western politicians and strategists, especially in the United States of America.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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 source

The Dollar and the Globalist Power Complex: Overcoming ‘Designer-Chaos’ at a Critical Moment for the Human Race

By Julian Rose, October 21, 2024

With the creation of The Federal Reserve as a public/private banking institution in 1913 came the financial means to fund the US as the new global hegemon, taking over where the British left off. The Rockefeller family encapsulated US elite ambitions to bring into reality a ‘New World Order’ with US power brokers at the helm. Thus the despotic call for ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’.

APEC, BRICS+, and the Global South

By Peter Koenig, October 21, 2024

The upcoming APEC summit may be a good opportunity to promote the Global South alliance and cooperation, politically, economically and by trade, as well as establishing links with the BRICS-plus alliance.

Global Tyranny Never Sounded So Good: UN Summit of the Future

By Michael Bryant, October 21, 2024

The framework for what that new global economic system might look like is articulated in the World Economic Forum’s guidebook The Great Reset. A deep dive into the details of The Great Reset, made famous by the slogan “You’ll own nothing and be happy,” exposes this pretentious tract as just another long-winded rationale for economic despotism and centralized control over the lives of all the people (read: peons) on the planet.

Netanyahu’s War against the U.N.: “Uniting for Peace” process to stop Israel.” Interview with Dan Kovalik

By Daniel Kovalik and Steven Sahiounie, October 21, 2024

Israel has been at war with the UN since the beginning of this conflict, killing more UN staff people than any killed in history. There is a way to stop this. The UN General Assembly must use the “Uniting for Peace” process and order a military force to intervene and stop Israel’s assault on the UN and to stop its genocidal rampage. This measure is long overdue.

Doctors Warn of ‘Alarming’ Surge in Heart Attacks Among Healthy Young Americans

By Frank Bergman, October 21, 2024

Doctors are warning of an “alarming” surge in heart attacks among healthy young Americans as new data shows the numbers are skyrocketing. New data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics shows heart attacks among 18-40-year-olds spiked massively in 2021.

Widening the War: The US Sends Troops to Israel

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, October 21, 2024

In a measure that should have garnered bold headlines, the Biden administration has announced the deployment of some 100 US soldiers to Israel who will be responsible for operating the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system.

First They Came for the Journalists and the Academics! Sun Now Setting on Democracy as We Know It.

By Michael Welch, Eva Bartlett, Tamara Lorincz, Vanessa Beeley, and Radhika Desai, October 19, 2024

We are now witnessing innocent people, from independent journalists to intellectuals of high esteem facing open challenges in the public sphere. In Canada, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) have put their women and men on notice to set their sites on any “person of interest” that could pose a threat. And far too many are being detained.

The dangers should be plastered on every wall in every office occupied by a military and political advisor.  Israel’s attempt to reshape the Middle East, far from giving it enduring security, will merely serve to make it more vulnerable and unstable than ever.  In that mix and mess will be its greatest sponsor and guardian, the United States, a giant of almost blind antiquity in all matters concerning the Jewish state.

In a measure that should have garnered bold headlines, the Biden administration has announced the deployment of some 100 US soldiers to Israel who will be responsible for operating the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system.  They are being sent to a conflict that resembles a train travelling at high speed, with no risk of stopping.  As Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant promised in the aftermath of Iran’s October 1 missile assault on his country,

“Our strike will be powerful, precise, and above all – surprising.”  It would be of such a nature that “They will not understand what happened and how it happened.”

In an October 16 meeting between the Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Gallant, the deployment of a mobile THAAD battery was seen “as an operational example of the United States’ ironclad support to the defense of Israel.”  Largely meaningless bits of advice were offered to Gallant: that Israel “continue taking steps to address the dire humanitarian situation” and take “all necessary measures to ensure the safety and security” of UN peacekeepers operating in Lebanon’s south.

Image: Sinwar, wounded, staring at an Israeli drone, with his face covered in a keffiyeh, shortly before his death (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

The charade continued the next day in a conversation between Austin and Gallant discussing the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.  THAAD was again mentioned as essential for Israel’s “right to defence itself” while representing the “United States’ unwavering, enduring, and ironclad commitment to Israel’s security.”  (“Ironclad” would seem to be the word of the moment, neatly accompanying Israel’s own Iron Dome defence system.)

A statement from the Pentagon press secretary, Maj. Gen. Patrick Ryder, was a fatuous effort in minimising the dangers of the deployment.  The battery would merely “augment Israel’s integrated air defense system,” affirm the ongoing commitment to Israel’s defence and “defend Americans in Israel, from any further ballistic missile attacks from Iran.”

The very public presence of US troops, working alongside their Israeli counterparts in anticipation of broadening conflict, does not merely suggest Washington’s failure to contain their ally.  It entails a promise of ceaseless supply, bolstering and emboldening.  Furthermore, it will involve placing US troops in harm’s way, a quixotic invitation if ever there was one.

As things stand, the US is already imperilling its troops by deploying them in a series of bases in Jordan, Syria and Iraq.  Iran’s armed affiliates have been making their presence felt, harrying the stationed troops with increasing regularity since the Israel-Hamas war broke out on October 7 last year.  A gradual, attritive toll is registering, featuring such attacks as those on the Tower 22 base in northern Jordan in January that left three US soldiers dead.

Writing in August for The Guardian, former US army major Harrison Mann eventually realised an awful truth about the mounting assaults on these sandy outposts of the US imperium: “there was no real plan to protect US troops beyond leaving them in their small, isolated bases while local militants, emboldened and agitated by US support for Israel’s brutal war in Gaza, used them for target practice.”  To send more aircraft and warships to the Middle East also served to encourage “reckless escalation towards a wider war,” providing insurance to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he could be protected “from the consequences of his actions.”

Daniel Davis, a military expert at Defense Priorities, is firmly logical on the point of enlisting US personnel in the Israeli cause.

“Naturally, if Americans are killed in the execution of their duties, there will be howls from the pro-war hawks in the West ‘demanding’ the president ‘protect our troops’ by firing back on Iran.”  It was “exactly the sort of thing that gets nations sucked into war they have no interest in fighting.”

Polling, insofar as that measure counts, suggests that enthusiasm for enrolling US troops in Israel’s defence is far from warm.  In results from a survey published by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations in August, some four in ten polled would favour sending US troops to defend Israel if it was attacked by Iran.  Of the sample, 53% of Republicans would favour defending Israel in that context, along with four in 10 independents (42%), and a third of Democrats (34%).

There have also been some mutterings from the Pentagon itself about Israel’s burgeoning military effort, in particular against the Lebanese Iran-backed militia, Hezbollah.  In a report from The New York Times, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., is said to be worried about the widening US presence in the region, a fact that would hamper overall “readiness” of the US in other conflicts.  Being worried is just the start of it.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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: THAAD (From the Public Domain)

In this insightful interview, Architect Eric Eyutchae, National Vice President of Alaigbo Development Foundation (ADF), an Enugu-based socio-political organization which focuses on the development of South East Nigeria, on the eve of XVI BRICS summit in Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, discusses Africa’s political and development pitfalls, evolutionary features of BRICS+ Association, its current challenges and implications for Africa and the entire Global South. Here are the interview excerpts.

Kester Kenn Klomegah (KKK): How would you argue the fact that under Russia presidency, BRICS+ has consolidated its position in Africa?

Architect Eric Eyutchae (AEE): BRICS is basically redesigning the economic, political and social landscape in Africa, as more and more African countries with increasing desire to join BRICS. From the very beginning, it is clear that the consolidation started off with South Africa as one of the pioneering countries that made up BRICS. South Africa attended the 3rd BRICS summit in 2011, with South Africa as the ‘S’ in BRICS acronym. I think from that moment, the African direction of consolidation started with South Africa especially being one of the major power houses in Africa. Personally, I think that was a great move.

As you know, BRICS is a new socio-cultural and political organization that is barely 20yrs in existence, so talking about total consolidation of African nations now would be rather too early to acknowledge. However, BRICS is Africa’s largest trading partner as of today and with Ethiopia and Egypt who have joined BRICS and many more African nations expressing interest in joining BRICS, there seems to be a serious seismic shift of African nations from non-western alliances and organizations towards BRICS. We can recall the 5th BRICS summit, held in South Africa, was solely focused on BRICS and Africa. The major theme at that time was about partnership, integration and industrialization between Africa and BRICS. In fact, that evidently showed the consolidation of African states has been in the making over the years, with trade volumes rapidly increasing over the years. 

Today’s BRICS under the Chairmanship of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has practical evidence to increase the process of enlargement and consolidation. A lot however would depend on how critical and important Africa’s partnership with BRICS is viewed from Putin’s perspective. But I am very optimistic there has been an increase in Africa’s relationship with Russia, in particular, over these past few years mainly instigated by the Russian/Ukraine war. In a short assessment, I think the war has helped to loosen the Western tight grip on Africa and paving the way for African leaders to shop around for better developmental opportunities. And BRICS, on the whole, is offering Africa better opportunities for economic, socio-cultural and political growth.

KKK: In terms of economic cooperation and trade, China continues playing the leading role. But at the same time, Russia and India have perspectives of raising their economic standing in the region. What are your views here?

AEE: In a practical sense, China today is Africa’s biggest trading partner. As the saying goes, ‘it is not who started first that wins the race.’ So I think that for Russia and India, a lot is still in the making. First of all, we need to take a clinical look into the basic principles of BRICS and its policies towards the African continent. It holds the keys to this major seismic shift in Africa’s look towards the BRICS nations. They have one thing in common, which is their socio-economic and political values. Today, there is a serious geopolitical struggle between Russia and western nations. Let us be reminded that the policy of Soviet Union, back in those days, with Africa was basically geared towards one interest, which was primarily to spread socialism and communism all around the continent. Today is quite understandable that Russia and the then Soviet Union are completely different countries. 

According to President Putin during last year’s Russia –Africa summit in Saint Petersburg, Russian companies are interested in agriculture, fuel and energy sectors, nuclear power, chemical industry, mining, transport engineering and fishery. A lot of intergovernmental commissions for trade, economic, scientific and technological cooperation have been set up all around the continent to foster this new economic partnership. 

Russian economic interest in Africa has been rapidly gaining grounds, but yet noticeably lagging behind China and the United States. Despite the ongoing war in Ukraine, Russia’s economic interest in Africa has significantly increased. Economic opportunities come as a result of the right political trajectory that Moscow focuses on. This is the reason why Russia would and can develop very strong economic ties unlike most other countries that started off first with economics and later politics. The Russia-Africa Summit, for example, was a big boost for the new Russia-Africa economic cooperation. There is also the need to take into serious consideration Russia’s freight transportation super-projects between EuroAsia and African continents. It is being facilitated through these new transport megaprojects, the North to South corridor and the Arctic sea routes. These initiatives are part of what makes Russia’s economic adventures in Africa look very bright. Moreso, Russia has quite an interesting non-aggressive.

Historical ties with Africa dating back to the days of General Gannibal, the first black General in the Russian Army and who happened to be the great-grand father of Alexander Pushkin, the great Russian poet. Russia as at the time was the first to make an African noble while others were busy enslaving Africans. Also let us remember how Russia helped to fight Apartheid in South Africa. Russia has more opportunities to leverage on when it comes to Africa because of its clean records of human relations with African countries. Its economic relations with Africa is rapidly building up to a win-win situation for both Russia and Africa. 

Truth is that right from the 1st century AD, Africa, India and middle east has already been trading partners. Most of these current relationships and partnerships can be traced to their history. As far as India is concerned, India and Africa have had a very long and shared history many centuries ago and till date. Back in the days, many Africans visited India as traders and slaves, indeed many lived and played very important roles in the Indian society right from around the 4th century, so it is no surprise that we see strong economic ties being sustained over the years, What we are witnessing now is an increase in these bilateral relations. 

India like most African countries was once a British colony but in recent years India has taken hold of its destiny as a great nation. India from the very beginning has been a great voice on decolonisation of Africa and also the fight against apartheid, so its not surprising that these political relations are materializing economically for both Africa and India. It is worthy to note that Indian independence from its colonial master was a model for African emancipation. The historic ties goes to the many years Mahatma Ghandhi lived in South Africa. At a time Africa was referred to as Indian sister continent by Nehru, Indian first Prime Minister. India has over the years kept a very warm and cordial relationship with African countries who have been visiting New Delhi frequently in less tha 10 years. That alone is a good signal that things are working out well as far as bilateral relations is concerned and points at the fact that creating good political relations is more important to grow economic relations and not the other way round. It is not surprising that India-Africa trade relations has been growing annually 18% since early 2000. India, as of today, is Africa’s 3rd largest trading partner after China and the EU nations. Let us note that is also the second largest lender in Africa. Furthermore, India is a member of the African Development bank. This goes to show how serious India Africa economic relations is in reality. I see an increase in these partnerships, this is as a result of their historic cooperation over the decades.

On the whole all resourceful trades and businesses are powered by individual relationships. Interpersonal relationships are the boosters of all other partnerships, so I see a very bright future for Russia, India and Africa economic relations. It is important to mention here the role of India in getting the African Union to become a member of the G20. 

KKK: Do you also think lack of good governance, poor state policies and organizational are still factors hindering development in Africa? Despite the enormous resources, both natural and human, why Africa’s living standard poor for majority of its population?

AEE: This is a very deep and interesting question. Africa’s inability to develop rapidly judging from its enormous natural reserves is quite saddening and the reasons for this is multifaceted. The first reason is poor governance as you rightly pointed out. A nation can rightly develop in as much as its policies are at par with development. And I believe, we are talking about economic development. Development itself has many facets. Africa’s inability to elect good leaders has been its major setback and has negatively impacted on entire economic development. 

On the other hand, foreign influence in electing or installing African leaders for foreign interests is part of the reason for such poor leaders in Africa. Some foreign powers see Africa as an economic competitor if given the chance, and the chance here means good leadership in Africa. 

The other reason here is ignorance of Africans stemming from lack of proper education. Unfortunately, the colonial masters might have left Africa physically to some extent but their spirit and religious views are still maintained in Africa. The education in Africa has been greatly distorted and has not been beneficial to Africa’s development. It is this ignorance that is leveraged on during elections in Africa to deceive the poor masses into voting wrong candidates into positions of power. This translates to rigging and corruption of the electoral system. The illiterate and mostly ignorant masses are the instruments used to rig and elect bad leaders who do the bidding for their foreign masters. This is an unfortunate situation. Hardly will you see an African leader who works for the interest of their people. They are mostly after power and lavish lifestyles. There are examples all over the continent.

The poor government policies and poor organizational structure of African governments are sustained due to the ignorance of the poor masses. In Africa today, many are involved so much with local politics that is rooted in corruption and have little understanding of global geopolitics. They lack the understanding of the trickle down effects of geopolitics. Most Africans really don’t understand how their countries are being influenced politically, socially and economically by global politics. Ignorance makes the masses to have the wrong order of values and virtues. I would believe that the right education can right most of these wrongs. The more aware and conscious a society is, the faster it can achieve great heights in all aspects of life. 

KKK: Do you think with the changing geopolitical situation, BRICS+ can facilitate and support Africa? 

AEE: Yes, I believe so. Like I mentioned earlier, it is all in the BRICS policies towards Africa and with South Africa as a foundational member and India as a long-time ally I see great support for Africa’s growth creating a win-win situation for both BRICS and Africa.

KKK: Can you explain the challenges which currently remain in the region especially with reference to Global South? How does Africa fit in here, as an integral part of the Global South?

AEE: Africa’s challenges today are the same challenges as yesteryears stemmimg from its past colonial rule. Africa’s difficulty in cutting away from its past as a colony to western European and American powers is a major hindrance. This actually cuts both ways, in the sense that a lot matters how we as Africans view ourselves and how our past colonial masters view Africa. I would think that African consciousness is lacking in most African countries. This is where the right education plays a major role. When you have a well educated society there is everyother possibility for such a society to thrive but in Africa, the issue of brain drain persists as also a limiting factor to development whereby aside from bad leadership, the few smart and conscious individuals are given opportunities by foreign countries to work in various developed nations.

This is a situation that made African societies lose most of the experts and professionals they have to already developed nations because at home they might become useless even with all the talent and knoweledge due to unemployment and poor infrastructures. With poor electricity supply for example it is impossible to have machines operate or even to read books and to function adequately as a human being in the 21st century. 

Yet Africa lacks in all of this. As far as the Global South is concerned, I am not sure much would change, except that the former members of G-77 countries who were known as the Third World countries are now called the Global South. It’s just ‘a new term’ coined for developing countries. From all indications, these are countries that are striving to become economically independent.

KKK: BRICS has been advocating for serious reforms within the multilateral institutions, supporting African unified voices on world’s stage. Why African leaders hate to clean and put their own homes in an order? Why they refuse to undertake reforms at African Union, and all the Regional Economic blocs especially ECOWAS? 

AEE: With the United Nations, BRICS has been advocating for reforms in these institutions. You see, these reforms have been in anticipation for decades. After the 2008 financial crises, BRICS was formed to seek an alternative to the Bretton Woods multilateral financial institutions. It is apparent that BRICS cannot rely on these institutions like IMF, World Bank et cetera, to make the necessary reforms through minilateral institutions like G20 and the rest. However, BRICS, now taking control of the majority of global oil producers, has the potential to advance these reforms, but first and foremost, BRICS member states need to make clear their collective aims and directions of the organization as new members are absorbed into the organization. I think that it’s not as much as supporting a unified African voice on global affairs, as it is for supporting the entire voice of the Global South of which Africa is a major part of. Of course, it is expected that through BRICS, Africa has a great opportunity to make its collective voice heard globally but the problem is in the collectivity of these African nations to be able to have a united voice. The various African leaders arrogantly refuse to clean up their countries basically because they don’t call the shots. Unfortunately Stockholm syndrome is still very real in most African countries. Hence, reforms can be made in the African Union, ECOWAS and other African regional organizations only when these African nations clean up all the rot in their various countries, and the truth is that no one is coming from outside to do it for Africans. Africans have to clean up themselves. 

Indeed, its is often asked how can Africa have a collective voice when most of the individual voices are echoes of their masters voices. Therefore, not until Africa becomes mentally free from its colonial masters, can there be any real collective African voice. Recently, the world witnessed the sham called elections in Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) last year, where there was zero accountability from the electoral body mandated to carry out these elections. How can such a country undergo any meaningful reforms voluntarily? The ball actually is in Africa’s court and we must play by the rules of development or gradually go extinct.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), Weekly Blitz and InDepthNews, is now a regular contributor to Global Research. He researches Eurasia, Russia, Africa and BRICS. His focused interest areas include geopolitical changes, foreign relations and economic development questions relating to Africa. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

One of the issues on which consensus should be created and can be treated at world level is that terrorism in all its forms should be firmly rejected. However this needs honesty and sincerity. Problems arise if some bigger powers insist on condemning terror attacks made by others but at the same time justify the use of terror by themselves on a large scale.

Those who claim to be in the leadership role in fighting terror have themselves been involved in several terror acts, including assassinations of highly respected national and world-level leaders, and at the same time have made use of many terror organizations and leading terrorists for achieving their narrowly defined objectives.

In fact some of the most serious problems have been created in the context of the supposed wars against terrorism and terrorist organizations which have been pursued in ways that have created terror of an even worst kind for an even larger number of people. This can be presently seen in the context of Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza which have resulted in terror of a much worst kind for a much larger number of innocent people compared to the Hamas terror attack to which it is supposed to be responding. The relentless attacks on Lebanon have led to similar concerns.

There are many example from recent decades in which similar opportunist use of terrorism and terrorist organizations was made.

In the 1980s the Sandinista government in Nicaragua was attracting wide attention with achieving very significant improvements in health, education and small peasant based farming cooperatives. Some of the development achievements it recorded could not be achieved by the Somoza dictatorship, a US client state, in the previous four decades. While the people of Nicaragua were very happy and hopeful with the achievements of the new government, the USA government was upset that this would spread a strong message regarding the superiority of the socialist model over the capitalist model. Hence the CIA and President Reagan launched a huge campaign to harm not just the Sandinista government but also the symbols of its success such as health centres, hospitals, schools and cooperatives. For this purpose various right-wing groups called contras (counter revolutionaries) were mobilized, armed and trained by the CIA in an operation costing several million dollars. In addition the CIA arranged for explosions at ports, refineries and pipelines.

America Watch, which subsequently became part of Human Rights Watch, accused the contras of targeting health care clinics and assassination of health workers, attacking and killing civilians, torturing them, raping women and burning civilian homes. Clearly terror tactics were widely used by obtaining the collusion of terror agents. Human Rights Watch stated in a report (1989),

“The Contras were major and systematic violators of the most basic standards of the laws of armed conflict, including by launching indiscriminate attacks on civilians, selectively murdering non-combatants and mistreating prisoners.”

When concern grew at the Contras’ indiscriminate aggressions and the US Congress stopped their funding, the CIA arranged illegal funds for the Contras including money from drugs trafficking and sale of arms.

Image: President Salvador Allende

In 1973 several terror tactics, including kidnapping, bombing and assassination of most senior leaders, were included in the CIA plan to oust another social government committed to the welfare of people—the Popular Unity government led by President Salvador Allende in Chile, a very popular leader who was expected to prove the superiority of the socialist path of progress. Following Allende’s election the CIA director had a meeting with President Nixon and a note from this meeting, later declassified, stated–$ 10 million available, more if necessary, full time job, best men we have, game plan make the economy scream, 48 hours for plan of action.

However before Allende could be removed, it was found necessary to get rid of General Rene Schneider who was committed to the constitution of the country and was a man of great integrity. Big money and weapons to get rid of him were provided by the CIA. Attempts to kidnap him were made in the course of which he was eventually killed. Then came the CIA-assisted attack against Allende in the course of which the presidential palace was bombed and Allende died. This led to the Pinochet dictatorship for several decades characterized by huge corruption, corporate plunder and inequalities on the one hand and the most terrible torture, executions and disappearances on the other hand, inflicted on tens of thousands of opponents including women. Hence terror tactics were used not just during the coup but continued till much later afterwards against innocent people. The Pinochet regime which tortured and killed opponents for decades got full support from the USA and the Chilean model was held out for emulation by a leading group of US economists the Chicago boys.

In 1961 the people of the newly independent Republic of Congo had high hopes of progress under the leadership of their very popular leader and freedom fighter Patrice Lumumba, but the democratically elected Prime Minister was ousted in a coup supported by Belgium and USA, and killed in a very cruel way. In this case also terror tactics like assassination were used not only during the coup but continued for a long time afterwards against innocent people, as this ouster was followed by Mobutu led dictatorship for decades, characterized by glaring abuse of human rights including large-scale torture, cruel suppression of opponents, plunder of economy and massive corruption. For the most part this dictatorship was supported by the USA.

In 1964 USA assisted efforts led to a coup to bring down the democratic government of Brazil led by President Joao Goulart. This led to a dictatorship characterized by death squads, torture and human rights violations.

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

Mohammad Mossadegh was a popular leader and Prime Minister of Iran, elected democratically in elections, keen to get more resources for helping his people by curbing the profits of oil multinationals. This led to a coup by the combined agents of the USA and Britain in 1953, so that the unpopular Shah of Iran could be brought in again for monarchical rule, suppressing the democratic aspirations of the people. While Mossadegh was jailed and many of his supporters were jailed or executed, a secret police called SAVAK was set up which became notorious for its gruesome torture and repressive activities.

In Guatemala around the same time a CIA-assisted coup led to the ouster of the democratically elected government of President Jacobo Arbenz that was known to be devoted to the welfare of people. This was followed by nearly four decades of military rule with its death squads, disappearances, torture, and mass executions, claiming over 150,000 victims.

The Church Committee of the US Senate had investigated the allegations relating to the assassination and attempted assassination of almost a dozen foreign leaders by the US intelligence agencies like the CIA. Other books on this subject have mentioned close to 40 prominent foreign leaders who are likely to have been targeted with assassination or grave harm. In addition many disturbing questions have been raised in the context of the circumstances of the death of three prominent leaders of the USA at a young age—President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy Sr. All three were involved in trying to find a path for the USA which is closer to the precepts of peace and justice, and the role of insider agencies associated with promotion of violence and war has been widely alleged in several well-documented reports.

In the case of Fidel Castro, the most popular leader and former President of Cuba, dozens of assassination and serious harm attempts were made but he survived them all. In addition there have been several other terrorist aggressions aimed at Cuba causing immense harm. There is an even longer history of disruptive and sabotage efforts by the USA and close allies against the Soviet Union and Russia.

In Indonesia the popular President Sukarno survived assassination and blackmailing attempts but was finally ousted around 1965 in a regime change that is widely believed to have been assisted by the USA. This was accompanied by a bloodbath aimed at particularly the communists and using religious fanatics as aggressors. The number of those who were killed was stated to be around half a million, although some estimates also mention a higher figure.

In Iraq the total number of those killed in direct and indirect ways in all the hostile activities of the USA and its close allies exceeds one million. Some of the most deadly new terrorist groups based on sectarian and fundamentalist ideologies were created as a result of the hostile actions of the USA and its allies here and in Syria (which too has experienced extensive devastation due to the various hostile activities of the USA).

Earlier the USA mobilized sectarian, fanatic militants from many Islamic countries and armed them heavily with the help of Pakistan to fight the Soviet army and the communist regime in Afghanistan. Over 15,000 of these armed militants later spread violent conflict in many other countries as well, while also attacking several US and western targets.

In Libya in 2011 USA, Britain and France again armed and used such militants for regime change in very violent ways, supported by thousands of air bombing raids. These militants again later troubled and destabilized several neighbouring countries.

Even within European allied countries like France, Italy and Greece there were reports of US interference to check the spread of leftist groups, including the use of gangster violence and other illegal methods for this. Even the most prominent national leaders like former President Charles de Gaulle in France felt badly threatened at times.

Several Cuban exiles who have taken shelter in the USA have been involved in terrorist activities against Cuba including airplane hijacking but have continued to find shelter and help in the USA. Similarly several other dictators or their henchmen used in serious human rights violations and crimes against their people have been finding safe haven in the USA from time to time.

A quote from a report of Amnesty International sums up the tragic situation —

“Throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced, tortured, killed or ‘disappeared’, at the hands of governments or armed political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame.” (Washington Office of Amnesty International, Human Rights and US Security Assistance, 1996, page 1).

The 9/11 terrorist attack on the USA was a most horrible attack and almost the entire world sympathized deeply with the USA and with the innocent persons who had lost their life in this attack. The 9/11 attacks led the USA military and foreign policy establishment to launch a prolonged series of military actions in many countries with the stated aim of curbing terrorism and terror. These have been collectively called the war on terror or terrorism, the global war on terror and the 9/11 wars. Although there have been criticisms and debates linked to these names, for practical purposes the short description of war on terror has been frequently used to collectively describe the US military actions mainly in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and elsewhere.

