“Gain of Function” and Influenza A Virus

May 22nd, 2024 by Dr. Robert Malone

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

 

 

 

“Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” – Winston Churchill

What Is Gain of Function Research (GOF)? 

There is no clear consensus regarding what constitutes GOF research. In the current political climate where the role of US Government (NIH/NIAID, DoD/DTRA, USAID and by implication CIA) in funding of what is clearly GOF research seeking to increase human infectivity of bat Coronaviruses has created an opportunity for stakeholders to sow confusion and ambiguity concerning what actually constitutes GOF research. Much of the resulting obfuscation has involved technical parsing of the definition of GOF in ways which conveniently support the interests of key stakeholders such as Dr. Peter Daszak and his EcoHealth Alliance organization, as well as Dr. Anthony Fauci and his famous denial and attack on the credibility of Senator Rand Paul during congressional testimony.

On October 17, 2014, the Obama White House issued a statement titled “U.S. Government Gain-of-Function Deliberative Process and Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses” which included a brief statement incorporating a useful general definition.

Gain-of-function studies, or research that improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease, help define the fundamental nature of human-pathogen interactions, thereby enabling assessment of the pandemic potential of emerging infectious agents, informing public health and preparedness efforts, and furthering medical countermeasure development. Gain-of-function studies may entail biosafety and biosecurity risks; therefore, the risks and benefits of gain-of-function research must be evaluated, both in the context of recent U.S. biosafety incidents and to keep pace with new technological developments, in order to determine which types of studies should go forward and under what conditions.

Dr. Yoshihiro Kawaoka, from the University of Wisconsin-Madison is a leading influenza GOF researcher who identified and published research demonstrating that four point mutations in the H5N1 hemagglutinin protein (analogous to SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein) which will convert productive and transmissible H5N1 from being restricted to birds to being able to infect and efficiently transmit between mammals (and potentially humans). In the 2015 workshop summary cited above, further details and discussions relating to the nature of GOF research are summarized in “Section 3: Gain-of-Function Research: Background and Alternatives”. In this section, Dr. Kawaoka described and classified types of GoF research depending on the outcome of the experiments.

The first category, which he called “gain of function research of concern,” includes the generation of viruses with properties that do not exist in nature. The now famous example he gave is the production of H5N1 influenza A viruses that are airborne-transmissible among ferrets, compared to the non-airborne transmissible wild type. The second category deals with the generation of viruses that may be more pathogenic and/or transmissible than the wild type viruses but are still comparable to or less problematic than those existing in nature. Kawaoka argued that the majority of strains studied have low pathogenicity, but mutations found in natural isolates will improve their replication in mammalian cells. Finally, the third category, which is somewhere in between the two first categories, includes the generation of highly pathogenic and/or transmissible viruses in animal models that nevertheless do not appear to be a major public health concern. An example cited the high-growth A/PR/8/34 influenza strain found to have increased pathogenicity in mice but not in humans.

Routine virological methods involve experiments that aim to produce a gain of a desired function, such as higher yields for vaccine strains, but often also lead to loss of function, such as loss of the ability for a virus to replicate well, as a consequence. In other words, any selection process involving an alteration of genotypes and their resulting phenotypes is considered a type of Gain-of-Function (GoF) research, even if U.S. HHS policies and definitions are intended to apply to only a small subset of such work.

One leading virologist, Dr. Subbarao emphasizes that such experiments in virology are fundamental to understanding the biology, ecology, and pathogenesis of viruses. He introduced the key questions that virologists ask at all stages of research on the emergence or re-emergence of a virus and specifically adapted these general questions to three viruses of interest (see below). To answer these questions, virologists use gain- and loss-of-function experiments to understand the genetic makeup of viruses and the specifics of virus-host interaction. For instance, as we all know based on the work performed at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, researchers now have advanced molecular technologies, such as reverse genetics, which allow them to produce de novo recombinant viruses from cloned cDNA, and deep sequencing that are critical for studying how viruses escape the host immune system and antiviral controls. Researchers also use targeted host or viral genome modification using small interfering RNA or the bacterial CRISPR-associated protein-9 nuclease as an editing tool.

General Virology Questions and Questions Specific to Influenza, SARS, and MERS Research

  • Why/how does the virus infect and kill mammals?
  • What are the critical host range and virulence determinants of MERS-CoV?
  • Why are some influenza strains more virulent than others?
  • Do antiviral drugs work, and how does the virus become resistant?
  • Can we identify antiviral drugs that are safe and effective for MERS-/SARS-CoV?
  • What drives the evolution of influenza antigenic change and antiviral resistance?
  • Do current or novel vaccines or monoclonal antibodies provide protection, and can the virus escape?
  • Can we develop a SARS-/MERS-CoV candidate vaccine that is safe, immunogenic, and efficacious?
  • Can monoclonal antibodies be used safely for prevention and treatment?
  • Are there some influenza viral targets that will not allow escape from the immune system?
  • How does the virus spread within animals or between animals?
  • Why do some influenza strains spread efficiently while others do not?
  • Could the virus cause a pandemic?
  • What is the likelihood of (re)emergence?
  • Will SARS or a SARS-like CoV re-emerge from bats or other animal hosts?

A Brief History of Gain of Function Research on Influenza A Viruses 

During a recent seminar and presentation at the 5/4/24 Rancho Mirage Summit, Dr. Lynn Fynn, MD (a pseudonym) presented a slide deck which briefly summarized the history of GOF research on Influenza A viruses, beginning with the H1N1 influenza virus associated with the infamous 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic (which was as much about bacterial pneumonia as it was about H1N1), and carrying through to the present situation with H5N1. She has kindly provided a copy of the deck and permission to republish on this substack.

This is a video clip from the above meeting, in which Dr. Robin Robinson (then serving as the Director, HHS/ASPR/BARDA) was asked about benefits obtained from H5N1 GOF research. Notable is that his answer focused on vaccine development. The subsequently developed and currently FDA authorized H5N1 vaccine does not incorporate any sequence information derived from GOF research. I am aware of no evidence that this or any other FDA authorized vaccine, antibody or drug development benefitted from H5N1 GOF research.

Click here to watch the video

*

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

All images in this article are from the author

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Gaza and to a lesser extent West Bank have seen so much violence that talk of durable peace is almost vanishing in the local as well as international discourse. Most discussions just now are limited to very temporary solutions based on ceasefire and release of hostages. Of course this is very much needed just now but this should only be the first step in any quest for durable peace.

It needs to be stated loudly and emphatically today that hope for durable peace should never be lost. In the extremely difficult situations that exist today such hope is the only basis for carrying on many good efforts, and this hope should never be lost.

One basic reason why hope for durable peace has been diminishing at a fast pace is that peace has never been given a fair chance. Peace does not appear from miracles. We have to work for peace, work hard, and this can be a long haul. 

So much is being done on daily basis for war preparation, involving a very large number of people, with a very big budget provided for this and with enormous efforts being made for military strategy and planning. On the other side, how many people are working daily and with continuity for peace? How many of the best talents are engaged in preparing and improving peace plans? How much budget is provided for peace work? Is it even five per cent of the military budget? Is it even one per cent? 

If there is continuing sincere work on daily basis for peace for about five years, on a big enough scale, and if there is a firm faith in peace, peaceful solutions will emerge.

Just now we need immediate ceasefire, release of hostages and the start of a big relief and rehabilitation effort in Gaza. This is the top priority just now but in addition we need efforts for durable peace.

We need the strengthening of peace efforts in Israel as well as in Gaza and West Bank. Specific solutions that have the most chance of success will emerge as people and communities from both sides talk peace with each other. The world will then see that people can be much more committed to peace than their politicians are, and among people women can be most committed to peace. Give them a fair chance, give peace a fair chance.

Such durable peace efforts on both sides of the affected region should be backed and supported fully by a growing peace movement in the USA and other western countries, in neighboring Arab countries, in Iran and in fact in all parts of the world. A broad-based peace effort in Israel and Palestine which gets such wide support at world level is most likely to achieve durable good results.

This peace effort should be integrated well with justice concerns, but at the same time it will be necessary to avoid such exaggerated interpretation of justice concerns which makes it impossible to achieve reconciliation and peace. Peace is achieved in a process of give and take, and not on the basis of repeated recalling of all the terrible injustices and atrocities that have taken place in the past.

The basis of future peace with justice is likely to be that the two state solution emerges in such a way that the Palestinians have a sovereign state with a fair share of resources, and its area is defined in such a way that its people do not have to pass through Israeli gates or need permission of a different country for travelling within their country. At the same the two sides should have a peace agreement that they will not allow their territories to be used for attacks against each other. This will help to build trust. All those who contest elections –and hence can emerge as future leaders on both sides—will have to declare their commitment to peace agreements that are reached, and hence agree to work within this framework.

While such peace will be a big blessing for the people on both sides on its own, in addition it will be very helpful to both sides for coping with challenges like environmental crisis, including climate change and worsening disasters like sea-storms and droughts. This entire region with its aridity, deserts and coastal areas is very vulnerable to climate change.

So instead of the extremely aggressive slogans of present times, in a future of peace we may hear something like this—

Between the Sea and the River,

Two friendly nations can prosper, 

In droughts and in storms,

They are helpful and together.

*

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

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Doing anything in your power to defeat an opponent is the very definition of total war. This entails everything from sabotage and terrorist attacks targeting civilians to assassinating your adversary’s top-ranking officials (or even the leaders themselves). Obviously, there’s also the possibility of direct war, including the usage of weapons of mass destruction (thermonuclear, biological, chemical). Conducting any of the aforementioned operations can easily escalate and lead to the latter. This is precisely why there’s the institution of diplomacy, a millennia-old practice that has been respected by all of the world’s civilizations(obviously, this automatically excludes the modern-day political West). Nazi Germany was one of the first modern nations that stopped honoring any diplomatic agreements, effectively reverting (geo)politics to a rather barbaric competition where everything is permitted at all times.

NATO, essentially its descendant, continued this practice. To this day there’s not a single agreement that the belligerent alliance signed that is worth more than the paper it was written on. The United States, as NATO’s leading member, fully embraced this approach and is now conducting its aggression against the world in a way that could be described as a crawling total war.

The warmongers in Washington DC and the Pentagon are openly talking about the so-called “decapitation strikes” on countries they don’t like, including military superpowers with the ability to simply wipe the US itself off the map. Former CIA directors and high-ranking officials, as well as sitting senators, are openly talking about “taking out” powerful global leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin. This was happening even at times when the latter was offering negotiations and mutually beneficial peaceful settlements.

The obvious question arises – if someone is openly threatening a person like Putin, who else could possibly feel safe in such a world?

This question becomes all the more relevant if we take into account the latest events concerning the assassination attempt on Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico and the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in a highly controversial helicopter crash.

On May 19, Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian both died when their Bell 212 went down near the city of Varzaqan in northwestern Iran. Seven other high-ranking officials, including the governor-general of Tehran’s East Azerbaijan province Malek Rahmati, as well as the state representative in the region Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem, were also killed in the crash. Although it’s still too early to say what exactly happened, some rather disturbing reports and details suggest that this wasn’t a mere accident.

The mainstream propaganda machine’s reaction to the assassination attempt on PM Fico and the death of President Raisi also raises serious concerns. Both the British Sky News and Financial Times published reports where they effectively tried to justify the terrorist who attempted to murder PM Fico, while the state-run BBC called the death of Raisi tragic, but still didn’t miss pointing out that he was supposedly “hardline”.

These incidents are highly beneficial to the political West, which fuels speculation about the possibility of its involvement in both cases. Fico was always highly critical of NATO’s crawling aggression on Russia, insisting that Slovakia doesn’t want to take part in it, while Raisi was a capable leader and also highly respected in the multipolar world. His and the death of Iran’s veteran diplomat Abdollahian is definitely a huge setback for Tehran, one that its adversaries will surely try to capitalize on.

The highly controversial details about the crash certainly haven’t helped dispel speculation about the possible foreign involvement. For instance, according to Turkey’s Transport Minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu, the Bell 212 helicopter that Raisi and Abdollahian flew in either didn’t have its emergency signal transmission system turned on or didn’t have one at all. It’s highly unusual that an aircraft transporting such top-ranking officials wouldn’t have a functioning system that could possibly prevent incidents like this, which further suggests that it could’ve been sabotaged. A malfunction is always a possibility and certainly shouldn’t be rejected entirely, but there are other peculiarities that suggest foul play. For example, relevant military sources report about an unusual arrival of a USAF C-130 aircraft to Azerbaijan that coincided with President Raisi’s departure from the border area where he met his Azeri counterpart, President Ilham Aliyev.

There’s speculation that electronic warfare (EW) systems could’ve been used to crash the helicopter. As Raisi was flown in a US-made Bell 212, which Iran acquired in large numbers back in the 1970s, this surely wouldn’t be a problem for Washington DC. Its services are quite familiar with the helicopter’s avionics, including the aforementioned emergency system. Bell 212’s reputation as a highly reliable aircraft is yet another unusual detail that suggests this wasn’t exactly accidental.

It should be noted that Iran itself is yet to accuse anyone of this. However, this is hardly enough to dispel such rumors, as Tehran would certainly want to avoid acquiring the reputation of not being able to protect its leaders and top-ranking officials. Iran has had numerous problems with its adversaries targeting high-ranking military officers and even its embassies, with the latest such incident resulting in a direct response.

However, targeting Raisi directly would be an unprecedented act of escalation that, if proven to be true, could prompt the Middle Eastern superpower to speed up its nuclear program. With the deployment of extremely low-yield warheads such as the 2-7 kt W76-2, the US is already trying to bait Iran into a “limited” nuclear war. Tehran has already demonstrated willingness to target America’s allies in the region, including Israel, which saw Iran’s retaliation for its strike on the latter’s embassy in Damascus. The country would certainly react far more resolutely in case a person of Raisi’s caliber was assassinated. Namely, many expected him to succeed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, so this fact alone would surely make Raisi a strategic asset of Iran, and thus, a prime target for its adversaries. The late president was also extremely important for the rapidly growing multipolar world, making his death all the more important for those who want to slow it down.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

On Monday May 20th, with the UN’s International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant along with three Hamas leaders for war crimes, and President Joe Biden again repeating, “What’s happening is not genocide. We reject that,” still insisting that Zionist Israel is not engaging in genocide against Palestinian people, we live in an increasingly dangerous world. This comes just days after a failed assassination attempt on an EU national leader, and then the sudden death of Iran’s president and foreign minister, today’s outrageous tempo of disturbing world events is extremely ominous.

The fact is, every single day now we are waking up to more perilously foreboding signs of endgame collapse, imminent world war between top nuclear powers, political assassinations, and yes, a polarized, seemingly out-of-control world, chaotically growing exponentially more unstable and violent by the week. This unending stream of unfolding incidents signify escalating global destabilization, the globalists’ deliberate controlled demolition of our planet gone mad. None of this is by chance nor by accident. It simply reflects the systematic breakdown by diabolical design of all life as we’ve known it. Destructive omens of accelerating upheaval and potential mass death appear near daily now, coming in large shocking doses.

Image source

Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico was nearly murdered last Wednesday May 15th. He is only one of two EU national leaders friendly to Russia opposing military aid to Ukraine, and the only national leader alive in this world investigating Pfizer and the powerbroking co-conspirator culprits behind the COVID kill shot holocaust, determined to publicly hold them criminally accountable.

The three African leaders and last elected Haitian leader were all murdered several years ago for vehemently taking bold stands against the globalist agenda to commit human genocide with its bioweapon Big Pharma non-vaccine poison. Of course no accident that one of the largest globalist controlled news outlets Associated Press would a few hours after the Fico shooting, claim “Slovak authorities [are] saying he [the failed assassin] acted alone in a politically motivated attack.” Like clockwork, every time the embedded Establishment deceivers purport their “lone gunman” trope, instantaneously they reach their standard criminal coverup conclusion. Yet facts so often prove otherwise as the CIA and Mossad are notoriously guilty in scores of assassinations and political coups. JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King all readily come to mind.

A mere month and a half ago, writer Simon Tisdall’s Guardian article entitled “Once a relic of the cold war, political assassins are back with a licence to kill” open with:

In today’s lawless world, political assassination is the new growth industry – and anyone, famous or not, is a potential victim. Government-sanctioned killings are proliferating, with Russia, Israel, Iran and India leading the pack.

Tisdall was referring to the Israel’s April Fool’s Day assassination of high-ranking Iranian generals in the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, clearly a violation of international law. This in turn led to Iran’s April 13th restrained “payback,” launching the world’s largest drone and missile attack as Tehran’s first time ever striking precise military targets directly on Israel’s soil, hitting spy and military posts in the Negev Desert, specifically minimizing civilian casualties yet sending the clear message that Israel’s air defense system is in fact penetrable, despite the Zionist bravado lies hyping its infallible “Iron Dome.”

Image source

Within four days this last week, the world has witnessed assassination, albeit a failed attempt on the life of a rare EU national leader friendly with Russia, followed just four days later by what may be successful assassinations of another Russian ally in Iran’s president and foreign minister. On Monday May 20th, all the headlines reported Iran’s 63-year old President Ebrahim Raisi, his 60-year old Iran Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian and six other high-ranking Iran officials died the day earlier on Sunday May 19th, in an apparent helicopter crash in northwestern Iran’s East Azerbaijan province near the city of Varzaqan. Others killed include governor-general of East Azerbaijan province Malek Rahmati and representative of the Supreme Leader in East Azerbaijan Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem.

Despite today’s instant GPS technology pinpointing specific location with a black box recording, reported heavy fog made search efforts difficult locating the crash site for forty rescue teams, which is suspicious in and of itself. AP stated that the crash occurred “on the side of a steep mountain” 12 miles south of the Iran-Azerbaijan border.

Instantly Israel denied any involvement, and of course the so-called harsh flying conditions at the time of the accident afford Israel’s notoriously automatic “plausible deniability” out. Reuters stated:

An Israeli official, who requested anonymity, told Reuters it was not involved in the crash. 

Israel’s track record for credibility in truth-telling has repeatedly been atrocious, especially as of late. Few nations or people trust Israel because this country possesses among the worst reputations for nonstop deception, not unlike its #1 Liar-in-Thief illegitimately occupying the White House and his treasonous DC regime.

The genocidal Israeli government has not disclosed its official response to the death of Iranian leaders. Yet Israel’s current Minister of Heritage Amichay Eliyahu, reacted to Raisi’s death posting an image of a wine glass on X with the caption “Cheers” underneath. Avigdor Lieberman, former defense minister and leader of the opposition right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu party, told Ynet news that Israel “will not shed a tear for the death of the Iranian president.”

https://x.com/Eliyahu_a/status/1792411988347490615

Despite alleged bad weather, two other Iranian helicopters apparently carrying lesser important Tehran officials both made it safely back to their destination after attending a ceremonial event opening a joint dam project with Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev. But is this helicopter crash truly an accident or is it another Israeli terrorist attack targeting the top leaders of Zionist Israel’s archrival enemy Iran?

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei since 1989 declared five days of mourning while placing Republic of Iran’s second in charge, Raisi’s deputy Mohammad Mokhber as acting president until an election is held within 50 days.

The assassination against Iran’s leader Ebrahim Raisi would certainly not be Israel and its allies’ first deadly political hit. The bottom line is that over the last half decade alone, Israel and friends have been directly responsible for numerous targeted assassinations against both Iran’s top political and top military leaders.

Image: General Qasem Soleimani

It was under Israeli firster Donald Trump’s presidency, bought and paid for by Israel first money, that his then Secretary of State, fellow West Point graduate a decade my junior and former CIA Director Mike Pompeo on January 3rd, 2020, launched his CIA drone strike on Iran’s most senior military official, General Qasem Soleimani. Mike Pompeo is another boldface liar the day after he executed Soleimani, spouting off on CNN as a feather in his cap, smugly claiming the Iran general was working with the Middle Eastern terrorists when in fact Soleimani was in actuality eliminating them, effectively defeating US supported terrorist proxy groups like ISIS in both Syria and Iraq.

America’s war against Iraq based on another boldface US lie of Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent WMDs was yet another US Empire expansionist imperial war, where again US as the globalists’ battering ram bully was clearly on the wrong side of history. Gen. Soleimani assisted Iraq in ultimately removing the US military as occupiers in Iraq delivering another humiliating US war loss in 2011 only eclipsed almost a decade later by Afghanistan debacle.

For years, the US has flagrantly violated Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan’s national sovereignty rights, deploying US military occupiers on the ground against the will and rights of both the Baghdad and Damascus governments, not to mention Kabul’s. These nations know that the given US excuse used to this day to justify its unwanted presence – removing the so-called vestiges of Islamic State terrorists from the region, is an absolute lie since it’s both the US and Israel that have been primary creators and longtime supporters of their proxy ally terrorists in the US manufactured War on Terror operating for decades throughout the Middle East. Prior to ISIS, the US and Israel teamed up with Gulf State monarchies to create al Qaeda and Bush ally the bin Laden family to pull off the inside US-Israeli job 9/11, deliberately committing treason to kill 3,000 Americans to launch their preplanned “new Pearl Harbor” to take down seven nations in five years. It all known history now.

As Iran’s most popular general and second most powerful national leader behind only the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei at the time of his 2020 assassination, General Soleimani was chiefly responsible for not only successfully weakening both the Taliban but also virtually eradicating the US created, financed and trained Islamic State terrorists that had grown to become the world’s largest terrorist organization, as well as other US supported jihadist militant groups operating inside Syria and Iraq.

It was in late December 2021 that Israel’s then recently retired head of military intelligence, Maj. Gen. Tamir Hayman, admitted that Israel assisted the United States in Gen. Soleimani’s assassination, gloating:

Soleimani’s assassination is an achievement, since our main enemy, in my eyes, are the Iranians. Two significant and important assassinations can be noted in my term.