This war on terror has proved extremely costly in terms of loss of human life and displacement of people. According to the Costs of War data base prepared by the Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs, Brown University, USA ( briefly referred to as Brown University estimates which were also cited, although selectively, by President Biden in one of his national addresses), these costs from 2001 to now have been unacceptably high.

This data base tells us that a total of 906,000 to 937,000 human lives have been lost in this war on terror in terms of direct war deaths (people who died from bombs and bullets or directly in conflicts). This figure does not include the deaths caused by infrastructure collapse of water, sewage and health as a result of war, or diseases related to war impacts. However the Brown University base clearly says that “several times as many more have been killed as a reverberating effect of war.”

Regarding the direct war deaths 176,000 took place in Afghanistan, 280,771 to 315,190 in Iraq, 268,816 in the context of Syria/ISIS, 112,000 in Yemen and 67,000 in Pakistan, and the remaining elsewhere.

What is more, 38 million people have been displaced by the post 9/11 wars—5.9 million in Afghanistan, 3.7 million in Pakistan, 4.6 million in Yemen, 4.3 million in Somalia, 1.8 million in the Philippines, 9.2 million in Iraq, 1.2 million in Libya and 7.1 million in Syria.

This estimate has been presented as a conservative estimate and according to this data base, a more realistic number would be somewhere between 49 to 60 million, which brings it closer to the displacement caused by World War II.

What did these interventions achieve? In the case of Afghanistan, the people who faced food insecurity were 62% of the population in 2001 (before the intervention), in 2022 this number had increased to 92%. The percentage of children under 5 suffering from malnutrition increased in a big way. The percentage of people of Afghanistan living in poverty increased from 80% to 97%. Women faced heavy restrictions in 2001, they also face heavy restrictions now.

The war on terror caused many more indirect deaths compared to the direct deaths due to the increase of hunger, disease, displacement, collapse of water, sanitation and health infra-structure. If all these deaths are added, then according to the Brown University estimates, the direct and indirect deaths caused by the war on terror are about 4.5 million. If these are completely updated and all the countries affected are covered, the number would be even higher.

These statistics collected from many sources by the Brown University data base tell a very sad story of a highly misguided war on terror hijacked to an entirely wrong path. The 9/11 attacks had created sincere and strong sympathy for the USA, on top of an already felt need for strong action against terrorism by many world leaders. Statements of sympathy, cooperation and help were pouring in without asking from several world leaders, including from Russia. This was the right time for mobilizing strong worldwide action against all terrorism in an unbiased way, based in the UN. Almost everyone would have cooperated and nobody would have been burdened too much by costs by pooling resources. But the hawkish policy makers in the USA concentrated instead on organizing the entire thing around their almost pre-set aggressive agenda, leading to such terrible results.

The USA is supposed to have some of the most capable intellectuals, some of the best universities, its democratic system is supposed to have checks and balances, how then it could continue such a futile and destructive agenda for such a long time? What is going so seriously wrong here? What is the remedial action needed? Answers to these questions have to be sought and only then we can say that the very costly lessons of the war on terror have been learnt.

US authorities must realize that their discourse on this and related issues increasingly lacks credibility among large sections of world’s people, including those who are sympathetic to USA.

A much greater effort should have been made to find out the entire truth about the 9/11 attacks as so many important, disturbing questions have been raised by several eminently qualified persons and groups. In fact this is true also regarding the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel as here too many aspects of the attack remain shrouded in suspicion and doubt. Apart from taking much greater care to find out the truth there is need also for looking at the social and related dimensions of the response instead of merely relying on force and military power.

However instead of committing adequate resources to a broad-based program to work towards a terror-free society, the USA and its close allies diverted most attention and resources to invading Iraq, a terrible mistake which proved very costly in terms of entirely avoidable loss of a large number of human lives. As President Bush’s senior counter-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke recalled later, he was asked to prepare a file on Saddam’s links to 9/11. When he responded by preparing a detailed note that there were none, even got it signed by other leading intelligence officials before submitting, he got back a curt reply—update and file again. Such glaring mistakes should be officially admitted and responsibility for them should be fixed.

The war against terror has failed because it was not conducted in a democratic and transparent way, the best advice available within the establishment was ignored, facts were pushed aside and falsehoods were deliberately promoted to suit arbitrarily taken decisions. An important question here is—was anyone punished for very costly mistakes? Were serious mistakes admitted officially in ways such that responsibility for these could be fixed? Were real efforts ever made to find out the causes of serious failures, or honestly detail the circumstances in which very costly mistakes were made?

Apart from the costly mistake of diverting the main war effort to Iraq without reason, there was the failure to commit adequate ground forces to apprehend bin Laden and his close colleagues in the Tora Bora caves during December 1-16 2001. As explained with supporting views of field level army officers and senior intelligence officials in a report titled ‘Tora Bora Revisited’, submitted to the foreign relations committee of the Senate headed by John. F. Kerry in 2009, repeated requests for reinforcements were refused or ignored allowing bin Laden and hundreds of his warriors to escape to Pakistan. Basically this report stated—about 2500 troops were needed to prevent escape, only 100 were provided, more were available easily but were not called in.

As long as the system does not fix responsibility for such glaring mistakes, these will continue to be made, as these were made subsequently with reference also to Syria, Libya and elsewhere. An even more basic question is—what are the grievances and arguments that attract significant numbers to the path of terrorism? Is enough being done to reduce the appeal of these grievances and arguments? If this is not being done, or if the grievances and arguments are seen to be becoming stronger for significant sections of people, then threat of terrorism is likely to increase.

It is well-known that in course of driving out the Soviet Army the CIA used Islamic militants from many countries using mediation of the ISI of Pakistan, and later many of these militants turned against the USA. Has the USA continued to opportunistically support such forces in other places, even if not to the same extent as before, to achieve short-term objectives?

A narrow-minded approach to counter terrorism based mainly on military force has failed. When will a broader approach based on longer term genuine commitment to peace, democracy, justice and development evolve? Only such a sustainable approach will lead to increasing non-relevance and loss of support for the ideologies of terrorism. If the USA is serious about correcting its record of very frequent and costly mistakes, its authorities should come out of their narrow and outdated thinking and approach these and related important issues with fresh, credible, transparent attitudes. Even those countries like India which have suffered a lot from across the border terrorism and wanted a relationship of cooperation with the USA and its close allies for reducing terrorism threats have been increasingly frustrated by the highly opportunistic attitudes of the USA and its close allies on terrorism, which appear mainly to be geared to advancing their own narrowly perceived interests at any given time. This kind of attitudes of the USA and close allies have increased the problems instead of solving them and progress will be made only by dropping double standards and opportunism and replacing this with the kind of sincerity that is needed for international cooperation on such an important issue.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. He has written with a perspective of peace, justice and environment protection for over 50 years. His recent books include ‘Protecting Earth for Children’, ‘Planet in Peril’, ‘Man over Machine’ and ‘A Day in 2071’. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The international community is united in their condemnation of the actions of Israel upon the civilians in Gaza, with a death now well over 40,000, and the attacks on Lebanon which have killed and injured civilians who have no connection to Hezbollah. The UN General Assembly has voted for a ceasefire, but Israel ignores the international community.

Israel carries out its genocide in Gaza, while opening a new war in Lebanon which may decimate the infrastructure of a member of the UN with a population of 43% Christians and 57% Muslims, and a French speaking nation.

The US veto in the UN Security Council allows Israel to act with impunity, safeguarded from any constraints.

However, the UN in 1950 designed an off-ramp, which allows for the General Assembly to act over and above if a Security Council is held hostage of one veto.

Experts say the time is overdue to act to avert a regional war in the Middle East which will certainly have global repercussions, as well may start the Third World War.

The UN resolution 377 A (V) was given the title “Uniting for Peace”, and allows the General Assembly to call for an emergency special session. The last emergency special session began in 1997, dealing with the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, and can be resumed at any time because it was only adjourned in 2006.

The US Ambassador to the UN, John Foster Dulles, was instrumental in the passing of the “Uniting for Peace” system. He said,

“If, in response to our resolution, the Member States do actually establish a system which ensures that aggression will be promptly exposed, if they maintain a collective strength, and if they have both the will and the way to use that strength promptly in case of need, then a third world war may be permanently averted … It would be vastly reassuring to all who love peace if here we could adopt unanimously a program which only aggressors need fear. … We must organize dependably the collective will to resist. If the Security Council does not do so, then this Assembly must do what it can by invoking its residual power of recommendation … As the world moves in the path that this resolution defines, it will move nearer and nearer to the Charter ideal.”

On September 18, the UN General Assembly passed historic Resolution ES-10/24 (124 in favor,14 against, 43 abstentions), demanding Israel end its occupation within 12 months, evacuate its settlers and military forces from the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT), and provide reparations to Palestinians affected by the occupation, and third states to suspend arms transfers to Israel, in accord with the ICJ advisory opinion finding Israel’s occupation illegal.

Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Dan Kovalik, human rights, labor rights lawyer, peace activist, and author of the new book, The Plot to Control The World.

Steven Sahiounie (SS): Israel attacked UN peacekeepers in Lebanon on October 10, October 11, and on October 13 two Israeli tanks burst through and destroyed the main gate to the UN base. These actions were met with international condemnation, but Israel seems to ignore it. In your opinion, is there any way to stop the Israeli attacks on the UN?

Dan Kovalik (DK): Israel has been at war with the UN since the beginning of this conflict, killing more UN staff people than any killed in history. There is a way to stop this. The UN General Assembly must use the “Uniting for Peace” process and order a military force to intervene and stop Israel’s assault on the UN and to stop its genocidal rampage. This measure is long overdue.

SS: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement addressed to U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres: “The time has come for you to withdraw UNIFIL from Hezbollah strongholds and from the combat zones.” In your view, why does Netanyahu want the UN peacekeepers to leave Lebanon?

Image: © UNIFIL/Pasqual Gorriz UNIFIL peacekeepers patrol between Ras Naqoura and Labounieh along the Blue Line in southwestern Lebanon.

DK: First of all, Guterres has no power to order UNIFIL to leave. They are there by Security Council authorization and can only be ordered to leave by the Security Council. That said, Netanyahu wants UNIFIL to leave in order to make way for a full-scale invasion of Lebanon without limit and without eyewitnesses to the crimes Netanyahu plans to commit against the Lebanese population.

SS: UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini said at least 230 UNRWA staff have been killed in the Gaza Strip since Israel’s attacks there. In your opinion, can Israel be held accountable for these deaths?

DK: Certainly, Israel can be held accountable for these crimes by the International Criminal Court if there is a will among the international community to do this. The problem is that the West, and especially the U.S. and UK, have been putting pressure on the ICC not to act against Israel.

SS: According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), at least 564 schools in the Gaza Strip have been directly hit or damaged by Israeli attacks. In your view, what can be done about this, and why would Israel target schools run by the UN?

DK: Israel has generally been targeting these schools because they have become centers to house Palestinians displaced by the war. Israel wants to do maximum damage to the Palestinian people in Gaza in order to carry out its genocidal designs. Israel has also targeted schools and universities as a process of “educide,” wanting to destroy Palestine’s well-known culture of education and learning.

SS: It appears Israel is above the law, and the international community seems impotent to stop Israel from atrocities and crimes. It is known that the US is complicit in the crimes that Israel is allowed to commit with impunity. In your opinion, is there any possibility of holding the US accountable for their complicity?

DK: It will be very difficult to hold the U.S. accountable because of its overwhelming military superiority in the world. The U.S. has destroyed international law in order to create a world in which might makes right, knowing that this would give the U.S. the advantage to do as it wills without limits. This has created a truly dangerous situation in the world which will be hard to contain.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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.

Background

For the third time, Peru will host the APEC Summit in Lima from 13-15 November 2024, bringing together over 1,000 international executives. Peru previously hosted the APEC Summit in 2008 and 2016. This is the 34^th APEC Conference. APEC was created in 1989, and APEC Summits are held annually.

The theme for the 2024 APEC meeting is Empower, Include, Grow.

The 2025 (March 16-20) APEC Summit will be hosted by the United States, in Atlanta, Georgia.

Expectation

Mr. Fernando Zavala, from Peru, will chair APEC 2024; he highlighted that APEC 2024 is a unique opportunity to give a fresh impetus to the Peruvian free trade agenda, the urgent attraction of private investments, and economic growth.

Image: Fernando Zavala (Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

There is a possibility that closer relations between APEC members and the new BRICS-plus (currently 10 members) might be sought. Current APEC members may aspire to become BRICS-plus members. Russia is hosting this year’s BRICS-plus Summit in Kazan, from October 22-24, 2024.

Mr. Zavala, the APEC 2024 Chair, is currently CEO of Intercorp, a Peruvian business conglomerate and consultant for Big Finance. Mr. Zavala is a former Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of Peru.

What Is APEC?

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is a forum of 21 Asia-Pacific economies. They include Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, The Republic of the Philippines, The Russian Federation, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, United States,  and Vietnam.

APEC’s member economies are home to more than 2.9 billion people and make up over 60 per cent of global GDP, i.e. about US$ 66 trillion (2024 estimate), and close to 50% of world trade.

The APEC forum was established in 1989 by Australia in Canberra. APEC began as an informal ministerial-level dialogue group with 12 founding members: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and the United States.

China became a member two years later, in November 1991, some 33 years ago. Today, APEC partners account for more than 60% of China’s trade.

In the case of Australia, APEC’s founder, APEC partners make up around 75 per cent of Australia’s total trade in goods and services. Closer regional economic integration contributes to Australian economic growth and prosperity.

Other APEC countries may have similar success stories as far as their trade relations and trade growth is concerned, thanks to APEC.

Since its creation, APEC has become the pre-eminent economic forum in the Asia-Pacific region. Its primary purpose and objective is promoting sustainable economic growth and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific area.

Present among the APEC participants in Lima, will be a myriad of commercial and political entities, including execs from JP Morgan and other top Wall Street bankers, as well as the head of the IMF, Dr. Kristalina Georgieva, and Klaus Schwab, former chair of the World Economic Forum (WEF) – and many other international personalities, likely also from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. This is an indication that APEC is ever-growing in international importance for both free-trade and investments.

Vision

The APEC Putrajaya Vision 2040 was adopted by APEC Leaders in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in November 2020. It set out a new mission statement for APEC for the next 20 years. Putrajaya is a city with a population of about 120,000, less than 40 km south of Kuala Lumpur, belonging to the Malaysia Federal Territory, and is also the seat of the Prime Minister’s Office, which explains the name, Putrajaya, for the vision approved by the 2020 APEC Summit.

The APEC Putrajaya Vision projects “an open, dynamic, resilient and peaceful Asia-Pacific community by 2040, for the prosperity of all our people and future generations”. The Putrajaya Vision 2040 is expected to be achieved through three economic drivers: trade and investment; innovation and digitalization; and strong, balanced, secure, sustainable, and inclusive growth.

China – Peru Relations

Peru and China these days have at least two cooperation opportunities: first, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit will be held in Lima from 13-15 November 2024; and second, almost simultaneously, expected also in November 2024, the inauguration of the Chancay mega-port in Peru, less than 100 km north of Lima, entirely built and to be managed by China; one of the most important Belt and Road hubs in Latin America.

The APEC Conference, may be an opportunity for China to making some inroads into Latin America through Peru, precisely in connection with the new mega-port in Chancay. Countries like Chile, Brazil, Paraguay, Ecuador and maybe even Colombia, may want to take advantage of this project to boost their exports to Asia, including China.

The mega-port of Chancay will be an extraordinary economic development opportunity – an export corridor.

Therefore, there is a clear link between Chancay and APEC – one that could work for mutual advantage of China and Peru; mutual investment and export opportunities. This may also apply to other LAC (Latin America and Caribbean) countries – making APEC and Chancay the focus of common interests and benefits for China, Peru, and other Latin American countries.

Mr. Zavala is a former Peruvian Prime Minister and Finance Minister and, while traditionally Peru is largely run by the United States through her current President Madame Dina Boluarte, practically an implant of Washington’s, the former Finance Minister may be the right dialogue partner for bilateral affairs.

Mme. Boluarte is currently involved in several corruption scandals in her country. Her current approval rating in Peru is less than 7% (a disapproval rating of over 93%).

*

BRICS-plus / Expansion of Global South

Russia will hold the BRICS Summit in Kazan from October 22 to 24, 2024.

Image is from the Public Domain

During its BRICS presidency this year, Russia has said it will focus on “promoting the entire range of partnership and cooperation within the framework of the association on three key tracks – politics and security, the economy and finance, and cultural and humanitarian ties.”

On January 1, 2024, the founding members of the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, were formally expanded by five new members: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Combined, the BRICS members encompass about 30% of the world’s land surface and 45% of the global population. By 2024, the BRICS-plus are holding a total 33 percent of the world’s GDP compared to 30 percent held by the G7 countries. The gap between BRICS+ and G7 is expected to further grow in the next five years.

This especially, if BRICS+ will gradually equal the Global South, which already in 2024 is estimated to hold about 40% of the world’s GDP and is expected to exceed 50% by 2030.

Ahead of the 2024 BRICS Summit in Kazan, on 18 October President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with journalists from the heads of leading BRICS media agencies in Novo-Ogaryovo, Moscow Region. Mr. Putin mentioned for example that the alliance among BRICS countries was not a move against the West, but an agreement to closer cooperation, comparing it with the growing collaboration among nations of the Global South.

Mr. Putin also mentioned that during the year of Russian chairmanship of the BRICS, about 250 events were planned, of which 200 had already taken place. Mr. Putin added,

“Now that we are working together within a single group, we have created platforms for exchanging ideas and exploring potential joint projects across a range of sectors. While economic cooperation is our primary focus, we are also placing significant emphasis on developing people-to-people and humanitarian ties in such areas as culture, cinema, youth exchanges, and more.”

President Putin’s further remark is significant in two ways: first, it indicates that BRICS is ever more representative of the Global South, and second, despite much interest, further expansion must be carefully analyzed by all BRICS members.

In Mr. Putin’s words:

“You know that each new country brings its close allies along in various areas. When a country joins the group, its partner nations naturally take an interest in what is happening and often express a desire to collaborate as well.”

“As I have mentioned many times before, around 30 countries have expressed interest in cooperating with BRICS in some form or participating in its activities. This is a clear and visible impact of our recent expansion. In fact, another wave of interest is already building on the heels of this one. However, we need to carefully consider, alongside all BRICS countries, how best to approach further expansion.”

But by the same token, Vladimir Putin adds:

“One thing is certain: We will not turn anyone away. The doors are wide open. The question now is how to structure this process, and my colleagues and I, along with our friends, will discuss all these matters when we meet in Kazan.”

See this for full Press Report.

As of now, it is unclear whether and / or how many new candidates may be accepted to join the BRICS-plus at the Kazan meeting 22-24 October 2024.

As indicated before, BRICS+ (BRICS-plus) will increasingly be interchangeable with the Global South; therefore the APEC Summit in Lima will also be an excellent opportunity for the founders of BRICS —China and Russia— to dialogue and interchange ideas with APEC-attending LAC countries, about the future of BRICS-plus. Such cooperation might benefit all, as the Global South is determined to exit the domination of the west.

The upcoming APEC summit may be a good opportunity to promote the Global South alliance and cooperation, politically, economically and by trade, as well as establishing links with the BRICS-plus alliance.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

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

Featured image is licensed under Fair Use

Order Out of Chaos – ‘E Pluribus Unem’–  thanks to its being imprinted on the US Dollar bill, is a well known epithet. It is accompanied by a pyramid in whose apex is embedded the all seeing Eye of Horus.

You won’t find a more stark symbol of the ambition of the globalist power complex than this. 

But as familiar as it is, it is worth reminding ourselves that this message is so brazenly printed on the bank note of the US currency because that country’s banking empire was designed to lead the take over and domination the world.

With the creation of The Federal Reserve as a public/private banking institution in 1913 came the financial means to fund the US as the new global hegemon, taking over where the British left off.

The Rockefeller family encapsulated US elite ambitions to bring into reality a ‘New World Order’ with US power brokers at the helm. Thus the despotic call for ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’.

Once joined up with the European Rothschild’s, a banking superpower was born that financed both the fascist and the ‘allies’ military industrial project, fully exploiting the power of the ‘divide and conquer’ formula during two world wars and beyond.

The objective was to not only get rich from war but also to crush the life out of the broad swathe of humanity whose instincts were essentially peaceful.

In order to be successful, this process – incorporating as it does general population reduction – needed to instil ‘chaos’ into the very foundation of society at a global level. 

The instilling of chaos on a global level is a long term affair. It has to eat its way into the heart of relatively stable national institutions; cultures; established socio economic trading patterns; environmental protection; agriculture; the arts; education and of course standard financial practices.

What I think we can safely say is that this process of totally undermining the stability of planetary existence and the basic equilibrium of human life is only now coming into its full expression.

It needed to absorb every nation state of the Western world, of Eastern Europe and Asia and the great majority of Southern hemisphere land masses and peoples, before having the capacity to fully dictate terms on the global stage.

Such unbridled megalomania was encapsulated in the initiative known as The Project for the New American Century, established as a ‘think tank’ in the mid 1990’s, but actually operating as a global policy maker.

The human and collateral damage done since this time has been massive. However the US has bankrupted itself in the process, both economically and psychically. The bottom has fallen out of the world policeman’s beat  – with the baton having been taken up by the shadow government hierarchy which is no longer identified with any particular land mass.

The deep state hierarchy was actually ‘in charge’ all along, but the US was chosen to be the front for its ambitions.

The global lockdowns achieved via mass promotion and indoctrination of the Covid scam are the most stark example of this one world dictatorship manoeuvring itself to exert the latest forms of chaos into every corner of the planet.

Chaos, taking the form of war fermentation, is now manifesting in Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and seeks to draw in Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and pretty much the whole of the Middle East.

The devastation takes different forms elsewhere, but is equally harsh. It can, and does, take the form of planned weather destabilisation leading to excess heat and excess precipitation, causing desertification and flooding of both populations centres and prime agricultural land.

Not just this, but the more precise targetted weaponising of weather via HAARP and scalar weapon activation leads to earthquakes, fires and tornadoes reeking their destruction on chosen targets.

Who is not questioning the origins of hurricanes Helene and Milton whose devastation of South and central Florida and into the Carolinas, brought misery and chaos to millions of residents?

Death tolls from such incidents are rising inexorably – and they are not examples of anthropogenic global warming doing its worst, as the super hyped ulterior motive of global warming/climate change is continuously rolled-out to insinuate.

This false flag global warming gaslighting was devised by the same hegemons who devised the world wide ‘order out of chaos’ destabilisation package.

No one should fall for their deeply sinister ambitions to bring humanity to its knees and to exact every last ounce of material and energetic reward in the process.

So here we are today, faced by the further manifestation of chaos at the hands of a small demonic elite whose insentient, compassionless state of being allows them to commit every kind of murderous homicide and genocide with apparent impunity.

We the people have to confront this reality head-on. There is no escaping it. And the first major problem we have is that the majority don’t believe in the existence of insient psychopaths.

They look into their own emotional repertoire and don’t find that particular ailment. So they conclude it can’t be true. 

The life haters are, in most peoples eyes, just crazed or sick humans having a murderous spree inadequately dealt with by inept, self satisfied governments.

If it were the case that only a bunch of crazed humans were on the loose, the damage suffered by this planet and its people would be a small fraction of what it is.

No, those in control of the proliferation of chaos are much darker, more cunning and much more single minded. Out of their chaos is supposed to emerge ‘The New World Order’ – ‘Order’ out of chaos.

Have a good look around and you will see that the ‘new order’ is slyly being pushed into place under the protection and distraction of increasingly chaotic surface events – and it’s not even covert any more.

Klaus Schwab and his henchmen at the Wold Economic Forum have already announced the Fourth Industrial Revolution and Green Deal to be part of ‘A Great Reset’. 

They are proud to declare that under this new order “You will own nothing and you will be happy”. 

Add to this the advent (this September 2024) of ‘The Pact for the Future’ United Nations summit in which all UN signed-up world leaders nodded their approval of a common position in the shared digitalisation, centralisation and exploitation of global power. In Shwarb’s terms, putting into effect  ‘you will own nothing we will own everything’.

We are entering a critical point in the inexorable rolling-out of a plan whose blueprint was hatched a good deal earlier than the privatisation of the Federal Reserve. Even before the creation of the Bank of England in 1694; an enterprise established specifically to enable Britain to go to war with France.

It matters not what the origins of this take over are. What matters is that the preliminary manifestation/actualisation of it has arrived and is encircling us even as I write.

What action are we taking? What action are we to take to derail this behemoth?

This is not a story in a book, a podcast, a news headline or a social media alert. It’s none of these. It’s actual – and without realising it the majority are helping to drive the beast on.

By failing to actively involve ourselves in the struggle to confront the agents of chaos and control, we leave the door open for their take-over of our lives. We become causal agents in the deliberately inflicted destitution, the droughts, the floods, the wars, the environmental degradation, the fear – the lack of a resolution. 

For many this is an uncomfortable admission to digest. But its indigestibility doesn’t mean it isn’t true. 

Coming face to face with intentional chaos demands a heightened level of discernment, including an awareness that intentional disruptions also spawn unintended consequences for their perpetrators. These also become part of the often unseen/unnoticed action/reaction matrix.

In order to wake-up to this fact – using scientific terminology – we have to shift from a linear Newtonian mind set to a state of holistic quantum awareness.  Otherwise we cannot understand what it is we are involved with.

Quantum made us realise that we are no longer observers of events  – we never were – we are part of them. We cannot now regress back to a state of tunnel vision ignorance.

We can no longer simply wonder what will happen – from a distance. Our ‘onlooker’ misdirected energies are a significant factor in what’s driving the whole tragic drama.

Our involvement is implicit. So we have no option but to renew our efforts to resist, to keep on exposing injustice, lies and deception – while taking actions that lay the foundations for a redeemed, restored and resonating planet. 

Unseen by us, and on another plain, such actions provoke a major transformation – a reversal – of the top down control system’s grip on world affairs.

That time line is not yet expressed as a complete metamorphosis, but that is coming. The rate at which it advances depends upon how purposefully we collectively direct our energies to the task at hand.

The more of us who engage in positive, courageous counteractions to the perpetrators of the death wish, the sooner will their ambitions be punctured, deflated and destroyed. 

But holding back, hiding from reality and continuing to support the already deeply corrupted socio economic and political status quo, runs directly counter to our redemption. It simply aids the suffocating agenda of our anti-life oppressors.

This is why I stated the unpalatable truth that under these conditions we become causal agents of the process of destruction. Complicit in aiding and abetting the dark agents of a dehumanised world. 

Yes, it comes down to something as starkly contrasting as that. We are either working every day for the emancipation of humanity and all living beings, or we are supporting their agonising demise. 

Each one of us individually must get to grips with this (inconvenient) truth. 

That will draw us closer together. Even if this togetherness is not spacial, but spirit based, it will be enough to shift the entire dark side agenda and get the forces behind the great turning into the driving seat.

So you see, the future is in our hands. Embrace this. Act with sincerity and courage. Raise the level of your mental, spiritual and physical commitment to confront evil at every turn. Because at this time – and at all times – nothing matters more.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, a writer, broadcaster and international activist. He is author of the acclaimed title ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind’. Do visit his website www.julianrose.info for further information.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

Doctors are warning of an “alarming” surge in heart attacks among healthy young Americans as new data shows the numbers are skyrocketing.

New data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics shows heart attacks among 18-40-year-olds spiked massively in 2021.

The numbers have continued soaring through this year.

When compared to 2020, before the spike started, heart attacks among young people in 2023 were a staggering 60% higher.

In 2019, roughly 0.3% of Americans aged 18-44 had a heart attack.

However, last year that rose to 0.5%, or one in 200.

While that may still seem like a relatively low number, it represents a 66% increase in cases in just four years.

Doctors are warning that the spike is “alarming.”

It also means that one in five heart attack patients are now younger than 40.

Traditionally, a number of factors have been linked to heart attacks, including rampant drug use, obesity, sedentary lifestyles, and bad diets.

However, a growing number of doctors are now noting that the timing strongly implies the Covid pandemic, or more specifically the mRNA “vaccines,” played a role.

Dr. Deepak Bhatt, the Director of the Mount Sinai Fuster Heart Hospital, told TODAY:

“There are definitely more younger people coming in with heart attacks.

“There’s data to back that up.

“What’s driving that is more controversial.”

The Covid mRNA “vaccines” made by Pfizer and Moderna have also been shown to cause heart inflammation, specifically in young men and boys.

This heart inflammation, called myocarditis, causes blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, cardiac arrests, and ultimately death.

.

Source: U.S. National Center for Health Statistics

.

Dr Laxmi Mehta, the director of Preventative Cardiology and Women’s Cardiovascular Health at The Ohio State University said:

“It is alarming that younger people don’t feel that they’re at risk for heart disease but it’s not surprising.

“Most young people think heart disease only happens in old people but that’s not the case.”

A 2024 study from Duke found the number of people of all ages who died from heart failure has been steadily increasing.

Heart failure deaths have increased from 82 deaths per 100,000 people in 2012 to 106 deaths per 100,000 people in 2021.

That rise was greatest in adults under 45, who saw a 905 percent increase in the number of people who died from a heart complication over the nine-year study period.

Dr. Susan Cheng is a cardiologist at Cedars Sinai who authored a 2023 study that found heart attack deaths in people 25 to 44 increased by nearly 30 percent after the Covid mRNA “vaccines” were rolled out for public use in early 2021.

“Young people are obviously not really supposed to die of a heart attack,” Dr. Cheng warned.

“They’re not really supposed to have heart attacks at all.”

Meanwhile, a major recent study concluded that Covid vaccines” are the sole cause of a surge in heart attacks among children.

The new large-scale study from renowned scientists at the prestigious University of Oxford has just confirmed that myocarditis and pericarditis only appear in children and adolescents after Covid vaccination and not after infection from the virus.

The study looked at the official government data of more than 1 million English children and adolescents aged between five and 11 and 12 and 15.

In detailing their findings, the researchers wrote:

“All myocarditis and pericarditis events during the study period occurred in vaccinated individuals.”

The study also noted that hospitalization related to COVID-19 was extremely rare among children and adolescents.

Additionally, there were no deaths from the virus recorded among the entire subject population.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Thanks to Dr. William Makis for bringing this article to our attention.

Featured image is from Slay News

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. 

Cada vez mais políticos em todo o mundo reconhecem a realidade do conflito ucraniano, admitindo que qualquer decisão tomada pela Ucrânia necessita de aprovação prévia do Ocidente. Numa declaração recente, um proeminente político checo afirmou que o conflito em solo ucraniano terminará quando os EUA “disser”. Embora esta não seja uma avaliação totalmente precisa, ele tem razão ao salientar que a Ucrânia depende inteiramente dos EUA para tomar qualquer ação na situação atual.

As palavras foram ditas pelo ex-presidente checo Vaclav Claus numa entrevista recente a um canal de televisão local. Ele disse que o fim do conflito ucraniano chegará assim que os EUA decidirem que é o momento certo para parar as hostilidades. Ele acredita que isso acontecerá em algum momento no futuro, mas se recusa a prever qualquer data exata para isso.

Na entrevista, Claus comentou como os EUA parecem estar a agir de acordo com a chamada “Armadilha de Tucídides” – um termo criado para explicar a tendência das potências hegemônicas de procurarem o conflito quando se vêem ameaçadas por potências emergentes. Claus enfatizou que tais ações poderiam levar a um grande conflito, colocando em risco a paz global como um todo.

Claus também comentou sobre o Oriente Médio, citando o conflito entre Israel e o Eixo da Resistência como outro exemplo das ações irresponsáveis ​​do poder hegemônico em declínio. Evitou culpar apenas o Ocidente, afirmando que o mundo inteiro é conjuntamente responsável pela atual crise de segurança, mas a sua avaliação especializada sugeriu claramente que Washington deveria ser visto como o principal culpado por todos estes problemas.

“O fim da guerra na Ucrânia chegará no momento em que os EUA disser que a guerra deve acabar (…) Tal comportamento pode desencadear um conflito em grande escala no caso de alguns dos outros principais intervenientes cometerem erros de cálculo estratégicos. (…) Tenho a forte convicção de que o resto do mundo – claro que num grau diferente – é co-responsável por estas guerras trágicas e pelo enorme sofrimento de milhões de homens, mulheres e crianças em todos os lados do lutando”, disse Klaus.

Claus está amplamente correto em sua avaliação. Na verdade, o fim do atual conflito depende em grande parte da vontade dos EUA de cooperarem para a paz. Se os EUA e a OTAN concordarem em negociar termos de paz mutuamente benéficos com a Rússia e pressionarem a Ucrânia a pôr fim ao massacre de civis russos nas fronteiras, será possível restabelecer um diálogo de paz, possivelmente resultando no fim das hostilidades. Mas se este passo não for dado, o conflito prolongar-se-á indefinidamente, trazendo terríveis consequências humanitárias.

Contudo, é errado pensar que o fim do conflito está nas mãos dos EUA. Washington tem o poder de armar a Ucrânia, mas não de dizer quando as hostilidades terminarão. Na verdade, a operação militar especial só terminará quando a Federação Russa compreender que os seus objetivos estratégicos foram alcançados. Independentemente das atitudes do Ocidente, é a Rússia que tem o poder de pôr fim à guerra, uma vez que apenas o lado vitorioso está numa posição viável para decidir se deve ou não continuar as hostilidades.

Contudo, o ponto principal é ver que políticos veteranos e respeitados estão a começar a admitir a realidade de que a Ucrânia não faz realmente parte do atual jogo geopolítico, uma vez que Kiev nada mais é do que um proxy da aliança militar ocidental – que é absolutamente controlada por os EUA. Neste sentido, apenas os lados realmente relevantes, os EUA e a Rússia, seriam capazes de pensar no diálogo diplomático, ficando Kiev totalmente excluída deste equilíbrio estratégico.

Na verdade, pode ser demasiado tarde para evitar que os EUA caiam na chamada “Armadilha de Tucídides”. Washington já demonstrou estar plenamente envolvido em conflitos duradouros e exaustivos, e não parece ter competências suficientes para se libertar de tais responsabilidades. Na Ucrânia e no Oriente Médio, os resultados da obsessão americana pelo poder e pela hegemonia podem ser claramente vistos. Os EUA estão prontos a fazer tudo para proteger o seu poder em declínio, embora todas as previsões indiquem que é impossível evitar a criação de uma ordem global multipolar.

Para os EUA, só existem duas alternativas: admitir a tempo a nova realidade geopolítica e evitar o derramamento de ainda mais sangue; ou correr o risco de um conflito global apenas para adiar a vitória inevitável da multipolaridade. Infelizmente, os tomadores de decisões americanos parecem ter tomado a pior decisão.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês : US could ‘end’ Ukraine conflict – Czech politician, InfoBrics, 18 de Outubro de 2024.

Imagem :  Ex-presidente tcheco Vaclav Claus. InfoBrics

*

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

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

“The fight in the U.S. is to fight for a real authentic democracy! It is a struggle to shift power from this repressive minority government – this ruling class that is committed to war and rep repression. To shift power away from them to the people – to the masses of the people! Because if not, we allow for these forces to continue. They will represent and are representing an existential threat to global humanity. And I don’t think that is an exaggeration.”

– Ajamu Baraka. From this week’s interview.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

“Unprecedented” was the term used by one Presidential historian in reference to the 2024 election campaign.

Some developments arising during the past few months:

• The President facing calls from his own party not to run for re-election due to his awkward aging moments.
• A candidate shot during a campaign stop.
• The President stepping down and nominating his vice-president to run for President. [1]
• The first African-American, Asian-American female to run for office.
• A prominent third party candidate, originally running for one dominant party steps down and endorses the candidate for the other dominant party! [2]

Let us also reflect on the fact that this election running at close to $15.9 billion is bound to be the most costly in history! [3]

Another factor is the current state of foreign policy. There are two major wars on the world stage, one instigated by NATO against Russia and one fought by Israel, with the support of the United States. One war is too costly for the Republicans to continue to finance in Ukraine, the other too immoral for a significant number of Democrats to support at all.

And then there is Iran striking Israel in retaliation for an Israeli air strike on Beirut killing the Hezbollah leader and the operations commander for the Israeli [Islamic?] Revolutionary Guards Force (IRGC) overseas arm, the Quds Force. Israel seems to expect that the U.S. will side with them in a war with Iran [????] [that statement is misleading, look at the history, Israel does not decide] which would according to some military analysis be very, very costly for the U.S. Does anyone remember Jim Carville’s famous 1992 expression “It’s the economy stupid!” ? [4][5][6]

But in the corridors of power, where there are decisions being made to advance power and prospects for some, we can pretty much ignore the many soundbites cluttering up the consciousness of the age. Major changes are about to happen, regardless of who wins the gold ring, that may mean less privacy rights, less freedoms, less income benefits, and a whole lot more surveillance setting us on the path to Orwell’s 1984. [7]

With less than a month to go before the ballot boxes are counted, the Global Research News Hour is taking a look at how the election is affecting affairs on a global stage, the prospect of seeking salvation in either wing of the “Republicrat” Uniparty, and the promise of using third party candidates as an option.

In the first half hour, we hear from Dimitri Lascaris, a prominent lawyer, journalist and activist. He comments on the foreign affairs question, and the hopes for ordinary people on November 5. In our second half hour, we are joined by Ajamu Baraka of the Black Alliance for Peace, who explains that what both parties have to offer are not of interest to the common working man and woman. Finally, we get a visit from journalist and author Matthew Ehret who brings up the bankers coup which almost took place in the early 1930s and explains that the climate is ripe for a similar development today.

Dimitri Lascaris is a lawyer, a journalist and an activist. From 2004 to 2016 he was a member of Canada’s leading class action law firm Siskinds LLP. He now works pro-bono legal cases. In 2020, he ran for the leadership of the Green Party of Canada and placed second with  45.5% of the membership.

Ajamu Baraka is Chairman of the Coordinating Committee of the Black Alliance for Peace and an editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report. Baraka serves on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Peace Council and leadership body of the U.S. based United National Anti-War Coalition (UNAC) and the Steering Committee of the Black is Back Coalition. In 2016, he ran for Vice President on the Green Party ticket.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation . Consider helping this process by making a donation to the RTF or becoming a Patreon supporter to the Canadian Patriot Review.

(Global Research News Hour episode 444)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcript of Dimitri Lascaris, October 9, 2024:

Global Research: Well, just before addressing the election question, you have, as I mentioned, they’ve been to Lebanon four times since the October 7th attack.

And as you predicted, the war has expanded. And after being mostly done with Gaza, they’re assaulting Lebanon with now more firepower than at any time since 1982. Israel managed to explode walkie-talkies and pagers, a move that surprised many people, and Israel has killed a few leaders, key leaders.

Benjamin Netanyahu then said that the Lebanese people can liberate their country by turning on Hezbollah. Now, is Israel more fierce than we contemplated a year ago? What are Lebanese people on the ground telling you about their situation?

Dimitri Lacaris: Well, it certainly depends on which Lebanese person you’re talking to. Lebanon is, I think it’s fair to say, historically has been a fairly sectarian society.

There are strong divisions in the society, even now, many years after the horrible civil war came to an end. And, you know, you’re likely to get fairly different answers and sometimes radically different answers, depending upon whether you’re speaking to somebody who is Shia, a Shia Muslim, or a Sunni Muslim, or a Christian, an Orthodox Christian, or a Falange Christian, or somebody who’s secular, who’s atheist. But I think, basically, there is, amongst the large majority of the population, I think this much I can say with confidence, a lot of anger towards Israel, probably less sympathy for Israel than there has ever been after a year of, you know, countless unspeakable atrocities being visited upon the Palestinian people.

And now, you know, the Israeli military evidently trying to turn the southern part of Beirut, Dahiya, into Gaza. Secondly, I think there’s probably a higher degree of unity amongst the various factions in Lebanese society vis-a-vis this war than there has been in the past. They’re trying to divide them, but I think the Israelis and the Americans are actually achieving the opposite outcome.

They are creating a higher sense of unity in terms of opposing the United States and Israel in the region. So, for example, the leader of the Druze, who typically has not been a supporter of Nasrallah and Hezbollah before Nasrallah’s assassination, expressed support for Hezbollah’s resistance to Israel and its attacks on its military bases. And when I’ve been there, I’ve spoken to people who come from the Christian community, people who are secular nationalists, supporters of the SSNP, the Syrian Social National Party or Nationalist Party, who are very supportive of Hezbollah, even though they’re not Shia Muslims.

But there are people, especially if you go further north in the country, away from the southern border, who feel that the country is being dragged into a war that it desperately doesn’t need because of the economic crisis and the ferocity of Israel’s attacks by Hezbollah’s resistance on the southern border. And they’d rather, they’re not unsympathetic necessarily to the Palestinian people, but they just rather keep out of it and let the Palestinians and the Israelis work it out for themselves. I would say at this stage, my sense is that that sentiment is felt by a minority of the Lebanese population.

And most of them are very angry with Israel and want Israel once and for all to be defeated.

GR: The election is influencing foreign policy-making and that they are concerned about the reaction of swing voters. I mean, why are both candidates for the Democrats and the Republicans holding up this war on the part of Israel when a sizable chunk of the electorate, I mean, you could see it in the streets, is concerned about Palestinians, international law and genocide?

DL: Well, you know, there’s a school of thought, Michael, that the Israel lobby controls the United States government.

I really am not a big fan of this theory. I understand there is evidence to support it. It’s not like there isn’t any evidence that the Israel lobby is extremely powerful and influential, but does it actually have so much power that it can force the US government to engage in a regional war that will do immense damage to the global economy and to interests in the region, and potentially, depending upon how that war is handled, result in the deaths of many US soldiers? I don’t think so.

I don’t think the Israel lobby has that much power. What we’re witnessing today, in my opinion, is just another example of a broader phenomenon in US politics, and that is that the US government does not, generally speaking, not just with respect to the wars escalating in West Asia, it generally does not do what the people of the United States want it to do. The US government is run by a very wealthy elite, which Bernie Sanders describes as the billionaire class.

Others refer to them as the oligarchs. You could also refer to them collectively, along with the corporations they control, as the military-industrial complex, as President Eisenhower did in January of 1961, three days from the end of his second term, warning of the power of the military-industrial complex. This is who controls the US government, and those people believe, I think wrongly, that their interests will be served and their power will be enhanced.

They don’t give a damn what the American people think, that their interests and their power will be enhanced if they can destroy the axis of resistance in West Asia, and I think they believe they can do it. That’s what’s going on here. The Israel lobby doesn’t have to force these people to do anything because their agenda is the same as that of Benjamin Netanyahu and the entire Israeli political elite.

It’s the destruction of any resistance to US-Israeli hegemony in West Asia. That’s what’s going on here. It’s not that the Israel lobby is forcing the US into a war that the Biden administration is doing everything desperately to avoid, which is the message we’ve been hearing, both from anonymous sources in the administration and from their spokespersons like Matthew Miller and Blinken and this character Amos Hochstein that’s supposed to be their envoy to Lebanon who formerly served in the Israeli military.

We really are trying to de-escalate the situation, and boy, that guy Netanyahu is a tough hombre, and Israel’s a sovereign nation, and we can’t tell Israel what to do. It’s a sovereign country. This is all nonsense.

It’s complete and utter nonsense.

GR: Of course, we don’t discount the propaganda as well, but Iran is being drawn into the war with Israel, and Israel thinks that the US will join in at some point. If the attack on Iran comes soon and then Iran fires back, then we see that whole trigger, that kind of a domino effect that essentially could result in what could be the October surprise of this election, essentially starting World War III in this sense.

Is that one of the things that’s holding back Israel from taking any stand? Would they be so compelled to support Israel that they will engage in the attack on Iran?

I don’t know. Should that happen? The pushback against Iran, it can affect Americans in the region, and it could have a devastating effect even on the economy. What do you think?

DL: Well, let me just say, first of all, that the Americans are fully engaged in this war.

Who provided the bunker buster bombs that annihilated an entire block in southern Beirut and killed Hassan Nasrallah? The Americans did. Of course, Israel couldn’t have done that without the United States. There were credible reports that at the time of the bombing that led to the killing of Nasrallah, there were two US Air Force AWACS operating off the coast of Lebanon, and that they temporarily turned off their transponders, and that this was very unusual behavior on their part.

Afterwards, the Biden administration made the preposterous claim that they didn’t know that the little country in West Asia that depends on the United States government for its very existence, its survival right now, was going to do something that was insanely provocative and kill Nasrallah. This is nonsense. They knew, and they not only knew, they helped them do it.

The Americans helped Israel do it. So, let’s just be clear. We need to dispense with this, as I said, what I call nonsense that we’re hearing in this Kabuki theater, that the US is standing back and Israel is acting on its own.

They’re partners in this crime and this series of crimes. The question is whether… Still, your question is a very important question, which is, will they step it up and actually help Israel to attack Iran? It’s very difficult to say right now. I think there’s a lot of things going on.

One of them is that this Iranian missile attack on October 1st, despite all the hoopla and the triumphalism we’re hearing from the West, Biden stood in front of the press and said with a straight face that the missile attack had been effectively defeated. That is bullocks, folks. That’s bullocks.

There are videos, which have been authenticated by the corporate media in the United States, showing that dozens of ballistic missiles struck Israel’s most heavily defended military bases, air bases, in particular, the Nevatim Air Base. The Western media calculated that the Nevatim Air Base suffered 32 strikes, 32 strikes. There was layer after layer of air defense.

The very best air defense capabilities that the West has were deployed in a layered system to protect that air base, and they nonetheless struck it 32 times. They didn’t fire anything close to their maximum capacity. They could have fired a much larger number of salvos, each consisting of a much larger number of missiles.

Right now, I don’t think that everybody in the Israeli government and the Pentagon is crazy. I think there are actually some people in there who at least have the good sense to say, the Iranians have just demonstrated to us that they can strike anything in Israel, because that’s what they did. They can strike anything and they can destroy anything in Israel, including the Dimona nuclear reactor.

There’s no reason to think if they can strike Nevatim 32 times in one attack, they can almost certainly strike Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor. There have to be people who are reflecting upon this. That’s number one.

Number two, we’re only less than a month away from the election, and I think a full-blown war, especially if there is an attack in the next couple of weeks before the voting by the Biden administration, I think we can expect that Iran is going to deliver a much more devastating blow on Israel than it had up until now. If it’s clear to the Iranians that the Americans participated in it, in the attacks on Iran, they will strike American military bases in the Middle East. How is that going to play with the American public? Is that going to actually enhance Kamala Harris’s chance of re-election? I don’t know.

I think that’s highly doubtful. I think that they are reflecting upon this right now, and there’s a lot of vigorous debate going on between the administration and the Netanyahu regime as to the timing of any response, the nature of any response, whether the US will directly and overtly participate in that response. And my sense is, could be wrong, they have not come to a decision.

And I think they’re in a real quandary, Michael. They’re in an extremely difficult quandary. What do they do now? In the background, we should mention also, they have not, despite the fact they’re saying, we’re turning our attention away from Gaza, they have not defeated Hamas.

Hamas is still a deadly fighting force. The Israelis in the last couple of weeks have announced casualties in combat in Gaza. They have a lot of troops committed there.

They’re slaughtering people en masse. They’re continuing to do that, particularly in the north of the Gaza Strip. And they’re taking a beating in South Lebanon.

Almost immediately upon announcing a ground, they didn’t announce a full-blown invasion. They were ambiguous about what the nature of the ground offensive was going to be. But it appears to have been quite limited.

And almost immediately, the Israelis were forced to reveal that eight of its soldiers were killed on the border. And there was a video circulating, which I saw, it’s a grisly video showing the dead Israeli soldiers lying on the ground and the Hamas fighters celebrating their victory. So they have to be worried about that.

What if Israel takes another kick in the teeth in South Lebanon over the next several weeks, just as it did in the course of five weeks of brutal fighting in 2006? And how is that going to affect the whole mix? They’re in a world of pain right now, the Americans and Israelis. And frankly, despite all of their triumphalism, I don’t know what they’re going to do to get themselves out of this mess.

GR: Dimitri, I guess I got to spend at least a couple of minutes talking about the Ukraine war, that other war front.

Biden seems more prepared to launch new weapons against Russia than Trump. And I believe it was in September that I think Scott Ritter had been commented that became a needle’s breath approach to going into nuclear war, because launching those weapons deep into Russia would be considered an attack by NATO. And then you have that kind of a collapsation into a nuclear threat.

So Trump, whatever else you have to say about him, it might improve matters because he’s not willing to spend more money on this war. And therefore, Ukraine, that would collapse a lot faster. I mean, what do you think? Is it possible that electing Trump might actually lessen the threat of a nuclear war?

DL: Well, maybe he will actually carry out his promise to bring that war to an end.

He certainly could do it. It’s very simple. He has to say, I mean, the two most important things is that Russia gets to retain the territories it’s annexed, not just those it occupies, but the additional territory that it has annexed the whole of Kherson, Zaporozhia, and the Donbass, and Luhansk, and it gets to keep Crimea, and Ukraine stays out of NATO.

If he agrees to that, this war is over. Essentially, those are the principal demands of the Russian Federation, and he might do it. He might force, and he could easily force the Zelensky regime to make those concessions, because it, like Israel, depends upon the United States for its very survival.

So, of course, that would decrease dramatically the risk of a nuclear war in Ukraine. But the problem is that Trump is probably going to increase the risk of a nuclear war in West Asia. He’s incentivizing.

This is the man who destroyed the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran, which the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran was respecting. This is the man who murdered Qasem Soleimani, the top general of Iran in Iraq, in a flagrant act of war. This is the man who pulled the United States out of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, which was a cornerstone of nuclear management and nuclear nonproliferation.

Russia is not going to allow Iran to be destroyed. It’s not. They have a very close defense relationship, and they’re on the verge of signing a mutual defense pact.

I don’t think China’s going to allow it either. At the end of the day, will the world be safer overall, assuming that Trump actually carries out his promises in foreign policy? I don’t know, Michael. It’s a hard call.

Either way, whether Trump wins or Kamala Harris wins, and I want to point out, it really is telling that Dick Cheney endorsed Kamala Harris. Tells you all you need to know. That psychopathic warmonger who dragged the United States into a criminal war of aggression against Iraq with all of its disastrous consequences and oversaw a torture regime and talked openly about attacking Iran, he endorsed Kamala Harris.

Whoever wins that election, we are in a very, very dangerous place.

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on April 19, 2022

GR Editor’s Note

It is worth noting that the Director of China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),  Dr. George Fu Gao was among the participants of Scenario 201 in October 2019. (Table Top Simulation of a Corona Virus Pandemic)

China’s CDC under Dr. George Fu Gao played a central and key role in overseeing the Covid-19 outbreak in Wuhan in December 2019, acting in close liaison with the US CDC, the Gates Foundation, the WHO, John Hopkins et al.

George Fu Gao is an Oxford graduate with links to Big Pharma. He was also for several years a fellow of the Wellcome Trust.

China’s CDC is a lead agency of the Chinese government in disease control and prevention.

“The Public Health Emergency Center (PHEC) of the China CDC takes charge of national public health emergency preparedness and response activities.”

Under its mandate, one would expect that China’s CDC Director George Gao Fu played a key role in the Shanghai March-April Lockdown emergency.

China’s Health authorities have confirmed that “Nucleic acid [namely PCR] tests are central to its strategy”. That test is totally unreliable. The figures quoted below do not under any circumstances justify the drastic measures put forth by the CDC and China’s National Health Commission.

Incisive analysis by Emmanuel Pastreich below

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research,  April 19, 2022

***

Corporate newspapers and social media have been flooded with horrific images of the Shanghai lockdown for the last week, a massive enterprise that has confined millions of Chinese to their homes for weeks and has resulted in the implementation of severe restrictions on access to basic supplies.

Images of citizens yelling from their apartments in frustration, or screaming heartfelt protests in moving soliloquies, videos of drones and robots patrolling the empty streets of Shanghai, present us with a terrifying vision of the totalitarian rule by technology that so many have predicted.

The underlying message is that China is the source of this nightmare.

What the?? This video taken yesterday in Shanghai, China, by the father of a close friend of mine. She verified its authenticity: People screaming out of their windows after a week of total lockdown, no leaving your apartment for any reason. pic.twitter.com/iHGOO8D8Cz

— Patrick Madrid ✌🏼 (@patrickmadrid) April 9, 2022

As seen on Weibo: Shanghai residents go to their balconies to sing & protest lack of supplies. A drone appears: “Please comply w covid restrictions. Control your soul’s desire for freedom. Do not open the window or sing.” https://t.co/0ZTc8fznaV pic.twitter.com/pAnEGOlBIh

— Alice Su (@aliceysu) April 6, 2022

The official story put out by the city of Shanghai, and not denied by the Chinese Communist Party, is so extreme as to invite ridicule.

A new “zero tolerance” policy for COVID-19, which is a bogus non-existent disease in the first place, was imposed on all Shanghai citizens, first on the East side of the Huangpu River from March 28, and then for the entire city from April 1^st.

Supposedly all citizens will be tested for COVID-19. According to media reports, only 26,087 new cases of COVID-19 have been found, and of those, only 914 were symptomatic (and there were no pictures of bodies on the ground, as was in the case in Wuhan at the end of 2019).

That is to say that the justifications for the lockdown are so absurd as to make the entire process farcical, perhaps an action intended to show citizens that they must do exactly what they are told to do, no matter how ridiculous and groundless the premises are.