The other assassination Hayman boasted of illustrates how Israel historically uses its divide and rule strategy to control both Palestinian groups, Hamas in Gaza and Palestinian Authority (PA) in West Bank. Hamas was secretly created and financed by Netanyahu to pit Hamas against the PA, and as long as the Palestinian groups are fighting against each other, remaining weak, more easily controlled, they enabled Netanyahu’s longtime policy forbidding the two-state solution. In this case, Hamas accused the Palestinian Authority intelligence operatives of informing the IDF of the specific Gaza location of Palestinian Islamic Jihad commander Baha Abu al-Ata for another Israeli airstrike assassination in November 2019. Still another Israeli below-the-belt, heavy blow delivered to Iran a year later on November 27th, 2020 was the assassination of Iran’s leading nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh-Mahavadi.

Then came another lethal Jewish State airstrike assassination last Christmas Day 2023 in a Damascus suburb, targeting yet another Iranian General Sayyed Razi Mousavi, the senior adviser in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) credited with coordinating the military alliance between Syria and Iran. Then little more than a week later on January 3rd, 2024, the US and Israel undoubtedly coordinated its Middle East proxy ally ISIS to yet again cold-bloodedly massacre 84 more Iranian civilians, simply for honoring the loss of their heroic popular general, attending Soleimani’s memorial service on his fourth year death anniversary. That terrorist act was perpetrated to deliberately ratchet up wider tensions in the Middle East, once again brutally targeting Iran as victim.

Israel aggression toward Iran has never been countered by Tehran retribution killings, though more than justified. Just last month on the Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr, Israel engaged in more targeted killing of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh’s three sons and four of his grandchildren. Haniyeh explained that Israel intentionally targeted his family at Shati refugee camp they visited relatives over the holiday. Targeted assassinations have been a protected way of life, seemingly reserved only for Jewish State “chosen ones.” No other nation-state even comes close to racking up such high frequency premeditated, heinously violent crime, though US would undoubtedly be the runner-up.

It didn’t take long for speculation to surge into overdrive, pointing to Israel as the most likely guilty suspect. According to DCM Global’s video released Monday May 20th, anonymous sources within the Tehran government claim that the helicopter pilot that transported Raisi and his staff to the event with Azeri President Ilham Aliyev inside Azerbaijan near its Iran border, was not the same pilot that transported them back to Iran for its accidental “hard landing.” The video further alleges that the second pilot was a Mossad agent. By the time search and rescue teams arrived at the alleged crash scene, the helicopter had been completely burned.

Fueling the high speculation over the sudden deaths of Iran’s president, foreign minister and other prominent officials, also come reports that a US Air Force C-130 aircraft suspiciously arrived in Azerbaijan near the time of Raisi’s helicopter departure. Conjecture centers around possible electronic warfare may have been used to jam the president’s aircraft to malfunction and ultimately cause the crash. Iran states that it purchased the Bell 212 helicopter in the early 2000s. The US would be extremely familiar with its avionics, potentially rendering Raisi’s copter in Azerbaijan nonfunctional. For many decades this Bell 212 model helicopter has maintained an excellent safety record, unlike Boeing aircraft in recent years. Thus, it is highly unusual for it to be involved in an accident, much less with a national president from a major regional power.

The timing of this fateful incident could not have come at a more intensely volatile moment during today’s growing pre-World War III conflict buildup. With the elderly 85-year old Supreme Leader Khamenei about ready to retire, again the timing here appears highly suspicious and troublesome. Raisi was considered the leading candidate to take over for Khamenei, much like he had served as president from 1981-89 under his aging predecessor Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini. 

With Israel playing a prominent role in murdering so many Iran’s top political as well as military and scientific leaders, Israel’s systematic targeting killing has gone on unchecked without consequence for three-quarters of a century. If strong conclusive evidence that Israel killed Raisi does emerge, will this latest, most egregious crime of them all also go unpunished? If history keeps repeating itself, then it will. But today we are living through extraordinary times calling for extraordinary, unprecedented measures. And radical change is in the air. Iran, the Muslim world and indeed the whole world is on the brink of revolt against the globalists’ Old-World Order-turned NWO. Growing opposition amidst so much public exposure of these blatant, unmasked crimes against humanity are reaching the point of no return.

It has been frequently reported that Iran and Azerbaijan have maintained strained relations in recent years. Despite Azerbaijan and Iran both being Shiite Muslim neighbors, it hasn’t stopped Caspian Sea oil-rich Azeri dictator Ilham Aliyev’s relations with Israel to grow increasingly cordial and cozy. After all, it was the Ashkenazim Jewish State that made all the difference supplying Azerbaijan the strategic drones that enabled it for the first time to tactically defeat Armenians on the battlefield in defense of their final Nagorno-Karabakh war lasting 45-days during late 2020. This action in turn set up Baku’s “lightning strike” in Nagorno-Karabakh last year, removing virtually all the remaining 120,000 Armenians uprooted from their rightful ancient homeland as war refugees fleeing for safety to the Republic of Armenia.

This symbiotic relationship between “odd fellows” Israel and Azerbaijan has Aliyev publicly supporting Israel’s war against Hamas today.

Thus, for Iran’s leader to attend a political event inside Azerbaijan with a proven untrustworthy despot so chummy with Iran’s chief nemesis Zionist Israel, may have been a mortally fateful mistake. And with Iran’s Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian of probable Armenian descent, it automatically renders this ill-fated trip all the more treacherously suspect. Aliyev has made no bones about erasing Armenians off the face of the earth, just as his unholy Khazarian mafia bedfellow Benjamin Netanyahu erases all Palestinians off the face of the earth. These two war criminal dictators Bibi and Ilham are two rotten peas from the same rotten pod.

*

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.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate, former Army officer and author of “Don’t Let the Bastards Getcha Down” exposing a faulty US military leadership system based on ticket punching up the seniority ladder, invariably weeding out the best and brightest, leaving mediocrity and order followers rising to the top as politician-bureaucrat generals designated to lose every modern US war by elite design. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In Los Angeles he found himself battling the largest county child protective services in the nation within America’s thoroughly broken and corrupt child welfare system.

The experience in both the military and child welfare system prepared him well as a researcher and independent journalist, exposing the evils of Big Pharma and how the Rockefeller controlled medical and psychiatric system inflict more harm than good, case in point, the pandemic hoax and kill shot genocide. As an independent journalist for the last decade, Joachim has written hundreds of articles for many news sites, including Global Research, lewrockwell.com and currently https//jameshfetzer.org, Inteldrop.org and  https://thegovernmentrag.com. As a published author of a 5-book volume series entitled Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy & the Deep State, Joachim’s books and chapters are Amazon bestsellers in child advocacy and human rights categories. His A-Z sourcebook series fully document and expose the global pedophilia scourge and remain available free at https://pedoempire.org/content s/. Joachim also hosts the weekly Revolution Radio broadcast “Cabal Empire Exposed” on Friday morning at 7AM EST (ID: revradio, password: rocks!).

Featured image is from the author

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

[This video was produced in May 2020.]

Transcript below.

BILL GATES: Hello. I’m Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft. In this video you’re going to see the future.

SOURCE: Hello, I’m Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft

Who is Bill Gates? A software developer? A businessman? A philanthropist? A global health expert?

This question, once merely academic, is becoming a very real question for those who are beginning to realize that Gates’ unimaginable wealth has been used to gain control over every corner of the fields of public health, medical research and vaccine development. And now that we are presented with the very problem that Gates has been talking about for years, we will soon find that this software developer with no medical training is going to leverage that wealth into control over the fates of billions of people.

GATES: [. . .] because until we get almost everybody vaccinated globally, we still won’t be fully back to normal.

SOURCE: Bill Gates on Finding a Vaccine for COVID-19, the Economy, and Returning to ‘Normal Life’

Bill Gates is no public health expert. He is not a doctor, an epidemiologist or an infectious disease researcher. Yet somehow he has become a central figure in the lives of billions of people, presuming to dictate the medical actions that will be required for the world to go “back to normal.” The transformation of Bill Gates from computer kingpin to global health czar is as remarkable as it is instructive, and it tells us a great deal about where we are heading as the world plunges into a crisis the likes of which we have not seen before.

This is the story of How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health.

You’re tuned in to The Corbett Report.

Until his reinvention as a philanthropist in the past decade, this is what many people thought of when they thought of Bill Gates:

NARRATOR: In the case of the United States vs Microsoft, the US Justice Department contended that the software giant had breached antitrust laws by competing unfairly against Netscape Communications in the internet browser market, effectively creating a monopoly. Bill’s first concern was that the prosecution could potentially block the release of his company’s latest operating system, Windows 98.

SOURCE: Bill Gates Defends Microsoft in Monopoly Lawsuit

GATES: Are you asking me about when I wrote this e-mail or what are you asking me about?

DAVID BOIES: I’m asking you about January of ’96.

GATES: That month?

BOIES: Yes, sir.

GATES: And what about it?

BOIES: What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 96?

GATES: I don’t know what you mean: “concerned.”

BOIES: What is it about the word “concerned” that you don’t understand?

GATES: I’m not sure what you mean by it.

SOURCE: Bill Gates Deposition

STEVE JOBS: We’re going to be working together on Microsoft Office, on Internet Explorer, on Java, and I think that it’s going to lead to a very healthy relationship. So it’s a package announcement today. We’re very, very happy about it, we’re very, very excited about it. And I happen to have a special guest with me today via satellite downlink, and if we could get him up on the stage right now.

[BILL GATES APPEARS, CROWD BOOS]

SOURCE: Macworld Boston 1997-The Microsoft Deal

DAN RATHER: Police and security guards in Belgium were caught flat-footed today by a cowardly sneak attack on one of the world’s wealthiest men. The target was Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, arriving for a meeting with community leaders. Watch what happens when a team of hit men meet him first with a pie in the face.

[GATES HIT IN THE FACE WITH PIE]

RATHER: Gates was momentarily and understandably shaken, but he was not injured. The hit squad piled on with two more pies before one of them was wrestled to the ground and arrested; the others—at least for the moment—got away. Gates went inside, wiped his face clean, and made no comment. He then went ahead with his scheduled meeting. No word on the motive for this attack.

SOURCE: Bill Gates Pie in Face

But, once reviled for the massive wealth and the monopolistic power that his virus-laden software afforded him, Gates is now hailed as a visionary who is leveraging that wealth and power for the greater good of humanity.

KLAUS SCHWAB: If in the 22nd century a book will be written about the entrepreneur of the 21st century [. . .] I’m sure that the person who will foremost come to the mind of those historians is certainly Bill Gates. [applause]

SOURCE: Davos Annual Meeting 2008 – Bill Gates

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that Bill Gates is singularly—I would argue—the most consequential individual of our generation. I mean that.

SOURCE: Bill Gates Talks Philanthropy, Microsoft, and Taxes | DealBook

ELLEN DEGENERES: Our next guest is one of the richest and most generous men in the world. Please welcome Bill Gates.

SOURCE: Bill Gates on Finding a Vaccine for COVID-19, the Economy, and Returning to ‘Normal Life’

JUDY WOODRUFF: At a time when everyone is looking to understand the scope of the pandemic and how to minimize the threat, one of the best informed voices is that of businessman and philanthropist Bill Gates.

SOURCE: Bill Gates on where the COVID-19 pandemic will hurt the most

The process by which this reinvention of Gates’ public image took place is not mysterious. It’s the same process by which every billionaire has revived their public image since John D. Rockefeller hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee to transform him from the head of the Standard Oil hydra into the kind old man handing out dimes to strangers.

MAN OFF CAMERA: Don’t you give dimes, Mr. Rockefeller? Please, go ahead.

WOMAN: Thank you, sir.

MAN: Thank you very much.

ROCKEFELLER: Thank you for the ride!

MAN: I consider myself more than amply paid.

ROCKEFELLER: Bless you! Bless you! Bless you!

SOURCE: John D. Rockefeller – Standard Oil

More to the point, John D. Rockefeller knew that to gain the adoration of the public, he had to appear to give them what they want: money. He devoted hundreds of millions of dollars of his vast oil monopoly fortune to establishing institutions that, he claimed, were for the public good. The General Education Board. The Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research. The Rockefeller Foundation.

Similarly, Bill Gates has spent much of the past two decades transforming himself from software magnate into a benefactor of humanity through his own Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In fact, Gates has surpassed Rockefeller’s legacy with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation long having eclipsed The Rockefeller Foundation as the largest private foundation in the world, with $46.8 billion of assets on its books that it wields in its stated program areas of global health and development, global growth, and global policy advocacy.

And, like Rockefeller, Gates’ transformation has been helped along by a well-funded public relations campaign. Gone are the theatrical tricks of the PR pioneers—the ubiquitous ice cream cones of Gates’ mentor Warren Buffett are the last remaining holdout of the old Rockefeller-handing-out-dimes gimmick. No, Gates has guided his public image into that of a modern-day saint through an even simpler tactic: buying good publicity.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation spends tens of millions of dollars per year on media partnerships, sponsoring coverage of its program areas across the board. Gates funds The Guardian‘s Global Development website. Gates funds NPR’s global health coverage. Gates funds the Our World in Data website that is tracking the latest statistics and research on the coronavirus pandemic. Gates funds BBC coverage of global health and development issues, both through its BBC Media Action organization and the BBC itself. Gates funds world health coverage on ABC News.

When the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer was given a $3.5 million Gates foundation grant to set up a special unit to report on global health issues, NewsHour communications chief Rob Flynn was asked about the potential conflict of interest that such a unit would have in reporting on issues that the Gates Foundation is itself involved in. “In some regards I guess you might say that there are not a heck of a lot of things you could touch in global health these days that would not have some kind of Gates tentacle,” Flynn responded.

Indeed, it would be almost impossible to find any area of global health that has been left untouched by the tentacles of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

It was Gates who sponsored the meeting that led to the creation of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, a global public-private partnership bringing together state sponsors and big pharmaceutical companies, whose specific goals include the creation of “healthy markets for vaccines and other immunisation products.” As a founding partner of the alliance, the Gates Foundation provided $750 million in seed funding and has gone on to make over $4.1 billion in commitments to the group.

Gates provided the seed money that created the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, a public-private partnership that acts as a finance vehicle for governmental AIDS, TB, and malaria programs.

When a public-private partnership of governments, world health bodies and 13 leading pharmaceutical companies came together in 2012 “to accelerate progress toward eliminating or controlling 10 neglected tropical diseases,” there was the Gates Foundation with $363 million of support.

When the Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents was launched in 2015 to leverage billions of dollars in public and private financing for global health and development programs, there was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as a founding partner with a $275 million contribution.

When the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2017 to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, there was the Gates Foundation with an initial injection of $100 million.

The examples go on and on. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s fingerprints can be seen on every major global health initiative of the past two decades. And beyond the flashy, billion-dollar global partnerships, the Foundation is behind hundreds of smaller country and region-specific grants—$10 million to combat a locust infestation in East Africa, or $300 million to support agricultural research in Africa and Asia—that add up to billions of dollars in commitments.

It comes as no surprise, then, that—far beyond the $250 million that the Gates Foundation has pledged to the “fight” against coronavirus—every aspect of the current coronavirus pandemic involves organizations, groups and individuals with direct ties to Gates funding.

From the start, the World Health Organization has directed the global response to the current pandemic. From its initial monitoring of the outbreak in Wuhan and its declaration in January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission to its live media briefings and its technical guidance on country-level planning and other matters, the WHO has been the body setting the guidelines and recommendations shaping the global response to this outbreak.

But even the World Health Organization itself is largely reliant on funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The WHO’s most recent donor report shows that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the organization’s second-largest donor behind the United States government. The Gates Foundation single-handedly contributes more to the world health body than Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Russia and the UK combined.

What’s more, current World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is, in fact, like Bill Gates himself, not a medical doctor at all, but the controversial ex-Minister of Health of Ethiopia, who was accused of covering up three cholera outbreaks in the country during his tenure. Before joining the WHO, he served as chair of the Gates-founded Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and sat on the board of the Gates-founded Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Gates-funded Stop TB Partnership.

The current round of lockdowns and restrictive stay-home orders in western countries was enacted on the back of alarming models predicting millions of deaths in the United States and hundreds of thousands in the UK.

HAYLEY MINOGUE: Imperial College in London released a COVID-19 report and that’s where most of our US leaders are getting the information they’re basing their decision making on. That 2.2 million deaths also doesn’t account for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed.

[. . .]

The report runs us through a few different ways this could turn out depending on what our responses are. If we don’t do anything to control this virus, over 80% of people in the US would be infected over the course of the epidemic, with 2.2 million deaths from COVID-19.

SOURCE: Extreme measures based on scientific paper

BORIS JOHNSON: From this evening I must give the British people a very simple instruction: you must stay at home.

SOURCE: Boris Johnson announces complete UK lockdown amid coronavirus crisis

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Enough is enough. Go home and stay home.

SOURCE: ‘Enough is enough’, Trudeau with a strong message to Canadians

GAVIN NEWSOM: . . . a statewide order for people to stay at home

SOURCE: California Gov Newsom issues statewide ‘SAFER AT HOME’ order

The work of two research groups was crucial in shaping the decision of the UK and US governments to implement wide-ranging lockdowns, and, in turn, governments around the world. The first group, the Imperial College COVID-19 Research Team, issued a report on March 16th that predicted up to 500,000 deaths in the UK and 2.2 million deaths in the US unless strict government measures were put in place.

Click here to read the full transcript.

*

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

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

This interview was recorded for the Global Research News Hour. Published May 18, 2024. Find a link here:

University Encampments and the Freedom Flotilla: Fighting Back Against Historical Racist Genocide – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, documentary film-maker, writer and political analyst, who has lived in and reported from the occupied Palestinian Territories. He has written for publications such as MintPress NewsMondoweissMEMO, TRT, and various other outlets. He currently works with The Last American VagabondPress TV and Quds News. Director of: ‘Steal of the Century‘ Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe

In this interview, RObert speaks of the uprisings of many university students against the Israeli actions in Gaza. He also talks about the decision by Israel to reject the ceasefire proposal they  submitted to Hamas only to reject it when Hamas agreed!

Global Research: You’re currently based in Calgary. Were you part of the pro-Palestine encampment at the University of Calgary, which was recently torn down by police?

Robert Inlakesh: Yes, I arrived there. I probably spent a good six hours there covering it.

I was filming with a bunch of the protesters and observing what was going on and wanting to document how it all played out. Of course, it took a violent turn due to the fact that the university, according to the information that I received from the students, they wanted to negotiate with the university. The university refused.

It said that we won’t listen to you, called the police in. The police arrived. The private security shut down all of the buildings.

The police blocked two exits, basically kettled all of the demonstrators in. There was a protest, which came actually in March towards the university and onto the campus to support the students. Within maybe a few hours of that protest arriving, the police showed up.

This was on the first day of the encampment. It was an extremely diverse encampment. You had conservative Muslims there standing next to people from the LGBT community.

Everywhere in between, we had people from the Blackfoot, different nations within the Blackfoot. Indigenous people came, gave their blessings for it to take place, this encampment on their land, their stolen land. They stood side by side with the students.

It was all peaceful until the police decided to come threaten them. They arrived with automatic weapons. They arrived in riot gear.

They openly threatened to arrest and disband the encampment. They said that you are trespassing, even though these are students paying their tuition fees in a peaceful protest. The students actually came to the middle of the encampment.

It was all on a loudspeaker. They were discussing and debating whether they should pack up the encampment and come back at another time, or they should stay essentially and try and defend the encampment. Before they could come to a conclusion, and they almost came to one, they stood there debating for maybe 10 minutes or so.

The police decided to push into the encampment. When it was not, let’s say, defended from the outside, it was easy for them to come in. They pushed through, smashed through the barriers, and began to initiate a small, let’s say, clash with the student demonstrators.

They locked arms. They stood there peacefully. They shouted the slogan, there is no riot here.

Why are you in riot gear? They repeatedly shouted this. Then there was a standoff for hours and hours. It looked like, okay, it’s going to end.

The students decided to come back at another day. The police told them that there will be no arrests made whatsoever. Then suddenly, as everything was being packed up, everyone was about to leave, the crowd at that point was very small in comparison to what it was before.

The police then decided to launch an attack. They went into full war mode. They shot people with rubber bullets.

They threw flashbangs down. They fired tear gas. People had gas that they got in their eyes, and some students were affected by that.

Also, they used batons. They hit an old woman in the head with a baton. They pushed another woman to the ground.

She hit her head. She apparently received hospital treatment. A friend of mine, who was organizing the demonstration, which came to support them, he was shot in the arm with a rubber bullet.

None of this was at all provoked by the students. It was completely peaceful. I was there the entire time.

The Canadian media covered this as if it was a clash, as if somehow the students had provoked this. In the CBC report, they didn’t even mention the word rubber bullets, which were fired. However, they implied it, but they didn’t mention it explicitly.

They were there. They saw what happened. They lied about it.

That’s how they disbanded the encampment on day one. That’s how they treated them. That’s how the university treated their own students.

GR: There wasn’t even rumors, people saying, well, they’re anti-Semitic, or they make me feel unsafe.

RI: Personally, I didn’t see any. For instance, there was no counter-protest there.

I didn’t see anything or hear anything from students in that university that said they felt unsafe. I might be incorrect, because when I was there, there might have been Jewish students who were pro-Israeli, who were on social media and saw it and were upset by this. That might have been the case.

That’s the case every single time these encampments are set up anywhere. You see that pro-Israeli students will claim that they feel persecuted. At that encampment, there were Jewish students and there were Jewish protesters.

There was a Jewish group there that came to support them in the protest that marched towards the encampment and stayed at the encampment. There were Jewish people there that were linking arms with the protesters and standing off against the police. Again, this was a diverse crowd.

You had indigenous people there. You had Black people, white people, people from all different backgrounds. You had people who were gay standing next to conservative Muslims, all in solidarity.

They put what might be in other cases causes for division aside. They united against the police to try and protect the encampment. In a call of solidarity with the Palestinians, there was nothing racist that happened there, nothing anti-Semitic that happened there.

They were very inclusive and it would be ridiculous to portray it as an anti-Semitic event. It was not at all. There was not a single person and none of those students that I spoke to would tolerate anything of that nature.

They were very explicit. If anyone makes any statements which can be interpreted as being anti-Jewish, they’re out. They’re not going to be tolerated.

GR: Can you comment on any evidence of the anti-Semitism or violence that the media and university officials and some politicians are latching onto at any of the sites?

RI: They’ll point to some instances where people, for instance, there was one case of a Jewish woman who’s pro-Israel. I believe she was a student. I can’t remember which university it was now.

I think you’ll know the cases as soon as I bring it up. She claimed to have been stabbed in the eye with a Palestinian flag. The video came out, anything that contradicted what she tried to portray.

She was, of course, propelled by the media, made famous. She was put on Piers Morgan, Fox News, and CNN. They all talked to her as if she was a victim of being stabbed in the eye in an anti-Semitic hate crime.

She was there clearly trying to go in and debate people. She was judged as an agitator on that campus. There are other cases, for instance, where they point to masked people holding up signs that talk about the Qasem brigades coming to get the pro-Israeli students.

There’s one case, I think, of people that were shouting something about October 7 will happen again. In terms of your classical anti-Semitic rhetoric, I don’t think we’ve seen any of that. In fact, we’ve seen all of the racist slurs on the other side.

In fact, the pro-Israeli crowds have been screaming the N-word at people. They’ve been making, in terms of these fraternity students, these frat boys, they were making monkey sounds at Black students. They’ve been attacking violently in different areas like UCLA.

They attacked violently the encampment with fireworks and sticks and metal poles. We’ve seen that the attacks have been against the Palestinian side, the pro-Palestinian side. Also, a lot of even anti-Jewish rhetoric against the Jewish students who are standing in solidarity with the encampments, calling them as if they’re not real Jews, using the slur kapos against them, which is essentially a collaborator with the Nazis during the Second World War, and a number of horrible slurs that have been used against them.

If you look at the hate crimes and the violent attacks that have been happening, it’s overwhelmingly all on the side of the pro-Israeli students. They’re the ones committing the bulk of the attacks. Of course, the police as well are violently attacking people.

In terms of these incidents, even if there were a handful of these incidents, and let’s assume that all of these people are masked, were actually part of the pro-Palestinian encampments. Let’s just, for argument’s sake, take that at face value. Let’s take it at face value that the woman was stabbed in the eye with a flagpole viciously, an anti-Semitic hate crime.

Let’s just take that. These encampments are across the country, not just across the country, across North America, and across the West. It’s spread into Japan and Korea.

There are tens of thousands of students who are out there protesting. Their message is very simple. It’s not anti-Semitic.

This is just a media narrative that has been concocted in order to try and justify police brutality against them, cracking down upon them, silencing them, and ultimately making it seem as if they’re these crazy anti-Semitic Nazis who, for some reason, a ceasefire is equivalent to wanting to kill all Jewish people.

GR: It’s been suggested that big money people are funding this movement. Is it possible? It’s not as grassroots as it appears to be?

RI: Well, in order to support that claim, if you’re going to say people are funding it, it has to be something specific, which is put out there.

I’ve seen nothing to back up the claim that somehow somebody like, let’s say, George Soros, that’s the one that they claim most of the time that George Soros had given money through Open Societies to Jewish Voices for Peace. That’s an argument I’ve heard made, for instance. In the past, you saw that a contribution was made by Open Societies to Jewish Voices for Peace.

That was before any of this. There’s no information supporting that this action has been somehow supported monetarily by people with a lot of money, these philanthropists like George Soros. There’s nothing that supports that immediately these encampments have been backed by or this movement was started by somebody backed by George Soros.

It was grassroots. Even if people are receiving money in some of the encampments, trying to link this to a global movement where you see hundreds upon hundreds of campuses now around the world where the students are doing the same thing, really, is it because of some financing that could have came from Open Societies Foundation that all these students are out there willing to risk their degrees, risk their futures to be arrested, brutalized, perhaps even, in some cases, seriously injured? Are they willing to risk that because George Soros gave tens of thousands of dollars to Jewish Voices for Peace, according to a tax statement in 2018 or whatever it was? Does that make any sense? Is it plausible? No, I don’t believe it is. I have not seen any information which backs that.

Of course, there’s the claims from the NYPD that professionals were occupying what the protesters called Hinz Hall. They occupied a hall at Columbia and they renamed it Hinz Hall, which, of course, follows on from the tradition of other students occupying that very same hall and calling it Mandela Hall in the past in opposition to apartheid. They said there were all of these outside agitators and professionals, yet the NYPD couldn’t point to having arrested any of these outside agitators.

It was asked, how many people did you arrest that were non-students? And it could not answer the question. Their representatives couldn’t answer that question. And I think that’s very clear why they couldn’t answer that question, because it was clear that these were not outside agitators, these were students.

So that would be my comment on the funding from the outside, as I see it at this point.

GR: You wrote an article recently about Hamas agreeing to a ceasefire, but then Israel stepped away. Clearly, Israel didn’t want a ceasefire.

What is exactly the military point of attacking Rafah?

RI: Well, there is a point which they have raised. It’s due to intelligence chatter that they came up with the idea largely of attacking Rafah, which was to do with an alleged financing network for Hamas operating in Rafah and the civil administration. And this came largely from discussions within the Israeli intelligence community and even the Palestinian Authority Intelligence from within Rafah.

Of course, this is just an excuse because this is the only major Palestinian population centre that they haven’t raided yet. So they have claimed, the Israeli military have claimed that we eliminated the Qassam Brigades, so the armed wing of Hamas, their battalions in the north, in the centre of Gaza, we’ve eliminated all of them, which is nonsense, of course, they’re fully functional. And right now there is a battle ongoing in Chevalier in northern Gaza, and it’s probably the fiercest battle that we’ve seen in the entirety of the war.

And they said they disbanded all the resistance groups there, and they didn’t disband any of them, let alone Hamas, the smaller ones they didn’t, and they didn’t manage to kill them and defeat them. They’re still operational, even small groups with a lot less power than Hamas. And so the justification, essentially, for invading Rafah, the public one is, well, this is how we complete our war.

Netanyahu said since February that if we don’t go in, we lose the war. And the intelligence chatter before this was, well, you know, we went into northern Gaza, and we disbanded the financing network of Hamas there, and then we went into Khan Younus, and we disbanded the financing network there, which is not even true, by the way, when they go into different areas, you’ll see that they loot Palestinian banks, they loot businesses, the soldiers will even go through and steal women’s jewellery, for instance, and claim that somehow this was being used for financing Hamas. Of course, there have to be financing networks, there have to be a supply chain, there has to be people from the former civil administration prior to the war, which, of course, Hamas was the elected government there.

So anyone who is a police officer, for instance, or is working in any capacity with the civil administration is technically of the quote-unquote Hamas civil administration, including the health ministry, which coordinates with the United Nations and groups, you know, international organizations around the world, is run by professional doctors, is technically Hamas, you know, because it’s under the banner, Hamas is the governing force there. So in Rafah, they argued, well, we can disband this financing network. And of course, there are more people from the civil administration there, there would be more financing networks, quote-unquote, in Rafah, simply because there’s more people there.

But they don’t know where this is. If they knew where the, you know, some sort of structure was for disbanding Hamas, they would have already taken it out and killed them. They could do that from the air.

In terms of going into the tunnels, taking out the Palestinian resistance, freeing their prisoners, which are held in Gaza, they’ve not been able to do that anywhere else. Why would they be able to do it there? At the end of the day, when it came to the ceasefire proposal, which Hamas accepted, you’re very right in saying that Israel didn’t expect them to actually say yes to it. This was a ceasefire proposal, which was put together by the Israeli intelligence and by the CIA, and handed over to them.

And there were small amendments, very small amendments, for instance, on what days should Hamas release the Israeli prisoners? And should it be the bodies first of Israeli prisoners that have been killed in airstrikes by the Israelis themselves? Or should it be, you know, that they’re alive in the first stage? These little things, which could have been rectified very easily. And the CIA itself, well, unnamed US officials themselves, recognized that this proposal was essentially the same one that was handed to Hamas. So Hamas knew that what the Israelis were saying for the past week, Netanyahu had been saying, we need to go into Rafah.

Even if we have a ceasefire, we’re going into Rafah. We can’t accept a deal with Hamas. There has to be the dismantlement of Hamas in a post-war Gaza.

So of course, this denotes not having a ceasefire. If you’re saying that you want to invade Rafah anyway, you can’t invade somewhere during a ceasefire. That makes no sense.

And also, the deal that you’re doing in the ceasefire that you’re now negotiating for is with Hamas, the governing authority, or the leading faction within the Palestinian network of resistance groups. So you have to negotiate with Hamas. But the Israelis have been very clear.

They’ve been saying, Netanyahu has been saying, that they want to completely dismantle Hamas, and they want to continue with this goal. So you can’t have both. You can’t have a ceasefire with Hamas and a prisoner exchange with Hamas, but still invade and aim at dismantling Hamas at the same time.

Because who else are you negotiating with? There wouldn’t be a negotiation that is even needed if Hamas was dismantled. So these two things, these two narratives, contradict each other. And that’s why the U.S. freaked out.

Israel freaked out. It started launching its troops towards the Rafah crossing. They captured the Rafah crossing.

And by entering the Philadelphia Axis, they violated the Camp David Accords, which is the normalization agreement between Egypt and Israel. So technically, that’s a declaration of war against Egypt. So this is what they’ve done.

They’ve committed themselves to wanting to do a ground incursion into Rafah, where there were around 1.4 million people, hundreds of thousands have fled. And of course, the death toll will be insane if they go into Rafah. But also, there will be a military defeat on many levels inflicted by the guerrilla groups on the ground.

The Palestinian resistance will have something in store for them.

GR: Robert, I think we’ll have to close the conversation now. But thanks again for sharing your thoughts and analysis with our listeners.

RI: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The leader and founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, is leaving his executive role and transitioning to a “non-executive chairman role” in 2025.

The truth is that Borge Brende, president of the World Economic Forum, already leads the day-to-day operations. Mr. Brende, a smart, sophisticated Norwegian negotiator with a proven track record, and he is primed to take on an even bigger role in the organization. His involvement in the Bilderberg meetings, including service on their steering committee and various roles within the United Nations, including Chairman of the UN Commission of Sustainable Development (2003-04), attest to his ability to build power and influence. He is the natural successor to Klaus’s vaulted title of executive chairman.

Schwab is an excellent cut-out villain cartoon character with his Germanic, authoritarian, and overbearing demeanor. He comes across as a two-dimensional figure, driven by corporatism and power, which makes him an easy target to hate. But the truth is that he has been coopting and coercing national leaders for decades.

Click here to watch the video

The Malone Institute put together a list of all the WEF Young Leaders Graduates and a list of US politicians who are graduates of the five-year long young leaders program, which can be found here.

Without Schwab at the helm, it will be harder to hold the WEF accountable for its corporatist agenda; that is a corporate governance of world affairs driven by its globalist mindset.

I predict that under Brende, the WEF will try to garner more power and influence among the “middle powers” (smaller nation-states), as the ability for more regulatory capture within the superpowers is already maxed out. As the middle powers crave a bigger and more important role on the world stage, they are an easy target for the WEF transnational corporations.

Already, the WEF website is courting these players as the next wave of world leaders. The WEF website states: “middle powers and regional groupings are emerging as alternative axes in today’s multipolar world.” By aligning these middle powers with the WEF, the corporatists will increase their wealth and power.

Some of the recent WEF articles on “middle powers” include:

Furthermore, I believe that in the future, the WEF will work to downplay the DAVOS-man opulent parties, opting instead for more exclusive and private venues. Where the press isn’t invited, as is the case with the Bilderberg meetings. The WEF leadership knows that they have a PR problem with the populist (center-right, libertarian, and conservative parties) throughout the world and Brende will act quickly to try to fix this. It will require a public relations overhaul of Klaus Schwab’s flagship policy agenda, which the WEF calls stake-holder capitalism. This, of course, is just another word for corporatism. Whereby there is a fusion of the unelected global leadership and transnational corporations in order for the largest corporations in the world access to enough power to rule the world. For our own good, of course!

The World Economic Forum is a tool for corporate globalists to rule the world through inverse totalitarianism. In effect, our nation, as well as many other nation-states, have been turned upside down while being captured by corporate interests that endorse authoritarian policies – hence “inverted totalitarianism”.

Here we are today.  In many ways, the hidden head of this unelected corporatist government structure is now the leadership of the World Economic Forum. This is where the heads of corporations, politicians, and other wealthy elites meet to decide the governing decisions of the world. A trade union of the thousand largest corporations in the world.

Resistance has begun, which is what makes the WEF so scared and defensive. That is why the WEF will have a facelift as soon as Schwab’s rule has ended. The WEF will try to become a behind-the-scenes power player once again. The hand inside the glove. It is our job to not let that happen.

This is why government, corporate interests, and “mainstream” media find alternate social media platforms that they can’t control to be so threatening.  They know social media, and the populist parties associated with it, are a threat to the corporatist globalist structure they have built over decades. They are worried that it is in danger of crumbling.

Resistance is not futile.

*

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

 

First, my sincerest condolences and deeply felt sorrow to Ayatollah Khamenei and the people of Iran, for the death of President Ebrahim Raisi, Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian, and other political personalities killed in a helicopter “accident” on 19 May 2024.

Both President Raisi and Foreign Minister Amirabdollahian were strong supporters and committed defenders of Palestine and of Palestinian rights.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei, immediately appointed Mr. Mohammad Mokhber, Iran’s first Vice-President, as Acting President until new elections, planned for end of June 2024. Mr. Mokhber follows ideologically in his boss’s footsteps. Therefore, no political change is to be expected.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has announced five days of mourning following the death of the country’s President.

Respecting Iran’s Constitution, the Supreme Leader announced new Presidential elections for 28 of June 2024.

See also this interesting interview by western Channel 4 News with an Iranian Professor (9-min video clip):

Investigations will, no doubt, reveal the truth of this helicopter disaster.

*

Israel on Monday denied involvement in the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and of several Government officials of his entourage in a helicopter crash on 19 May 2024.

“It wasn’t us,” news agency Reuters quoted an Israeli official, who requested anonymity (Al Jazeera, 20 May 2024).

Very convincing, indeed.

Could it be an act of the Usual Suspects?

Maybe the Usual Suspects – plus one?

Several details point to a smelling rat – the smell of foul play.

Iranian media and many Iranian official voices call President Ebrahim Raisi’s death “martyrdom”. In Moslem parlage, this means an assassination. If it was somebody simply dying in a crash, it is just death by accident. By calling it “martyrdom”, Iranian sources have already stated that President Raisi has been killed by Iran’s enemies (Kevin Barrett). 

While the cause behind the crash is not clear yet, it is worthy to note of the ongoing Israeli invasion of Gaza and an escalation of tension between Israel and Iran just weeks ago. It started with an Israeli unprovoked attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission in Syria, to which Iran responded with a military-infrastructure destructive retaliation – causing a minimum of human harm.

Israel, the “Chosen One,” cannot allow being retaliated without further response. So, they did, but very lightly – hardly harmful – on instructions from Washington, hoping that this back-and-forth may not become a prelude to more death and bloodshed, or – God forbid – to a hot WWIII.

Of course, somebody like PM Netanyahu could not let that stand. He is also threatened with an arrest warrant from the ICC (International Criminal Court) in The Hague, which he is now fighting “diplomatically” by sending today (21 May) a mission to Paris and the EU; shall we call it to beg for help? “Begging for help” is usually not Israel’s style.

Or is it a mode of deviating attention from something much bigger, like the “presumed” assassination of President Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian?

PM Netanyahu and his military gang may have thought of and planned something much more devastating, not only a re-retaliation, but bringing Israel’s eternal feud with Iran onto yet another level.

Iran is and has always been a fervent defender and supporter of Palestine. They would never let Palestine be erased by Zionist-Israel. In addition, Iran is by far Israel’s strongest contender in the Zionist’s thrive towards a Greater Israel – dominating the Middle East and its hydrocarbon riches.

Besides, as a new BRICS member, Iran has become a close ally of China and Russia, both economically and militarily.

Economically, Iran plays an important role in the new BRICS-plus-five, whose priorities include dedollarizing the world’s monetary system. This does not bode well with the Western hegemon and its vassals. The Western hegemon includes Israel as a key actor; with the European puppets being useful “suicidal” idiots.

Yes, suicidal, because they are in the process of destroying themselves, following Washington’s dictate on sanctioning Russia, when cooperating with Russia and China would be an uplifting boom to Europe and a recreation of the globe’s by far largest market, the huge contiguous Continent Eurasia, reminiscent of the Ancient Silk Road, of 2,100 years ago.

Already then, this brilliant initiative was emanating from China. President Xi’s 2013 Belt and Road Initiative (also called the New Silk Road) is lending a hand to Europe for peaceful cooperation and socioeconomic development. So far, Europe, under the corrupt and unelected leadership of the European Union, has failed to accept, collaborate, and prosper. Instead, Europe obeys the dying empire’s orders to commit to their economic and social collapse.

How much longer will they remain in the dark, not ascending to the Light?

Therefore, maybe secretly with the help of the “Usual Suspects”, the Zionists in the name of Israel wanted to put a wrench in the wheels of progress. Defending the dying beast, prolonging the agony, pulling more people and societies into the Western abyss of misery.

Who are these elusive Usual Suspects? Mossad, CIA, and UK’s MI6. A potential downing of President Raisi’s Presidential Helicopter might bear the fingerprints of the infamous trio. If so, what more is to come?

Starting From the Beginning

The President of Iran took a helicopter trip to the border with Azerbaijan, where he participated in the inauguration of a new dam built by Iran; briefly also meeting the President of Azerbaijan, Mr. Ilham Aliyev. This visit may also have been an Iranian attempt to smoothen relations with Azerbeijan.

Having been part of the Persian Empire until the 19th century, Azerbaijan has deep historical ties with Iran. However, relations have not been the best, as Azerbaijan has been leaning increasingly to the West in recent years, despite her geographic and historically rather eastern political philosophy. Is this pulling away from the East, a mere voluntary sovereign action?

After the brief visit, President Raisi, his Foreign Minister, and other members of government, intended returning home. They never made it.

The Western official version goes that the Presidential Helicopter encountered strong adverse weather in the mountainous Azerbaijan – Iran region and crashed, leaving all eight chopper occupants dead.

Western media were also quick in reporting that thanks to Western sanctions, Iran was unable to import necessary parts to properly maintain her air force, that therefore the Presidential Helicopter was in bad shape.

The truth is very likely quite different.

As time goes on, new elements make the crash rather appear as a deliberate assassination. The international conspiracy – what it likely was – and the cover-up seem to have been well-prepared.

The plan was thoroughly thought out to the point – would you believe! – that ALL Weather Satellite imagery for that region on the day of the crash (19 May) was DELETED. See this.

So, there is no evidence of the much announced and repeated blizzard-like weather that downed the Presidential Helicopter.

Also, it appears that at the time of the crash, a US C-17 Globemaster III cargo aircraft was in the sky close to the site of the air-disaster. The C-17 is capable of rapid moves, strategic positioning and maintaining contact with major operating bases.

If this were to be indeed the case – the C-17 Globemaster plane in the sky, in theory, it would be possible that this plane could have used a Direct Energy Weapon (DEW) to down the Presidential Helicopter, right?

Furthermore, strange was the fact that the Presidential Helicopter’s emergency transponder seems to have been disabled, and so was the “mayday” emergency call function, so that no emergency signals were sent and received that could have located the chopper and come to rescue immediately.

And is it another strange coincidence that the Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, also met with the President of Azerbaijan, days before Fico was shot in an assassination attempt. See this.

Again, see this, providing a run-down of the latest emerging events.

Remember the three Usual Suspects – and in this case, possibly one more. Could this one more be Azerbaijan?

Airplane “accidents” have often been used by opponents to eliminate political leaders in office. Here are some of the more prominent ones:

Panama President – Omar Torrijos died when his aircraft, a de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter of the Panamanian Air Force, crashed on July 31, 1981. It was a presumed assassination.

Ecuadorian President – Jaime Roldós Aguilera, died on 24 May 1981 in a plane crash. It was an assumed assassination, enhanced by the controversial absence of the plane’s black box. President Roldós’ firm stand on Human Rights brought him poor relations with then US President Ronald Reagon, mostly due to Washington’s violent interference in Latin America. Remember Jorge Rafael Videla, Argentina’s military dictator (1976-1981), and Augusto Pinochet, Chile’s military dictator (1973-1990)? 

The second Secretary General of the UN, Dag Hammarskjöld of Sweden, whom JFK called the “greatest statesman of our century”, was killed in a plane crash on 18 September 1961. Mr. Hammarskjöld was a crucial mediator between Israel and the Arab States, as well as between China and the US. Hammarskjöld was also a force for African decolonization. It is assumed that his strong involvement in helping liberating Congo may have killed him.

Prime Minister Rashid Karami of Lebanon was killed in a helicopter which was rigged with a remote-controlled bomb on 1 June 1987. He was considered one of the most important political figures of Lebanon in the 20th Century, as he fought for better Muslim representation in the Lebanese government, and for Palestinian causes.