The Western corporate media had a ready answer for what was going on: The Chinese Communist Party, following its “undemocratic socialist ideas”, is violating the fundamental rights of citizens that we Westerners respect.

The American Jack Posobiec, who refers to himself as a “veteran Navy intel officer,” posted extensively on Twitter about the lockdown, blaming Communism and making statements like “This is what the CCP is doing to the 26 million people of Shanghai.”

Human Rights Watch was quick to condemn China for its human rights violations in Shanghai, stating on April 6 that “The Chinese government should respect the right to health and other basic rights in its response to the Covid-19 surge in the country,” but did so without any reference to similar, or worse, policies being carried out around the world.

The problem is that although this lockdown is blamed on Communism, there is no precedent for the shutdown of a major city to be found in the Chinese communist tradition; no part of the imposition of technofascism can be traced back to the calls of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai for class struggle and for resistance to imperialism.

The model for the Shanghai lockdown, it turns out, is the lockdown of Boston after the Boston Marathon bombing of April 15, 2013, exactly nine years ago. On that occasion, the United States Federal government, specifically the FBI, used a murky charge of a terrorist attack (about which serious doubts remain) as an excuse to lock down vast sections of the city of Boston and to confine citizens to their homes while armed police patrolled the streets.

The question we should ask is whether what is taking place in Shanghai is being organized by the same people who organized the Boston lockdown, and similar lockdowns around the world over the last two year, and not by the Chinese Communist Party—or not primarily by the Chinese Communist Party.

Horrific videos of Chinese committing suicide by jumping from their windows were also widely circulated, and they may have been real, but there is no reason to assume anything is true just because it was broadly circulated.

Another popular video featured a dog-shaped robot (that resembles a Boston Dynamics SpotMini) patrolling the streets with a microphone on its back telling the people of Shanghai to stay inside. Anyone who looked at the video with critical eyes had to be doubtful. The speaker was carelessly strapped to the back of the robot with barricade tape in what appears to be a careless stunt, and it was most certainly not representative of government policy.

But the giveaway that this lockdown has silent partners who had nothing to do with the CCP bureaucracy was the constant harping in the Western media on the suffering of animals in Shanghai. Images of live cats rounded up and put in bags for disposal were pasted all over the internet, along with a video of a Chinese man cruelly holding a dog in pain with a device and then dropping it into a container with other injured dogs. Although the video certainly was disturbing, I dare horrified Americans to watch a video of a factory-scale slaughterhouse in the United States for even few minutes.

The focus on cruelty to animals is a standard in the operation to demonize Russia in the Ukraine. For example, a call by “Soi Dog co-founder John Dalley” for help to rescue the dogs and cats of Ukraine has been broadly circulated in the United States.

There are numerous indications that the Shanghai lockdown is being marketed for the Western audience as the equivalent of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The narrative presented is of a cruel totalitarian Communist government in China that oppresses the poor citizens of Shanghai who yearn to be free from these unreasonable “zero covid” restrictions (but no suggestion is offered that covid restrictions themselves are wrong).

MSN reported,

“There are videos of locked-up residents chanting ‘we want food’ and ‘we want freedom.’ In a video, citizens are seen going to their balconies and protesting against the lack of supplies.”

But the videos, the reports, are just too perfect, too carefully staged.

Shanghai Shutdown as war by other means

The details of the actions by American operatives in collaboration with corrupt Chinese officials to plan, and to carry out, this Shanghai lockdown are not available to me. Granted the completely speculative, and often blatantly wrong, reporting that passes for journalism these days, however, I hope that I can be forgiven if I infer, based on the ample evidence I have read in English and Chinese, as to what may be going on behind the scenes.

The Shanghai lockdown must be seen first in proper geopolitical perspective.

China has been subject to high level pressure from Washington D.C. over the last two months in an effort to thwart any possible cooperation with the Russian Federation since Russian troops entered the Ukraine.

Let us consider the critical events leading up to the lockdown.

US President Joe Biden warned the People’s Republic of China on March 18, in a conversation with President Xi Jinping, that there would serious consequences for China if it offered any support for Russia, economic, or, especially, military. White House press secretary Jen Psaki explained,

“He made clear what the implications and consequences would be if China provides material support to Russia as it conducts brutal attacks against Ukrainian cities and civilians.”

We do not know what Biden said, but just three days later, on March 21, China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 was heading for a smooth landing at the Guangzhou International Airport when it suddenly plunged inexplicably into a nosedive. The cause of the crash has yet to be explained—even three weeks later.

Many Chinese believe the arguments made in videos posted on Weibo (and elsewhere) soon after that incident that the crash was the result of a remote hijacking (similar to the 9/11 crashes) probably conducted by United States. The story was confirmed by the American intelligence investigative blog State of the Nation. Moreover, the egregious decision to include a seven-member team from the United States in the formal investigation of this domestic crash suggests something a bit unusual.

Then, on March 28, the Shanghai Municipal People’s Government, not the central government in Beijing that had been easing restrictions, suddenly launched a radical COVID-19 “zero tolerance” policy.

If intelligence operatives for the United States were looking to give China its own “Ukraine,” and to find a new field for the trouble making that they funded in Hong Kong previously, Shanghai was the logical choice.

Shanghai is riddled with global financial interests, with the head offices (or certainly the major branch) for all major multinational investment banks and multinational corporations located there. Their impact on the Chinese economy remains immense.

Shanghai has a history of over a hundred years as a center for global capital with a parasitic relationship to the rest of the nation. It was Shanghai, after all, that offered extraterritoriality to citizens from imperial powers until the 1940s.

Following that tradition, Shanghai today has the most extreme special economic zone policies of any city in China, policies that allow foreign corporations to engage in a broad range of activities without the authorization of the government.

As part of its drive to meet the demands of multinational corporations, the Shanghai government has privatized services and promoted technological solutions to just about everything. Shanghai has been so enthusiastic in adopting smart grids, 5G, online governance, and automation that it won the top rank globally as smart city from Juniper Research this year.

Shanghai has rolled out the red carpet for global finance, giving special privileges to select institutional investors, opening up to just about any investment from offshore, expanding the derivatives markets, and permitting investment banks to create their own “wealth management joint ventures.”

Who might be involved on the Chinese side in this Shanghai shutdown?

There are plenty of billionaires active in Shanghai with close ties to global finance who might be tempted to play the role of an Igor Kolomoisky, the billionaire who created current president of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky in response to American encouragement.

For example, we know that the billionaire Ma Yun (Jack Ma), who took enormous amounts of funding from Goldman Sachs and other American investment banks when he created Alibaba as a global marketing and distribution giant that rivaled Amazon, was very unhappy with Chinese policies.

Ma is popular figure among the globalists, and he is a member of the board of trustees of the World Economic Forum.

Although the details are obscure, Ma’s push for the globalist agenda in China ran afoul of state planners in Beijing, Xi Jinping included, two years ago.

Ma established the Ant Group, a financial institution intended to revolutionize finance by creating an unregulated banking system.

The story is that he delivered a speech on October 24, 2020 in which he called for sweeping changes in the banking system. As a result, the central government cracked down on his activities and he has rarely been seen in public since.

Alibaba is headquartered in Hangzhou, near Shanghai, and has its largest presence in Shanghai.

There are also American billionaires interested in using Shanghai as a way to muscle in and open up China to foreign capital. For example, Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of the private equity firm Blackstone, has bought off many intellectuals and government officials in the Chinese Communist Party with his money, especially the more than 100 million USD he gave to establish, among other things, the prestigious “Schwarzman Scholars” Program at Tsinghua University.

Another American billionaire heavily invested in China is John Thornton, founder of the John L. Thornton China Center at Brookings Institution. Thornton is a member of the International Advisory Council of the China Investment Corporation (China’s sovereign wealth fund) and he is constantly pushing to increase foreign influence over China’s financial policy.

Shanghai Lockdown and Global Economic Disruption

The economic disruption caused by the Shanghai lockdown is already being promoted in the corporate media as the reason for delays in the production and delivery of electronics, automobiles, and other household goods that are produced in, shipped through, or dependent on parts manufactured in Shanghai. Although this disruption is true, there is every reason to believe that this situation will be exploited and exaggerated to justify efforts by the super-rich to destroy the global economy further and to impoverish the Earth’s citizens.

Combining a Ukraine crisis that justifies a sudden scarcity of agricultural goods, raw materials, natural gas, and manufactured goods with a Shanghai crisis that shuts down global trade offers globalists an opportunity to explain just about any disruption.

Already plans are in place to adopt a similar zero tolerance policies in the city of Guangzhou, another major manufacturing and finance center. The resulting economic slowdowns, disruptions in supply chains, increasing inflation and shortages will be just what the doctor ordered.

The economic crisis of the Shanghai lockdown has also been employed as an argument for increasing vaccinations in China, predictably, and for introducing the first Chinese-made mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, according to China’s National Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

Differences between Russia and China

There are clear differences in the nature of the attack on Russia through Ukraine and on China through Shanghai. The United States and China, although talk of war has become a constant theme over the last decade, are also highly integrated economies that involve deep cooperation even in the midst of radical political theatre. Moreover, China has refused to respond to the efforts to goad it into military action in Taiwan, Hong Kong or the South China Sea. The attack, therefore, had to be launched in a covert and obscure manner so as to make it appear as if the Chinese Communist Party that the source of the problem because it is abusing the people of Shanghai. As of this moment, there is not a trace of the American hand anywhere in the public discourse.

Russia, by contrast never had the rapprochement with the United States that China had after President Richard Nixon’s meeting with Chairman Mao Zedong in 1972, nor are the economies of the United States and Russia that integrated. There were Russians who studied in the United States, but study in America did not have the same appeal for Russians that it had for Chinese over the last thirty years.

Thus, although there is American investment in Russia, and American interference in Russia, Russia is not so deeply integrated into the American logistics and supply chain, and American investment banks have fewer ties and fewer financial interests.

What needs to be done

The Chinese have been subject to their part of the Great Reset, serving as guinea pigs for social credit systems that allow for constant surveillance and for the evaluation of citizens via AI, and for the required use of digital payment systems. The globalists most likely targeted China for these experiments, before broader application in the world, because the emphasis on technological development in Chinese society, and Chinese naivety about the negative impact of technological innovation on human society, made the Chinese ready victims.

These technofascist policies are promoted by many bureaucrats in the Chinese Communist Party, but they did not originate in China. They are but a part of a global strategy for control of the world’s economy by the financial elites, cunning men who flatter the Chinese about the effectiveness of their response to COVID-19, and their potential to be innovation leaders through AI.

What is desperately needed in response to the current effort of globalists to induce needless conflicts between nation states, and within nations, through operations like the Shanghai lockdown, is an alliance of citizens in China, Russia, the United States, and other countries against the predations of multinational investment banks and corporations, an alliance that resembles the internationalist anti-fascist movements of the 1930s.

The Shanghai lockdown was designed to increase the isolation of the individual in a technological prison while also creating greater distance between Americans (Westerners) and Chinese who ought to be cooperating to respond to the threat of techno-fascism. It is time for us all to come together in response.

*

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 Circles and Squares.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Boston Lockdown of 2013 (Source: C and S)

A OTAN anuncia que seu exercício nuclear anual Steadfast Noon de duas semanas começou em 14 de outubro de 2024, com mais de 60 aeronaves de 13 países realizando voos de treinamento sobre a Europa Ocidental. Caças capazes de transportar ogivas nucleares dos EUA participam do exercício, incluindo os primeiros caças F-35A da OTAN declarados prontos para o uso nuclear. Participam bombardeiros pesados, caças de escolta, aeronaves de reabastecimento em voo e aeronaves de guerra eletrônica, com uma equipe de 2.000 militares de oito bases aéreas.

O exercício de guerra nuclear, claramente dirigido contra a Rússia, também conta com a participação da Itália, que – juntamente com a Alemanha, a Bélgica e a Holanda – adere ao “Compartilhamento Nuclear” da OTAN. Qual é o grau de “compartilhamento”, a própria OTAN explica em um texto oficial:

1) “O planejamento nuclear da OTAN é realizado pelo Grupo de Alto Nível, presidido pelos Estados Unidos”.

2) “Os Estados Unidos mantêm o controle absoluto e a custódia de suas armas nucleares instaladas na Europa, enquanto os Aliados fornecem apoio militar.”

Em suma, são os EUA que fornecem aos aliados europeus as armas nucleares sobre as quais mantêm controle absoluto, enquanto os aliados europeus fornecem aeronaves prontas para uso nuclear e pessoal militar sob comando absoluto dos EUA.

O “compartilhamento” nuclear está se estendendo para além dos países que oficialmente fazem parte dela: isso é demonstrado pelo fato de que a Polônia, a Romênia e a Finlândia estão participando do exercício de guerra nuclear. Como as aeronaves da OTAN com dupla capacidade convencional e nuclear também estão posicionadas nos países bálticos, isso significa que os EUA estabeleceram uma frente avançada na Europa a partir da qual um ataque nuclear contra a Rússia pode ser lançado.

Ao mesmo tempo, os Estados Unidos “modernizaram” suas bases nucleares na Europa para equipá-las com os caças F-35A e as novas bombas nucleares B61-12. Na Itália, a base de Ghedi, onde está estacionada a 6ª Ala da Força Aérea Italiana, e a base de Aviano, onde está estacionada a 31ª Ala de Caças dos EUA, foram “modernizadas”. As outras bases nucleares “modernizadas” são as de Kleine Brogel, na Bélgica, Volkel, na Holanda, e Büchel, na Alemanha, às quais deve ser acrescentada a base de Lakenheasth, na Grã-Bretanha, que foi secretamente “modernizada”.

Os Estados Unidos estão “modernizando” seu arsenal nuclear com um gasto projetado de US$ 1,7 trilhão, promovendo uma corrida armamentista que está se tornando mais perigosa do que a da Guerra Fria. Basta dizer que as armas nucleares dos EUA instaladas na Europa, perto da Rússia, podem atingir São Petersburgo ou Moscou em questão de minutos.

Manlio Dinucci

Breve resumo da análise da imprensa internacional do Grandangolo na sexta-feira, 18 de Outubro de 2024, no canal de TV italiano Byoblu:

https://www.byoblu.com/2024/10/18/le-bombe-nucleari-sotto-i-nostri-piedi-grandangolo-pangea-la-rassegna-stampa-internazionale-di-byoblu/

Tradução : Mondialisation.ca 

VIDEO (em italiano) :

*

Manlio Dinucci é geógrafo e jornalista, e ex-diretor executivo italiano da International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, que recebeu o Prêmio Nobel da Paz em 1985. Porta-voz do Comitato no Guerra no Nato (Itália) e pesquisador associado do Centre de recherche sur la Mondialisation (Canadá). Vencedor do Prêmio Internacional de Jornalismo 2019 para Análise Geoestratégica do Club de Periodistas de México.

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.

Donation Drive: Global Research Is Committed to the “Unspoken Truth”

***

In his newly published book, Nuclear High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse, Steven Starr shows that all it takes is one nuclear explosion to shut down  the United States and throw the population back into the Dark Ages. The electric power grid would be destroyed along with the communications system, the cooling systems at nuclear power plants and all electronic devices. The reason is that civilian infrastructure is not protected from Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP). The military has taken steps to shield its weapon and communication systems, but nothing has been done to protect civilian infrastructure. Bills mandating EMP protection have been defeated in Congress.  

Starr reports that only 4% of the US military budget is required to shield the power grid and civilian infrastructure. Instead, the Washington idiots waste trillions of dollars in pointless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Serbia, Syria, Yemen, Palestine, and Ukraine.  

American cities would suffer no effects from blast and fire, such as would be produced by ground level detonation, but the consequences would be just as dire. Starr describes them in a summary on his website.

Effects of a Single High-altitude Nuclear Detonation Over the Eastern U.S.

“105 miles above Ohio, a single nuclear warhead explodes. Because it is far above the atmosphere, there will be no blast or fire effects felt on Earth, however, this high-altitude nuclear detonation will create a gigantic electromagnetic pulse or EMP.

“In one billionth of a second, the initial EMP E1 wave will cause massive voltages and currents to form within power lines, telecommunication lines, cables, wires, antennas, and any other electrically conductive material found beneath the nuclear detonation in a circular area covering hundreds of thousands of square miles.

“Within this region, under ideal conditions, the E1 wave will produce 2 million volts and a current of 5,000 to 10,000 amps within medium distribution power lines. Any unshielded modern electronic devices that contain solid-state circuitry, which are plugged into the grid, will be disabled, damaged, or destroyed. This includes the electronic devices required to operate all critical national infrastructure.

“Unshielded electronic devices within ground, air, and sea transportation systems, water and sanitation systems, fuel and food distribution systems, water and sanitation systems, telecommunication systems, and banking systems would all be simultaneously knocked out of service – and all these systems would be disabled until the solid-state electronics required to operate them could be repaired or replaced.

“The E1 wave will also instantly destroy millions of glass insulators found on 15 kilovolt-class electric power distribution lines. 78% of all electricity in the US is delivered to end users (residential, agricultural, commercial) through these 15 kV power lines. The loss of a single insulator on a line can knock out power distribution on the entire line.

“At the same instant, the massive voltage and current induced by the E1 wave will damage and destroy the relays, sensors, and control panels at 1783 High Voltage Substations, knocking out the entire electric power grid in the eastern half of the United States.

“One to ten seconds after the nuclear detonation, the following EMP E3 wave would induce powerful current flows in power lines including lines that are both above and below ground. E3 would damage or destroy many – if not most – of the Large Power Transformers and Extra High Voltage Circuit Breakers required for the long-distance transmission of about 90% of electrical power in the United States.

“The loss of Large Power Transformers and Extra High Voltage Circuit Breakers would mean that entire regions within the United States would be left without electric power for up to a year or longer. This is because Large Power Transformers are not stockpiled and the current wait time for their manufacture is 18 to 24 months; they must be custom designed and manufactured and about 80% are made overseas. They each weigh between 200 and 400 tons and must be shipped by sea and moving them to their final destination is quite difficult even under normal circumstances.

“Because nuclear power plants are not designed to withstand the effects of EMP, the solid-state electronics within their backup electrical and cooling systems would also be damaged and disabled. The failure of their Emergency Power Systems and active Emergency Core Cooling Systems will make it impossible to cool their reactor cores after emergency shutdown; this will quickly lead to reactor core meltdowns at dozens of nuclear power plants.

“To summarize, a single nuclear high-altitude electromagnetic pulse can instantly take out most or all of the US power grid while simultaneously destroying the solid-state electronic devices required to operate US critical national infrastructure – including the safety systems at nuclear power plants. Following a nuclear EMP, the people of the US would suddenly find themselves living in the conditions of the Middle Ages for a period possibly as long as a year – most Americans would not be able to survive such circumstances.

“For less than 4% of the US national defense budget, the US power grid and critical infrastructure can be shielded from EMP. However, the political will to implement this protection has not yet been found, so Americans remain very much at risk.”

The book is available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Kindle. If you read it, you will be amazed and disgusted at the negligence and stupidity of the US government.  Thanks to the fools who govern us, we have zero national security despite the massive expenditures year after year, decade after decade.

People do not realize that the convenience and entertainment provided by their cell phones comes at great cost when measured by risk.  Nothing is secure in the digital age, not your identity, your privacy, your bank account, or your independence. The expansion of the digital revolution into money will mean that you can be denied access to your money for any reason including the exercise of free speech.  All accumulated knowledge in digital form can be erased by one EMP. Try to imagine the consequences of such a loss.  These are new risks never before experienced on Earth.

*

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.

For the last several weeks, the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky has been pitching the much-touted “victory plan” to his overlords in the political West. It didn’t impress them, to put it mildly. Despite this, on October 16, he finally decided to go public with it, revealing the main points in an address to the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament). The document contains five publicly available points and three additional “secret” ones, allegedly “shared only with certain partners”, as CNN reports. Zelensky stated this “would be a bridge toward future peace talks with Russia”. However, among the main points of the “victory plan” is more of the same – NATO membership. CNN claims it also outlines “provisions to strengthen Ukraine’s defense and implement a non-nuclear strategic deterrence package”.

However, already the next day, CNN’s claim was denied by none other than Zelensky himself. Namely, he stated, in no uncertain terms, that if the Neo-Nazi junta isn’t allowed to join NATO, its “only option” will be to acquire nuclear weapons. So much for a “non-nuclear strategic deterrence package”. To make matters worse, he said this during a press conference following his speech in Brussels. He also made a false claim that “Ukraine was the only one who gave up its nuclear weapons” and that “this is why it’s fighting today”. However, this is patently false. Only one country dismantled its own nuclear arsenal completely and that was South Africa (officially in 1994). At around that time, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan signed an agreement on the transfer of Soviet thermonuclear weapons back to Russia, the sole successor state of the USSR.

Known as the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, the document promised security guarantees to all three former Soviet republics. However, the political West broke these agreements after launching numerous color revolutions across Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, with the goal of taking control over the former republics and strategically encircling Russia. After the CIA-orchestrated “Orange Revolution”, Ukraine stopped being a neutral state and the new foreign-backed regime announced its intention to join the EU and NATO. This was completely unacceptable to the Kremlin, but its reaction was calm, as the putschists were defeated at the 2010 election, normalizing relations between Moscow and Kiev. Unfortunately, this was short-lived, as the US set off the 2014 Maidan coup which brought the Neo-Nazis to power.

The illegal junta then launched the war in the Donbass, killing thousands in the process and here we are today. It should be noted that the Kiev regime already flirted with the idea of acquiring nuclear weapons in the years prior to the special military operation (SMO). Namely, back in early 2021, the Neo-Nazi junta’s former ambassador to Germany, Andriy Melnyk, infamous for his defense of Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, threatened that they’ll acquire nuclear weapons. Zelensky himself reiterated this right before and after the SMO began, only to “suddenly change his opinion” days later, due to peace negotiations with Russia. At the time, he stated that “Ukraine must accept it will never join NATO” and that it will “do so if it brings peace”. And that would’ve certainly worked, but there was “just one tiny” problem – Zelensky lied.

The already signed peace deal was thrown into the dustbin and now hundreds of thousands (not too far from a million) are dead, with even more maimed for life and millions of refugees (around half of whom fled to Russia). However, that’s clearly not enough for the political West and its Neo-Nazi puppets.

According to the Associated Press, Zelensky supposedly “gave his allies three months to approve the key points of his ‘victory plan'”, but didn’t specify what the Kiev regime would do if its demands weren’t met. It seems the Neo-Nazi junta frontman decided to spell it out this time. While he was presenting the plan, Zelensky claimed that “Ukraine could win no later than next year”. If you’re laughing at this, you’re not the only one. Namely, prior to publicly revealing it, Zelensky presented this “victory plan” to the US, UK, France, Italy, Germany, etc.

The lack of any official reaction to the document is very telling. The plan includes points that were already publicly rejected by many NATO members, including the demand to allow long-range strikes deeper within Russia. It should be noted that this is not because of any sanity or altruism in those countries’ leaders, but because Moscow made it very clear that they would suffer direct consequences if this ever came to pass. Another point of the plan boils down to NATO effectively establishing no-fly zones over parts of Ukraine, but this too was rejected in previous months, so there’s no reason to think anything changed about it, especially because Moscow demonstrated what would happen to those trying to enforce it. And to top it off, Zelensky even suggested that Kiev regime forces could replace some US troops in Europe.

He insisted that “the strength and experience of Ukraine’s military could be used to strengthen European defense after the war and eventually replace certain US forces in Europe”. While Ukrainian soldiers might be better than NATO troops (according to their own admission), this very idea is absolutely ridiculous. However, what’s not is the possibility that Zelensky’s comments are not just “crazy talk”. Namely, the political West already showed signs that it’s ready to help the Neo-Nazi junta with developing nuclear weapons in hopes of inciting a localized nuclear conflict that would destroy both Russia and Ukraine. The Kremlin is perfectly aware of this, with its top diplomat Sergei Lavrov warning that such plans would fail, as Moscow would respond with its own strikes on the Kiev regime’s sponsors in this eventuality.

However, it seems NATO hasn’t given up on this plan. And this is seen not only in the fact that Zelensky was allowed to make the aforementioned statement in Brussels, but also because certain members of the world’s most vile racketeering cartel already support some points of the “victory plan”. Namely, the Netherlands backed the Neo-Nazi junta’s attacks on Russia using its nuclear-capable F-16s and reiterated this after it delivered the fighters earlier this month. Such belligerence will surely not go unnoticed in Moscow. However, even if the political West doesn’t provide the means for the Kiev regime to acquire nuclear weapons, it may help them make the so-called “dirty bomb”. This issue was raised many times by Moscow, including by Andrei Kartapolov, the head of the State Duma Defense Committee, in comments to RIA Novosti.

Either way, it’s perfectly clear that the political West cannot defeat Russia directly, so it keeps trying to make these Pilatian moves where its participation will be concealed under the shroud of public “rejection” of the Neo-Nazi junta’s requests, when, in reality, it keeps pushing for greater escalation that would be limited to Russia and Ukraine only. NATO is perfectly aware that Moscow’s advance cannot be stopped by any conventional means and that the Kremlin will take back Ukraine one way or another. Thus, if that’s inevitable, it wants to ensure that the unfortunate country becomes a ruin*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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 SERGEI SUPINSKY

The UK government is betting big on injectable weight-loss drugs. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Health Secretary Wes Streeting are even promoting them as the solution to getting the unemployed back to work, claiming the shots will not only tackle obesity but also boost the UK economy. In reality, however, their enthusiasm for these drugs has little to do with health. Far from being ‘miracle drugs,’ weight-loss injections like Ozempic, Mounjaro, and Wegovy are simply the latest cynical attempt to feed the insatiable greed of the pharmaceutical investment business.

Reflecting their roles as political stakeholders for the pharma industry, Starmer and Streeting are pinning their hopes on a clinical trial to be run in partnership with American drug giant Eli Lilly, which will inject obese unemployed people with Mounjaro. But in their zeal to worship at the trillion-dollar altar of the pharma industry, they are ignoring the fact that obesity is just one part of a multi-faceted health problem. Treating it without addressing its root causes is not the answer.

Wishful Thinking

This is hardly the first time that the UK government has attempted to tackle obesity. From half-heartedly promoting healthy eating to slapping a tax on sugary drinks, countless initiatives have been thrown at the problem. But they’ve all failed. Today, one in three UK adults is still obese. The notion that drugs are going to achieve what decades of public health policy couldn’t is wishful thinking.

Weight-loss drugs might make people feel full faster, but they aren’t a cure for calorie-dense nutrient-deficient diets. Moreover, there’s already serious concern that relying on them will create a ‘dependency culture’ where people skip the hard work of improving their diet and exercise routines and just rely on injectable pharmaceuticals instead. This might be good for drug industry profits, but it ignores the root causes of the problem.