Prime Minister Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, Pakistan – died in a plane crash on 17 August 1988. He was a military leader, a proponent for a heavily Islam-influenced Pakistan. He also is reputed of pursuing nuclear arms for Pakistan to re-establish a power balance with India, after the Bangladesh Liberation war of 1971. He also supported the Afghan Mujahideen in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

And the count goes on, for sure, as leaders frequently move about in planes and helicopters, exposing themselves to the risk of “accidents” and sabotage by political opponents – internal and external.

*

The death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and his seven companions in the helicopter flight from the Iranian border with Azerbaijan on 19 May 2024 needs to be investigated all the way to the truth. Justice must be done and further bloodshed, or worse, avoided.

*

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 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: Raisi with Ilham Aliyev at the border with Azerbaijan, hours before his death (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

On 20 May 2024, New Zealand’s Health and Disability Commission handed down its decision on a case involving the death of a young New Zealander from myocarditis, inflicted by the Pfizer so-called vaccine, on 17 November 2021.

The HDC’s media release stated unequivocally that Mr. Nairn’s death was found by the Coroner to have been directly caused by the Pfizer inoculation.

Commissioner Morag McDowell concluded that the man had not been informed of the potentially serious side effects of the “vaccine” (my quotation marks), and that “failing to provide this information was a prima facie breach of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights.”

Despite this breach, the Commissioner also noted that

“none of the sources of official information [i.e., New Zealand’s governmental authorities] explicitly required vaccinators to disclose the risk of myocarditis as part of the informed consent process prior to vaccination.”

The full decision is a curious and smug piece of legerdemain on the part of McDowell, that seeks at once to cover all bases, and by so covering, to dissipate any real culpability.

On the one hand, the Commissioner feels that practitioners are obliged to exercise their own critical judgment in providing appropriate warnings and advice to those who have engaged them, and on the other hand she merely slaps the wrist of the Ministry of Health for not issuing firm and specific guidance about myocarditis in the midst of the public health crisis.

Missing from the decision, and glaringly so, is the fact that any truly adequate informed consent would have entailed communicating to recipients of the provisionally authorised Pfizer jab that safety had not and could not have been established given the absence of anything approaching long-term evaluation. And as to efficacy … well, we all know by now that despite initial claims it has prevented neither infection nor transmission, thus relegating the gene-altering intervention to a species of treatment that should never have qualified it as a bona fide vaccine in the first place.

In an irony of majestic proportions those of us who dared to advise caution about the administration of this insufficiently tested agent had our medical licences suspended as a warning shot to any other uppity doctors who might have gotten it into their crazy heads that true informed consent was a pillar of their profession.

A young man, in the prime of a hopeful life, has died, quite unnecessarily, simply because a tyrannical government had an agenda to inoculate an entire population.

That same government perpetrated deceptions about the value of masks and ‘social’ distancing, and actively suppressed any motions in support of prevention and treatment of a pathogen they worked overtime to convince us was deadlier than the bubonic plague.

I had coffee today with a family in my environs who had held out against the persuasions to be inoculated — two elderly parents and a thriving youthful son not much older than Rory Nairn. They had all contracted covid or some flu-like illness, and they had all survived, old and young.

We sipped our drinks in solidarity to health and reason and our fundamental right to the sanctity of our bodies and souls. We rued the disingenuousness of a government that had created an apartheid state and pushed their invasive medical wares upon a naive populace.

I understand that Rory Nairn never wanted a piece of the Pfizer scam. It was the government’s multi-dimensional criminality that was directly responsible for his death — in pressuring him to get the lethal agent, and in failing to inform him of its lethal potential.

No amount of mealy-mouthed bureaucratic jargon from the HDC can hide it.

*

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

Dr. Garcia is a Philadelphia-born psychoanalyst and psychiatrist who emigrated to New Zealand in 2006. He has authored articles ranging from explorations of psychoanalytic technique, the psychology of creativity in music (Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Delius), and politics. He is also a poet, novelist and theatrical director. He retired from psychiatric practice in 2021 after working in the public sector in New Zealand. Visit his substack at https://newzealanddoc.substack.com/.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Vaccine Reaction


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

In Mumia’s recent encampment messages to CUNY and PENN, he spoke to roaring crowds of approving students, proclaiming that “Students who protest against injustice, against racist violence, should be celebrated, lauded, and applauded.” He encouraged the rebel youth to answer the call of history, not to bow down, to recognize the rightness of their actions, and to keep fighting for humanity. What did you think an old Panther would say, other than to urge today’s youth to “Seize the Time” and “keep on keeping on”?

Mumia’s message, coming from a maximum-security prison, an institution from which the state plans to never release him, is an intergenerational handshake, made to a new generation of youth about to learn the devastating lessons of state harassment, violence, and terror. A new generation poised to learn the difficult and sobering message of where state-defying strategies can land you.

“Think about it,” he prompts, what is the nature of a state that punishes people for protesting against a genocide?

If we think about it, what does it mean that Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former rebel youth himself, should be forced to address the encampment students through the crackling lines of globeltel prison network phone system while being held captive in an enemy death camp?

This is a moment where we cannot fail to discern our collective force, to equate the liberation of Palestine with our own, and to equate the liberation of Mumia and all political prisoners with our own.

Mumia’s first published book, Live from Death Row, in the essay “The Lost Generation” he counters the assumption that the current generation of youth is directionless. Of them he claims,

“They are not so much lost as mislaid, discarded by this increasingly racist system that undermines their inherent worth. They are all potential revolutionaries, with the historic power to transform our dull realities.”

It was true when he wrote those words in 1995, and even more true now.

We salute the student protestors and are starkly reminded that Mumia’s future, their future, our future – all of our futures are entwined. Across the generations, across national divides, we remain coterminous factors in the equation for justice.

When We Love, We Win.

When We Survive, We Win.

When We Fight, We Win.

*

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

All images in this article are from PRU

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

“I think bird flu is going to be the cause of the great pandemic – where they’re teaching these viruses to be more infectious for humans,” he said.

Dr. Robert Redfield, the former Director for the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under the Trump Administration, recently divulged in an interview for the third time publicly that he believes bird flu will be seen as the “great pandemic,” attributing it to a lab-leak from gain-of-function escape from a laboratory.

Redfield expressed his viewpoint in a short interview with Newsweek on April 8th, talking about new supposed allegations in the quest to discover the true origins of Covid-19. Unlike his counterpart Dr. Anthony Fauci, who has supposedly disagreed and quarreled with Fauci on different occasions, Redfield has argued with Fauci on the origins of Covid-19 and how to treat it. Redfield very early on claimed Covid-19 was the result of gain-of-function experimentation that leaked from a lab.

Near the end of the interview, Redfield shifted his attention towards bird flu and the current spread that’s going on right now. Redfield said:

“Right now, it takes five amino acid changes for it to be effectively infecting humans. That’s a pretty heavy species barrier – but this virus is already in 26 mammal species, as you most recently saw cattle. But in the laboratory, I could make it highly infectious for humans in just months.”

Redfield warned that he believes bird flu will become the “great pandemic” because of lab manipulation to make it more infectious for humans.

That’s the real threat. That’s the real biosecurity threat that these university labs are doing bio-experiments that are intentionally modifying viruses – and I think bird flu is going to be the cause of the great pandemic – where they’re teaching these viruses to be more infectious for humans.

He said, though the interviewer did not follow up on his remark.

This is not the first time Redfield has been vocal in affirmatively saying he believes bird flu will be the next pandemic.

In 2022, The WinePress cited an interview appearance on the Trinitarian Broadcasting Network (TBN) where Redfield warned bird flu would be the next great pandemic, with a lethality of 10-50%, warning that the government needs to make preparing for this the number one priority.

Yeah I think we have to recognize – I’ve always said that I think the Covid pandemic was a wakeup call. I don’t believe it’s the great pandemic.

I believe the great pandemic is still in the future, and that’s going to be a bird flu pandemic for man. It’s gonna have significant mortality in the 10-50% range. It’s gonna be trouble.

And we should get great prepared for it. I do believe the pandemic risk is a greater risk of the national security of the United States more than [North] Korea, China, Russia, Iran; and we ought to start investing proportional to that national security risk so that we’re prepared.

Unfortunately we’re not more prepared today then when the [Covid-19] pandemic, when I was [the] CDC Director. And we need to make proportional investment so that we are prepared, not the least of which is enhancing our manufacturing capability.

So now that we have new technology like the mRNA technology: it’s great that I can make a vaccine in 2, 4, 6, 8 weeks. But it doesn’t help me if I can’t manufacture 330 million doses.

So, this is a serious issue. I don’t think our politicians are focused on the magnitude of this issue. This needs to be approached with a budgetary perspective measured in multiple aircraft carriers, not in the 5, 8,10 million dollar budget we spend on public health on this nation.

Moreover, in 2023 Redfield was even more adamant in an interview with The Hill, this time specifying that the ‘great pandemic’ of bird flu would be a result of gain-of-function escaping a laboratory.

I do believe the next pandemic, and we’re going to have another pandemic and I think it’s going to be the great pandemic. I consider Covid a minor pandemic, the great pandemic’s going to come.

And normally, it would come from spillover – bird flu that learns how to transmit to humans and then go to human-to-human. But I think the species barriers are very real.

But it’s much more probable that it will happen because of gain-of-function research in a laboratory and then escape and then we’re going to have a pandemic… which will be much more brutal to the world than Covid was.

I told you that the great pandemic is coming. I think it’s gonna come not from spillover, it’s going to come from gain-of-function research or intentional bioterrorism. Alright, it’s going to be a bird flu virus that is manipulated to be able to transmit human-to-human, very similar to what we saw with Covid.

You know in 2014 that laboratory published that they finally learned to take their Covid virus, and have it bind to the H2 receptor and humanize mice, and therefore it could go human-to-human.

He said at the time.

Currently the mainstream media, and national and global health organizations have been incessantly warning about the spread of bird flu in meat and dairy, to other animals and people especially.

*

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

Featured image: Birds that have been put down because of avian influenza. The virus is spread by contact between healthy and unhealthy birds. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Russian forces have made advances in recent weeks, including in the Kharkov region, taking more territory than Ukrainian troops took during its failed counteroffensive in the summer of 2023, analysts told The Washington Post in an article published on May 17. This is a startling revelation, especially since the Ukrainian counteroffensive was launched with much media fanfare whilst Russia’s significant and successful advances are mostly underreported.

“Russia seizes more land than Ukraine liberated in 2023 counteroffensive,” the outlet noted, adding that the Russian advance, which the article’s authors call significant, is putting pressure on Ukrainian troops.

Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the Russian military is “looking to create vulnerabilities on the Ukrainian side, pressing the enemy on all sides.”

Gian Gentile, a senior historian at Rand, told The Washington Post that this new Russian assault means Ukraine will have to move forces around, especially to the north, which could hamper any Ukrainian efforts to prepare for an offensive of its own.

It is recalled that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky described on May 19 that the situation in the Kharkov region, especially in the city of Volchansk, was extremely difficult for Ukrainian troops. The Ukrainian General Staff recognised the difficult operational situation in the region and the “tactical success” of Russian forces.

Ukraine’s counteroffensive began on June 4, 2023, and three months later, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared that the counteroffensive had not only stopped but had failed. In January 2024, Putin reiterated this message, saying that the initiative was in the hands of the Russian Armed Forces and that if it continued, Ukraine’s viability as a state would be in question.

On December 19, 2023, then-Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported that the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost 159,000 soldiers, 121 planes, and 766 tanks, including 37 Leopard, during their counteroffensive. He said at the time that Western weapons supplies and the Ukrainian command’s use of strategic reserves on the battlefield did not change the operational situation.

Robert Clark, senior researcher at the Civitas Analytical Center, told The Telegraph that the failed defence of the Ukrainian military near Kharkov with unfinished fortifications could be repeated across the entire front line.

“30,000 Russians – between two and three divisions worth – seemingly walked back across a previously hard-fought region of north-eastern Ukraine exactly 18 months ago, now swallowing up already thinly-spread Ukrainian reserve forces,” Clark said.

“There are now serious questions as to whether a defence was even properly constructed. If so, this is deep professional negligence of the highest order, and risks raising the ugly spectre of corruption within the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Having personally met with many wounded Ukrainian veterans, I profoundly hope that this is not the case,” the analyst lamented.

“The worry is of course that these problems could be replicated across the frontage, as already this moderate in scale but highly damaging Russian advance risks stretching Ukrainian reserve elements incredibly thinly, as Moscow seeks to press home its numerical advantage over the Ukrainian Armed Forces – one variable that Kyiv and its allies cannot overcome,” he added.

To stop Russia’s offensive, Zelensky has continuously asked the US for more weapons and money, even following the Congressional approval of tens of billions in aid. Even so, the new US arms aid has had little impact on conditions on the Ukrainian battlefield, with Russian forces breaking through heavily fortified Ukrainian defences in Donbass and advancing into the Kharkov region.

Yet, even with Russian forces advancing, the Kiev regime is refusing to acknowledge the reality and engage in negotiations to end the bloody conflict, a point highlighted by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on May 19.

“It is time for the Kiev regime to recognise the realities on the ground. I hope that this message, which has been repeated many times, will be understood, and the West will realise that it is time to stop sacrificing Ukraine for its absolutely futile goals,” Lavrov told the Rossiya 1 television channel.

Although it is widely accepted that the Ukrainian counteroffensive was a major blunder, the full extent of it is understood now that Russia has effortlessly captured more territory in a matter of weeks than what Ukraine achieved over an entire summer and with major Western backing. Although Lavrov’s urgings will likely fall on deaf ears, it can be certain that Russia will continue to easily capture more territory as the Kiev regime refuses to engage in a peace negotiation with Moscow.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image: Ukrainian snipers attend shooting training near the front line amid Russia-Ukraine war in Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine, on February 18, 2023. [Source: businessinsider.com]

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

As the latest combat operations in the Kharkov oblast (region) unfold in a way that’s not exactly great for the Neo-Nazi junta, to put it mildly, its leadership is looking for someone to blame. The Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky insists that it’s “the world’s fault” for the Russian military’s rapid advance. In an interview with ABC News, Zelensky argued that the delays in the so-called US “military aid” package resulted in a poor state of battle readiness of the Neo-Nazi junta forces, insisting they were not properly equipped to handle Moscow’s offensive operations. And indeed, the Kiev regime’s significant territorial losses resulted in the Russian military acquiring dominant elevated positions from which it could easily use its superior artillery to exercise near-total fire control over the entire northern Kharkov oblast and even beyond.

“Brigades are not totally equipped because of the package, which we waited through for eight months,” Zelensky told ABC News. When asked if he specifically blamed the United States, he said: “It’s the world’s fault. They gave the opportunity for Putin to occupy. But now the world can help.”

It should be noted that this is not what the Neo-Nazi junta frontman was claiming back in December last year when he said that fortifications in the Kharkov oblast are “the strongest” and that other regions should “follow its example”.

In reality, it turned out that the story about the “Kharkov stronghold” wasn’t only a gross exaggeration, but that it simply didn’t exist. And yet, this isn’t where Zelensky’s lies end. Namely, he slammed Washington DC for not sending more of the extremely overhyped US-made “Patriot” SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems. Zelensky insists that “only two” of these air defense systems would’ve supposedly been “more than enough to defeat Russian forces”.

“All we need are two ‘Patriot’ systems. Russia will not be able to occupy Kharkiv if we have those,” he stated.

Needing “only two” of the SAM systems is quite different from the claims Zelensky made just last month when he effectively asked for around 30% of all “Patriot” missiles ever made to “unblock the sky”. And to prove the point that the Kiev regime frontman doesn’t really have the slightest clue what he’s talking about, in a previous interview back in late March, he told CBS News that “only five to seven ‘Patriot’ systems from [the US] will protect industrial platforms in Ukraine today”.

And yet, as previously mentioned, just a bit over a week after that interview, Zelensky made a starkly different assessment, insisting that “it’s preferable to have 25 Patriot systems, with 6-8 batteries each”. This is a four or fivefold increase, a massive difference in comparison to his previous claims. EU chief diplomat Josep Borrell supported this, but also admitted:

“I don’t have ‘Patriots’ in Brussels, they are in the capitals, and it is up to them to take decisions.”

And speaking of Borrell, he’s certainly relevant to Zelensky’s blame game. Namely, the rather laughable accusation that it’s “the world’s fault” for not helping, both of them should specify what exactly do they mean when they say “the world”. Actually, when we really think about it, we’re already halfway through this process, as back in 2022, Borrell gave his assessment, saying that the actual world is a “jungle”, while the political West is a “garden”. Thus, Zelensky, as one of the “gardeners”, certainly shouldn’t be complaining to the rest of us “jungle” people. At the end of the day, we’re all just “fence sitters”, as US Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen said back in 2022. In addition, it seems the world should completely ignore the endemic corruption of the Neo-Nazi junta, busy buying villas, penthouses, seaside resorts, supercars, etc.

Not to mention that Zelensky himself is busy selling Ukrainian land to global(ist) corporations and organizing so-called “peace summits” every once in a while.

It should also be noted that everyone but Russia is invited to these entirely pointless gatherings.

Worse yet, the Kiev regime and its NATO overlords are wasting their time on organizing sabotage and terrorist attacks on hundreds of Russian civilians, instead of fortifying the Kharkov oblast, with troops there left with insufficient equipment and even undermanned while having to face a military superpower opponent that is in the middle of returning to its 1980s zenith. However, the corrupt Neo-Nazi junta couldn’t possibly care less, as its leadership is now considering the option of sending ever more Ukrainians into the meatgrinder, including millions of women (even pregnant ones, no less).

However, in conclusion, in some weird way, Zelensky is right. One of the many reasons why the Neo-Nazi junta is not winning (one being that it’s fighting a country that has stood undefeated for centuries) is also because the actual world doesn’t want to help a NATO puppet regime and instead opts to build closer ties with Russia. Namely, around 85% of the planet fully realizes that any victory for the political West ultimately goes against their national interests, as the belligerent power pole is the enemy of the whole world, including its very own citizens.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

The Assange Case: A Flicker of Hope in the UK High Court

May 21st, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

It was faint, but there was more than just a flicker of hope.  In the tormented (and tormenting) journey the WikiLeaks founder and publisher, Julian Assange, has endured, May 20, 2024 provided another pitstop.  As with many such stops over the years, it involved lawyers.  Many of them.    

The occasion was whether the UK High Court of Justice would grant Assange leave to appeal his extradition to the United States to face 18 charges, 17 hewn from the monstrous quarry that is the Espionage Act of 1917.  He is wanted for receiving and publishing classified US government materials comprising diplomatic cables, the files of those detained in Guantanamo Bay, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Any computed sentence, glacially calculated at 175 years, would effectively spell his end. 

News on the legal front has often been discomforting for Assange and his supporters.  The US has been favoured, repeatedly, in various appeals, chalking up the lion’s share of victories since successfully overturning the decision by Judge Vanessa Baraitser to bar extradition in January 2021 on mental health grounds.  But Justice Johnson and Dame Victoria Sharp of the High Court of Justice in London promised to keep matters interesting.   

A key sticking point in the proceedings has been whether the First Amendment would protect Assange’s publishing activity in the course of any trial in the US.  The attitude from the central US prosecutor in the extradition proceedings, Gordon Kromberg, and former Secretary of State and ex-CIA director Mike Pompeo, has been one of hearty disapproval that it should. 

Pompeo’s remarks in an infamous April 2017 address as CIA director to the Center for Strategic and International Studiesopenly branded WikiLeaks “a hostile intelligence service” that proselytised in the cause of transparency and aided such powers as RussiaAssange “and his kind” were “not in the slightest bit interested in improving civil liberties or enhancing personal freedomThey have pretended that America’s First Amendment freedom shield them from justice.”  They were “wrong” to have thought so. 

On January 17, 2020, Kromberg submitted an affidavit to the UK district court that was eye opening on the subjectThe following remains salient:

“Concerning any First Amendment challenge, the United States could argue that foreign nationals are not entitled to protections under the First Amendment, at least as it concerns national defense information, and even were they so entitled, that Assange’s conduct is unprotected because of his complicity in illegal acts and in publishing the names of innocent sources to their grave and imminent risk of harm.” 

In March 2024, the High Court curtly dismissed six of the nine arguments submitted by Assange in part of his effort to seek a review of the entire case.  The judges, anchoring themselves in the initial reasoning of the district court judge, refused to accept that he was being charged with a political offence, something barred by the US-UK Extradition Treaty, or that the CIA had breached lawyer-client privilege in having spied on him in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, not to mention the serious thought given to abduction and assassination.   

The judges gave the prosecution a heavy olive branch, implying that the case for extradition would be stronger if a number ofassurances could be made by the US prosecution.  These were, in turn, that Assange be offered First Amendment protections, despite him not being deemed a journalist; that he not be prejudiced, both during the trial and in sentence, on account of his nationality, and that he not be subject to the death penalty. The insistence on such undertakings had a slightly unreal, woolly-headed air to them.  

On April 16, the US State Department filed the fangless assurances in a diplomatic note to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)

“Assange will not be prejudiced by reason of nationality with respect to which defenses he may seek to raise at trial and at sentencing.”  If extradited, he could still “raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United StatesA decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the US Courts.”   

The US authorities further undertook to avoid seeking or imposing the death sentence. “The United States is able to provide such assurance as Assange is not charged with a death-penalty eligible offense, and the United States assures that he will not be tried for a death-eligible offense.”  This can only be taken as conjecture, given the latitude the prosecution has in laying further charges that carry the death penalty should Assange find himself in US captivity. 

In court, Edward Fitzgerald KC, representing Assange, explained with cold sobriety that such an assurance made no guarantee that Assange could rely on the First Amendment at trial.

“It does not commit the prosecution to take the point, which gave rise to this court’s concerns, i.e. the point that as a foreign citizen he is not entitled to rely on the First Amendment, at least in relation to a national security matter.”  In any case, US courts were hardly bound by it, a point emphasised in the statement given by defence witness and former US district judge, Professor Paul Grimm. It followed that the assurance was “blatantly inadequate” and “would cause the applicant prejudice on the basis of his nationality.” 

Written submissions to the court from Assange’s legal team also argued that discrimination “on grounds that a person is a foreigner, whether on the basis that they are a foreign national or a foreign citizen, is plainly within the scope of the prohibition [against extradition under the UK Extradition Act 2003]. ‘Prejudice at trial’ must include exclusion on grounds of citizenship from fundamental substantive rights that can be asserted at trial.  On the US argument, trial procedures could discriminate on grounds of citizenship.” 

In response, the US submitted arguments of a headshaking qualityThrough James Lewis KC, it was submitted that the High Court had erred in its March judgment in equating “prejudice on grounds of foreign nationality with discrimination on grounds of foreign citizenship”.  The UK Extradition Act mentions “nationality” in preference to “citizenship”.  These terms were not “synonymous”.  

According to Lewis, Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) protecting journalists and whistleblowers was qualified by conduct “within the tenets of reasonable and responsible journalism”. One factor in this context “whether it is reasonable and responsible is where the publication took place – inside a member state’s territory or outside a member state’s territory.” 

The prosecution’s written submissions summarise the points. The First Amendment’s applicability to Assange’s case depended on “the components of (1) conduct on foreign (outside the United States of America) soil; (2) non-US citizenship; and (3) national defense information”. Assange, Lewis elaborated, “will be able to rely on it but that does not mean the scope will cover the conduct he is accused of.” 

The prosecution suggested that former US Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning, a vital source for WikiLeaks, had been unable to rely on the First Amendment, limiting the possibility that its protections could extend to covering Assange. 

Mark Summers KC, also representing Assange, was bemused.

“The fact that Chelsea Manning was found in the end to have no substantial First Amendment claims tells you nothing at all. She was a government employee, not a publisher.”   

He also made the point that “You can be a national without being a citizen [but] you cannot be a citizen without nationality.”  It followed that discrimination arising out of citizenship would result in discrimination based on nationality, and nothing adduced by the prosecution in terms of case law suggested otherwise. 

Unconvinced by the prosecution’s contorted reasoning, Dame Victoria Sharp agreed to grant leave to Assange to appeal on the grounds he is at risk of discrimination by virtue of his nationality, in so far as it affects his right to assert protections afforded by Article 10 of the ECHR and the First Amendment.  

It remains to be seen whether this legal victory for the ailing Australian will yield a sweet harvest rather than the bitter fruit it has. He remains Britain’s most prominent political prisoner, held in unpardonable conditions, refused bail and subject to jailing conditions vicariously approved by those in Washington. In the meantime, the public campaign to drop the indictment and seek his liberation continues to ripen. 

*

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

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

Featured image: STOP THIS – by Mr. Fish

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

All wars are inherently destructive and efforts to avoid all wars must be made. However those wars which involve the biggest powers and nuclear weapon powers, or show high chances of advancing towards such confrontation, are by far the most dangerous wars which must be avoided under all circumstances.

At present among all the conflicts in the world, it is the Ukraine conflict which shows the maximum signs of escalating into such a confrontation of the biggest nuclear weapon powers, hence this is one war that should never have happened, or having started should have ended as early as possible, instead of continuing for over two years already.

Despite the terrible dangers of such escalation, in recent times the dangers of this conflict escalating into or drifting towards a Russia-NATO or Russia-USA war have actually increased with prominent NATO members saying that the chances of sending their soldiers to Ukraine cannot be ruled out, and also saying that longer-range weapons they are supplying to Ukraine can be used by Ukraine to hit deep into Russian mainland. This is just a step away from direct war of big nuclear weapon powers in which use of nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out.

Image: General Charles Q. Brown, Jr. (From the Public Domain)

undefined

On May 16 the New York Times reported that General Charles Brown Jr., the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has stated that “NATO trainers will eventually be sent to Ukraine.” He said NATO deployment of trainers seems inevitable. Commenting on this the news report stated that this could draw the US and Europe more directly into the war with Russia. (Report titled ‘NATO considers sending trainers to Ukraine’, May 16).    

Before any further escalation takes place, this is a time for an honest appraisal of the losses on all sides to bring out the utter futility of this war.

Several observers have pointed out that this war really started not in 2022 but with the 2014 coup in Ukraine, carried out with the instigation of the USA and close allies, to topple an elected President and his government and take Ukraine on a course where henceforth opposition to Russia would be the one basic and main constant of its policy.

The losses on all sides since then have been very serious and tragic.

In the case of Ukraine, several hundred thousand people have lost their life, or else have been seriously injured and disabled.

According to some estimates, almost 9 million people have been displaced externally or internally at least for some time (about one-fifth of the population).

Nearly 20 per cent of the territory has been lost.

Economy has suffered very badly and has become more dependent on foreign aid than ever before, while high levels of corruption have still continued or increased further.

Foreign domination of important sectors of economy has increased. Democracy has suffered badly, with strong actions taken against opposition parties and leaders, while far right, neo-Nazi militants have been strengthened. 

Russian language speaking citizens of Ukraine faced increasing discrimination and aggression against them in East Ukraine in particular. They were victims of various attacks and thousands of them died in the violence against them spread over the years 2014-21, this increasing aggression also precipitating the Russian invasion of 2022.

Russia has lost a large number of  lives and many other have been seriously injured or disabled. Severe economic sanctions have been imposed on Russia by western countries led by the USA.

Those European countries dependent more on oil and gas imports, such as Germany, have suffered heavily in economic and industrial terms. Many European countries have been driven towards heavier militarization. They have to find billions of dollars for Ukraine, although despite this help the sufferings of people of Ukraine remain at high levels.

Many countries of the Global South depending on food, fertilizer, oil and gas imports from Russia and Ukraine have suffered a lot.

These include countries with very serious food shortages. Countries trading with Russia have suffered more generally because of the impact of sanctions. Aid commitments for countries suffering from extreme hunger and poverty have declined because of huge priority commitments for Ukraine. 

Environment has been devastated badly by the prolonged and heavy conflict. High risks have appeared for nuclear power plants and dams. The Nord Stream sabotage was as much a huge environmental disaster as an economic one.

USA has been providing many instalments of billions of dollars for Ukraine at a time when its commitments for urgent domestic budgets for pressing needs of weaker sections have been falling short. USA’s military challenges have increased because of Russia and China coming closer together more than ever before.

With a war imposing such heavy costs, the case for stopping the war has always been strong but a significant peace effort which had reached an advanced stage as early as April 2022, just two months into the war, was sabotaged by Britain and USA.

A firefighter works to extinguish a burning car following what was said to be Ukrainian forces’ shelling in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict, in Belgorod, Russia December 30, 2023, in this still image taken from video. Russian Emergencies Ministry/Handout via REUTERS 

Now with increasing danger of this conflict leading to a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO, it is clearly time to increase the peace efforts and try to clinch a peace deal as early as possible.

The escalation to higher levels can take place in several ways.

At present the Ukraine forces are in a very difficult situation and unable to take further the fight on their own.

Instead of seeking peace, if USA, NATO and Ukraine decide that NATO fighters and trainers will be sent to Ukraine and long range weapons to strike Russian mainland will be provided (in addition to overall  increased military and economic aid to Ukraine) then the chances of direct confrontation between Russia and NATO will also increase.

But let us also imagine another scenario in which NATO involvement increases so substantially and there are some other adverse factors also for Russia so as to create an existential threat for Russia.

In such a case the Russian nuclear doctrine allows for the use of nuclear weapons and Russia is very likely to use nuclear weapons. But anticipating this, NATO forces can also be the first to strike with nuclear weapons. In such situations of brinkmanship and prolonged extreme tensions, with hawkish elements present on both sides, with both sides having the capacity of very high speed weapons, the risk of a nuclear weapons war getting started on the basis of misunderstanding and accident is also there of course. 

Once this starts, with both sides possessing over eleven thousand nuclear weapons all combined, one doesn’t know where this will end but this much is clear that the world will suffer the kind of destruction that has never been seen before and Europe in particular will be almost entirely destroyed.

The possibilities of extreme, unprecedented destruction here are such that the top most priority should be given to stop the war as early as possible. There should be unconditional ceasefire on the basis of the present line of control, and then there can be prolonged negotiations to settle all contentious issues. The negotiations should not break down no matter what the differences. There can be a pause and then resumption of negotiations. Meanwhile a very big but community-based relief and rehabilitation should start with everyone in the world helping to the extent possible. A big effort to restore goodwill among people of Ukraine and Russia should also start. The war should end in such a way that the two neighbors can live peacefully after this.

*

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

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

More than 35,000 Palestinians are dead, and thousands of Israelis are in the streets asking for their government to resign. The Israeli people thought their government would work to negotiate a release of the Israeli hostages held in Gaza, but are now faced with the realization that to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “Hostage Lives Don’t Matter”.

Netanyahu wants to hang on to power at all costs, even if it means his citizens have turned against him.

Experts expect the Israeli war on Gaza to lasts months. With the US government and other western democracies willing to fund the slaughter of unarmed civilians in Gaza, there is no end in sight to the genocide.

While many in Israel are patriotically supporting the slaughter in Gaza, others have turned off the official state media outlets, and are getting their news online. They have realized the Israeli media sources have been feeding the public news which does not represent the truth of the situation on the ground in Gaza.

At the same time, the American people have gotten used to relying on their cell phone for news, and the images and stories they are reading from Gaza are against the core American value they hold highest. They see an unarmed civilian population being exterminated by one of the most sophisticated modern military on earth. Freedom is the highest held value in America, and the American anger is real and directed against the US government as well as the Netanyahu government.

Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Ambassador Peter Ford, who served as the British Ambassador to Bahrain from 1999 to 2003 and to Syria from 2003 to 2006. In 2023, Ford became a Deputy Leader of the Workers Party of Britain.

Peter Ford is an expert on the Middle East and gives some rare insight into the situation in Gaza and the broader picture of the region and players.

Steven Sahiounie (SS): The war on Gaza is now more than 8 -months-old, and the political pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu to stop the genocide is increasing. In your opinion, will this pressure succeed in stopping this war?

Peter Ford (PF): No. Certainly the pressure from the US and Europe will not force Netanyahu to change course. That pressure is for the gallery only – not serious. More significant is the pressure from within Israel to prioritize recovering the hostages, which would mean conceding defeat, in that the only scenario where that could happen would be if Israel withdrew. As long as the settler extremists support Netanyahu he can probably resist that internal pressure, and press on with attacking Rafah, possibly in salami slices to minimize reactions from the US. This means the war is likely to continue for some months yet.

SS: The Arab League is meeting in Bahrain on May 16. In your opinion, will this Arab meeting have any role in decreasing the suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza?

PF: The Arab League meeting was significant in only one respect: by insisting that any peacekeeping force be UN-linked Arab leaders were effectively consigning to the dustbin the US/Israeli plan for an Arab peacekeeping force which would police Gaza on Israel’s behalf. Russia and China would never allow it even if some Gulf countries were ready to participate. One by one all the Israeli/US fantasies about a power substitute for Hamas are falling away: the Palestinian Authority, local clan leaders, Arab peacekeepers. Non-starters from the beginning.

SS: For the last 8 months the IDF has been using massive military power in Gaza, but until now they have failed in achieving any of their military goals, and yet the Palestinian resistance is still fighting back. What does this situation tell us about the Israeli military, and the resistance groups?

PF: The Israelis and their Western backers clearly overestimated the capability of the Israeli army and underestimated the resilience of the Resistance. We must ask ourselves, however, why could the Israelis not bring Gaza to heel as they have brought the West Bank? And why is the Israeli army so resistant to Netanyahu’s desire for it to stay in Gaza more or less indefinitely? The answer staring us in the face is that it is the collaboration of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, obviously absent in Gaza, which makes the difference. The more or less painless ( for the Israelis) occupation of the West Bank is only possible because of the assist from Abbas.

SS: According to media reports, China is working on brokering a Palestinian peace deal between Hamas and Fatah. In your opinion, will Beijing be as successful in this endeavor, as compared to their success in the deal they brokered between Saudi Arabia and Iran?

PF: The Chinese effort is commendable, but unlikely to succeed as long as Abbas remains in charge of the West Bank. And as long as the Israelis keep incarcerated the one man who could change the equation: Marwan Barghouti.

SS: Social media outlets are showing the massive pro-Palestinian protests and signs of support from people around the world, especially in the United States and Europe. In your opinion, what has caused these western communities to risk arrest in some cases to voice their concern?

PF: The outpouring of support for Gazans is a natural consequence of the internet and social media. The horrendous suffering Israel is inflicting on Gazans cannot be camouflaged. The protests are also fueled by anger at the support Western governments are very visibly giving to Israel. They may also owe something to the way young people in the West have been primed by earlier causes dear to liberal hearts: Black Lives Matter, Ukraine, and climate. It is no accident that climate campaigner Greta Thunberg is also campaigning for Gaza.

*

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

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

If we can solve the problems in Palestine-Israel, the Holy Land for Christians, Muslims, and Jews–everything else will be a piece of cake. What happens in Palestine-Israel has repercussions throughout the world, which is why it is so important to learn more about Zionism, imperialism, and the Middle East crisis, especially now considering the catastrophic situation in Rafah, Gaza.

The first World Zionist Congress was established in 1897 by Theodore Herzl.  Beginning in the 1920s, Jews mostly from Europe started immigrating into Palestine increasingly. Years later after the Holocaust and World War II, the idea of creating a safe homeland for the Jews in Palestine through Zionism  became more popular.

The movie Lawrence of Arabia was about how the British Empire convinced the Arabs to revolt against the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

The British promised the Arabs an independent homeland after the war. However, after the British captured the Palestine region, British foreign secretary Arthur Balfour wrote a letter on November 2, 1917, now referred to as the Balfour Declaration, to Lord Nathaniel Rothschild, one of the leaders of the British Jewish community. In that letter Balfour expressed British support of a “national home for the Jewish people” in the land of Palestine. The wealthy Rothschild family would then give private donations to help Jews purchase land in Palestine.

Arthur Koestler best summed up the Balfour Declaration as quoted in this 3-minute video: “One nation solemnly promised to another nation the country of a third.” The crown had decided Palestine is for the Jews, thus ensuring (emphasis mine) a perpetually divided Middle East.”

The Bible says Satan is the father of all lies. And whether or not you believe he is real or not, there has been a satanic influence and control of society at the deepest level  by the imperialists throughout history. We do live in a fallen world, literally or metaphorically. The satanic imperialists are still in charge of the world and that is why the world is the way it is. That is why there is no peace and harmony in the world.

At the end of World War I (1914-1918), the victorious world powers (Britain, US, Italy, and France) convened in Versailles, France to begin establishing some new nations based on historical ethnic groups. Emir Faisal (the leader of the Arab Revolt against the Ottomans) outlined a case for the independence of Arab countries, but on July 24, 1922, the League of  Nations, influenced by the European powers, decided through the British Mandate that the British, not the Arabs, would be in charge of  Mandatory Palestine. The British Mandate lasted from 1922 to 1948. While the British imperialists promised the Arab Palestinians a homeland during World War I, their true intention was to establish a Jewish state. It was a lie. It was a deception.

The British Empire, and what we might now call the Billionaire Globalists, realized that placing European Jewish colonists right in the middle of the Middle East would be a strong ally to purposely destabilize the oil-rich Arab region. The defeated Ottoman Empire was dissolved and much of the territory was divided up by Britain and France, actively drawing the borders to keep Arabs divided.

The reason one of the world’s wealthiest men of that time, Lord Nathaniel Rothschild, and the British Empire wanted a Jewish state in the middle of an Arab region of the world was  to purposely create division, hardship, and strife there to ultimately gain more power and control over that region and eventually the world. It is the old divide and conquer strategy. Unfortunately, those  same forces and families are still at work today, which is why there is so little peace, justice, freedom, and democracy in the world.

After the UN General Assembly adopted the resolution to partition Palestine between Arabs and Jews on November 29, 1947, Britain announced that the termination of its Mandate over Palestine would take effect on May 15, 1948. The day before on May 14, 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed.

The Zionist Jews accepted the new UN partition plan of November 1947, but the Arabs refused for all kinds of reasons as explained  here.  The day after the State of Israel was proclaimed by the Zionist Jews, the surrounding Arab nations declared war on Israel in the First Arab-Israeli War of 1948, but the Arabs lost, and historians debate the reasons why.

As a result of the first Arab-Israeli War of 1948, the State of Israel controlled the area that the UN had proposed for it in November 1947 as well as almost 60 percent of the area that had been proposed for the Arab state! It was a very large gain. During this first Arab-Israeli War in 1948, over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes that were in the territory now considered part of Israel, as a result of the war. This was when the Palestinian refugee problem first began. The Arabs refer to this catastrophe in 1948 as the Nakba.

undefined

February 1956 Map of UN Partition Plan for Palestine, adopted 29 Nov 1947, with boundary of previous UNSCOP partition plan added in green. (From the Public Domain)

According to the classic book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Ilan Pappe, the removal or ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Zionist militias and the new Israeli army became systematic in 1948 with  Plan Dalet (or Plan D). The tumultuous events that occurred between 1948 and October 7, 2023 (over 75 years) are not discussed in this article.

The Israel-Hamas War began with the  Hamas attack on October 7, 2023 that killed 1,139 Israeli citizens (revised from 1,400).  Now after more than 7 months of fighting, the destruction of Rafah–the last safe zone for Palestinians in Gaza–is imminent. According to English.Almayadeen.net, Israel as of May 19, 2024 has killed 35,456 in Gaza and has injured 79,476, since Oct 7, 2023.

According to one  leaked document the Israeli plan is to push Palestinians from Gaza into refugee camps in the Sinai desert of Egypt. But according to an article by Chris Hedges a few weeks ago,

“The temporary pier being built on the Mediterranean coast of Gaza is not there to alleviate the famine, but to herd Palestinians onto ships and into permanent exile.”

The current Middle East crisis could spiral into World War III, as tensions and hatred among nations increase. Zionism has not made a safe place for Jews in Palestine. It has only caused Arabs in the Middle East to feel increasingly indignant toward the State of Israel, and it shouldn’t be too hard to understand why. Some would even say that what the Nazis did to the Jews, the Zionist Israeli Jews are doing to the Palestinians, especially in Gaza.

What will it take to bring healing, forgiveness, and reconciliation between Arab Muslims and Israeli Jews in the land of Palestine?

Individuals and nations of the world need to strongly urge the citizens of Israel to remove the influence of Zionism. Also, Hamas in Gaza needs to be willing to step down if the citizens of Gaza no longer support it.

There is a way to create a safe homeland for the Jews, Muslims, and Christians currently living in the  State of Israel  and the Israeli-occupied State of Palestine. It is a secular one-state solution. A secular one-state solution is better than a two-state solution, but  even a two-state solution would be better than the current apartheid state of settler colonialism. However, recent Pulitzer Prize winner Nathan Thrall, speaking on Democracy Now, stated that talk about either a two-state or a one-state solution is merely a distraction because Israel will do whatever it wants.

President Biden in his recent State of the Union Address was applauded when he said that he supported a two-state-solution for Israel. But a two-state solution would not reduce the hostilities between the Israelis and Palestinians, and land disputes between the two nations would continue. Therefore, it is not the best way to create a free Palestine.

Not all Christians and Jews support Zionism, but most evangelical, Baptist, Pentecostal, and megachurch Christians do with their belief in dispensational premillennialism. And these churches are currently the fastest growing!  US evangelicals are an important constituency for Israel, but younger evangelical Christians are becoming less supportive of Israel. As stated in the subtitle of this article: Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is increasingly seen as unfair–it is turning younger churchgoers away from Christian Zionism. Not just the  Ultra-Orthodox Jews oppose Zionism; there are other Jews as well. Ultra-Orthodox Jews believe Jews must wait for the coming Messiah to lead them back to the land of Israel.

Prominent American evangelical Pastor Dr Chuck Baldwin, who was the presidential nominee of the Constitution Party for the 2008 US presidential election, said he preached Christian Zionism for more than 30 years before renouncing it as told in this interview.

The  dwindling mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Peace churches fortunately do not support Christian Zionism in their biblical interpretations of the End Times. Practicing the nonviolence that Jesus demonstrated in the Gospels, these churches need to oppose and demonstrate against the endless wars that only benefit the Zionist military-industrial complex. By deeply studying and discussing the Bible, growing spiritually, and challenging the powers-that-shouldn’t be, these churches can start making a comeback, and they will be more pleasing to God.

A secular one-state integration of Jews, Muslims, and Christians in Palestine-Israel could even become a democratic model for establishing world peace if we equally empower the seven largest political parties in a unicameral legislature and give those political parties proportionate control over the mainstream media as well.

Peace in Palestine-Israel is not likely to happen soon. According to a recent survey, 2/3 of Jewish Israelis oppose humanitarian aid to Palestinians starving in Gaza. But that can change if Jewish Israelis (and Arab Palestinians too) can be inspired by a new vision and dream that creates a win-win situation for everyone.

A CNN article on March 11, 2024 by Nadeen Ebrahim was entitled “Rift between Biden and Natanyahu widens as Israeli leader vows to press with the Rafah operation.” But we know this is a mere slap on Netanyahu’s wrist. An article at The Conversation  by Professor M. Muhannad Ayyash on July 24, 2023 was entitled “Biden says the U.S. would have to invent an Israel if it didn’t exist.” Ayyash concluded, “Biden’s frank comments make clear that the U.S.-Israel ‘bond’ is not about defending democracy.  Rather it has always been, and still is, about American imperial interests in the region.” But it is self-defeating to believe it will be like this forever. The powers-that-shouldn’t-be shape our public perceptions, but as more and more individuals wake up and unite together we can still create a much better world.