Celebrity Endorsement

The UK government’s plan raises other questions as well. The country’s National Health Service (NHS) has strict rules about who can get these drugs, for example. Currently, only people with severe obesity and other health complications qualify for Wegovy, and even then, access is restricted to specialist programs that are already stretched to breaking point. Meanwhile, Mounjaro isn’t even approved in the UK yet, and when it is, it could take years to roll out.

But let’s imagine that Starmer and Streeting force the NHS to open up the floodgates. Would drug manufacturers be able to keep up with demand, or would they respond by raising prices? There are already shortages of Wegovy and Ozempi due to private clinics hoarding the supply for wealthy clients. Celebrities have been speaking openly about their use of the injections, and social media is full of endorsements. All this has left the NHS scrambling for supply.

The idea that weight-loss injections will magically reduce long-term unemployment is ultimately delusional. Shedding excess weight could undoubtedly improve some people’s health, but obesity isn’t the primary driver of unemployment. According to data from the UK’s Office for National Statistics, mental health conditions and musculoskeletal problems are the main reasons people can’t work. As such, these drugs are clearly not going to spark the economic revival that Starmer and Streeting are seeking.

Unpleasant Side Effects

While weight-loss injections are being pushed as the ultimate fix for obesity and unemployment, they come with a slew of unpleasant side effects that no one’s talking about loudly enough. Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and abdominal pain are particularly common. And if patients stop having the injections, most or all of the weight they have lost will likely come back. At a cost of around $1,000 per month per patient, the pharma industry has a vested interest in people becoming dependent on these treatments.

Far from being the game-changer that they are being promoted as, weight-loss drugs are just the latest overhyped pharma fad. It would be naïve to expect them to solve a nation’s health or economic problems anytime soon. Instead, they’re simply another distraction that puts more money in pharma pockets and avoids addressing real, long-term solutions to the myriad of problems now facing our world.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Adobe Stock / Dr. Rath Health Foundation

The greatly respected geneticist Kevin McKernan and his team have presented their most recent research, now available in preprint.

Using five different laboratory methods, McKernan and his team studied two vials each of Moderna’s and Pfizer’s bivalent “vaccines.” Both brands contained levels of DNA contamination that exceeded the limits set by both the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the U.S. FDA.

.

.

Pfizer’s bivalent “vaccine” contains several components when assembling the RNA sequence library. These include the spike protein insert (marked in red), a bacterial origin of replication (yellow), a Neo/Kan resistance gene (green), and two origins of replication (yellow) along with an SV40 promoter (marked in yellow and white).

.

.

When testing for RNA and DNA in the vaccine, the ratio of RNA to DNA was found to be between 43:1 and 161:1. However, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) requires a much higher ratio of 3030:1 for safety. This means the amount of DNA in the vaccine is 18 to 70 times higher than what is allowed by the EMA.

This raises multiple concerns, adding to the growing body of evidence calling for an immediate halt to these injections. One particularly troubling issue is the danger of DNA contamination in breast milk. Current testing methods would miss this problem, as exosomes containing DNA in breast milk could easily pass into suckling infants through their highly receptive neonatal upper digestive tract. The risk of genetic invasion via breast milk is alarming and could constitute a serious violation of medical safety.

The research team consists of Kevin McKernan, Yvonne Helbert, Liam T. Kane, and Stephen McLaughlin from Medicinal Genomics. Their preprint report is titled “Sequencing of Bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA Vaccines Reveals Nanogram to Microgram Quantities of Expression Vector dsDNA per Dose” and can be found here.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is from Mercola

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. 

“ It is clear that such a major campaign against Germany’s peace and security cannot go unanswered. World propaganda against us will be answered with world propaganda for us.” – Joseph Goebbels [1]

“I just think that what I’d like people to understand is that so many of the things that as Canadians we’d like to think are sacrosanct, you know, whether it’s we live in a democratic society, we have a free and open media, we have academic institutions, like you said, Michael, that are these open spaces of knowledge exchange, all of these things are being severely eroded, seriously eroded. And I think that really what, you know, if Canadians don’t wake up pretty soon, you know, that democracy is going to slip through our hands, like grains of sand, you know, because it really is getting that intense.” – Kevin MacKay, from this week’s interview.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format) 

In her 2007 book The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot,  Naomi Wolf wrote about how the “blueprint” for crushing a democracy always took the form of ten steps:

1. Invoking an external and internal threat
2. Establish secret prisons
3. Develop a paramilitary force
4. Surveil ordinary citizens
5. Infiltrate citizen groups
6. Arbitrarily detain and release citizens
7. Target key individuals
8. Restrict the press
9. Cast criticism as ‘espionage’ and dissent as ‘treason’
10. Subvert the rule of law [2]

It is shocking to reflect on how many of these steps have been taken in many countries. And not just in places like Ukraine and Israel, as spelled out throughout this website. Canada, too, is not the crusader for democracy it bills itself to be. Several past guests of the Global Research News Hour have experiences with the majority of these repressive measures. And this is a situation that should concern all of us.[3]

We have rocket high inflation, largely due to the war in Ukraine (NATO vs Russia). We have enemies (Russia and Palestine supporters). And increasingly, the “pawns” they set up in academia and in journalism are contributing “dis-information” to stir up harmful dissent in our conversations about war torn regions on the globe.[4]

We are now witnessing innocent people, from independent journalists to intellectuals of high esteem facing open challenges in the public sphere. In Canada, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) have put their women and men on notice to set their sites on any “person of interest” that could pose a threat. And far too many are being detained. [5]

Germany was a democratic society just a few years before suspicion and despair drove it toward a constitutional abyss. If Canada has begun to follow the same path then the subject deserves a fair hearing on the Global Research News Hour. [6]

Our show starts with two women, Eva Bartlett and Tamara Lorincz, who got detained in Canadian airports and asked unusual questions for daring to – gulp – speak with Russians! Later in the program, we hear from three more people: Professor Radhika Desai, Professor Kevin MacKay, and independent journalist Vanessa Beeley about similar encounters in airports and in academia more generally. These individuals through what they experienced tell us more about what happened, how much worse this could get, and what can be done about it.

Eva Bartlett is a Canadian independent journalist and activist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and occupied Palestine. She is a recipient of the 2017 International Journalism Award for International Reporting, granted by the Mexican Journalists’ Press Club, was the first recipient of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism, and was short-listed in 2017 for the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism.

Tamara Lorincz is a member of Canadian Voice of Women for Peace. Tamara is also a member of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom-Canada, and a fellow with the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute. As well, she is on the advisory committee of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, World Beyond War and the No to War, No to NATO Network. She is a PhD candidate, Balsillie School of International Affairs, Wilfrid Laurier University.

Radhika Desai is  Professor in the Department of Political Studies at the University of Manitoba in Canada; and she is the Convener of the International Manifesto Group. She is the author of Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire (2013) among other books, as well as numerous articles in Economic and Political Weekly, International Critical Thought, New Left Review, Third World Quarterly, World Review of Political Economy and other journals.

Kevin MacKay is Anthropology professor at Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology, and also the  Co-op Executive Director of Skydragon cooperative,  a non-profit community development organization in Hamilton, Ontario. He also coordinates a new group: Canadian Academics for a Just Foreign Policy (justforeignpolicy.ca)

Vanessa Beeley is an independent journalist and photographer who has worked extensively in the Middle East – on the ground in Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Palestine, while also covering the conflict in Yemen since 2015. In 2017 Vanessa was a finalist for the prestigious Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism which was won by the much-acclaimed Robert Parry that year. In 2019, Vanessa was among recipients of the Serena Shim Award for uncompromised integrity in journalism. 

(Global Research News Hour episode 445)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format) 

Transcript of interview with Kevin MacKay, Radhika Desai and Vanessa Beeley, October 15, 2024

Global Research: I will start with Professor MacKay. Could you comment a little on the experiences that you have endured and witnessed in the last year or so?

Kevin MacKay: Thank you.

Yeah, I think like a lot of other folks in academia who are studying critical foreign policy, so they’re looking at world events from a lens that is critical of Western interests, you know, Western colonialism, imperialism. We’ve all been, I think, experiencing a chill and pushback in various ways. At my institution, it has, there’s been a couple of campaigns to get me fired.

I seem to have very, very poor luck using space on campus to hold any kind of critical event. And I’m trying to use legal means to push against that. So definitely been experiencing a lot of suppression, and then also encountering other folks who have been as well.

And so I really think this is a national phenomenon that we’re witnessing.

GR: Yeah, yeah. I mean, I guess, especially with the, what’s happening on campuses with students who are trying to embargo the against, you know, starting the embargoes against the Palestine, the genocide of Palestinians.

KM: Yeah, very much so. So we’ve seen it among students and faculty, you’re right, there’s really a concerted effort to crack down on any alternative narratives.

And I think it speaks a lot to you, as I’m sure other guests will speak to the importance of establishment narratives in enabling things like the Palestinian genocide, enabling the proxy war in Ukraine. I think that, you know, obviously, our governments, the military industrial complex, the other power centers, the only way they can do what they do is if there is, you know, profound misinformation and really skewed narratives out there in the public. And I think folks who are trying to push against that, you know, such as Vanessa, Radhika, you know, myself, other academics are becoming targets simply because they can’t let the truth come out.

GR: Okay. Radhika Desai, I know that you travel pretty frequently as part of your job. You know, you’ve been to China many times, Russia, you’ve been, you know, all over the place.

And you actually asked some of the guests to come here, convene them in conferences, have them speak to your students and so on. Yet, something happened to you recently that’s, as I understand, it’s never happened before. And, you know, maybe you could enlighten us on what exactly happened.

It was at an airport, correct?

Radhika Desai: Yeah. So, I just want to say that actually, the history of trying to suppress the alternative, you know, suppress the truthful narratives that, at least the diverse views that we must put forward in order to have any proper debate, the suppression of that, for me, in my personal experience goes back a long way. I remember in 2014, when essentially Russia incorporated Crimea into its own territory.

And Boris Kagarlitsky, who you will know, is at the moment under arrest in Russia. At that time, he had held a conference. He’s a good friend of mine and my husband, Alan Freeman.

And he had invited us to a conference in Yalta, in the Crimea. We had gone there. It was a conference of activists.

As you know, when the original civil war started, there was a, you know, these people called them, they saw themselves as establishing these people’s republics and so on. And so, we had gone there and there was another Canadian there, Roger Annis. And when we all came back, we decided to hold an event just to report on what we had done, because we had been talking to all the activists, the Odessa massacre had just taken place.

So, there were activists from all over essentially reporting on what had happened. And we, after coming back, we held a public meeting at the Ukrainian Labour Temple, which is a very well-known and beautiful venue here in Winnipeg. And we had essentially people who were also academics at the same university, but also their community allies tried to disrupt our meeting.

A year or two later, we had an event on NATO. There were attempts to disrupt it. Every so often, there are people writing to my head of department or my dean saying this woman should not be working here, et cetera.

But so far, thanks to the University of Manitoba, they have taken the position that Radhika has, as like all faculty members, has academic freedom. And I have written about Ukraine. I have edited a book about it.

So, it’s not like I’m, you know, mouthing off about things I know nothing about. Then, yes, you were mentioning, so this was already in the background. And then last year, we were going to Valdai.

It’s essentially Russia’s equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations. If the Council on Foreign Relations of a big and important country invites you, you want to go because there are really interesting people there. And by the way, I should mention that the guests at Valdai don’t just include, you know, sort of people from countries that are not Western.

They include a lot of Western countries. There are people from France, from Germany, from the UK, from Italy, from all over Western Europe, et cetera. But anyway, so we were there.

And before we got there, we actually were in China for a few days for a conference. And then we were going from China to Sochi and back and then back from China to Winnipeg. And so, while we were in China, we heard that Valdai had been sanctioned by the Canadian government.

This immediately raised the question, should we go or not? Alan and I sat and we read the sanctions, like the law of the sanctions. We consulted informally, of course, a lot of friends, knowledgeable friends, including friends who were lawyers. And we decided on balance that the sanctions did not apply to us.

We went. We returned. We spent a couple more days in China before returning via Vancouver to Canada and to Winnipeg.

And at Vancouver Airport, we were subject, Alan and I were subject to a three hours long interrogation in which the customs officers were essentially on a fishing expedition saying things like, you know, Valdai has been sanctioned. Why did you go to Valdai? Who did you meet? Blah, blah, and so on. And initially, we thought, you know, we should cooperate.

We can tell them everything that we do, et cetera. So, we cooperated. But they kept pushing and being really aggressive and often insulting and all that.

So, then finally, we decided, OK, we’re not going to, you know, this is it. So, I said, you know, you keep saying that Valdai has been sanctioned, but I have read the sanctions law. It does not apply to attending conference.

Have you read the sanctions law? This guy says, oh, there are two people there. O h, we don’t know anything about sanctions. We’re just customs officers.

I said, right. So, I’m answering every last question you got about what is on my person, what’s in my bags. And I let you do your job as a customs officer, but I’m not answering a single other question about Valdai or anything that that’s none of your business.

So, then they tried to, they goaded me for another 15 minutes because they finished with Alan by this time. They goaded me for another 15 minutes and then they gave up because I refused. I literally just stood there like this and I did not answer any question.

They would do stupid things like don’t put your hands in your pockets. Like, where have you heard that? You know, they just do anything to try to intimidate you, to discombobulate you, to make you feel like you are very insecure and you really have to fight back. But they were just on a fishing expedition.

They got nothing. And I am going to Valdai again this year and I will see what they do when I come back.

GR: Vanessa Beeley, you were confronted at Heathrow Airport almost three years ago, I believe. And I mean, you live in Damascus now, but you travelled to different centres from time to time.

I noticed that you’ve really undercut Western state narratives, particularly with regard to the White Helmets in Syria, right? And maybe you may have run into difficulties, just for that, with getting into the United States and Canada. But as I understand it, it’s nothing like what you went through at Heathrow Airport. And does it sound, what Radhika went through, does that sound similar to what you went through?

Vanessa Beeley: Yeah, very similar.

But I mean, if you remember when I did the speaking tour in Canada, I think that was 20, no, it was 2018 or 2019. I’m losing track. But if you remember, every single talk was boycotted and shut down.

And we had to, in every city, find a last minute venue to do the talk. I mean, it was just extraordinary. And even in Winnipeg, by the way, I can’t remember the university that stopped it, but crazy.

But anyway, so I came to live in Syria in 2019. And then of course, COVID hit and everyone was kind of pretty much isolated, couldn’t go anywhere. And then I think it was at the end of 2022, I decided I would go back.

My brother had had his first baby, so I wanted to go back for Christmas. And I’ll never forget, so it was a flight coming in from Beirut. I’m probably the only British person on this flight.

And I get off the plane and there’s two plainclothes policemen standing there, one woman, one guy. And they basically presented themselves as the anti-terrorist squad. They demanded my passport, my mobile phone.

And I remember that my first statement to them was, why are you arresting me? Why aren’t you arresting the British government? They’re responsible for the terrorism in Syria. I was so angry. I was so incensed, you know, that-

GR: You were like Radhika, you stood your ground.

VB: Yeah, absolutely. And I refused to give the mobile phone. So they said, okay, if you don’t, we’ll arrest you.

So I had to hand it over.

GR: You’re a journalist too.

VB: Yeah! So it was Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorist act which is effectively, as Radhika mentioned, it’s a fishing expedition, right? And I was held for six hours, which is the maximum amount of time that they can hold you under this particular section.

There is now another section that they’re bringing into use where they can effectively arrest people without charging them and hold them like Richard Medhurst and Sarah Wilkinson in the UK for their anti-genocide views. I’m not even going to say pro-Palestinian because, you know, any human being should be against what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and now to the Lebanese. And of course, for many years against Syria also.

And so I was interrogated for this six hours. I had my DNA taken. I had my fingerprints taken.

I was photographed like a criminal, you know, with your face against the wall and you have to turn sideways. So it was a total criminalization process. It was a total intimidation harassment process.

And the thing is, at the end of it, because I had also undergone very much like  Eva Bartlett, two years of solid media pressure and attacks, not only media, but also from academic institutions where I was, you know, going to speak and so on. But I found out at the end of the interview, so at the end of the six hours, that effectively the BBC had given the information to the terrorist squad. Why did I know this? Because of the questions that were being asked were related to a sting operation that was carried out against an academic that was part of the working group investigating the OPCW corruption and misreporting of the alleged chemical weapon attacks in Syria, particularly in 2018 in Douma in the eastern suburbs of Damascus.

So it became very clear to me then that media outlets like the BBC and The Guardian and Channel 4 and all of these outlets that had been attacking me for two years were working in lockstep with the security agencies in the UK who were then triggering the anti-terrorist police. And I wasn’t investigated, by the way, about my Syria work so much, although that was a major part of the conversation, I was stopped on the basis that I was giving secret information to foreign intelligence agencies, primarily Russia. So, you know, it was ridiculous.

And to a degree, you know, I was pretty relaxed. I didn’t have anything to hide. Everything I say is in the public domain anyway.

And at the end of six hours, they did give me back my phone, which many people didn’t have that advantage.

GR: So, I mean, it’s not as if they actually believe necessarily that you are this terrible person, that they’re, as you say, a fishing expedition and they’re trying to, you know, get whatever they can and to intimidate you and to avoid covering these things.

VB: Well, and to download everything from my phone, everything.

So, all my emails, it took them six hours to take all that information and I still don’t know where it is. I don’t know who’s received this information, what it’s being used for, what my DNA is going to be used for. Is it going to be stored? Is it going to be, you know, used as some kind of data mining service in the future? I have no idea.

There’s been no responses from them since the interrogation.

GR: Yeah. Well, Radhika and Vanessa, I mean, did you take any action, like in protest, like go to a political individual or anyone who could say, hey, you got to do something about this?

RD: Well, I mean, I’ve just been so darn busy this past year, partly, of course, because of these things, because Vanessa mentioned something which I should also mention, which is that, of course, when I came back, literally, like, as some of you know, part of the reason why I was interrogated, apart from going to the Valdai conference, is that I embarrassed the Canadian government because we were asked, you know, in the past, we used to be able to just ask questions from the floor to President Putin.

Valdai always closes with a big address by President Putin. That’s like one of the big events on the foreign policy calendar in Russia. And so in the past, we used to just get up on the floor from the floor and ask questions.

But lately, they have said, please submit questions. So I had submitted a question about the fact that and this is an appropriate question to ask the president of the country that played such a big role in defeating Nazism, because the Canadian parliament has stood up and applauded a Nazi on the grounds that he had been fighting the communists. And I just find it to this day astonishing that hundreds, how many MPs do we have 400 and something?

GR: 338, I think.

RD: Yeah, three or whatever. I think the senators were there too. But whatever.

The point is that the entire parliament, hundreds of parliamentarians can stand up and applaud this guy without asking a very simple question. If he was fighting the Russians in World War Two, who was he fighting with?

GR: Yeah.

RD: They never asked that question. How? And I saw, you know, of course, that I got so the moment I saw, I asked this question.

And incidentally, I also asked a question about Boris Kagarlitsky. So I asked these two questions, because Boris is a friend, although, you know, on the war, he has taken a position that I do not agree with. But I still think he’s a great scholar and important intellectual.

Anyway, I asked President Putin about this. And in fact, Boris was, as a result, released for a while. Anyway, the point is that I asked this question.

And of course, Putin began, you know, took his time elaborating an answer, because, of course, as is his right as the leader of this country. And so, you know, he, so he did this, and the meeting hadn’t even ended.

a 

a 
And my phone was bleeping with, you know, CBC wants to interview, blah, blah, etc.

And I took the interview. And that told me taught me one lesson, never do an interview unless they let you record it, because they so misrepresent what you’ve said. And they just take little clips, you know, and they remove and I would have loved to put a recording of that interview on my own website and said, please listen to this here.

But anyway, so I just wanted to and then I got a bad out, you know, the local CBC people came and interviewed me and did the same hash job, and so on. So, all of that has happened. And I should mention just one quick other thing.

And now I’m, you know, so I’ve just been so busy. And I have so much writing to do that I haven’t bothered to do anything, although I have made notes. And I had for a while thought I would write a thing on sanctions, because there is something really, really problematic about sanctions too, because these sanctions are written in such a way that they will allow most businessmen to continue their operations with Russia and with Russian businesses.

They are actually written in a way that they can be used to harass people like me not to actually obstruct business between Canada and Russia, which is what their proclaimed goal is. So, I was going to write an article about that. That didn’t get done because of too many other things.

But lately, there has been an article in The Hill Times about people who appear on RT and attend Valdai Club conferences. There is actually a handful of us in this country who fit that definition. And Dimitri Lascaris, who you know, and Alan and I, we certainly have written a joint letter to The Hill Times.

We are told it’s going to be published soon. So, I hope they will publish it either this week or next. And I should also add that Vanessa’s experience with what is the venue being cancelled and finding a new secret venue each time.

This happened when Dimitri was doing a tour, touring all over the country and reporting on his trip to Ukraine and to Crimea. Sorry, to Russia and to Crimea. So, anyway, I mean, these things are happening.

And I would say, of course, now, at Kevin’s instigation, Kevin has taken the initiative, an excellent initiative to start this Canadian Academics for Just Foreign Policy. So, I’ll let him talk about that. But this is the rubric under which we should fight.

GR: Kevin McKay, you know, the university has been such a, I don’t know, a sanctuary, in a sense, you know, I mean, you know, certain perspectives like communism or LGBTQ in the past, they could be spoken here before anywhere else, really. This is where it started as a sanctionary.

And what’s more, you have Tenure. And so, it protects you, you know, to explore new frontiers of thought, you know, kind of unmolested, but now we seem to see we’re seeing where things are no longer safe. Talk about, you know, going forward, where were the these things that are they’re affecting a faculty and in students, is there a noticeable change in the way they’re studying and or behaving or working that that you’re noticing?

KM: Yeah, thank you.

I mean, you know, I wasn’t around as an academic in the 60s. But from what I understand from folks who were, we’ve had, we’ve had waves of this kind of suppression, right? We’ve had, you know, obviously, sort of the McCarthy era in the States, we had, you know, our equivalent in Canada, as well, where at different times, academics have been suppressed, it always seems to be when the empire is waging major wars. I mean, when Canada was occupying Afghanistan, it was incredibly difficult to have any kind of discourse about Afghanistan within academia.

So, I think that’s the suppression has always been there. But I think we see, I mean, recently, it seems to me, anyway, that it’s been given this new sort of unholy energy, right, by, you know, the conflict in Palestine, the genocide there, by the Ukraine proxy war, there’s a real, it’s more blatant, I would say, it’s more out in the open, in the sense that you have faculty members whose employment is being threatened, you have a lot of internal chilling, you know, that I know, Radhika, when we did our launch last week, spoke really, really eloquently about just all the subtle ways in which, whether it’s getting grants, whether it’s getting publications, whether it’s participating on committees, you know, doing acts of service within the institution as professors are supposed to do. There’s so many ways in which people can be marginalized, and they’re doing it to students as well.

So, we had an amazing graduate student speaking at our launch last week, and it was a really heartbreaking story. She was talking about just all the ways in which she is being systematically marginalized, whether it’s her thesis committee, whether it’s constant investigations that the institution is conducting into her behaviour. And the thing is, too, there’s the weaponization of codes of conduct that we’re seeing now across academia.

And so, we all have these kind of codes of conduct or civility policies or anti-harassment policies, and it sounds great on a certain level, you know, if you’re going to storm into someone’s office and tell them off, well, we don’t want that, right? But what they’re being used to do is to suppress speech, to threaten, to intimidate and harass faculty who are speaking out against genocide, speaking out against proxy war, and even just speaking for peace. And this is what, to me, what is really interesting is just advocating for a peaceful foreign policy, advocating for things like international law and global cooperation. These things are making people a target now.

And it’s just, you know, to sort of leave off my talk here, I just think that what I’d like people to understand is that so many of the things that as Canadians we’d like to think are sacrosanct, you know, whether it’s we live in a democratic society, we have a free and open media, we have academic institutions, like you said, Michael, that are these open spaces of knowledge exchange, all of these things are being severely eroded, seriously eroded. And I think that really what, you know, if Canadians don’t wake up pretty soon, you know, that democracy is going to slip through our hands, like grains of sand, you know, because it really is getting that intense. And so what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to try to organize, I mean, everyone’s already doing, I mean, the two other women on this conversation have been doing this for a lot longer than I have, but trying to organize whether we’re journalists or academics, I mean, we need to reassert these foundational values of a democratic society, you know, that we have academic freedom, we have free speech, we have the freedom of dissent and association and whatnot.

So I think that’s the way forward is we need to just keep organizing around these, these issues.

GR: Yeah. Vanessa, I’m like listening to Kevin, I’m reminded of the saying is back in World War Two, you know, Martin Niemöller, first, they came for the socialists, then they came for the trade unionists, then they came for this, the Jews, then they came for me.

And I mean, I don’t know, I’m, I mean, I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say we’re kind of on the same trapping, you’re witnessing this, you know, creeping levels of, you know, you know, fascism or something. I mean, but I mean, given your engagement, and you’re right, like in the thick of things with your journalism, and then speaking out unreservedly, what do you think the kind of engagement? Like, where is this leading? Do you think? I mean, what’s happening around us? And what could we possibly do to reverse the trend?

VB: Um, that’s a really interesting question. And, and, you know, I don’t have all the answers.

But I guess, if I look at what frightens them most, are these public talks, are these public conferences where people can come and hear you and ask questions and interact and meet you face to face? I mean, it’s fantastic, we will have YouTube, we will, well, some of us don’t, of course, because of censorship. But you know, the internet is a great tool. But I don’t think it’s as big a threat as meeting people in person and talking to them about your experiences, because the internet creates a kind of gladiatorial environment in which people can just put forward their arguments and challenge your arguments in a very aggressive, non constructive, counterintuitive way.

But when you actually go to these public forums, and interestingly, as a group, which was called media on trial, where we’re restarting this, particularly in the UK, but then spreading outwards. And I think the very fact that these kind of events are being cancelled and being attacked, I mean, mine were actually under attack from the extremist elements that had come to Canada from Syria, and who objected to my speaking about my experience inside Syria, which was very different, of course, to the portrayal of events in Syria by the legacy media, the colonial media across the West. But I think when you can actually sit down face to face, and have a panel of people who can present ideas and concepts and opinions in a very intelligent, constructive way that destroys their narratives.

And so for me, it’s not allowing ourselves to be isolated, to make sure that we’re creating groups of like minded people all the time. Because for example, I’m in Syria, you’re in Canada, other people are in Russia, we’re scattered. We don’t have that enormous resource pool, and complex, entire industrial complex of information manipulation that the ruling elite and the oligarchs and the military industrial complex, and the globalists have, we don’t have that.