ANSWER [Act Now to Stop War and End Racism] Coalition is a national umbrella organization that selects days for national protest in the US and around the world when it’s urgent. At the Hands off Rafah! National Day of Protest on March 2, 120 cities  registered to participate.

Source

When I did an online search of “Christians against genocide in Gaza” a few weeks ago, I found an existing group called  Christians For A Free Palestine, and that gave me the idea that maybe there are other Christians in my area that support a free Palestine. This organization believes in the power of nonviolent civil disobedience to heal and transform our communities. It seeks to directly confront the powers of imperialism through nonviolent direct action, as Jesus did. After I joined the organization, they sent me a helpful Day of Action Toolkit for an upcoming March 18th event, which I copied and pasted into a document  here  for other prospective organizers.

The organization “Christians For A Free Palestine” has already made achievements in the news that are praiseworthy, but what is needed now is a more inclusive group with a more specific goal, and that would be “Christians, Muslims, and Jews for a Secular One-State Solution in Palestine-Israel.”

Imagine the ramifications if many more cities register with  ANSWER Coalition at future national days of protest in support of a Free Palestine. It could change the world. Otherwise, if we feel helpless and hopeless, it will just get worse.

Obviously it is self-defeating for Arab Muslims and Christians in Palestine to support the Zionist State of Israel. Jews no longer need Zionism. Actually they never needed it. It was a terrible mistake brought to fruition by the imperialists. Under the Ottoman Empire, Jews, Muslims, and Christians in Palestine got along just fine. Palestine-Israel needs to become a secular one-state nation that gives equal rights to all, however difficult to achieve that might seem. That is the best way to make a safe homeland for all the Jews, Muslims, and Christians living there. And if the majority of citizens in a new secularized state of Palestine-Israel chooses the religion of either Christianity, Islam, or Judaism–let it be.

Citizens of the Zionist State of Israel need to abolish Zionism democratically.

Citizens of Gaza voted for Hamas most likely out of desperation.

However, if provided with the option of a secular one-state solution for all of Palestine-Israel, the citizens of Gaza and the West Bank will accept it as a much better alternative than what they are living under now. But it will also take international pressure to stop the imperialists who have turned the world into a living hell, as if inspired by Satan himself.

One way we can show our love for God is to seek justice for all.

*

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.

Roger Copple retired in 2010 at the age of 60. As a high school special education teacher, he taught algebra, English, and history.  As a general education teacher he taught mostly 3rd grade. His website www.WorldWithoutEmpire.com was created the same year he retired with his son’s help. Roger renewed his Christian faith on September 17, 2023 in an evangelical church after being enamored with yoga philosophy and Buddhism for many years. However, for the last 3 months, he has identified as a mainline Presbyterian. Roger lives in Gulfport, Florida.

Sources

What’s the Balfour Declaration? And how did it MESS UP the Middle East?–3 min, 19 sec–2018

Aljazeera : How Israel Was Created–14 min, 28 sec–June 2023

Aljazeera . com : What’s the Israel-Palestine conflict about? A simple guide–by Linah Alsaafin–October 9, 2023 This article includes the above video “How Israel Was Created.”

MSN . com : The Israel-Palestine conflict explained for dummies–Story by Mohammad Bilal–5 min read–October 2023

Israel & Palestine: Manny Man Does History–by John D Ruddy–52 min, 7 sec–April 2024

Featured image is from Jewish Voice for Labour

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

This interview was recorded for the Global Research News Hour. Published May 18, 2024. Find a link here:

University Encampments and the Freedom Flotilla: Fighting Back Against Historical Racist Genocide – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Dimitri Lascaris is a lawyer, journalist and activist.

After graduating from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law in 1991, Dimitri began his legal career at the Wall Street law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell, first working from the firm’s New York offices and then joining the firm’s offices in Paris, France.

In 2004, Dimitri joined one of Canada’s leading class action law firms, Siskinds LLP. While at Siskinds, Dimitri co-founded and led Canada’s largest and most accomplished team of securities class action lawyers. From 2004 to 2016, the Siskinds securities class actions team recovered more than $450 million for aggrieved investors.

In 2012, Dimitri was selected by Canadian Lawyer Magazine as one of the 25 most influential lawyers in Canada. In 2013, he was named by Canadian Business Magazine as one of the 50 most influential persons in Canadian business. Canadian Business Magazine described Dimitri as the “fiercest legal advocate for shareholder rights.” In 2023, Dimitri was nominated as one of Canadian Lawyer’s 25 most influential lawyers in Canada.

From 2012 to 2022, Dimitri was a correspondent and Board member of The Real News Network.

In March 2020, Dimitri announced his candidacy for the leadership of the Green Party of Canada. The leadership contest concluded in October 2020. Dimitri finished in second place out of eight candidates, garnering 45.5% of the votes on the eighth and final ballot.

In this interview, Dimitri talks about the trip on board the Freedom Flotilla he intends to take to Gaza in a few weeks, the obstacles it has faced, and the prospects of it being a successful action.

Global Research: Dimitri, the trip this year hit a snag in late April when the West African nation of Guinea-Bissau withdrew their flag from two of the ships on the grounds of extraordinary requests for information. One of those ships contained 5,000 tons of life-saving aid. You were present at the Freedom Flotilla’s press conference at which they declared Guinea-Bissau complicit alongside Israel in the deliberate starvation, siege, and genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Explain for our viewers, for our listeners, what made the actions of Guinea-Bissau authorities suspicious in the eyes of Freedom Flotilla members and why they think Israel had any involvement in influencing the situation.

Dimitri Lascaris: Well, I myself was not involved in communications with the authorities of Guinea-Bissau, so I’m limited in what I’ve been told by the organizers who were in contact with them. It’s my understanding that they learned that the Israeli authorities had made a request to the government of Guinea-Bissau to withdraw its flag from two of the three vessels that comprised the Flotilla.

The other one has a flag that is of a different country. In fact, it wasn’t 5,000 tons of humanitarian aid. It’s my understanding that there are, I believe, in excess of 50,000 tons of humanitarian aid.

It was a tremendous amount. These are sizable boats, and as they told us, the participants who had gathered in Istanbul waiting patiently for the boats to be authorized to leave for Gaza from Turkish waters, the response of the government of Guinea-Bissau to this request was to immediately insist upon inspecting the vessels, even though they had been thoroughly vetted already and were more than adequate to meet applicable standards, local law and international law. And so they immediately cooperated.

The organizers gave them complete access, had nothing to hide. And then before they completed their inspection, before the three inspectors who were sent to inspect the vessels completed their inspection within 24 hours, they sent a letter to the organizers saying, you know, we will allow you to retain the flag of Guinea-Bissau if you give us written confirmation that you aren’t going to go to Gaza. Or if you are going to go to Gaza, you have to have authorization from the port authority in Gaza.

The problem, as undoubtedly the government of Guinea-Bissau knows, is that there is no port authority in Gaza. Gaza doesn’t have a port because Israel won’t allow it to have a port. So the demand was effectively a refusal to allow the ship to go to Gaza with the flag of Guinea-Bissau.

At that stage, you know, even before they had an opportunity to respond. So how they get this demand, you know, for documentation and confirmation, the organizers, even before they had an opportunity to respond to this demand from the government of Guinea-Bissau, they get another communication and the government of Guinea-Bissau just announces we’re withdrawing our flag. They didn’t even wait for them to respond.

So that’s, at the current time, that’s where things stand. Two of the three vessels, well I should mention there has been an update. I understand, I haven’t spoken directly to all the organizers, but one of the organizers tells me that the government of Guinea-Bissau has now restored the flag to these two vessels, but apparently there are no assurances that it won’t withdraw the flag again.

And so no one is prepared to, you know, call all the participants back to Istanbul to prepare to leave after, you know, so many people came, hundreds of people came, went through non-violence training, waited for days, incurred expenses, to call them back when, you know, this has already happened. Guinea-Bissau has violated the trust of the organizers. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.

So they’re looking for another flag, and one of the countries they’re looking at is Ireland.

GR: Okay, so that just delays things. Isn’t it, you know, regardless of what Guinea-Bissau is doing, they’re still going to get around it, just take a little longer, right?

DL: That’s certainly, they are absolutely determined to sail to Gaza with that humanitarian aid, but they want, they don’t want this to happen again.

So we’re, they’re hoping that the Irish government will respond favourably to their request.

GR: Yeah, it seems to me that the Freedom Flotilla is united in spirit with all these campus protests cropping up really all over the world, not only desire to stop the genocide, but also taking a risk, you know, the campus protesters, you know, it could affect their careers and, you know, there are other risks as well. And you guys with the Freedom Flotilla are, you know, potentially risking your very lives.

I mean, because, I mean, you know, that on a past mission of the Freedom Flotilla back in 2010, Israelis boarded the ship bound for Gaza and killed 10 participants, and then also took several hostage for a time. And since then boats to Gaza have never gotten through due to Israeli interference. And yet what’s happening now is several times worse, because people all over Gaza, I mean, people in Rafah in particular are being bombed relentlessly.

A EuroMed human rights monitor found 140 mass graves containing the bodies of thousands of Palestinians. I mean, and they just say everything is because of what the Israelis say is, you know, basically, they blame everything on Hamas. I mean, including the murders of, you know, murdered journalists, doctors, patients even, and then say, well, you know, human shields or whatever.

So what I’m getting at is, what is the likelihood that once you get started, that you’re actually going to be able to get into Gaza to deliver aid?

DL: Well, it’s low. I mean, if we’re being honest with ourselves, the likelihood is low. I wouldn’t exclude the possibility because that would happen this time, because first of all, there are a lot of people on these boats, including people from elected officials from governments.

For example, there were a number of parliamentarians from Jordan, whose cooperation is extremely important to Israel, or I should say, collaboration is extremely important to Israel. So given the number of people, given their status, given their citizenship, you know, that’s going to be something that’s going to potentially cause the Israelis to allow the vessel through. The other thing that the Israelis have to be very mindful of is, you know, they are being prosecuted for genocide.

And one huge problem that they have is that their defense minister said at the very outset that they were going to starve the civilian population of Gaza. And the International Court of Justice, in ruling that it was plausible Israel was filing a genocide convention, referred to the statements of the defense minister and the practices of withholding aid. So this will be a very high profile, high visibility refusal of them to allow a large quantity of aid into Gaza, if they were to resort to prior practice and stop the vessel from entering, you know, the waters of Gaza.

And that would be incriminating at a time when they’re being prosecuted for, or I should say, you know, pursued, it’s not really a criminal prosecution at the International Court of Justice. But, you know, at the end of the day, they probably will stop us. But even then, we will be able to draw attention, the attention of the world to the obvious desire of the Israeli government to starve the population of Gaza.

GR: I know the freedom flotilla is unfortunately not mentioned very much in the Western media. However, I’m wondering what kind of attention it’s getting in Istanbul and in areas of that country, which is a lot closer to it and where people are more engaged with the Palestinians. I mean, what is the media aspects of it? And what is the general mood of the people in the area?

DL: Well, the general mood of the people is one of determination.

I think there’s people are very concerned about their safety. No one has any illusions about what the Israelis are capable of. I mean, they actually murdered seven workers of World Central Kitchen, six of whom were Western citizens.

And, you know, the head of the organization, this Spanish chef, was a good friend of Anthony Blinken and was actually quite pro-Israel in his public commentary up until that point in time. And yet they still killed six of his workers. So no one has any illusions.

People are taking this very seriously. As I say, that’s why there’s been so much non-violence training. But there’s a lot of high spirit of camaraderie, I think a steely determination to proceed and to overcome these obstacles.

And people were frankly quite saddened when we found out about the flag being withdrawn, despite the risks. So the press in that part of the world, Michael, I mean, it’s like night and day. I’ve been to Canada six weeks, a total of six weeks during this genocide, which began in October.

The rest of the time I’ve been in Eastern Mediterranean. And a good chunk of that time I was in West Asia. And how the press in this part of the world looks at this conflict and the extent to which it covers it is vastly different from what we’re seeing in Western countries.

And it’s really quite shameful. The mainstream press in the West has failed so miserably to rise to the occasion in the face of a Western backed genocide.

GR: Yeah.

And this wasn’t, wouldn’t be your first voyage on the freedom flotilla. It seems to me, you probably have a good idea of what to expect. But Dimitri, I’m afraid I’m going to have to leave you now.

But I wish you well on your voyage. And I hope and pray that whatever happens, you will make it and get out successfully and be able to get something to the people. And you’ll have plenty to share with us when your tour of Canada resumes.

So take care, my friend, and best wishes.

DL: Thank you, Michael. I appreciate it, my friend.

 

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The Meaning of Intifada

The Arabic word intifada means “shaking off” but in the political language as a term, it means “uprising”. More precisely, this term refers to the two Palestinian uprisings on both territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. These two territories were occupied by Israel during The 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and the coalition of the Arab states in the region of the Middle East. Both intifadas lasted from 1987 to 2000. 

The First Intifada

The First Intifada was, in fact, the spontaneous uprising in 1987 which lasted until 1993. It began as a revolt of the Palestinian youth throwing stones against the forces of the Israeli occupation but soon became a widespread movement involving civil disobedience with periodic large-scale demonstrations supported by commercial strikes. Usually, it is considered that the beginning of the First Intifada was a response to:

  1. The realization that the Palestinian Question in the Middle East together with the Arab-Israeli conflict was not seriously taken into consideration by the Governments of Arab states.
  2. The fact that the Palestinians in the so-called Occupied Territories (after The 1967 Six-Day War) should have to take matters into their own hands.

The West Bank’s and Gaza’s Palestinians started an uprising in December 1987 against the policy of occupation run by the Israeli Government. It has to be clearly noted that the First Intifada was not either started or directed by the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO) which was at that time located in Tunis. It was, actually, a popular mobilization organized by local Palestinian organizations and institutions in Palestine. The movement very quickly became massive involving several hundreds of thousands of Palestinians of whom many had not participated before in the previous resistance actions and many of them were teenagers and even kids. The response of the Israeli security forces was brutal repression of the whole Palestinian population of the Occupied Territories.

During the first years of the uprising, the movement chose a similar form of the fight of Mahatma Gandhi (1869−1948) in India against British colonial authorities: civil disobedience, massive demonstrations, general strikes, refusal to pay taxis, boycotts of Israeli products, writing political graffiti or establishment of underground the so-called “freedom schools”. Later, the uprising took certain forms of “terrorist” actions like stone-throwing, Molotov cocktails, or putting the barricades to stop Israeli military forces. 

The actions of the First Intifada have been organized within the framework of the United National Leadership of the Uprising which embraced several popular committees. The fact was that Intifada succeeded in attracting up to that time the biggest attention by the international community, especially of those dealing with human and minority rights to the situation of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The Israeli occupation of these territories has been criticized as never since 1967.

undefined

Intifada in Gaza Strip. (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

Israeli Defence Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s strategy to deal with Intifada was to use military force and security power. In the years from 1987 to 1991, according to Palestinian sources, the Israeli army murdered over 1.000 Palestinians. Among them, there were some 200 teenagers under the age of 16. Army’s actions included massive arrests resulted that during the First Intifada, Israel had the highest number of prisoners per capita in the world. Due to such brutal actions, by 1990 most of the Palestinian leaders of the Intifada had been in prison and, therefore, the uprising lost its cohesive force but, nevertheless, it continued until 1993. 

The Negotiations, the Washington Talks, and the Oslo Accords

During the First Gulf War in 1990−1991, the Palestinians and their national organization the PLO opposed the US-led attack on Iraq. After this war, the PLO became diplomatically isolated, and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia stopped financing it, therefore, bringing the PLO to the financial and political crisis. 

The US administration after the First Gulf War decided to politically make firmer its position in the Middle East by diplomatically promoting Washington’s crucial role in the process of resolution of regional cancer – the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was organized multilateral conference in Madrid in October 1991 attended by on one side the Palestinian representatives and the representatives of the Arab states and on the other side representatives of Israel led by PM Yitzhak Shamir who was practically forced to participate in the conference under the pressure by the US President George H. W. Bush (Bush Senior). However, behind the Israeli delegation, it was, in fact, Washington dictating Israeli conditions to negotiate. More precisely, Y. Shamir required that: 

  1. The PLO be excluded from the conference (as considered to be a terrorist organization); and 
  2. The Palestinians would not “directly” raise the question of independence and statehood for Palestine. 

The talks after Madrid have been continued in Washington where the Palestinian delegation was composed of negotiators from the Occupied Territories. However, the representatives of East Jerusalem were not allowed to participate in the negotiations by Israel on the grounds that East Jerusalem is part of the State of Israel. Formally, the PLO representatives were excluded from the conference but in reality, its political leaders regularly consulted with and advised the official Palestinian delegation but little progress was achieved through the process of negotiations. According to Israeli PM Y. Shamir, the focal aim of the Israeli delegation and negotiation policy was to drug out Washington’s talks for some 10 years as after that the Israeli annexation of the West Bank would be simply de facto accomplished fact for the international community. 

undefined

Barricades during the Intifada (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Very soon, in 1992, immediately when Yitzhak Rabin became a new Israeli PM, the human rights of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories (the Gaza Strip and the West Bank) tremendously became worse – a fact which dramatically undermined the legitimacy of the Palestinian delegation to Washington’s talks and prompted the resignation of several delegates. There were several reasons for the failure of Washington’s talks as human rights violations and economic decline in the Occupied Territories, growth of radical Islamism as a challenge to the PLO, violent actions against Israeli security forces and civilians by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and, finally, the first suicide bombing (in 1993). 

There were two chief reasons for the Israeli PM Y. Rabin to continue the negotiations with the Palestinian representatives: 

  1. The real security threat for Israel of radical Islam and Islamic fundamentalists; and 
  2. The stalemate in the Washington talks. 

Those two factors also contributed to Y. Rabin’s Government reversing the traditional Israeli refusal to negotiate with the PLO (at least not directly). As a consequence of such a drastically changed political situation, it was Israel to initiate secret talks directly with the Palestinian representatives from the PLO in Oslo, Norway. The talks resulted in the Israeli-PLO Declaration of Principles, which was signed in Washington in September 1993. The main points of the declaration were:

  1. A fact that it was founded on bilateral recognition of Israel and the PLO as legitimate negotiating sides.
  2. The declaration established that the Israeli forces would withdraw from the Gaza Strip and Jericho.
  3. The additional withdrawals of Israel from unspecified territories of the West Bank during a five-year interim period were agreed upon.
  4. However, the key issues of Israeli-Palestinian relations have been put aside to be discussed in some final status talks like the extent of the land to be ceded by Israel, the status of the city of Jerusalem, the Palestinian refugee problem’s resolution, the nature of the Palestinian entity to be established, the question of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank or water rights. 

With the 1993 Oslo Accords, the First Palestinian Intifada against the State of Israel was over.

*

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

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

Notes

[1] The 1967 Six-Day War from 5th to 10th June is known in the Arabic world as the June War. The formal reason for this war has been three requests by Egypt to the OUN Emergency Force in Sinai: 1) to withdraw their detachments from the Israeli border; 2) the increase of Egyptian military troops on the Sinai Peninsula; and 3) to close the Straits of Tiran in the Gulf of Aqaba for the use by Israeli ships. Three Arab states made a military coalition against Zionist Israel: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. The 1967 Six-Day War was started by the Israeli Minister of Defence General Dayan as a pre-emptive airstrike. However, it was soon followed by the Israeli occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, Old Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights during two last days of the war [Guy Laron, The Six-Day War: The Breaking of the Middle East, New Haven−London: Yale University Press, 2017].    

[2] Don Peretz, Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising, London−New York: Routledge, 2018.

[3] The Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO) is both a political and military organization that was created in 1964 for the sake of uniting different Arab Palestinian groups to fight Israeli anti-Palestinian policy on the land of Palestine. The PLO became dominated since 1967 by al-Fatah that was led by Yasser Arafat. In 1974, the PLO became recognized by the Arab states as an official political and national representative of all Palestinians. The Israeli military invasion of South Lebanon in 1982 decreased its military power and organization itself. As a consequence, the PLO became reorganized in Tunisia. The organization, however, became split into several extremist-radical groups like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine or the Black September (classic terrorist group) who became responsible for kidnappings, hijackings or murdering within or outside of the Middle East. Yasser Arafat, therefore, persuaded in 1988 the PLO to renounce violence and terrorist acts and its governing council recognized the existence of Israeli state. As a direct consequence of such political move, since 1988, the PLO was accepted by many states as being a Government-in-Exile of Palestine. Yasser Arafat in 1993 acted as a Chair of the Palestinian National Authority administering the territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank [Jillian Becker, The PLO: The Rise and Fall of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2014]. 

[4] The regular schools were closed by the military authority of Israel as an act of revenge for Intifada.

[5] The Palestinian side claims that during the First Intifada, the Israeli Government runs a secret policy of killing of the Palestinians on the Occupied Territories. Such kind of operations has been done by special units who either presented themselves as Arabs in order to approach and execute the victims or by snipers who have been killing from a distance.   

[6] The Madrid Peace Process was launched by the US’ President Bush and the Soviet leader M. Gorbachev.

[7] It is a matter of very fact that before the First Intifada started, Israel enabled further development of the Islamic groups among the Palestinians believing to create in such a way opposition to the PLO’s secular nationalism and consequently to divide Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. However, since 1993, it became obvious that Islamic fundamentalist groups are more dangerous for Israel than the PLO. About Hamas, see in [Matthew Levitt, Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad, New Haven−London: Yale University Press, 2006]. 

Featured image: An IDF soldier requesting a resident of Jabalia to erase a slogan on a wall during the first intifada. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on July 9, 2020

***

The idea of the Great Reset derives from the New World Order which is still alive in the minds of the establishment or who we can call the globalists from people like Henry Kissinger to the current US president, Joe Biden.  Of course there are many others on the top levels of the pyramid whose ideas range from

  • establishing a police state,
  • to implanting microchips the day we are born to track and trace us,
  • to depopulating the planet. 

I know it all sounds insane but that’s what the globalists have planned for us for a very long time.  

Klaus Schwab’s protégé, Yuval Noah Harari, is an Israeli born intellectual who authored a popular bestseller titled ‘Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind’ and is also a professor of history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.  Harari once asked a disturbing question, “what to do with all these useless people?”  Harari is an intelligent man, there is no doubt about that, but his intelligence has led him to the level of insanity. 

Harari is an influential member of the World Economic Forum (WEF) who supports the idea of creating a dystopian society managed by a handful of globalists who will rule over every human being on earth from the day they are born.  According to Harari, planet earth is overpopulated:  

Again, I think the biggest question in maybe in economics and politics of the coming decades will be what to do with all these useless people? The problem is more boredom and how what to do with them and how will they find some sense of meaning in life, when they are basically meaningless, worthless?

My best guess, at present is a combination of drugs and computer games as a solution for [most]. It’s already happening…In under different titles, different headings you see more and more people spending more and more time or solving the inner problems with the drugs and computer games both legal drugs and illegal drugs…

They also want people to stay home connected to the Metaverse world, a virtual reality simulation and at the same time get them addicted to all sorts of drugs.  The kind of world they are trying to create for us is pure lunacy. Wired, a monthly magazine describes the metaverses as a combination of the digital and physical worlds that creates a virtual reality as in the Hollywood film, ‘Ready Player One,The article What is the Metaverse, Exactly?’ answers that question, 

“Broadly speaking, the technologies companies refer to when they talk about “the metaverse” can include virtual reality—characterized by persistent virtual worlds that continue to exist even when you’re not playing—as well as augmented reality that combines aspects of the digital and physical worlds.”

Many other Hollywood films that are based on virtual reality in the future includes Jumanji, Source Code, The Matrix, Total Recall, Inception, and many others.  The globalists want you to believe that a dystopic society is in the works for us, but no worries, you will be completely happy at least according to Klaus Schwab.

In my opinion, the notion that the human species will be living their lives through virtual reality is far-fetched, it’s an illusion that will take decades even centuries to accomplish and that would only happen if we allowed it to happen.

Harari is saying that under a scientific, technocratic world order, the state will be your sole provider for everything, so basically, he says that families are not needed in this new world they are creating for us, in other words, having a family will be a thing of the past:

After millions of years of evolution suddenly within 200 years the family and the intimate community break, that they collapse most of the roles filled by the family for thousands and tens of thousands of years are transferred very quickly to new networks provided by the state and the market, you don’t need children, you can have a pension fund, you don’t need somebody to take care of you, you don’t need neighbors and sisters or brothers to take care of you if you’re sick, the state takes care of you, the states provide you with police, with education, with help with everything

Listen to Harari’s own words in this video: [taken down]

 

 

 

The World in Crisis: A Stakeholder Economy, the Green Agenda and Covid-19    

Rahm Emanuel worked for US presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama under various titles, but one quote he will always be remembered for was when he said “you never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” That is exactly what happened under the Covid-19 global health emergency.

Klaus Schwab, who is the original founder, and executive chairman of the WEF published an article that outlines three basic components of the Great Reset titled Now is the Time for a ‘Great Reset, in the first component, they would help steer or “improve coordination (for example, in tax, regulatory, and fiscal policy), upgrade trade arrangements, and create the conditions for a “stakeholder economy.”  

How would this work? There are more than 195 countries in the world meaning that all these countries would have to establish a “unified” tax, regulatory and fiscal policy, all in sync, all with the same laws and that would be impossible even if they tried because all countries have different tax systems, different economies and cultures and that will not change because of a handful of globalists with outlandish ideas of a unified financial system they want to control for their own benefit.  It’s a ridiculous idea.  In fact, more countries today are more open to imposing less taxes and regulations to attract foreign investments to grow their economies, so the WEF ‘s recommendations will never work, in fact its dead-on arrival.

Then there is the looming financial crisis that can ultimately force the world into a Federal Reserve Bank “Digital Currency” known as central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) that will be tracked by the government on how you spend your money.  What can go wrong with this idea?

If in any case, you are not politically aligned with a particular party or refuse an experimental injection, then the government may block your transactions.  In other words, they can literally control when and how you spend your money and that is something most people will not accept.  An article published by Stefan Gleason who is an investor, political strategist, and grassroots activist wrote an interesting analysis last year for fxstreet.com titled ‘The Great Reset is Coming for the Currency’ asks what will be the next major issue for a Global Reset?

“As the Great Reset proceeds from globalist think tanks and technology billionaires to allied media elites, governments, schools, and Woke corporations, what will be “reset” next?  The next reset will most likely take place in the financial sector as “Supporters of the World Economic Forum’s all-encompassing Great Reset agenda are eyeing BIG changes for the global monetary system.”

Biden’s Treasury Secretary and former Federal Reserve Chair, Janet Yellen wants to end the use of various cryptocurrencies and have the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issue CBDC’s.  “Yellen derided Bitcoin as “an extremely inefficient way to conduct transactions” because “the amount of energy consumed in processing those transactions is staggering.”  Gleason says that Yellen and her colleagues are planning to have the public use digitized tokens issued by the central bank.  The bottom line is that “They just want to make sure those digits are issued and controlled by governments and central banks.” 

The best way to avoid the Federal Reserve bank’s control over your finances is to own gold, silver, and other safe-haven assets.

“Anyone who is concerned about the prospect of being herded into a new digital currency regime should make it a high priority to own tangible money that exists outside the financial system.”

Gleason makes the case for owning gold and silver,

“No technology or government mandate can change the fact that gold and silver have universally recognized, inflation-resistant value.”

At some point, the public will reject the Federal Reserve and its ‘digital currency’ if they can avoid it.  However, the best way to bypass CBDC’s in the future is to buy gold, silver, and other metals that that can maintain value and become resistant to inflationary pressures.  An important note to consider is that all US silver coins that were produced before 1964 were minted with 90% silver and 10% copper, so keep an eye on your pocket-change just in case you come across some silver coins with value.

The second component

“would ensure that investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability. Here, the large-scale spending programs that many governments are implementing represent a major opportunity for progress.”

Which means that governments will be required to print an unlimited money supply to support their agenda that will eventually lead to inflationary pressures which can devastate their respective economies.

“Here, the large-scale spending programs that many governments are implementing represent a major opportunity for progress. The European Commission, for one, has unveiled plans for a €750 billion ($826 billion) recovery fund. The US, China, and Japan also have ambitious economic-stimulus plans.”

They are pushing for an expensive Green Agenda which is part of Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that will change how the world operates when it comes to using traditional energy resources such as coal, oil, and natural gas:

Rather than using these funds, as well as investments from private entities and pension funds, to fill cracks in the old system, we should use them to create a new one that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building “green” urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics

Last year, Forbes magazine published Why Biden’s Climate Agenda Is Falling Apart’ which does explain how the Green Agenda is an expensive and unreliable scheme:

The vast majority of human beings want high rather than low economic growth, and so politicians ultimately choose policies that make energy cheap, not expensive.

And the limitations of weather-dependent renewables are more visible than ever. If California’s large wind energy project is built, it will provide less than half of the energy of California’s Diablo Canyon nuclear plant Newsom is planning to close in 2025, and it will be unreliable. During the heatwave-driven blackouts last summer, there was little wind in California or other Western states, meaning we can’t count on wind energy when we need it most. 

In other words, the Democrats’ climate change and renewable energy agenda is rapidly falling apart, and the reasons have far more to do with physics than with politics

Schwab proposes that the third component is basically the innovations that will lead to centralized control of the world’s health policies by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, the innovations began the moment  WHO officials declared a global Public Health Emergency more than 2 years ago. 

Schwab mentioned the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ which is described on the World Economic Forum’s website as a new system that

“shapes new policies and strategies in areas such as artificial intelligence, blockchain and digital assets, the internet of things or autonomous vehicles, and enables agile implementation and iteration via its fast-growing network of national and sub-national centres.”

Regarding Covid-19 or any other declared public health emergency in the future, the new system will be able

“to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges. During the COVID-19 crisis, companies, universities, and others have joined forces to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and possible vaccines; establish testing centers; create mechanisms for tracing infections; and deliver telemedicine.”

However, there was a unified response put forward by a several nations including Brazil, India, Russia, China, Iran, South Africa, Malaysia and the practically the entire continent of Africa that rejected a pandemic treaty developed by the World Health Organization.  They all agreed that the treaty would allow authorities from the WHO to gain control of their health policies bypassing their rights as sovereign nations.

As the spirit of Tanzania’s late President, John Magufuli lives on, Reuters published the positive move on behalf of the African continent Africa objects to U.S. push to reform health rules at WHO assembly regarding Africa’s 47 nations who rejected the treaty “African countries raised an objection on Tuesday to a U.S.-led proposal to reform the International Health Regulations (IHR), a move delegates say might prevent passage at the World Health Organization’s annual assembly.”

The treaty brought forward by the WHO and the US government was technically defeated which is a positive outcome considering what’s at stake:

If Africa continues to withhold support, it could block one of the only concrete reforms expected from the meeting, fraying hopes that members will unite on reforms to strengthen the U.N. health agency’s rules as it seeks a central role for itself in global health policy.

The IHR set out WHO members’ legally binding obligations around outbreaks. The United States has proposed 13 IHR reforms which seek to authorise the deployment of expert teams to contamination sites and the creation of a new compliance committee to monitor implementation of the rules.

But the African group expressed reservations about even this narrow change, saying all reforms should be tackled together as part of a “holistic package” at a later stage

Western powers along with top level WHO officials will try to persuade or blackmail sovereign nations who originally rejected the IHR treaty to reverse their decision with a new modified version in hopes of centralized control of any future pandemic, but the current decision made by those nations who rejected the treaty is welcoming news indeed.

Just imagine the concept of a group of mostly unelected bureaucrats with the power to oversee a centralized control grid to rule over a global pandemic is Orwellian, in fact, the Great Reset kind of reminds me of the 1973 classic Hollywood film, Soylent Green with Charlton Heston based on the 1966 science fiction novel ‘Make Room! Make Room! by Harry Harrison based on a dystopian society.  The story is about a police investigation into the murder of a wealthy businessman while the world is experiencing a slow death from “greenhouse gases” that produced a variety of problems for humanity including overpopulation, pollution, poverty, crime, and the concept of enforced euthanasia by the state.

Soylent Green is an example of what a deranged group of globalists or in this case, government bureaucrats would do to humanity if we did nothing to stop them.  In the film, Detective Thorn (played by Charlton Heston) warned his colleague Chief Hatcher (Brock Peters) “The ocean’s dying! Plankton’s dying! It’s people – Soylent Green is made out of people! They’re making our food out of people! Next thing they’ll be breeding us like cattle for food! You’ve gotta tell them, you’ve gotta tell them!” Although Soylent Green is obviously fictional, it’s a metaphor on how far globalists will be willing to go so that their agenda of world control and depopulation can succeed.  In the film, the state strongly encouraged and even facilitated suicide which turned the people into food for the remaining population.  It sounds insane but reading about the agenda of the Great Reset of you ‘owning nothing and being happy is the start of something more sinister in our future.  I am not saying that they will try to turn people into food in the future, but they are certainly trying to push forward other outrages solutions to feed the world such as the possibility of people eating insects to survive.  I wish this was a joke, but it’s not.

Globalists are calling for the world’s population to be completely vaccinated with their Covid-19 experimental injections, in other words, they want total control over the world’s healthcare policies to enforce the use of facemasks and endless vaccination schemes through government-imposed mandates on the population although Covid-19 experimental injections are injuring and even killing thousands of people around the world.  Globalist plotters began their plan of action to implement their vaccine mandates as soon as the Public Health Emergency was announced, but there were governments who rejected the idea from the start.  On December 3rd, 2020, Brazil’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Ernesto Araujo clearly rejected the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset agenda by addressing the United Nations (UN) special session on COVID-19 by saying that “Those who dislike freedom always try to benefit from moments of crisis to preach the curtailing of freedom. Let’s not fall for that trap” In his conclusion, Araujo clearly states what is Brazil’s position on the idea of the Great Reset:

Fundamental freedoms are not an ideology. Human dignity requires freedom as much as it requires health and economic opportunities.  Those who dislike freedom always try to benefit from moments of crisis to preach the curtailing of freedom. Let’s not fall for that trap.  Totalitarian social control is not the remedy for any crisis. Let’s not make democracy and freedom one more victim of COVID-19

Is the World Ready to Embrace the Great Reset?  

In the geopolitical spectrum, globalists are set on punishing sovereign countries who do not obey a rules-based order under the Great Reset agenda in partnership with the US-NATO alliance leading the world to some form of conflict or regime change against Russia, China, Iran, Belarus, Syria, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and any other nation who wants to remain sovereign at all costs. There are many who are vehemently opposed to such an idea, for example, on January 27th, 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke at the World Economic Forum (WEF) and basically rejected the idea of the Great Reset and gave a reasonable idea of humanity working together to achieve a prosperous future for all with “calls for inclusive growth and for creating decent standards of living for everyone are regularly made at various international forums.

This is how it should be, and this is an absolutely correct view of our joint efforts” and that “It is clear that the world cannot continue creating an economy that will only benefit a million people, or even the golden billion. This is a destructive precept. This model is unbalanced by default.” Putin’s perception of the Great Reset or a unipolar world order is correct because it is destined for failure since the world is a complex place where nations have distinct cultures and history.  Putin questions how nations would respond to a Great Reset with a rules-based order run by an elite group of psychopaths that expect a harmonious transition from all nations who are willing to comply:

We are open to the broadest international cooperation, while achieving our national goals, and we are confident that cooperation on matters of the global socioeconomic agenda would have a positive influence on the overall atmosphere in global affairs, and that interdependence in addressing acute current problems would also increase mutual trust which is particularly important and particularly topical today.

Obviously, the era linked with attempts to build a centralized and unipolar world order has ended. To be honest, this era did not even begin. A mere attempt was made in this direction, but this, too, is now history. The essence of this monopoly ran counter to our civilization’s cultural and historical diversity.

The reality is such that really different development centers with their distinctive models, political systems and public institutions have taken shape in the world. Today, it is very important to create mechanisms for harmonizing their interests to prevent the diversity and natural competition of the development poles from triggering anarchy and a series of protracted conflicts

The rejection of the Great Reset and its associated global institutions and industries such as the WHO, NATO and Big Pharma is a step in the right direction and the globalists are in panic.  Brazil, Russia, the continent of Africa and others are proving that the Great Reset or that century’s old idea of a New World Order has become a failed project.  Some people might disagree with my analysis because many are pessimistic about their future because they believe that a Great Reset is inevitable, that there is no escape from it because it seems that things are getting out of control with ongoing wars, coming food shortages and a growing danger of a global medical tyranny.

However, I do believe that we are in the early stages of a great awakening, not a rules-based order managed by a group of globalists despite the endless propaganda on how the Great Reset will make the planet a better place for all of us.

People and certain governments are awakening to the fact that a group of globalists are working against them on every level, and they are starting to fight back.  We do not want to be ruled by a centralized power telling us what to do or how to think.  The concept of the Great Reset has failed in many ways, but there is still work to do.

Never give up, never allow a group of influential globalists whether they are billionaires or bankers, government bureaucrats or special interest groups, resist this ideology of a unipolar world order.  We can win this war, there is still time, I believe that we will prevail if we just don’t comply with their goal of them trying to control us, the useless people.

*

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.

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

Featured image is from SCN

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Cult of Globalism: The Great Reset and Its “Final Solution” for “Useless People”
  • Tags: , ,

International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Karim A. A. Khan K.C. Accuses Palestine of Waging War Against Israel

By International Criminal Court and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 20, 2024

My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas running in parallel.

Putin’s Strategic Blunder

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, May 20, 2024

The blunder began years before February 2022. Putin failed to realize that the US was preparing the overthrow of the Ukraine government. When the overthrow began, Putin took no action to prevent the overthrow. Instead, Russia permitted Washington to take over the former province of the Russian state.

Fighting Back Against a Historical Racist Genocide. Mike Whitney

By Mike Whitney and Michael Welch, May 20, 2024

This interview  discusses the article King Bibi’s Land Grab. Here, Mr. Whitney describes the racism at the root of Israel’s cruelty toward the Palestinian people, and also how it is rooted in the same dynamic as other European nations and the settler tribes of North America.

Commemorating Nakba, 76 years Ago: Palestine Apartheid, Stolen Lives and Land, History Erased, United Nations Deaf Mute

By Felicity Arbuthnot, May 20, 2024

Between November 1947 and November 1948, 531 Palestinian towns and villages had been “ethnically cleansed.” By 1952, it was 615. This “Nakba” (“catastrophe”) 70 years after Israel’s final founding is ongoing. The land grabs are illegal and violate: U.N. Charter, Article 2(4) & 51 (1945); Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations…, Principle 1 (1970). 

First World War and Imperialism. Dr. Jacques Pauwels

By Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels, May 20, 2024

Imperialism, the worldwide expansion of capitalism, motivated by the lust for raw materials such as petroleum, markets and cheap labour, involved fierce competition among great powers such as the British Empire, czarist Russia, and the German Reich, and thus led to the Great War of 1914–1918, later to be known as the First World War or World War I.

Ebrahim Raisi, Iran’s President, Dies in Helicopter Crash Aged 63. “It Was Not Us” Said Israeli Official “Who Requested Anonymity”

By Al-Jazeera, May 20, 2024

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi has died after a helicopter carrying him and other officials crashed in a mountainous and forested area of the country in poor weather. The 63-year-old, a figure representing conservative and hardline factions in Iranian politics, was president for nearly three years, and appeared on track to run for re-election next year.

Ecological Disruption and Militarization of Antarctica Will Push the Planet Closer to Tipping Points

By Bharat Dogra, May 20, 2024

Antarctica, a continent about 40% larger than Europe in area, has also been called the world’s largest desert and the coldest, windiest, loneliest continent. Such descriptions do not exactly make this the most attractive continent, but in keeping with our times, those looking for minerals and geo-strategic advantages can find their own allurements.

Putin’s Strategic Blunder

May 20th, 2024 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The blunder began years before February 2022. Putin failed to realize that the US was preparing the overthrow of the Ukraine government. When the overthrow began, Putin took no action to prevent the overthrow. Instead, Russia permitted Washington to take over the former province of the Russian state.

A hostile Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia.

Why did Russia stand aside and permit Washington’s takeover?

Why did Russia sit for the next eight years on its hands, rejecting the votes of the independent Donbas republics to be reunited with Russia from which they were torn by Soviet leaders and stuck in Ukraine?

The culprit in these strategic blunders was the Kremlin’s lack of realism.

Putin relied on diplomacy despite the fact that Washington relies on threats, bribes, and coercion. The Kremlin simply did not understand that with the Minsk Agreement it was saddling a dead horse that could go nowhere.

When Putin was finally forced to intervene by the prospect that the inhabitants of Russian Donbas were about to be slaughtered like Palestinians in Gaza today, Putin failed to respond decisively. Still playing all by himself a diplomatic game, he insisted that there be no Russian invasion of Ukraine, only a “special military operation” to clear hostile Ukrainian forces from Donbas.

Lost in a diplomatic world that no longer exists, Putin failed to realize that regardless of what he said or did, Western propaganda would present the intervention as a reconstruction of the Soviet Empire that would extend to all of Europe.

It was immediately obvious that the limited and slow-paced “special military operation” would provide Washington and its NATO puppets abundant time to become involved in the conflict, thus endlessly widening the conflict until the conflict became an existential issue for Russia. This is what has occurred.

Still the Kremlin thinks unrealistically. Putin is on the verge of succeeding with his purpose of driving Ukrainian forces out of, and away from, the Russian populated areas, and the assumption is that the war will be over and Russia’s success will be acknowledged in a negotiated settlement.

This delusion persists despite Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov’s acknowledgement that Washington intends Russia’s destruction. Both Lavrov and Putin continue to stress that they are willing to negotiate with Washington Washington’s intention to destroy Russia. It would be hilarious if were not so deadly.

Listen to Lavrov’s speech. He understands the threat to Russia but is incapable of matching a Russian response to the threat.

Thinking Russia’s intervention to be limited, Putin was unprepared for war. He has done very little to hamper the Ukrainian government’s ability to conduct war. Rather than shutting down Ukraine, Putin chose a long drawn-out village by village conquest. The West interpreted this as limited Russian military capability, and this provided both encouragement and time for the West to involve itself in the conflict.

The West is so involved now and the Western political leaders are so certain that Russia intends more aggression that they are preparing for war against Russia. Still, Putin and Lavrov speak of negotiation. After a decade of the West’s rejection of negotiation, how can the Kremlin still see negotiation as a solution?

What needed to be done was to knock Kiev out of the war, install a Russian friendly government in place of the American puppet regime, and present the West with a fait accompli before the West had time to get involved. It is Western involvement that presents the danger of the conflict widening into a war between Russia and the West.

Possibly the solution is still viable. It would leave a neutral Ukrainian state west of the Dnieper River with no Black Sea access. It is highly unlikely that such an outcome can be achieved by negotiation. It can only be imposed by force.

By restraining Russia’s use of force, Putin has opened the road to nuclear Armageddon?

*

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

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

This interview was recorded for the Global Research News Hour. Published May 18, 2024. Find a link here:

University Encampments and the Freedom Flotilla: Fighting Back Against Historical Racist Genocide – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

This interview  discusses the article King Bibi’s Land Grab. Here, Mr. Whitney describes the racism at the root of Israel’s cruelty toward the Palestinian people, and also how it is rooted in the same dynamic as other European nations and the settler tribes of North America.