But I think, and Russia is actually quite good at this, you mentioned Valdai, but there are many NGOs in Russia, for example, who are constantly establishing these kind of meeting places. And I think we need to start doing more of this, you know, breaking out of that academic paradigm where you’re in a minority, create the majority in another space. Including academics or including journalists.

And what I’d love to see – just one last thing – is this collaboration between like-minded academics and journalists, because that also has been eroded. And I think that’s what I found incredibly invaluable, because my experience for example on the ground combined with an academic investigation into a certain event is an invaluable combination.

So I think that sort of collaboration between independent journalists and independent thinking academics is incredibly important also for the future.

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg.

First published on October 12, 2024

The Covid 19 “Vaccine” narrative is being question n several countries, confirming what we have outlined and document since the vaccine rollout in mid-December 2020.

We recall the recent courageous statement of Japan’s Former Minister of Internal Affairs Kazuhiro Haraguchi:

“‘You Were Right, Vaccines Are Killing Millions of Our Loved Ones” 

“They are trying to block our freedom, our resistance, our power. But we will never lose.”

And now Florida’s Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo questions the legitimacy of the mRNA Vaccine, prior to the November 5, Presidential Elections: 

The decision of the Surgeon General is carefully documented. The Florida Department of Health issued the following advisory

***

.

Bombshell: Fox New Reports the following: “Severely Pissed Off”

“MSM now admits the shots are toxic “Discovery billions fragments of DNA in every dose” – Florida Surgeon General

The masses are going to be severely pi$$ed off when they finally find out what they’ve injected themselves with numerous times”

VIDEO Click Here or Screen to access Fox News Report

***

People across America

The State of Florida has called for a halt of the use of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccines, setting a precedent for the implementation of similar decisions not only across the United States, but Worldwide. 

The evidence is overwhelming. 

Read the powerful message of Florida State Surgeon General Joseph A. Ladapo who has come to the rescue of 22 million people in Florida. 

We call upon people across the United States to pressure State officials to cancel the mRNA Covid-19 once and for all.

The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming. 

The official data (mortality and morbidity) as well as numerous scientific studies confirm the nature of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine which is being imposed on all humanity. 

Contact your representative at the US Congress. The decision of the State of Florida must be the object of debate and analysis across the land. AND THIS SHOULD TAKE PLACE BEFORE THE NOVEMBER 5 ELECTIONS. 

The media has remained mum on the dangers of the vaccine in the course of the last three years.

We invite the media to emulate Fox News, to provide coverage pertaining to the “failures” of the Covid-19 Vaccine and its implications, nationally and internationally. 

In less than four weeks from now it’s Election 2024. Let us actively debate the issue of the vaccine which has affected millions of Americans. 

It is essential that the candidates for the Presidency of the United States take a stance regarding the Covid 19 mRNA vaccine which has been carefully documented by Florida’s Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladopo. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 12, 2024

***

Below is a short review of the impacts of the Covid-19 Vaccine on Excess Mortality

There are numerous studies on vaccine related excess mortality. Below is a summary of an incisive study pertaining to Cancer Related Excess Mortality in England and Wales resulting from the mRNA Vaccine conducted by the team of Edward Dowd

The data for excess mortality in 2020 (the year prior to the vaccine) are negative with the exception of “malignant neoplasm without specification of site”.

The COVID-19 vaccine was rolled-out in several phases in England and Wales starting on December 8, 2020  and extending into March-April 2021.

The upward movement in excess mortality (%) commences in 2021. The increase in excess mortality related to malignant neoplasm is tabulated for the two first years of the vaccine. 

England and Wales: Excess Mortality

Below is a similar table pertaining to Excess Mortality in Germany, which points to the Deviation of Observed Mortality from Expected Mortality (by age group) in 2020, 2021, and 2022.

Notice the upward shift in excess mortality in 2021 and 2022 following the rollout of the Covid Vaccine in December 2020

Germany: Excess Mortality 

Germany: Excess Mortality by Age Group (%)

Excess Mortality in Red by age group, Total Excess Mortality in Gray 

Japan:  Excess Mortality

Japan. Excess Mortality (2020-2022): Jump in Excess mortality in 2021 and 2022 (January-October 2022)

United States:

The above are excerpts from my Article on the Corona Virus Pandemic 

Starts At 6’47”: The Worldwide Corona Crisis

Our thanks to Vaccine Choice Canada 

Michel  Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 12, 2024

La NATO comunica che, il 14 ottobre 2024, ha iniziato la sua esercitazione nucleare annuale Steadfast Noon della durata di due settimane, con oltre 60 aerei di 13 Paesi che effettuano voli di addestramento sull’Europa Occidentale. Vi prendono parte jet da combattimento in grado di trasportare testate nucleari statunitensi, tra cui i primi caccia NATO F-35A dichiarati pronti a svolgere ruoli nucleari. Vi prendono parte bombardieri pesanti, caccia di scorta, aerei da rifornimento in volo e aerei da guerra elettronica, con un personale di 2.000 militari di otto basi aeree.

All’esercitazione di guerra nucleare, chiaramente diretta contro la Russia, partecipa anche l’Italia che – insieme a Germania, Belgio e Olanda – aderisce ala “Nuclear Sharing”, la “Condivisione Nucleare” della NATO.

Quale sia il grado di “condivisione” lo spiega la NATO stessa in un testo ufficiale:

1) “La pianificazione nucleare della NATO è effettuata dal Gruppo di Alto Livello, presieduto dagli Stati Uniti.”

2) “Gli Stati Uniti mantengono il controllo assoluto e la custodia delle loro armi nucleari dispiegate in Europa, mentre gli Alleati forniscono supporto militare”.

In poche parole, sono gli Stati Uniti che forniscono agli Alleati europei le armi nucleari su cui mantengono l’assoluto controllo, mentre gli Alleati europei forniscono aerei e personale militare pronti all’attacco nucleare sotto l’assoluto comando statunitense. La “condivisione nucleare” si sta estendendo al di là dei paesi che ufficialmente ne fanno parte: lo dimostra il fatto che, all’esercitazione di guerra nucleare, partecipano Polonia, Romania e Finlandia. Poiché anche nei Paesi baltici sono schierati aerei NATO a duplice capacità convenzionale e nucleare, ciò significa che gli Stati Uniti hanno costituito in Europa un fronte avanzato da cui può essere lanciato un attacco nucleare contro la Russia.

Contemporaneamente gli Stati Uniti hanno “ammodernato” le basi nucleari in Europa per dotarle dei caccia F-35A e delle nuove bombe nucleari B61-12. In Italia sono state “ammodernate” la base di Ghedi, dove è di stanza il 6° Stormo dell’Aeronautica italiana, e quella di Aviano dove è di stanza il 31° Stoormo di Caccia USA. Le altre basi nucleari “ammodernate” sono quelle di Kleine Brogel in Belgio, di Volkel in Olanda, di Büchel in Germania, cui si aggiiunge la base di Lakenheasth in Gran Bretagna che è stata “ammodernata” segretamente.

Gli Stati Uniti stanno “ammodernando” il proprio arsenale nucleare con una spesa prevista in 1.700 miliardi di dollari., facendo da volano a una corsa agli armamenti che sta divenendo più pericolosa di quella della Guerra Fredda. Basti pensare che le armi nucleari statunitensi schierate in Europa, a ridosso della Russia, possono colpire in pochi minuti San Pietroburgo o Mosca.

Manlio Dinucci

VIDEO :

A hipocrisia aparentemente tornou-se um aspecto vital dos discursos dos líderes ocidentais. Recentemente, o primeiro-ministro alemão falou sobre “paz” e “diplomacia” com a Federação Russa, alegando que o seu objectivo mais importante é acabar com o conflito na Ucrânia. No entanto, não demonstrou interesse em acabar com o atual programa de apoio de Berlim a Kiev, que é um dos maiores de todo o Ocidente.

Olaf Scholz disse que está pronto para negociar com o presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, termos de paz que poriam fim às hostilidades na Ucrânia de uma vez por todas. Disse que apoia incondicionalmente as iniciativas de Kiev e as propostas de cessar-fogo apresentadas por Vladimir Zelensky, que, entre outras questões, exigem o fim da presença da Rússia nos territórios reintegrados. No entanto, ele deixou claro que está pronto para negociar diretamente com os russos se for necessário para pôr fim ao conflito.

“Portanto, também é verdade que quando nos perguntam se também falaremos com o presidente russo, respondemos – sim, iremos (…) (As negociações, no entanto, não aconteceriam) ignorando a Ucrânia e nunca sem conversas com nossos parceiros mais próximos”, disse Scholz.

Obviamente, Scholz comentou o assunto como se o Ocidente e a Ucrânia fossem o lado disposto a alcançar a paz, ignorando que foi Moscou, e não Kiev, quem tomou todas as iniciativas diplomáticas desde 2022. Scholz exige que a Ucrânia faça parte do processo de diálogo, mas ignora hipocritamente que os seus parceiros ocidentais, principalmente os EUA e o Reino Unido, boicotaram deliberadamente as conversações anteriores, não tendo sido criticados em nenhum momento pelos líderes europeus por tais ações.

Além disso, é curioso que Scholz comente sobre a paz e as negociações quando a Alemanha é um dos maiores fornecedores de armas, dinheiro e equipamento militar para a Ucrânia em todo o Ocidente. Mesmo passando por uma grave crise energética e desindustrialização, a Alemanha continua a fazer esforços profundos para produzir todos os equipamentos necessários para abastecer o programa de ajuda da Ucrânia, priorizando Kiev em detrimento do próprio povo alemão.

É totalmente hipócrita que um político fale de “paz” e “diplomacia” enquanto o seu governo coopera diretamente no prolongamento da guerra. Se a Alemanha tivesse um interesse real em acabar com as hostilidades, o primeiro passo seria acabar com a ajuda militar à Ucrânia. Sem armas ocidentais, o regime neonazista não teria qualquer hipótese de continuar a lutar e seria forçado a capitular – o que obviamente poria fim ao conflito. Em vez disso, Scholz, tal como outros líderes ocidentais, procura deliberadamente a guerra, ao mesmo tempo que afirma hipocritamente defender a paz.

Toda a retórica a favor da “paz” e da “diplomacia” revela-se absolutamente inútil no contexto atual, uma vez que a realidade mostra que as negociações diretas entre a Rússia e a Ucrânia são impossíveis. Em vez de tentar acalmar o conflito, Kiev tomou todas as medidas possíveis no sentido de aumentar a violência, sobretudo atacando a região desmilitarizada do Oblast de Kursk, matando civis num território que nem sequer é reivindicado pela Ucrânia.

Após a invasão de Kursk, o presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, deixou claro que não haveria mais conversações de paz, cancelando esforços diplomáticos anteriores. Esta ação foi necessária porque Kiev se revelou indigna de qualquer confiança, sendo um regime capaz de cometer os mais terríveis crimes de guerra e violações de direitos básicos. Não é possível negociar com um governo que demonstra interesse em matar civis inocentes numa zona indiscutível e desmilitarizada. A Rússia compreendeu simplesmente que não são possíveis negociações com a Ucrânia e que uma solução militar é a única alternativa para acabar com a guerra.

É também importante sublinhar que a Ucrânia é apenas um representante nesta guerra. O regime não está a lutar contra a Rússia porque quer, mas porque a OTAN o obriga a fazê-lo e envia recursos para que isso aconteça. Neste sentido, não é lógico exigir que a Ucrânia participe nas negociações de paz. O mais eficiente seria Scholz apelar aos seus próprios parceiros ocidentais para pressionarem o proxy ucraniano a pôr fim aos ataques a civis russos, o que restabeleceria o diálogo de paz. No entanto, Scholz não tem interesse em realmente alcançar a paz, mas sim em melhorar a sua própria imagem política através de uma retórica pseudo-pacifista e fútil.

Há um impasse no conflito ucraniano: para resolvê-lo, o Ocidente precisa de abandonar a sua obsessão hegemonista e reconhecer a realidade multipolar, negociando termos mutuamente favoráveis ​​com a Rússia. Obviamente, os EUA não estão dispostos a fazer isto, e é por isso que a guerra provavelmente continuará.

Neste impasse, líderes como Scholz tentam “sobreviver” politicamente, permanecendo alinhados com o Ocidente mas ao mesmo tempo falando de “paz” para evitar serem vistos como colaboradores no derramamento de sangue.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês : Scholz talks about diplomacy and peace while keeps arming Ukraine, InfoBrics, 17 de Outubro de 2024.

*

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

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

The Monster Behind Weather Engineering?

By Peter Koenig, October 18, 2024

“Climate instability” is a soft term, for climate geoengineering, weather modification, extended into weather weaponizing. In other words, a crime on humanity.

Is Political West Bailing Out Due to ‘Real and Increasing Ukraine Fatigue’?

By Drago Bosnic, October 18, 2024

The term “Ukraine fatigue” is certainly not new. We’re accustomed to the political West using it, particularly during the fall and winter, when Europe’s dependence on Russian energy is most apparent. However, it seems the latest usage of the term breaks off from the usual pattern and may indicate that the world’s most aggressive power pole is looking for ways to leave the Neo-Nazi junta to fend for itself.

Zelensky’s 5/8ths Victory Plan

By Dr. Jack Rasmus, October 18, 2024

So what are the details of the Zelensky Victory Plan? Is it a roadmap to eventually winning the war militarily? How different—or not—is it from his and Ukraine’s previous plan and strategy for conducting the war?

Slovakia Moves to Ban ‘Dangerous’ COVID ‘Vaccines,’ Declares Pandemic a ‘Fabricated Operation’

By Frank Bergman, October 18, 2024

Top government officials in Slovakia are moving to ban “dangerous” Covid mRNA shots from the country after an explosive investigation determined that the pandemic was a “fabricated operation” and the “vaccines” were a resulting “act of bioterrorism.”

Historical View of France’s Internal Problems and Unrest in Its Army

By Shane Quinn, October 18, 2024

France’s defeat against Germany in the Franco-Prussian War, or Franco-German War, of the early 1870s provided stark evidence of the country’s regression. The French birth rate by this point was largely stagnating and the population of France was scarcely higher in 1870 compared to half a century before, at little more than 30 million.

Video: Tokyo International Summit Crisis: Naming Names and Connecting Dots in the Globalist Agenda. Dr. Meryl Nass and James Corbett

By Dr. Meryl Nass and James Corbett, October 18, 2024

Join James for this week’s edition of The Corbett Report where he breaks down Dr. Meryl Nass’ presentation to the International Crisis Summit in Tokyo and provides context and further reading about the cadre of elitists who are attempting to take control of the planet and its resources.

Bosnia-Herzegovina: Political Intrusion, Attempts to Eliminate Republika Srpska. Attacks Against RS President. Call to Respect the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement

By Belgrade Forum, October 17, 2024

The Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals expresses deep concern over the growing threat to the Republika Srpska (RS) and the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) by open attacks on the institutions and competences of the RS guaranteed by the Dayton-Paris Agreement (1995).

“Climate instability” is a soft term, for climate geoengineering, weather modification, extended into weather weaponizing. In other words, a crime on humanity.

Professor Michel Chossudovsky provides the historic and technical details concerning weather warfare that has been emerging slowly since WW II, and probably before.

For certain, whenever you hear “fake news” to comments and reports about geoengineering and weather weaponizing, you can be sure the so-called fake news are actually the truth. And this is the case for most everything else called “fake news”.

However, what tops it all, is the recent discovery through a former employee at the South Pole Station in Antarctica. He says, what he saw at the South Pole Station is “HAARP on steroids”. He became a whistleblower, who testified before the United States Senate.

HAARP stands for High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program. Since 2015, it is officially a University of Alaska Fairbanks project which researches the ionosphere – the highest, ionized part of Earth’s atmosphere. In reality, it has a long history of weather modification and climate geoengineering.

The researcher and whistleblower, Eric Hecker, used to work for Raytheon Technologies Corporation, an American multinational aerospace and defense conglomerate, at the South Pole Station. In a 15-minute interview by Redacted, he reveals the existence of a MASSIVE weather machine at the South Pole Station. The interview, which details what Mr. Hecker experienced at the South Pole Station, is mind-blowing. It “makes the HAARP project look like a baby project.”

The weather machines at the South Poles Station can control earthquakes and the weather, alias climate. They can fabricate and direct earthquakes, hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones just about anywhere in the world. In addition, there is a giant UFO control tower, also called a neutrino control tower.

Neutrinos are tiny subatomic particles, often called ‘ghost particles’ because they barely interact with anything else. Neutrinos can be used as high-frequency energy transmitters. Earthquake or storm forming energy can be beamed literally anywhere in the world.

Mr. Hecker talks about precisely targeted earthquakes and storms. 

See and listen to this earth-shaking interview by Redacted of 11 October 2024.

With this prelude, the recent category 3 to 5 devastating hurricanes hitting North Carolina and Florida, as well as the typhoons Bebinca and Yagi, hitting China and other Asian countries, are easily explained. 

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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

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

Earlier this month de facto president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, visited the White House to present his new Victory Plan to US president Joe Biden. Days before the meeting, Zelensky announced to the world he had a new comprehensive plan for Ukraine’s victory in its war with Russia but provided no details. Biden was the first to learn of it, before Zelensky publicly revealed its contents this past week when he finally shared details of his plan with the world in his speech to the Ukrainian parliament on October 16, 2024.

So what are the details of the Zelensky Victory Plan? Is it a roadmap to eventually winning the war militarily? How different—or not—is it from his and Ukraine’s previous plan and strategy for conducting the war?

The first thing to know about it is the Victory Plan has five critical points Zelensky described in his speech—AND three other critical points he didn’t reveal. Three of the plan’s key elements must remain a ‘secret’, he said

So what we got from Zelensky on October 16 was a 5/8ths Victory Plan. Or, to restate: a 62.5% roadmap to winning the war with Russia. More on the ‘secret three’ shortly.

Joe Biden certainly knows of the three ‘secret’ points. Undoubtedly Zelensky share all eight points with him in his recent meeting. And just as certain, Biden and Zelensky must have mutually agreed not to make the ‘secret three’ points public.

It’s also likely the leaders of other main European NATO countries who Zelensky visited after his meeting with Biden weeks ago—Starmer in the UK, Scholz in Germany, Macron in France—are aware of the full picture but are remaining mute.

But we the public in the USA and Europe, and the rest of the world as well, only get to hear 5/8ths of the Victory Plan. The three secrets are obviously too dangerous or outrageous to share.

Zelensky’s 5-Point Victory Plan

Of the five points he did describe in his speech, at the top of his list as point number one, Zelensky said Ukraine was inviting NATO to offer it immediate membership in NATO. Note this meant that Ukraine was no longer waiting for NATO to invite it, Ukraine, to join; Ukraine was inviting NATO to ask it to join. The Zelensky Plan’s precondition for victory was thus immediate NATO membership!

Zelensky called his second point Defense. That meant NATO providing Ukraine still more weapons, especially more missiles, planes and drones. To quote him directly, Zelensky called for “joint shooting down of Russian planes and missiles”.  That suggests direct involvement by NATO planes and NATO manned anti-missile systems. It perhaps even suggests a NATO enforced ‘no fly’ zone, a demand that Zelensky has been proposing for quite some time.

Even more ominous, Zelensky’s point two included “removal of restrictions on (Ukraine’s) use of weapons”. That statement was undoubtedly a reference to Ukraine’s long standing demand that NATO (UK and Germany) give it long range cruise missiles to let it strike with them deep into Russia, including presumably as far as Moscow which would be within their range.

Point three of the Victory Plan was called Deterrence. By Deterrence Zelensky meant stationing a permanent, albeit non-nuclear, NATO military force within Ukraine. As he said, to ensure victory Ukraine proposed to host a NATO “strategic deterrence package on its soil.” To put it bluntly this could only mean permanent NATO troop ‘boots on the ground’.

The fourth point of the Victory Plan called for the West to tighten sanctions on Russian oil prices and shipments. To date these measures have not had much effect on Russian oil production or sales. The ‘Russian oil price caps’ sanction issued earlier this year has had no effect on Russian oil prices. And Western media largely admits Russia has found various ways around shipping its oil. Russian natural gas continues to ship via two southern Europe pipelines into Europe, one through Turkey and the other actually through Ukraine, both transporting Russian natural gas into Hungary, Bulgaria, the Balkans and even Italy. And from those countries, some of the gas gets resold to elsewhere in Europe. Russian liquefied natural gas has also continued to flow via by sea into western Europe ports. Other official sanctions have proved no less ineffective. Point four wants all that to stop.

Point four also made reference to Ukraine strengthening its economy. Most economic indicators show Ukraine’s economy has continued to deteriorate steadily in 2023-24 as the war has intensified. Ukraine has publicly admitted, for example, it requires $8 billion/month just to keep its government functioning and pay the salaries, pensions and benefits of government employees, among other costs.

The US $61B aid package passed by the US Congress last April will soon be spent. US Speaker of the House, Johnson, has publicly said there’s no more money from Congress for Ukraine. He won’t bring another proposal to the House floor.

Meanwhile, Europe is struggling to pass some kind of measure to raise bonds to fund Ukraine and the war in 2025 by either using the $260 billion of frozen Russian assets in its banks or by using the $260 billion as collateral for raising private money to buy new Euro bonds it would issue. However, neither measure has gained much political traction in Europe which itself is steadily slipping into recession. Either requires the approval of other EU members like Hungary and Slovakia both of which continue to block such measures. Euro neocons are so frustrated they are proposing to throw Hungary and Slovakia out of the EU entirely.

If the preceding four points appear wishful thinking—given that recent US and NATO statements that have rejected all of them—point five is even more fantastic: in it Zelensky said that points one to four would assure Ukraine’s victory. That would then leave Ukraine’s military one of the largest, most experienced and effective military forces in Europe and NATO after the war. A victorious Ukraine would “strengthen NATO” and represent a “guarantee of security in Europe”.  Furthermore, the USA would no longer have to keep its forces in Europe since Ukraine’s forces could “replace the US contingent”.

Zelensky summarized his five points by saying if the US, NATO and the West adopted these five points it would result in the “end of the war no later than next year”! (Zelensky’s full speech is in writing on the Ukraine government’s website).

One can hardly call Zelensky’s Victory Plan a roadmap for military victory. Zelensky’s position remains as it has been since the start of the war: all Russian forces must be driven from Ukraine, including from Crimea, and Ukraine’s 1991 borders restored. His position has been—and remains—Ukraine will commence negotiations with Russia only after it leaves Ukraine. In other words, no negotiations unless Russia first capitulates. Still remains Ukraine’s position even as continues to steadily retreat from territory in its former eastern provinces as its forces are encircled and are being now pushed out of Russia’s Kursk region that Ukraine invaded this past August.

All along the eastern Donbass front Ukraine’s military has been forced out of its former strongholds in key cities like Vuledar, Andeyevka, Robotyne, Toretsk, and is being encircled there as well in various locations like Kourakova, Chasov Yar, Kupiansk and elsewhere. In Kursk three current encirclements have threatened the capture of four Ukraine battalions and Ukraine has given back more than 500 square kilometers of former captured territory. It may have to exit Kursk before the US November election.

In short, the reality is that Zelensky’s Victory Plan is a political wish list, not a military roadmap to a victory that continues to slip away for Ukraine by the day.

The Victory Plan, moreover, is not just a political plan. It is a plan to get NATO into the war more directly in order for Ukraine to win.  It represents an ultimatum to NATO: either accept the Plan’s five points or else Ukraine may lose, Zelensky seems to be saying. And if Ukraine loses, so does NATO lose. NATO may even unravel if that happens.

In addition, Zelensky indirectly is saying the economic cost to the West will be significant. It may lose all the funds thus far invested in Ukraine and all the West’s corporations who have also committed heavily to investing in Ukraine will lose their money as well.

The Zelensky 5-Point Victory Plan is therefore not just an ‘ultimatum’ to NATO but a form of political blackmail to it: either accept the Victory Plan, Zelensky seems to say, or Ukraine will lose the war and so will you NATO!

Russia’s Hardening Position

From the very beginning of the war Russia’s number one demand has always been ‘No NATO’ in Ukraine and Ukraine must remain politically neutral. Its second demand, cemented in concrete in the fall of 2022 as well is that Crimea and the four other provinces are now part of Russia. That will never be reversed. That too is non-negotiable now.  After that, according to Putin, remaining issues are negotiable. He called it, ‘Istanbul II’, last June. It is the start pointing for negotiating. Instanbul is a reference to the first deal agreed to in April 2022 between Russia and Ukraine as result of discussions in Instanbul Turkey. That tentative deal Zelensky subsequently backed out of as result of NATO urging him to reject it outright in April 2022 and to resort to  a military solution to the war backed by NATO weapons and money.

Russia has recently added to its Instanbul II position in its latest warning and red line it recently communicated directly to NATO and the US Pentagon: giving Ukraine the green light to use NATO long range missiles to attack deep into Russia and its major cities means Russia will attack NATO forces directly as well.  Putin added to this warning intimating that Russia response might include using tactical nuclear weapons if necessary. Apparently this warning was taken seriously by most NATO military establishments, including the US Pentagon.

US Neocons vs the Pentagon

When Zelensky visited Washington DC to meet with Biden earlier this month he was accompanied by the newly elected UK prime minister, Keir Starmer. Both he and Starmer were reportedly assured by US Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, that Biden would approve the delivery of UK long range ‘storm shadow’ missiles to Ukraine and their use to strike deep into Russia. But Zelensky-Starmer and Blinken went away empty handed. Biden did not give his approval.

The reason was the Pentagon and US military Joint Chiefs of Staff generals pushed back and US neocons broke rank.

Neocon Jake Sullivan sided with the Pentagon and generals and together they convinced Biden to hold off granting Ukraine and UK approval to deploy and use UK’s storm shadow long distance missiles. That remains the tentative status quo, at least until the US November election after which Biden may change his mind—especially if Trump wins the election.

USA’s Split Positions

The USA notably has not endorsed Zelensky’s Victory Plan. In fact, it has reaffirmed its prior position it does not agree to green light Zelensky’s request for long distance missiles to attack Russia.  The USA—and for that matter NATO in general—has not agreed to fast track Ukraine’s membership into NATO either.

As for the other elements of Zelensky’s 5 point plan, there’s clearly no more money from Congress for Ukraine. The USA position is and remains: Europe is sitting on $260 billion of Russian assets. It should find a way for it to use those assets to fund Ukraine. That possibility is easier said than done, however, since Hungary, Slovakia and soon perhaps Spain and Italy are not too happy about stealing Russia’s assets. Russia has threatened to seize those countries’ business assets in Russia in turn and may have already begun some action in that regard.  And then there’s the question of Russian natural gas that continues to flow into southern Europe, Italy in particular.

There is not a single unified position among the US elite on continuing to fund or militarily support Ukraine, however.  The US neocons are looking for a formula to revive it. And they are increasingly on the defensive in that regard.

Another faction in the elite want to push Ukraine to negotiate with Russia on the basis of proposing a ceasefire and NATO membership in exchange for conceding the territory already virtually won by Russia on the ground so far: Crimea and the four east Ukraine provinces that Russia has legally annexed as part of Russia. But the US doesn’t want to initiate negotiations; it wants Ukraine to do so and offer the ‘land for NATO’ proposal. That proposal, however, is a non-starter for Russia. It will never agree to a NATO presence in even part of Ukraine. It sees that as just a hiatus in the war that will eventually resume later.

Then there is a faction among the US military that wants to focus on preparing for military conflict with China, which it sees as the real challenge to USA hegemony. More than one general has slipped up and publicly admitted war with China was likely by 2030. The longer the Ukraine Project goes on the more the delay in confronting China. Were it over in one year was accepted, but it’s now going on three and the generals and admirals are getting nervous.

Last, and not least, there’s the Israel faction. They see an imminent and costly conflict in the middle east on the horizon. Israel has more political influence by far in the USA than Ukraine. This faction wants to dump Project Ukraine on the Europeans and focus on Israel-Iran.

For now the dominant US position with regard to continuing ‘Project Ukraine’ is twofold:

First, in the very short term keep the status quo in Ukraine as is until the US November 5 elections. The US and Biden regime do not want a collapse of Ukraine before the election. Nor do they want an unforeseen major escalation precipitated by either Ukraine or Russia should the former start launching long range UK missiles into Moscow.

The slightly longer term period from November 5 to January 20, 2025 is less clear. Will Biden still not want a collapse of Ukraine ‘on his watch’, as they say? Or will he allow Ukraine to escalate and leave the mess for his successor, especially if Trump, which now seems likely. Biden has a visceral dislike of Putin and Russia. And who knows how deep his resentment of his own Democrat party goes after they unceremoniously dumped him as their candidate this summer. Then there’s his unknown mental state of mind as a factor. In short, Biden could ‘go all in’ after November 5, as they saying goes, and give Ukraine a green light to further escalate using the long range missiles… or worse.

Which brings the situation of Project Ukraine to the latest event.

Zelensky & Biden in Berlin

It is strange that both the mainstream media in the US and West, as well as those sources more favorably disposed to Russia’s position, have largely ignored discussing the issue of the ‘three secret’ points of Zelensky’s Victory Plan.

Perhaps some light has just been thrown on the ‘three secrets’ by Zelensky himself the day after his speech to his parliament. He attended a general NATO meeting in Brussels yesterday, the 17^th of October, after which he gave a press interview.  In that interview Zelensky made a remarkable statement.  He said that when he was last in New York he spoke with Trump as well as Harris. He then said that Trump told him, after Zelensky apparently shared some of the elements of his Victory Plan, that Trump said Ukraine should either be admitted to NATO or be allowed to have a nuclear weapon!

Zelensky added in the interview that he told Trump he’d rather have NATO membership than the nuclear weapon.  This is a remarkable exchange. Did Trump actually say that? Or is Zelensky trying to undermine Trump on behalf of Biden and the Dems? Trump has yet to reply. Regardless it shows something of Zelensky’s thinking, state of desperation, and potentially how far he’s prepared to go.

What is especially curious about this exchange is that the same day of his interview and statement about choosing the nuclear weapon or NATO, the politically well positioned German magazine BILD said Ukraine had all the knowledge and materials to build a nuclear weapon in just weeks! And most likely it would build one in the vicinity of one of its several Nuclear Power Plants.

To make matters even more intriguing, Ukraine’s foreign minister on the same day as Zelensky’s interview and the BILD article said Russia was planning soon to attack and destroy Ukraine’s nuclear power plants.

This all coincidentally sounds like Zelensky and Ukraine resorting indirectly to nuclear blackmail of NATO and the West, and not just Russia.

In his interview after yesterday’s NATO meeting in Brussels, is Zelensky (with assistance of European neocons) telling NATO: either let us into NATO now or we will build a nuclear weapon as a last resort to try to force Russia to capitulate! Is he bluffing? Or is he saying Ukraine has nothing to lose if Russia advances on Kiev and it is about to be defeated.

In conclusion, maybe…just maybe…something similar to what Zelensky revealed in his interview is hidden in the ‘three secret’ points of Zelensky’s Victory Plan that Biden and US neocons don’t want publicly? At least not until after the November 5 election perhaps.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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 source

Alexander Hamilton and the Origins of the Fed

By Jack Rasmus

Publisher:‎ Lexington Books (February 28, 2019)

Hardcover: ‎146 pages

ISBN-10:‎ 1498582842

ISBN-13:‎ 978-1498582841

Alexander Hamilton and the Origins of the Fed describes how US federal governments, often in cooperation with the largest US private banks, introduced and expanded central banking functions from 1781 through the creation of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Based on an analysis of the evolution of the US banking system – from pre-1781, through the 1787 US Constitutional Convention, Congressional debates on Hamilton’s reports to Congress, the rise and fall of the 1st and 2nd Banks of the United States, and through the long period of the National Banking System form 1862-1913, the book shows how central banking in the US evolved out of the private banking system, and how following the financial crash of 1907 big New York banks pushed through Congress the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, creating a central bank which they then managed for their interests.

Click here to purchase. 

Imagine you’re a retiring politician getting ready to close the door on a long and suspiciously lucrative career of taking advantage of the American people.

What would you do as your final act? What would be the perfect way to swindle your constituents one final time?

Pardoning your notoriously criminal son would do the trick. And that’s exactly what Joe Biden may be planning.

Could he really get away with that?

We’re on the brink of finding out, and longtime political columnist Miranda Devine joined today’s Tucker Carlson Show to spill all the details of how that last-second deal could go down, the extent to which the president is in bed with Ukraine, all of the Biden family crimes, and more.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image: This caricature of Hunter Biden was adapted from in the public domain from the US Congress (PDF). The body was adapted from in the public domain from The White House’s Flickr photostream.

The “Victory Plan” presented by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is an acknowledgment of capitulation because it is obvious that, even in his estimation, without the massive involvement of NATO countries in the conflict, the Ukrainian army will not be able to hold back Russian forces in the foreseeable future.

Zelensky presented his Victory Plan to the Ukrainian parliament on October 16 and the European Council on October 17. The plan consists of five points and three secret amendments. In addition to admitting defeat, Zelensky’s Victory Plan also reveals a desire for maximum escalation of the conflict, where, of course, the main burden should be borne on NATO countries and not Ukrainian forces.

The Ukrainian president thinks that escalating what led to the suffering of his citizens and destroyed the economy will lead to Ukraine’s victory.

At the same time, his Victory Plan could be used to pressure Biden or his successor to make decisions about striking deep into the Russian Federation without, supposedly, provoking Moscow to react excessively. Nonetheless, the Kremlin has already said Russia will respond to any attacks.

The Victory Plan truly hinges on US support and not European. Therefore, bodies such as the Council of Europe only serve to give the Biden administration legitimacy when ​​he puts pressure on some parts of the American establishment that are clearly resisting further support for Ukraine.

The first point of Zelensky’s Victory Plan is geopolitical and concerns Ukraine’s immediate invitation to NATO. The other points concern the Ukrainian military and its allies destroying Russia’s aviation, deploying a non-nuclear strategic containment package on its territory, strengthening sanctions on Russia, and allowing Ukrainian soldiers to replace part of the American contingent in Europe in the post-war period.

According to the latest available data, 84% of Ukrainians want their country to be a member of NATO. Despite the widespread support for joining the alliance and although NATO has declared Ukraine’s membership path irreversible, it cannot be completed during the war, and the alliance declined to put a timeline. In effect, NATO has categorically ruled out membership until the war is over, which already makes Zelensky’s Victory Plan detached from reality since the very first point of the plan to defeat Russia is to join the bloc.

For this reason, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova condemned Zelensky’s Victory Plan as nothing more than a collection of “incoherent slogans.”

“This is, of course, no plan at all. It is a collection of incoherent slogans. It is blood foam at the mouth of a neo-Nazi murderer,” the spokeswoman stated during a briefing on October 16.

She also criticised Zelensky’s intention to damage the Russian air force with the assistance of his allies, saying,

“He is pushing NATO to a direct conflict with our country and again insists on getting permission to use long-range weapons on Russian territory, knowing perfectly well, at least those who wrote him these speeches, realised what it would lead to because the corresponding statements by the Russian leadership were made just a week ago.”

“Taken as a sum, all these points and secret sub-clauses are not Zelensky’s plan of victory but a plan to bring misfortune upon Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. This aims to keep the money flowing and present his terrorist capabilities. I think that today Zelensky definitively proved to everyone that he hates Ukrainians to the extent that can be characterised as Ukrainophobia,” Zakharova added.

Since Zelensky evidently does not have any plans to begin serious negotiations, as seen by his Victory Plan, any negotiations conducted in the short term can be used by the West and the Kiev regime to freeze the conflict in Ukraine, replenish their capabilities and launch new attacks against Russia.

According to Western media, including The Washington Post, Zelensky has shown himself more open to holding talks with Russia amid Ukraine’s weakening positions. At the same time, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that no adequate proposals had yet been received regarding the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, apart from the hype in the Western media.

Zelensky’s masters in the West are beginning to see that they are not able to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia and are beginning to ask for negotiations. For the moment, they are resorting to negotiation chatter, as mentioned, to try to freeze the conflict and build up forces. In this context, the only way to end the conflict is the complete defeat of Ukraine, peace on Moscow’s terms, and the strategic retreat of the West from Russia’s borders.

The Victory Plan has certainly dominated headlines and occupied the attention of many world leaders, but Kiev has no way of enforcing it, especially since, from the very first point, it ensures failure, considering NATO has been very clear on Ukraine’s membership path, which cannot progress until the war is already over.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image source

Israeli security sources have told ABC News and CNN that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has approved a set of targets for retaliation strikes on Iran, considered imminent, following the Oct. 1 major Iranian ballistic missile attack on Israel.

Still, no timeline has been given—only that the attack is expected to be carried out before November 5th, election day in America. “American officials expect Israel will retaliate against this month’s Iranian attack before November 5, sources tell CNN — a timeline that would thrust the growing volatility in the Middle East squarely into public view within days of the US presidential election,” CNN has written. Russia and China are among the lone global voices urging against any new attack or escalation from Israel.

.

.

Beijing’s concerns were conveyed in a call between the Chinese and Israeli foreign ministers early this week. The Chinese side also condemned attacks on the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), following reports that the IDF wounded two of the UN peace keepers. China repeated its stance of wanting to see an immediate, complete and permanent cease-fire in Gaza.

But amid reports that Israel’s expected attack on Iran could come at any moment, Russia has been the most forceful in its new warnings.

On Thursday Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov conveyed Russia’s position that Israel must not even think about hitting Iran’s nuclear energy sites or infrastructure.

He said that any “hypothetical” Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be “catastrophic” – as quoted in TASS.

“We have repeatedly warned and continue to warn, to caution [Israel] against even hypothetically considering the possibility of a strike on nuclear facilities and nuclear infrastructure [of Iran],” Ryabkov said. “This would be a catastrophic development and a complete negation of those postulates in the area of ​​ensuring nuclear safety that exist.”

Netanyahu has reportedly told the White House that Israel will commit to attacking only Iranian military sites; however, reports out of Israel continue to suggest that all options remain on the table.

Russia and Iran have of late deepened their relationship on the economic and military fronts. The West has even accused Tehran of transferring ballistic missiles to Russia for its war in Ukraine – something which Iranian and Russian officials have denied. 

But the US and EU have still used the accusation to slap new sanctions on top Iranian and defense sector officials. Additionally the sanctions “target companies and individuals accused of being involved in the transfer of the weapons to Russia, including the country’s flagship carrier Iran Air, as well as airlines Saha Airlines and Mahan Air.”

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image source

Florida authorities on Oct. 16 sued the U.S. government, alleging that U.S. officials are illegally refusing to cooperate with Florida’s effort to remove noncitizens from its voter rolls.

State law requires state authorities to maintain accurate voter registration records. Federal law requires the federal government to respond to inquiries from federal, state, and local government agencies that are “seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency.”

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Zachary Stieber is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times based in Maryland. He covers U.S. and world news. Contact Zachary at [email protected] 

Featured image: Official photo of Attorney General of Florida Ashley Moody (From the Public Domain)

Top government officials in Slovakia are moving to ban “dangerous” Covid mRNA shots from the country after an explosive investigation determined that the pandemic was a “fabricated operation” and the “vaccines” were a resulting “act of bioterrorism.”

The findings were revealed in a Slovak government commission report on the nation’s investigations into the Covid pandemic.

The investigation was led by Commissioner Peter Kotlár.

In releasing his report, Kotlár held a press conference to call for the immediate ban of the Covid mRNA injections and called on governments around the world to do the same.

Due to the severity of the findings detailed in the report, Kotlár has called for an emergency “session of the government” to immediately ban the “vaccines” and to cut the nation’s ties with the globalist World Health Organization (WHO).

While the report has not yet been made public, Kotlár confirmed that it will be released after the “session of the government.”

However, he did reveal that the report details evidence showing that Covid was artificially created in a biolab and deliberately spread worldwide.

“The most serious consequence of the whole fabricated operation called the COVID-19 pandemic is the endangerment of human health and the confirmation of the naivety of the world population to be subconsciously obedient,” Kotlár said.

“Let us at least make the right gesture together by stopping the administration of mRNA preparations until their effectiveness and safety have been proven,” Kotlar demanded when presenting his report.

The most serious finding is that mRNA preparations alter human DNA, he notes.

The vaccines are therefore dangerous, the commissioner warns.

During the press conference, Kotlár specifically named Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.

Kotlár asserted that government investigators found that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was funding the “fabricated operation.”

Dr. Fleming has been tipped to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) if President Donald Trump wins re-election.

Both Fleming and Kotlár made several references to Trump and noted that the 45th president shares their views on bringing justice to those behind the pandemic.

Fleming said he hopes the findings in Slovakia will provoke similar investigations in the United States.

“It is my hope that the materials provided will give you clarity so that you will have the courage to call for the investigation of the Americans through the U.S. government responsible for evolving these bioweapons.

“That you will withdraw these eugenic genetic vaccines from the Slovakian population.

“Stopping the harm and injury occurring to Slovakians, particularly your children.

“And to stand firm in your resolution to not sign the 2024 IHR and to go further with revocation of any presumed actions by the UN giving them authority over your country.”

The commission’s findings have sent shockwaves through the Slovakian government.

Health Minister Zuzana Dolinkova resigned almost immediately after Kotlár’s bombshell press conference.

Her resignation came after only eleven months in office.

Dolinkova justified it with differences of opinion over the budget, which provides for deep cuts in the healthcare system.

However, the sudden resignation was conveniently timed with Kotlár’s announcement about the government commission’s report.

Meanwhile, the government of Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico has declared its opposition to mRNA vaccines.

As a first step, it announced that it would end its cooperation with the WHO over the pandemic and the mRNA vaccine campaign.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Thanks to Dr. William Makis for bringing this article to our attention.

Featured image is a screenshot from one of the videos above

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. 

The term “Ukraine fatigue” is certainly not new. We’re accustomed to the political West using it, particularly during the fall and winter, when Europe’s dependence on Russian energy is most apparent. However, it seems the latest usage of the term breaks off from the usual pattern and may indicate that the world’s most aggressive power pole is looking for ways to leave the Neo-Nazi junta to fend for itself.

The main issue seems to be how to accomplish this without it looking like yet another pathetic defeat. Obviously, the United States and EU/NATO are directly responsible for this dilemma, as the mainstream propaganda machine spent the last two and a half years claiming that “Ukraine is winning”. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the actual situation would laugh at this notion, but the vast majority of regular people simply don’t have access to such information.

However, top-ranking officials in US/EU/NATO often tell us what’s really going on with spelling it out. Namely, in an interview with FT, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen talked about the aforementioned “Ukraine fatigue” and stated that “it’s real, and increasingly so”. According to her assessment, wars in the Middle East (specifically Gaza and Lebanon) have further “heightened this fatigue”, as they’re also distracting the political West’s attention and resources away from supporting the Kiev regime.

“These two conflicts are, of course, very much linked. But for us Europeans, it would be important to realize that if we allow Russia to win in Ukraine, then essentially we end the credibility of our deterrence,” Valtonen said, adding: “There is support for Ukraine, but what is sufficient? That is the question. Many [countries] would like to think, since especially with the war waiting in the Middle East, it would be great if we found an answer to this war.”

As per usual, (geo)political schizophrenia is the standard practice in NATO, as it makes no sense to whine about “Ukraine fatigue” and then reiterate the “necessity of defeating Russia”. And yet, that’s exactly what high-ranking officials such as Valtonen continue to do. The need to win the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict might be a matter of prestige for the political West, but it’s a matter of survival for Russia, which is why the former will never be able to match the latter’s motivation and determination.

For the US/EU/NATO, the matter of “winning” is primarily tied to maintaining a certain reputation. However, they fail to understand that it’s long gone, particularly in the aftermath of a crushing and humiliating defeat in Afghanistan. Thus, there’s simply no reputation to speak of, as even the Taliban seem like heroes in comparison to the political West. As a result, the very idea that prolonging the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict would ameliorate this is ludicrous.

Not to mention that it’s also causing more “Ukraine fatigue”, both in Europe and North America. In addition, even the Europeans seem to be trying to get on Trump’s good side (something the Neo-Nazi junta is terrible at). Namely, he repeatedly promised to “end the war on the first day”. Given his popularity, many in the EU are likely preparing for his second term, as he might try at the very least.

We don’t really know if Trump will succeed in changing American foreign policy. However, his rhetoric certainly suggests he’ll try. During one of his recent campaign speeches, he pledged to “end the war in Ukraine, stop the chaos in the Middle East and prevent WW3”. Regardless of his true intentions, such statements are certainly welcome, particularly at a time when the Deep State and other war criminals in Washington DC and Brussels keep insisting on escalating the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict by continuously provoking Russia, including by trying to assassinate Putin. Combined with repeated attempts on Trump’s life, it’s clear what the warmongering oligarchy wants for the world. Thus, the ongoing power shift is leading to expected changes in the official narrative. Even the mainstream propaganda machine seems to be engaged in it.

Namely, headlines in Europe and the US now suggest that the Neo-Nazi junta’s situation is nowhere near the previous chest-thumping about “Russia losing”. This has been replaced by whining about dwindling supplies of weapons and munitions, massive losses, Russian advances and generally gloomy prospects for the Kiev regime. Germany and the US, both top suppliers, are complaining they have no heavy weapons to spare, with the Pentagon warning that “our supplies are not endless”, stressing they have to meet the needs of “both Israel and Ukraine”. Volodymyr Zelensky himself has been complaining about this, although this didn’t prevent him from presenting the laughable “victory plan” that even the infamous CNN isn’t too happy about. The document is essentially more of the same, only “wrapped a bit differently” to make it look “brand new”.

Even the staunchest supporters of the Neo-Nazi junta seem to be highly critical of it, including Julian Roepcke (better known as Jihadi Julian), one of the more prominent “military experts” at the Bild, a German tabloid. NYT is talking about a “not so good situation in Kursk [oblast]”, while the general situation on the battlefield is so bad that the US wants the Kiev regime to forcefully mobilize teenagers. However, in order to achieve this, the latter’s Territorial Recruitment Office (TCC) needs more foreigners. Multiple sources indicate that nearly 50% of its personnel are Poles and that this will swell to at least 70% by December. People simply don’t want to fight, which is why TCC has effectively become a genocidal organization detested by all regular Ukrainians, as it’s directly responsible for the deaths of at least 75 people every single day.

Even NATO-funded think tanks, such as the ISW (Institute for the Study of War), are reporting that around 20% of forcefully conscripted Ukrainians are beaten to death by TCC personnel. If such an organization is reporting these numbers, the actual situation is almost certainly orders of magnitude worse. However, even 20% is simply horrifying. Still, this begs the question, why would anyone in the political West reveal such information after years of trying to build the image of the Neo-Nazi junta as the “beacon of democracy”, particularly when nobody really asked for it.

It seems that Zelensky, whose lionization was the primary task of the mainstream propaganda machine, is now being thrown under the bus, as it can only be expected that he’s responsible for the policies of the TCC and other institutions of the Kiev regime. So, are we seeing the political West bailing out?

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

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 source

The International Crisis Summit (ICS) is an all star team of scientists, doctors, lawyers, and activists united in a mission to help save the world. Please donate generously to support ICS in completing our mission. We are fighting for you and your family.

Here is the first official material I have to share from ICS6 in Japan. Myself and others traveled from around the world, joining Japanese scientists and leaders on a mission to stop the next generation of genetic experiments on humans: self-replicating RNA injections for COVID-19.

While we did not succeed in prompting a government order to cancel the licensing of these injections, which were scheduled to begin on October 1st, we have definitely inspired the Japanese people. Reports suggest that many are rejecting this experiment, and even nursing homes are refusing to administer the injections. The manufacturer has seen nearly zero sales and is now threatening to sue our Japanese colleagues for ruining their profits.

Please help support the work of the International Crisis Summit.

*

My Speech to the Japanese Public

Here is my first speech to the Japanese parliament, urging them to reject genetic injections and embrace natural health and traditional wisdom.

.

Click here to watch the video

.

ICS6 Media Conference

Here are the full five panels from this September 26th, 2024 ICS6 media conference, held at the Trunk Hotel in Tokyo.

.

ICS 6 Speakers

.

Panel 1:

Dr. Ryan Cole (USA),

Dr. Chris Flowers (USA),

Dr. Izumi Kamijo (Japan),

Dr. Seiji Kojima (Japan),

Professor Yasufumi Murakami (Japan),

Dr. Harvey Risch (USA)

.

Click here to watch the video

.

Panel 2:

Dr. Byram Bridle (Canada),

Dr. Miki Gibo (Japan),

Dr. Niel Karrow (Canada),

Dr. William Makis (Canada),

Dr. Jessica Rose (Canada),

Dr. Mark Trozzi (Canada)

.

Click here to watch the video

.

Panel 3:

Mr. Jason Christoff (Canada),

Professor Chikatsu Hayashi (Japan),

Mr. James Lindsay (USA),

Professor Shigetoshi Sano (Japan),

Dr. Andrea Stramezzi (Italy),

Dr. Simone Gold (USA)

.

Click here to watch the video

.

Panel 4:

Ms. Renate Holzeisen (Italy),

Dr. Maria Hubmer-Mogg (Austria),

Professor Masayasu Inoue (Japan),

Mr. Takayuki Kikuchi (Japan),

Dr. Meryl Nass (USA),

Dr. David Bell (USA)

.

Click here to watch the video

.

Panel 5:

MEP Ms. Christine Anderson (Germany),

Dr. Alejandro Diaz (Mexico),

Rev. Dr. Wai-Chin Lee (Japan),

Dr. Robert Malone (USA),

Dr. Sorin Muncaciu (Romania),

Dr. Panagis Polykretis (Greece),

Pietro Stramezzi (Italy)

.

Click here to watch the video

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image is from the author

The rift between India and Canada over the killing of Khalistani activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar has deepened into a first-rate diplomatic crisis with the ‘tit-for-tat’ expulsion of senior diplomats, including the heads of missions. 

That this happened on a day when an Indian team of officials was heading to Washington for talks relating to the alleged plot to kill a US citizen in New York City may be a coincidence, but the coordinated moves by Canada and the US is an open secret. 

Meanwhile, the broader question of alleged Indian interference in the  internal affairs of the two North American countries is becoming the leitmotif. It hurts. A Reuters commentary hit the nail on the head:

“For a developing country courting overseas investment, seeking to embed itself into the world’s supply chains, and encouraging its companies to go global, it is unhelpful, to say the least, to be dubbed by a rich country as the second-most significant “foreign interference” threat after China…

“Canada is home to some of the world’s big global investors, from Brookfield to the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. Their leaders, who between them manage some $1.7 trillion in assets may suddenly, for example, find it awkward to travel and negotiate deals in India if their government is effectively persona non grata in the emerging market.”

Puzzling out in what year this alleged shift in the Indian policies towards the North American region began, the Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau’s narrative puts 2019-2020 as the timeline. 

Indeed, 2020 happened to be a tumultuous year in Indian politics,  when the farmers’ protests threatened to create an insurrectionary situation in Delhi that is commonly associated with ‘colour revolutions’. And the incontrovertible fact is that Trudeau government poured oil into the fire by empathising gratuitously with the agitating farmers who were mostly Sikhs.  

Again, 2019-2020 was a turbulent period in American politics, too. The hugely controversial Howdy, Modi event in Houston, Texas, was emblematic of it, as the Indian prime minister shared a podium with the embattled US president Donald Trump who was battling impeachment attempts in the US Congress spearheaded by the Democratic Party. 

The Washington Post succinctly captured the matrix of Howdy Modi  when the daily reported that

“A rousing endorsement of Modi from a US immigrant group that is highly successful, by income and education metrics, and is the largest Indian diaspora in any country, sends multiple signals. The huge crowds of supporters overseas help reaffirm Modi’s support at home, and offer a jab at his detractors. For the broader audience in the host country [US], the message is that this support could transfer to Modi’s hosts [in the Beltway], if they are well disposed to India’s concerns [eg., farmers’ protests, Khalistani separatism, etc.]”         

.

President Donald J. Trump holds hands with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India as they take a surprise walk together Sunday, Sept. 22, 2019, around the NRG Stadium in Houston, Texas. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead/Public Domain)

.

Tacitus, one of the greatest Roman historians in the annals of civilisations of antiquity, once wrote that “all transactions of pre-eminent importance are wrapt in doubt and obscurity; while some hold for certain facts the most precarious hearsay, others turn facts into falsehoods; and both are exaggerated by posterity.” How true! 

The choice, therefore, is between writing for today, with adrenaline flowing, or to put the crisis in the India-Canada-US triangle in proper perspective through a candid political dialogue, seal it in a lead casket  and bury it for posterity. 

For all three countries, the stakes are exceedingly high for ensuring that a new normal is restored as quickly as possible. But the probability is that a denouement may have to wait. The Canadian federal election must take place by October 20, 2025  and the post-Biden presidency in the US begins on January 20. 

No doubt, foreign interference in the democratic process in Canada and the US is a combustible campaign issue. And the ethnic Sikh population in the two countries is assertive. Delhi suspects collusion between the local authorities and the Sikh separatists. 

Washington and Delhi have thus far managed a trapeze act by keeping their interactions largely in diplomatic exchanges. But a trial is about to begin in the US federal court shortly. Top US officials have admitted that Ottawa and Washington coordinated their investigations into the alleged Indian assassination plots. In fact, US president Joe Biden and Trudeau first raised this issue with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in Delhi in September last year! 

Are we to believe that coordinated moves by the Canadian and US authorities are no longer taking place? The US and Canada are tied to each other by an umbilical cord, which is not only about their Anglo-Saxon ancestry, but their tight embrace as strategic partners. Analysts even predicted a future annexation of Canada by its Big Brother. 

When it comes to security issues, the US and Canada operate from an exclusive platform of international spy network created during World War 2 — the Five Eyes which also includes the UK, Australia and New Zealand — borne out of a profound realisation that while intelligence is not a magic bullet in the wider context of decision-making, marrying up intelligence record with strategic and operational decisions can be a game changer. 

Suffice to say, the tensions within the India-Canada-US triangle today arise when transparency is lacking in their relationships. It is a moot point whether it all began when Modi waded into the cauldron of US domestic politics or whether Trudeau triggered it by canvassing for the farmers’ protest in India. Anyway, Modi did the right thing by giving up the idea of a meeting with Trump during his last visit to the US in September.

The US is the only winner here. The Biden White House skilfully handled the fallouts from the alleged assassination plot against Pannun. Several billion dollars worth arms deals have been wrapped up in these past couple of years alone. Modi cleared a $3 billion drone deal just last Wednesday (within a month of Biden raising it in Delaware). The arms trade between India and the US has touched an impressive figure of $25 billion. At the present rate, the US arms industry may give a run for the money to Russians in a conceivable near term. 

An emboldened Delhi takes a hard line on Trudeau, whereas, it is offering ‘cooperation’ to the US. A modus vivendii becomes possible if the US accepts the Indian finding that certain rogue elements might have acted on their own.  

The catch is, once the hearings in the US federal court begin, new facts may emerge. But then, it is not as if the USG lacks the authority to stem the tide from damaging its ties with India, whom Washington describes as one of the “consequential” countries in the world.  

However, the big question remains: Why is there such ambivalence on the part of Washington and Ottawa regarding Khalistani separatism? This is not a new phenomenon. One bloody saga ended after much suffering all around in India culminating in a traumatic ‘regime change’ four decades ago. That is why, a discussion at the political level with the US and Canadian leaderships becomes necessary.

Even if one were to assume that India now has a state policy to erase Khalistani separatist elements from the face of the earth, is that  something typical of Indian statecraft? The US holds the champion’s trophy in political assassinations.

Remember, Trump, in collaboration with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, assassinated the Iranian general Qassem Soleimani while on a visit to Baghdad — and later bragged about it to his friends. The paradox is, Biden today has turned into Trump’s guardian angel, and sternly  demands from Tehran that the tragic chapter be closed. 

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image: The Guru Nanak Gurdwara, outside of which Nijjar was killed (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3)

France’s defeat against Germany in the Franco-Prussian War, or Franco-German War, of the early 1870s provided stark evidence of the country’s regression. The French birth rate by this point was largely stagnating and the population of France was scarcely higher in 1870 compared to half a century before, at little more than 30 million.

French industrial capacity was trailing behind and at the time of the Franco-Prussian War France had been in decline for some decades. France was unable to recover from Napoleon Bonaparte’s ill-advised, unprovoked invasion of Russia in June 1812, which resulted in the decimation of French military forces by the more powerful and larger Russian Army.

.

The Siege of Paris in 1870 (From the Public Domain)

.

Near the time of the French attack on Russia, the Russian population was estimated to be 40.7 million, which was bigger than France’s population recorded in 1820 (30.5 million), and the Russians had greater material resources at their disposal. Russia is easily the biggest country in the world which presents a daunting challenge for an enemy force, while the Russian soldiers can be counted on to fight tenaciously, with much skill and discipline, and equipped with advanced military hardware produced by renowned manufacturers like the Tula Arms Plant.

Particularly as a result of the failed attack against Russia, France was left exhausted, shaken, and its resources diminished. France’s troubles were then compounded by being in opposition to Germany in 1870. From 1864, the German General Staff was developed by recruiting the most capable officers available. These men were highly trained, devoted to their country, and were encouraged to explore the latest military ideas.

What’s more the well-known German company, Krupp, was producing advanced weapons and was heavily supplying the German Army. Krupp would furnish German soldiers with giant siege guns like Big Bertha, which was eventually upgraded by 1918 to fire a 1-tonne shell over a distance of 23 miles; but these guns, although very powerful and impressive to look at, were quite cumbersome, slow to transport, and didn’t prove as effective as the Germans had hoped. Having a strong, professional army was a necessity for Germany. The nation’s vulnerable position in central Europe meant that in a continental war the Germans could be faced with conflicts along 2 fronts, on its western and eastern borders.

To further alleviate the threat of a 2 front war the Germans built a modern railway system, with routes running from east to west across the country. The railway lines could carry 2 army corps from East Prussia (in eastern Germany) to the Rhineland (in western Germany) in 18 hours, and vice versa. It ensured that in the event of war breaking out the German high command could rapidly deploy its troops to different battlefronts.

From the 1890s Russia was also faced with a potential war on 2 fronts should a global conflict begin. Japan’s emergence as a major power, and that country’s rivalry with Russia, meant it was not an impossibility that the Japanese would some day invade eastern Russia. In such a scenario Germany, and maybe its ally Austria, could have proceeded in a predatory fashion by attacking western Russia.

Unlike Germany, France, and Japan, Russia has had a large population and by 1890 there were an estimated 118 million Russians, a total that was bigger than any other European state and Japan. This remains the case today with a Russian population of about 150 million, while there are around 122 million Japanese, 83 million Germans, and 65 million French.

Russia has enjoyed having greater industrial capacity and resources like oil and natural gas compared to its rivals mentioned. The continued construction and expansion of Russia’s Trans-Siberian Railway from the late 19th century onward, the biggest railway on earth stretching across thousands of miles of land, was an example of Russia’s manufacturing power and innovation; and the sort of venture which the western European nations and Japan could only dream about.

.

Trans-Siberian Railway, c. 1904 (From the Public Domain)

.

Russia by itself has proven capable of winning conflicts both of a short and long duration, months or years. Resource-poor countries with populations limited in size, like Germany and France, were only capable on their own of winning wars within a short time frame. The French on their own have not triumphed in a major conflict in Europe since the beginning of the 19th century under Napoleon’s reign. Defeat against the Russians in 1812 could be excused by the French as their having been beaten by a more formidable rival. Defeat in the early 1870s to Germany, France’s neighbour and a country of similar size, was more difficult for the French to accept.

For centuries France had held the upper hand over the Germans, managing to keep German provinces like Prussia and Bavaria weak and divided by political or military measures. The tide turned with the Franco-Prussian War. The French defeat and the founding of the new German empire in 1871 drastically altered the balance of power in western and central Europe. Almost right away Germany seemed to inherit France’s claims to greatness.

This had long-lasting psychological effects on the French. In losing the Franco-Prussian War they had lost the territories of Alsace and Lorraine which the German leadership annexed to the Reich, and an inferiority complex and a hatred developed in French minds about the Germans. France’s birth rate and population continued to stagnate while Germany’s increased. In 1880 there were 45.2 million Germans and 37.4 million French. By 1890 the German population was 49.4 million while there were 38.1 million French in 1890. The gap continued growing.

What was alarming too for the French was that German industry was outstripping them. Relating to pig iron production, an important commodity in a civilian or war economy, France produced almost 1.2 million tonnes of pig iron in 1870. That same year Germany produced 1.4 million tonnes of pig iron and they increased the figure to 9.8 million tonnes by 1903. France in 1903 produced 2.8 million tonnes of pig iron.

France left to its own devices would never be a threat to Germany again; but their defeat in the Franco-Prussian War had not resulted in pacifist feelings emerging in France, nor did it for the Germans in victory, who like the French continued to believe in solving problems by military solutions if necessary. In France after 1871 army reforms were enacted, universal compulsory military service was introduced, new fortifications were built and more weapons were designed or upgraded.

Many Frenchmen longed for the return of past glories and the restoration of Alsace-Lorraine. These territories were home to a population who mostly spoke German as a first language, and the region had historical links to Germany (while after World War I there was a large pro-German separatist movement in Alsace-Lorraine between 1924 and 1929, demanding reunion with Germany, after France had retaken Alsace-Lorraine with plenty of help from her wartime allies).

Image: Napoleon after his abdication in Fontainebleau, 4 April 1814, by Paul Delaroche (From the Public Domain)

A risky, semi-mystical quality in French military thinking based on ultra-offensive tactics had sprung up following the Franco-Prussian War. Napoleon’s old saying “The moral is to the material as 3 is to 1” was much quoted and officers like Louis de Grandmaison, the chief of the Operations Branch of the French General Staff, increasingly pushed an all-out attacking war plan.

When war did break out in 1914, the French Army from the outset suffered unsustainable casualties mainly because its commanders time after time sent their soldiers on suicidal offensives across no-man’s-land, or into areas with thick vegetation where the Germans were waiting for them. De Grandmaison himself would be killed in battle in February 1915, one of numerous French officers and generals who died.

France’s gung-ho tactics played a key part resulting in the mass mutinies of the spring and early summer of 1917, nearly 3 years into World War I. The French Army was actually in the process of collapse. From April to June 1917 the French high command would acknowledge that 170 acts of mutiny had occurred during that time, of which the most severe outbreaks had involved 79 infantry regiments, 8 artillery regiments, 21 chasseur (light infantry) battalions, a Senegalese battalion, and a dragoon (mounted infantry) regiment.

The French Army rebellions were worse than Paris admitted to, involving hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and in all probability the acts of mutiny were considerably higher than 170. In the 35-mile distance between Soissons and Reims in northern France, the entire frontline was heaving with revolt. By 9 June 1917 mutinies had affected 54 French divisions. There was large-scale desertion as well, with 27,000 troops having fled to Paris alone. In the French capital city the deserting soldiers tried to conceal their identities by purchasing civilian clothes from shops beside train stations, where they had disembarked.

.

Possible execution at Verdun during the mutinies in 1917. The original French text accompanying the photograph notes that the uniforms are those of 1914/15 and that the execution may be that of a spy at the beginning of the war. (From the Public Domain)

.

Drunkenness is an example of rebellious or at least unprofessional conduct, for soldiers who are often drunk obviously can’t fight properly and in many instances will refuse to fight. Part of the problem was that alcohol was readily available to French troops, with pinard, a cheap red wine, present along the frontlines in too plentiful a supply.

The sight of drunken French infantrymen was all too common and the easy access to wine had a role in the mutinies breaking out, as did anti-war pamphlets and enemy propaganda. It was the case too that France had a disturbing number of defeatists and traitors, among them many liberals, who preferred defeat to Germany than for the war to continue.

That spring and summer of 1917, in French military formations where no mutiny was recorded by the authorities, more than 50 percent of troops returning from leave were also reporting back drunk. They must have gotten intoxicated at home, or in bars and cafes, in the hours before they returned to the front. All of this was a sign of a massive breakdown in discipline and morale.

Stern measures taken by the French high command helped to quell the insurrections, including executing the ringleaders, executing troops with the worst record of past offences, random executions as a form of intimidation, sending mutineers into no-man’s-land where they were killed by the French artillery, penal servitude for men who had committed lesser offences.

Promises were made to the French soldiers they wouldn’t be ordered to make any more suicidal attacks, that the quality of food and medical services was to be improved, and they would be allowed periods of rest. The supply of wine to the troops was curtailed though they were still allowed the occasional drink.

On 4 June 1917, when the rebellions were approaching their worst, the French war minister Paul Painlevé told the country’s leader, Raymond Poincaré, that between the German frontlines and Paris there were just 2 fully dependable French divisions, both of which were cavalry formations lacking in heavy weapons. As Poincaré and Painlevé were aware, had the Germans gone on the offensive at this time they would have won the war with ease, but they failed to attack.

The Germans did receive reports of the French mutinies. For example, 3 German prisoners who had escaped from a camp beside Fismes, 75 miles east of Paris, made their way back to German lines. They provided reliable accounts to their superior officers of a vast deterioration of discipline in the French ranks including wide-scale rioting, poor morale, the refusal of soldiers to obey orders, and drunkenness.

These reports were forwarded to the German military command but were ultimately ignored. The country’s warlord, General Erich Ludendorff, must have thought the reports were exaggerated. In any case he had set his heart months ago on pursuing a mostly defensive strategy of warfare for 1917, while building up German manpower reserves for a major offensive in the spring of 1918, approaching 4 years into the war.

From about 20 June 1917 the harsh measures of the French high command started to take effect and the unrest was dying down. It would be a partial recovery at best for the French Army. The failure of Germany to launch an attack against France in June 1917 must rank as one of history’s great missed opportunities. Had the Germans been victorious in 1917, the German empire would not have collapsed and the Nazis would never have come to power.

Britain, France’s ally, was of course aware of the rebellions afflicting the French Army. At the beginning of June 1917 the French chief of staff, General Marie Eugène Debeney, cautiously told Field Marshal Douglas Haig, commander of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), of widespread unrest in the French forces.

Haig was not surprised and chose to keep the news of the French mutinies a “military secret”. He decided not to inform the British government what was going on. Haig had already complained to the head of the British Army, Field Marshal William Robertson, that it was clear how the French lacked the moral fibre needed and Britain would have to shoulder the burden of the war effort.

France’s hierarchy suppressed information about the rebellions long after World War I had ended. The root causes of the discord, such as poor command and discipline, were not properly analysed and dealt with. The malady within the French Army was transmitted to the next generation of French troops, which would have dire consequences in World War II.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

This article was originally published on Geopolitika.ru.

Shane Quinn obtained an honors journalism degree. He is interested in writing primarily on foreign affairs, having been inspired by authors like Noam Chomsky. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Sources

“Big Bertha, captured by the Australians in 1918”, National Army Museum

“History of Alsace and Lorraine”, feefhs.org

“Crude birth rate in France, from 1800 to 2020”, Statista, 4 July 2024

Donald J. Goodspeed, The German Wars: 1914-1945 (Bonanza Books, 1 January 1985)

“Population of the major European countries in the 19th century”, Wesleyan University

“The Franco-Prussian War Museum at Woerth (Alsace), History of Modern France at War”, 27 September 2019

Featured image: Revue du 14 juillet 1917 [Paris] (From the Public Domain)

German Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich’s Persecution in Prison


Reiner Fuellmich, October 14, 2024

Climate Instability Worldwide: Does the US Military “Own the Weather”? “Weaponizing the Weather” as an Instrument of Modern Warfare?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 8, 2024

The Biden Regime Has Just Issued a Very Suspicious Directive Permitting Military Intervention in US Domestic Affairs. Dr. Paul C. Roberts

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, October 14, 2024

Extermination Works. At First. “If Israel is Not Stopped”…. Chris Hedges

Chris Hedges, October 15, 2024

If Israel Attacks Iran, Russia Is Not Going to Stay on the Sideline. Mike Whitney

Mike Whitney, October 14, 2024

Brace Yourselves: A Tsunami Approaches. “There is Something being Concocted in the Dens of Power”

John W. Whitehead, October 16, 2024

“Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT). The Ongoing Planning of War against Iran

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 14, 2024

It’s a “Killer” Vaccine Worldwide: Japanese Researchers Say Side Effects of COVID Vaccines Linked to 201 Types of Diseases

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 16, 2024

The Present State of Israel vs. the Israel of the Bible: Understanding the Difference.: “The Present State of Israel Is Not the Israel of God”

Prof. Ruel F. Pepa, October 16, 2024

Is the Mossad Preparing a False Flag Attack for the US to Declare War on Iran?

Germán Gorraiz López, October 14, 2024

Florida Surgeon General Calls for Halt of Covid-19 Vaccine. The Vaccine Affects Millions of Americans. It Should be the Object of Debate Prior to the 2024 Elections

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 12, 2024

The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

James A. Lucas, October 14, 2024

Poland Expecting Kiev Regime’s Total Defeat, Planning for War with Russia

Drago Bosnic, October 15, 2024

Video: Japan Rising. The Tokyo International Crisis Summit. The New “Replicon” Self-amplifying mRNA Vaccines

The Corbett Report, October 17, 2024

The Preposterous Nature of “Reality”: Digital Madness, Spying on Americans, Massive Drug Use, “No Peace Movement as War Rages”. Edward Curtin

Edward Curtin, October 11, 2024

15 Minutes with Dr. William Makis: Threats Against My Family by the College. Visit to Edmonton Police Service Today

Dr. William Makis, October 11, 2024

How Significant Is the US’ THAAD Deployment to Israel?

Andrew Korybko, October 14, 2024

DMSO Could Save Millions from Brain and Spinal Injury

A Midwestern Doctor, October 15, 2024

Middle Eastern and Global Crises: Who Are the Perpetrators?

Peter Koenig, October 14, 2024

The Greater Israel Project. It’s Not Just About the Palestinians: “Israel’s borders will extend from Lebanon to Saudi Arabia”

Timothy Alexander Guzman, October 16, 2024

So, you want someone to name names, cite documents and expose the facts about the decades-long globalist takeover?

Then you’ve come to the right place!

Join James for this week’s edition of The Corbett Report where he breaks down Dr. Meryl Nass’ presentation to the International Crisis Summit in Tokyo and provides context and further reading about the cadre of elitists who are attempting to take control of the planet and its resources.

.

.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

First published on April 23, 2023

*** 

At first sight you may wonder what do Ursula Von der Leyen and McKinsey and Pfizer have in common? The answer is: Corruption. Utmost corruption. Madame Von der Leyen, unelected President of the European Commission (EC) has several corruption scandals on her neck. 

It was recently revealed that Madame von der Leyen’s son, David, had a “summer intern” stint at McKinsey, the giant US-based management consulting firm. Though, records of David’s responsibilities with McKinsey are purposefully flimsy, it appears that his employment was much more than a “summer intern”. He had consulting teams under his responsibilities and worked for McKinsey for more than 3 years.

Is it coincidence that he left McKinsey in 2019, just before his mom was appointed – not elected – President of the European Commission (EC)?

We know there are no coincidences.

Was David perhaps paving the way for the future EC President’s – his mother – easy access to McKinsey’s higher management ranks?

More about that later.

*

Let’s start with a scandal already fairly well known among informed sources: Ursula Von der Leyen’s direct negotiations with Pfizer for purchasing 900 million Pfizer vaxx doses, with the option of another 900 million, a total of 1.8 billion doses. Repeat, in case you think you misread: 1.8 billion of the maligned Pfizer mRNA gene modifying vaxx doses – yes, for a population of some 450 million. This would amount to 4 doses per person of the European Union (EU).

These “negotiations” went on in 2021 as exchanges of texts were discovered between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. Pressure on the EC to release the texts was simply ignored.

This has happened preceding the signing of the 1.8 billion doses contract. It is clearly an infraction against EU rules of competition, i.e., competitive bidding. The contracts were signed in May 2021. Totally against EU international competitive bidding rules. Aside from that, how were 4 doses per EU citizen justified?

What is the total price of this insane package?

Ursula von der Leyen: “Mrs. 4.5 Billion Doses”

In recent developments Van Der Leyen is involved in negotiating another big contract with Pfizer: 

Madame Von der Leyen’s close ‘’collaboration’’ with Pfizer may be just the tip of the iceberg.

Her husband Heiko is the medical director of Orgenesis, a US Biotech company specializing in gene therapies such as Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

Ursula has been on Orgenesis’ scientific council since 2019. Pfizer and Orgenesis have a very close relationship since Orgenesis was actively involved in the development of the Pfizer vaccine. Heiko von der Leyen has a long relationship with Pfizer. See this for more details. 

*

Back to the vaxxes. What will happen with the billions of superfluous useless — and dangerous – jabs?

The way the Pharma-EU corruption seems to play out, it wouldn’t be surprising if the vaxxes would be relabeled for another purpose. How would anybody know? 

After all, over the last three years, with the implementation of the WEF’s Great Reset and the UN Agenda 2030 – which are basically identical, as the UN is in bed with the WEF — it has become redundantly clear that vaccination has nothing to do with health, preserving people’s health but rather with large-scale genocide.

One of the key objectives of the Reset / Agenda 2030 is a massive population reduction. What we can see so far, after barely over two years of so-called vaccination, most of it coerced injections, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of deaths and people maimed for life, as well as rapidly increasing miscarriages, as well as infertility of both women and men.

And this is only the beginning. The bulk of the crime may play out within the coming 5 to 10 years, when nobody will be able to prove the cause being the covid jabs. These are the warning words of Michael Yeadon, former VP and Chief Science Officer, Pfizer. See this.

Was the European Public Prosecutor’s Office investigating von der Leyen’s criminal case? Nobody knows. Imagine nobody knows and nobody asks!

Politico reports, in April 2021, von der Leyen told the New York Times that she had traded texts with the Pfizer CEO for a month in the run-up to the EU signing its contract with the US pharmaceutical giant. 

In the deal, the Commission committed to buy 900 million Pfizer-BioNTech shots on behalf of EU members, with an option to purchase another 900 million. This or these contracts must be worth hundreds of millions, if not in the billions of dollars. The figure has never been officially disclosed and EU watchdogs close their eyes to the scandal.

That in itself is a horrendous disgrace.

Later, the EU Ombudsman revealed that the Commission had never explicitly asked von der Leyen’s team to look for the texts, since it didn’t consider them “documents” that merited preservation. In a report on its findings, the ombudsman simply called the approach “maladministration.”

For its part the European Commission countered that it can’t provide the texts because “short-lived, ephemeral documents are not kept.”  See this.

End of story for now. But lest you tend to forget, the European Union, especially the non-elected EC, is one of the world’s most corrupt institutions. And, so far, it seems to be getting away with it.

*

Back to McKinsey. The McKinsey consulting firm is full of scandals of its own. The firm’s work for both authoritarian governments and the Pentagon raises questions about conflicts of interest.

When in the early 21^st century the dot.com bubble crash destroyed many corporations, and with them also the potential for management consulting, McKinsey was faced with a dilemma. They needed to find ways to enlarge their client pool. So, McKinsey started competing for government contracts not just within the United States, but worldwide.

The New York Times reports that McKinsey’s decision to venture into the public sector at home and abroad created a business model rife with conflicts of interest. 

A US domestic example is well-known. McKinsey advising the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), while also advising pharmaceutical giant Purdue Pharma. Internationally, McKinsey’s work at times appears equally extensive with potential conflicts of interest, courting state clients as diverse as the Pentagon, China, and Saudi Arabia. 

While McKinsey took up hundreds of millions of dollars in US defense contracts, it also advised a cadre of foreign companies and governments. McKinsey’s own website boasts about these connections: “We have long-standing relationships with ministries and departments of defense worldwide.”

In another, by now well-known case, global consulting firm McKinsey faces criminal charges for corruption in South Africa. The case centers on McKinsey’s role in the country’s biggest post-apartheid scandal, known as the state capture scandal under former president Jacob Zuma. It involved the misappropriation of public funds on a vast scale, as reported in February 2023, see this.

That says it all. The key is international high-level government connections. It may never be proven, but a profound suspicion prevails, that Heiko and Ursula von der Leyen’s son, David, may have had a role in preparing the way for McKinsey to buy off governments around the globe to go along with the tremendous and deadly covid vaxx fraud.

See this for full details.

The question Europeans, not the corrupt governments, but We, the People, have to ask ourselves, how long do we continue tolerating Ursula von der Leyen’s Presidency of the EC?

Of course, Ursula von der Leyen is a darling of Klaus Schwab’s, WEF CEO. On the behest of his corrupt financiers, he put her in this position. She is not only a scholar of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders (YGL) academy, but she is also on the WEF’s Board of Trustees.

That protection may be waning, though, as the WEF’s standing in the world is quietly gliding away. Just think of the January 2023 WEF disaster in Davos. See this.

Europe’s Central Bank

Or, an even better question, how long do Europeans tolerate the current ultra-corrupt EC / EU set up? Time to demolish the EU to go back to nation states and local currencies is long overdue. It would be a tremendous boost for the European economy and the European people’s wellbeing.

The longer We, the People, wait, the more difficult it will become to step out of the financial prison matrix.

See this from Christine LaGarde, President of the European Central Bank (ECB). She promises prison, if you spend a thousand euros in cash. 

Ironically, Christine LaGarde who runs the ECB on behalf of powerful financial interests has a criminal record.

Screenshot: The Independent, December  2016  

Click here to view the video

How much longer until we wake up?

*

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: EC President von der Leyen, 2023. (Source: Facebook)

The Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals expresses deep concern over the growing threat to the Republika Srpska (RS) and the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) by open attacks on the institutions and competences of the RS guaranteed by the Dayton-Paris Agreement (1995).

The Belgrade Forum condemns all attempts of the western power centers aimed at the abolishment of the Republika Srpska and the revision of the 1995 peace agreement and stands for the full respect of the Dayton Paris Agreement, especially for respect of the constitutional principle of equality of the two entities and the three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Belgrade Forum points out the inadmissibility of the systematic usurpation of the competences of the institutions of BiH and the RS by the illegally imposed so-called High Representative Christijan Schmidt, which leads to the blocking of the constitutional functioning of BiH and the entities and raising political tensions. The Belgrade Forum considers that the High Representative is a remnant of the past neo-colonialist concepts and a serious obstacle to the rule of law and democracy, and that it is high time for its abolition.

Nobody is authorized to disempowered the RS of its constitutional rights or to stop its legitimate demands for the restitution of all the usurped powers provided for by the Dayton Paris Agreement and the Constitution, including the right to develop special parallel relations with neighboring Republic of Serbia.

Current processes and attacks on the President of the RS, Milorad Dodik, are unfounded and politically motivated. They confirm the plans of the Western power centers aimed at abolishing of the RS, disregarding of the Dayton-Paris Agreement and the creation of a unitary BiH under the domination of the Bosniak elite in Sarajevo. On the other hand, the same power centers continue to violate the UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) in order to legitimize unilateral separation of the so-called Kosovo thus imposing yet another Albanian state on the territory of the Republic of Serbia. Both – endeavors to create unitary BiH and greater Albania – have common denominator anti-Serbian geopolitical projects aimed at establishing full control over the Balkan Peninsula expanding NATO and the West, in general, to the East.

The creation of a unitary BiH and its inclusion in NATO is contrary to the determination of the Serbian people to freely decide on their development and future, respecting the same rights of other Balkan nations. Ongoing pressures and threats against the institutions and acquired rights of the Republika Srpska represent a danger for the freedom and equality of the Serbian people in the Balkans and require unanimous support to the full respect and implementation of the international law, particularly the Dayton Paris Peace Agreement and UN SC resolution 1244.

The Belgrade Forum emphasizes the importance of the Declaration of the All-Serbian Congress held on June 8, 2024 and calls on all patriotic forces for unity, national solidarity and decisive support to the Republika Srpska and its legitimate leadership, in defense of all rights guaranteed by the Dayton Agreement and the Constitution.

*

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

Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War 

Featured image: President Slobodan Milosevic of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, President Alija Izetbegovic of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and President Franjo Tudjman of the Republic of Croatia initial the draft of the Dayton Peace Accords. (From the Public Domain)