Global Research: Your article states that eradicating Hamas is not the goal of the mission. I mean, the real goal is essentially to get Palestinians out of Gaza, your ethnic cleansing or your Nakba 2.0. You go on mentioning the cheers and the dancing from Israelis when Rafah was being hit. You even show of Norman Finkelstein, a Jew, lamenting about how 95% of Israelis support the war, and you maintain that all this springs from a deep-seated anti-Palestinian racism that goes way, way back to the origins of Zionism in the 19th century as a European Jewish imperialist phenomenon.

Could I get you to expand on that concept, what you’re talking about?

Mike Whitney: I mean, it actually goes back 50 years before the creation of the Jewish state, you know, when Theodor Herzl originated the idea. And it was realized at that time that if they transplanted this idea to Palestine, that eventually the immigration of Jews, European Jews and, you know, Russian Jews suffering from the pogroms there, European, Ukrainian, etc., that they still would not have the demographic numbers needed to be the majority to maintain a Jewish state. So you need a clear Jewish majority to be able to maintain that.

And that means that a certain number of the population of Indigenous people, the Palestinians, would have to be removed. And that was achieved, of course, in 1948 under Ben-Gurion. But a lot of people fault Ben-Gurion for not having been more expansive at the time and just completing the expulsion of Palestinians.

They also call it transfer from the West Bank and Gaza. Of course, they had limited resources, so that really wasn’t an option. But I think that’s basically why there’s so much support in Israel for this.

The average Israeli is not confused about the fact that Hamas is not going to be defeated by levelling all of Gaza and reducing it all to rubble. You know, Hamas is already making a reappearance in northern Gaza, and they’re fighting quite admirably. But regardless, they’re trying to make an inhabitable Gaza so that the people will have no homes, no hospitals, no schools, no infrastructure to return to.

And once it’s no longer a livable place, then they’ll be living in tent cities and they’re counting on the empathy from people around the world, other leaders who will take them 100,000 or 200,000 at a time and export them to their own countries. That’s essentially the plan. So I think the average Israeli is aware of that.

They don’t think at all that this Hamas is just basically a hoax.

GR: One of the people you referred to, Lawrence Davidson, had written an article way back in 2012, and he was talking about the roots of anti-Arab prejudice among the European Jews. That white supremacist attitude was really all the rage in Europe, right? It seems to have been preserved in Israel, whereas it fell away in the other countries eventually, right?

MW: Well, exactly.

I mean, the colonial period has essentially ended, but, you know, I mean, now we call it white supremacy, but that’s typical of the colonial attitude. Of course, if you come from a culture that can dominate another, say, third world country and you become the dominant force, you’re going to have all the high paying jobs, the government positions, all the power is going to be accrued to you and your group and your ethnicity and your religion. And so naturally, you’re going to bring up your children, etc., to feel like you’re superior to the people you are ruling over.

And that’s just typical of the colonial mindset. The thing is, is that Israel is really the last bastion of that form of settler colonial mindset. And you can see the impact of that over the decades, where the lack of sympathy and the lack of empathy that we see on Twitter and TikTok on a daily basis, these people taking food shipments, basically taking crusts of bread out of starving children’s mouth, throwing it on the ground and jumping on it with their feet, rolling over it with trucks and preventing any of these food and medical assistance trucks from even entering Gaza.

You wonder where this rash of sadistic behaviour comes from. And it comes from that years and years of colonial supremacy just steeped in these people’s bloodstreams. So it’s a very toxic environment that creates a very prejudicial mind.

And then eventually, when you see the other as distinctively inferior to yourself, then any form of crime can be perpetrated and justified because you are the superior being.

GR: Yeah, well, this phenomenon, if it is rooted in the racist roots of European settler colonialism, I mean, we’re looking at the past not only of Israel, but of South Africa, and also of the Canadian tradition of clearing the land of Indigenous people, so they can set up their own settler colonies. And there’s an article that was written in the National Post nine years ago, and it’s entitled, “Sure, John A. Macdonald, (that’s our first Prime Minister in 1867), was a Racist Colonizer and Misogynist, but So Were Most Canadians Back Then.”

If we are to understand the racism of Israelis today, should we just look at the racism of the White settlers in Canada 150 years ago? I mean, is it a direct cut and paste?

MW: Well, pretty closely. I think if we look at it, that’s why I think Americans should be at least sympathetic to what the Israelis are going for. It’s a terrible and vital predicament, but it’s not something that Americans haven’t experienced, and that its government still doesn’t foster by telling people how we’re the exceptional nation.

So the rules of international law don’t really apply to us. So we can have wars in Iraq and kill a million people, and Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, and just basically disrupt the large swaths of the entire planet. And the rules of international law don’t apply to us because we’re exceptional.

We’re actually this bumbling force that never really does anything intentionally wrong, but we kind of stumble into things where innocent people are injured. So it’s a whole narrative that’s really deceptive. But I mean, look at what we did to Black African-Americans and enslaved them for two or three hundred years.

And then the Indian Wars, where we just mercilessly slaughtered one tribe after the other, some for no reason whatsoever, and then, you know, try to jam our own religion down their throats, etc., etc. And, you know, the story of that is quite incredible, because, you know, you have people like William Tecumseh Sherman, who, you know, finished the march to Atlanta, where he completely destroyed the civilization down there, killing many White, you know, women and children. And then as soon as he was done with the Civil War, he went out to kill Indians.

So it’s this kind of attitude of superiority is insatiable. It’s just blood-lust. So in the case of Israel, it’s in some ways, it’s not that extraordinary, but it has to be stopped.

It’s transparently immoral. And, you know, hurrah for the student groups that are, you know, basically the tip of the spear in leading the opposition to this madness.

GR: Yeah. You know, Israel’s assault on Gaza, and particularly now on Rafah, is not popular outside of Israel. I mean, tent encampments, as you say, they’re propping up everywhere, and yet major leaders, you know, seem to keep up this so-called ironclad support for Israel.

And the people they preside over aren’t directing their leaders on this front. How has the support for this anti-Palestinian racism managed to go in between the leaders and the people that vote for them outside of Israel?

MW: Well, I don’t think it can be explained other than money. And the money that is going into the coffers of these elected officials as such from AIPAC and some of the other powerful Jewish groups, Israeli-sponsored groups, is really having a dramatic impact.

And I mean, how, for example, could you explain that sending additional weapons and bombs, etc., etc., basically giving Israel a blank check for as much weaponry, lethal weaponry, as they need was supported by nearly excluding for every Democratic congressman in Congress. And when you realize that, according to the recent Gallup poll, 75 percent of registered Democrats oppose the policy in Gaza. So they’re departing from their own, they’re, you know, opposing their own constituency.

The people who got them voted into office, they’re ignoring. And the only explanation you can have is that their coffers are being filled by wealthy people who have an interest in that. Does that make sense?

GR: Well, yeah, to a certain degree.

But maybe I’m missing something. I mean, like, please let me stress that I do not condone anti-Semitism, even for a second, neither do you. But this racist Zionist viewpoint, which is not shared by all Jews, that’s what we’re confronting.

And I see in our own background that we have a kind of a common heritage in the 19th century. So maybe we can offer something that could kind of unite us in a way. How can we transform the individuals in Israel to wake them up, to stop, you know, cheering on killing civilians? And, you know, is there a lesson from our own past that could affect the Israelis in the future?

MW: Yeah, the most effective tool we have right now, one of the EU leaders said it just two days ago, he said, “the only way Netanyahu’s going to stop bombing Gaza is when he runs out of bombs.”

And this is basically what the United States is called upon to do, is just to cease all provision of lethal weaponry until they start coinciding with not just our policy and the intentions of the Biden Administration, but the official policy of Democrats and Republicans alike, dating back 57 years. It’s always been the two-state solution. This creeping annexation is making the possibility of a two-state solution impossible.

So that is what we should be emphasizing. And that is what is in U.S. interests. It’s only to be humouring Israel by sending them more weaponry when it’s clearly in violation of our own goals in the region is foolish beyond, you know, beyond anything.

GR: And in the minute or so we’ve got left, I understand you’re following these student encampments throughout the United States and actually around the world. I mean, do you see this as basically a major lens through which we can force a change of the guard, both within our own country and in Israel?

MW: You know, this is a very interesting issue because I mean, I think the protesters and the demonstrations have captured the imagination of people who are hopeful for the people to have a positive impact on the government’s policy-making. But here’s where I’m really confused.

And I don’t have an answer for this, but since the Patriot Act in 2001, the government has prepared itself for a moment like this and intensified its warrant-less surveillance of people, its penetration of groups, its isolation of leaders of political organizations. This is not 1965 and we’re not, you know, going through the opposition to the Vietnam War again. This is an entirely different experience and they have a lot of the tools of coercion that can prevent this thing from succeeding.

So we can’t sit on our laurels and think that this is an idea whose time has come because the government is preparing, not only preparing, you’ve probably noticed if you look carefully at what’s happening, they are going great guns to a full show of force, overwhelming force in each case on these peaceful protesters to intimidate them and to coerce them not into going back and pursuing the same activity. So I think that we have to make sure that this whole opposition is nurtured along so that it produces some, you know, basically performs what the American people want it to, because right now the majority, according to Gallup and some other polls of Americans do not support the existing policy in Gaza. So we need something that represents the will of the people.

And this movement is the one that is really pushing the government in that direction.

GR: Mr. Whitney, thank you so much for this enlightened perspective. And we should talk again soon.

MW: Thank you, Michael.

 

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Many scholars committed to Palestinian liberation can no longer do their jobs. That’s because many of the professors most supportive of Palestine don’t have jobs anymore.

This is nowhere truer than in the Gaza Strip — where all 12 universities have been reduced to rubble, and more than 90 professors have been reported killed during Israel’s assault on the territory. The gravity of what United Nations experts warn could amount to U.S.-backed “scholasticide” has no equivalent on American soil.

Yet Israel’s attempted eradication of intellectual life in Gaza echoes far beyond the territory, with U.S. universities ensuring that some professors vocal in their support of Palestine can no longer do their jobs either.

Since the beginning of Israel’s war on Gaza, academics in fields including politics, sociology, Japanese literature, public health, Latin American and Caribbean studies, Middle East and African studies, mathematics, education, and more have been fired, suspended, or removed from the classroom for pro-Palestine, anti-Israel speech.

These educators have little in common. They live in different cities and states and hail from different countries. Some have been teaching in their institutions for decades, some were newly hired. Some taught at private universities, others public. They have varying degrees of job security, from a tenured professor to the most precarious adjunct contracts. And they are racially, ethnically, religiously, age, and gender diverse.

What they share is that, in recent months, they have all staked out positions in favor of Palestinian freedom — positions that lead them to be targeted by pro-Israel groups.

From campus to campus, professors have defended students’ right to protest, but when scholars themselves espouse support for Palestine and opposition to the Israeli state, professional consequences have frequently been grave.

There’s no official tally of the number of academic workers who have lost jobs or faced suspension over support for Palestine, not least because higher education in this country is disarticulated, often privatized, and reliant on short-term contract labor. By and large, professors facing job loss and suspensions over Palestine have brought these allegations into public view by speaking out themselves. Scores of academics across the country are likely under investigation, and many stand to have their contracts quietly expire without renewals.

The Intercept spoke with more than a dozen professors, both adjuncts and those with tenure, whose employment has been imperiled by their pro-Palestine speech. Of the professors I talked to, all were at one point under investigation since October 7; some of the probes closed without findings of wrongdoing. Several faced varying degrees of suspensions, and four of the professors lost their jobs or expect to lose them next week when the semester ends without the renewal of their contracts.

The interviews, including those with campus labor activists and academic associations, revealed a pattern of politically motivated repression where campaigns by pro-Israel advocates can mar the careers of academics because of comments that express outrage at Israel’s ongoing occupation and its war in Gaza.

“The bulk of our inquiries, even our cases, have to do with violations of due process related to non-reappointment, to dismissal, to tenure award, et cetera,” said Anita Levy, senior program officer with the American Association of University Professors. Levy told me that the nonprofit organization, which advocates for faculty rights and academic freedom, currently has opened five cases in recent months related to pro-Palestinian speech.

“When we get five or six of these cases in a two-month period, where there are suspensions related to social media posts over a current event, shall we say, the war in Gaza, that is unusual,” she said. “Of the cases that we’ve opened, none of them have been related to pro-Israel speech. All of them have been in support of the Palestinian cause.”

We are at the dawn of a “new McCarthyism,” Levy said. “This may be the tip of the iceberg.”

Institutions are well positioned to eliminate political dissenters from their payrolls under the misleading banner of protecting Jewish people, primed by heightened Republican attacks on higher education.

“This is beyond the new McCarthyism. This has to deal fundamentally with Islamophobia, anti-Muslim racism, anti-Arab racism, anti-Palestinian racism,” said Mohamed Abdou, who is a visiting professor in Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African studies at Columbia University — that is, until this semester ends.

Columbia President Minouche Shafik announced that the university was cutting ties with Abdou during a congressional hearing last month about antisemitism on campus. Abdou was one of five professors named by the school administrator but the only one without the relative protection of tenure. His one-year contract ends this month.

“What she effectively did was blacklist me globally,” Abdou told me of Shafik’s testimony. (Columbia did not respond to a request for comment.)

Abdou said he was smeared for words in a Facebook post on October 11 that were taken dramatically out of context. The activist-scholar was framed in Congress and in the right-wing media as an antisemite and Hamas supporter. His lengthy post asks readers to think about a future for Palestine, and support for resistance, beyond the binary of a secularized, Eurocentric state formation, or “Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s neoconservative idea of Sharia.”

Screenshot from Abdou’s Facebook

“I’m against any form of authoritarianism,” Abdou — whose work focuses on Islam, anarchism, and settler colonialism since 1492 — told me.

One extramural social media post has been weaponized to undo Abdou’s career, after 20 years of teaching in Canada, Egypt, and the U.S. in fields including queer studies and Indigenous studies, leaving the scholar with scant recourse and limited options. He is hardly alone.

“Fired After 18 Years”

Anti-Palestinian repression on U.S. campuses since October 7 has not been subtle. Students and faculty face far-reaching discriminatory censure and defamatory allegations for pro-Palestinian advocacy, as administrators jump to appease pro-Israel donors and conservative political interests.

In the last months, school administrators called in riot cops to clear student encampments and arrest thousands at Columbia University, City College of New York, Emerson College, Emory University, New York University, the University of Austin at Texas, and more. It was brutal state violence against students not seen since the campus movement against the Vietnam War — justified this time by flimsy claims about student safety, undergirded by a conflation of anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

There have been scenes of faculty solidarity. Last week, faculty members at the New School in New York, where I teach, launched the first faculty-led solidarity encampment, following the shuttering of the student encampment with mass arrests. In late April, dozens of professors and others from New York University formed a line around their protesting students as police were called in to raid their encampment; faculty and students were all arrested together. Footage capturing the arrests of Emory Philosophy Department Chair Noëlle McAfee and economics professor Caroline Fohlin, the latter who was slammed brutally to the ground by cops, was shared widely online.

Yet once media attention moves away from encampment sweeps and violent arrests, many professors who have lost work will still be without their livelihoods or left facing precarious futures with their reputations unfairly besmirched.

“I was fired after 18 years as a professor of Latin American and Caribbean studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice,” Danny Shaw said. He was told last month by administrators at the college, which is part of the public City University of New York system, that he would not be reappointed to his longtime adjunct position. Shaw’s colleagues had moved to reappoint him but were overruled by John Jay President Karol Mason, according to an open letter from the economics department.

https://x.com/JJayEcon/status/1775622502972084645

“The non-reappointment of Danny Shaw is an unacceptable action,” Shaw’s colleagues in the economics department wrote in their open letter. “Danny Shaw is a valuable member of his department who has been teaching at John Jay since 2007. Professor Shaw is an excellent teacher who has received a Distinguished Teaching Award.”

The dismissal followed right-wing, pro-Israel online harassment, Shaw said, in response to his showing vocal support for Palestine and opposition to Israel following October 7 and the start of Israel’s bombardments.

“I saw a genocide in motion, so I began to organize demonstrations and teach-ins and conferences,” Shaw told me.

On his X account in mid-October, in the wake of stridently bellicose remarks from Israeli officials, Shaw wrote in a now-deleted post that Zionism “is beyond a mental illness; it’s a genocidal disease.” The target was unambiguously Zionist ideology and its adherents, not Jews for being Jewish. The speech is also clearly within the bounds of First Amendment protections. It was, of course, decried as antisemitic.

The pattern is now familiar. Zionist groups like Canary Mission and Antisemitism.org, which have made a business of going after faculty and students online, single out those on campus with pro-Palestine views. Universities then face political and donor pressure to censure the targeted professors.

Many academics now facing termination, suspension, or having their contracts not renewed told me their open support for Palestinian freedom was nothing new and had never been a significant issue before. “I’ve been doing Palestinian solidarity work since the 1990s when I was a teenager,” Shaw said.

At the time John Jay cut ties with Shaw, CUNY was facing increasing pressure from the city and state, with the threat of funding loss tied to trumped-up claims of spiking antisemitism on campus. In late October, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul ordered an independent investigation into antisemitism at CUNY. (A spokesperson for John Jay College said the school can’t comment on personnel matters.)

CUNY has ended its relationship with at least on other professor because of speech related to Israel’s war on Gaza. One, Lisa Hofmann-Kuroda, a scholar of Japanese literature formerly at CUNY’s Hunter College, told me in a statement that a student reported several of her pro-Palestine social media posts to the head of her department in November. Nothing in the posts, she noted, was antisemitic. “The only thing I have done,” she said, “is to criticize the state of Israel for its 75-year brutal occupation of Palestine and criticize Americans for their complicity or silence in this genocide.”

Pro-Israel speech incurs consequences much less frequently, but it does happen. In one case, Arizona State University put postdoctoral research fellow Jonathan Yudelman on leave after a video of a pro-Israel rally went viral. In the video, shot near campus in May, Yudelman gets in the face of a woman in a hijab, who says her religious boundaries are being violated. Yudelman replies, “You disrespect my sense of humanity, bitch.” A statement released by the school last week said that Yudelman “is on leave from Arizona State University pending the outcome of an investigation” into the incident. The statement said that, prior to the event, “Yudelman had already resigned his position at ASU, effective June 30, and he was not scheduled to teach any additional courses.”

Yudelman’s case is a rare exception to the rule that treats support for Palestine as a professional liability.

Tenure in the Age of Unsafety

What the late, legendary civil rights attorney Michael Ratner coined as “the Palestine exception to free speech” is not new, though its escalation in the months since October has been ferocious.

“Repression of anti-Zionism has a long and ugly history in academe. It really started to pick up after 1967,” Palestinian American scholar and author Steven Salaita told me by email, referring to the period of the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, a time when support for Israel was growing in the U.S. “Too many people to remember have been negatively affected. But it’s worse now than I’ve ever seen it.”

Salaita was fired for pro-Palestinian speech in 2014, a forerunner for the current repressive moment. After Salaita was let go from a tenured position in American Indian Studies at the University of Illinois over tweets criticizing Israel, a public records request on Salaita’s behalf revealed communications between the university and several wealthy donors threatening to withdraw financial support unless Salaita was fired. The university eventually settled a lawsuit by Salaita for $875,000.

“I’d say that on the one hand my situation with the University of Illinois a decade ago is exactly like what so many of my colleagues and comrades currently suffer,” Salaita told me. “On the other hand, my situation was different insofar as I was fired from a tenured professorship, which is highly uncommon.”

In recent years, right-wing culture warriors and administrators with their eyes on the bottom line have been trying to find ways to fire tenured professors. As political theorist Joshua Clover, a tenured professor at the University of California, Davis, pointed out, universities for the most part have only been able to achieve this by closing down whole departments on purported economic grounds. The attack of pro-Palestinian speech, though, offers a whole new avenue, under the guise of protecting Jewish students.

Broad and vague charges of “making students feel unsafe” allow universities to scrutinize everything a professor does, inside or outside of the classroom. Clover, who has himself been targeted by Canary Mission for anti-Zionist speech, told me this enables “extramural speech to be treated as something relevant to people’s work situation.”

“There’s nothing extramural anymore,” he said. “We’re all at work 24 hours a day, wherever we are.”

It was extramural speech — an essay for a leftist publisher — that earned a suspension from teaching for Jodi Dean, a tenured political theorist at Hobart and William Smith Colleges in New York, where she has taught for 30 years. (She remains employed at the university.) Her essay was condemned for describing seeing images of the breach of the Gaza wall on October 7 as “exhilarating,” and the college president said in a letter that there “may be students on our campus who may feel threatened in or outside of the classroom.”

“I have been here for 20 years and I haven’t seen anything like this,” Paul Passavant, a professor of politics at Hobart and William Smith, told Middle East Eye of Dean’s suspension. “​​It is a total violation of academic freedom. And it violates the integrity of the institution as an academic institution.”

In response to requests for comment, a Hobart and William Smith spokesperson forwarded three letters from university leadership that had been sent out to the college community in mid-April.

“Professor Dean has the right to express her views,” the school’s provost and dean of faculty Sarah Kirk wrote in an April 15 letter. “It is also true that Hobart and William Smith has the obligation under federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VI, to investigate and take prompt action where the possibility exists that there is a hostile environment based on national origin, shared ancestry, or other protected classes that may interfere with a student’s ability to learn and enjoy the benefits of an education.” The letters all say that Dean has been “relieved” of classroom duties while she is under investigation by the school.

Activist and scholar Amin Husain likewise was punished for extramural speech. He had called for Palestinian liberation for many years, but he was only suspended from his adjunct position at New York University in January of this year.

Husain told me that the university’s human resources department questioned him not only about his anti-Zionist statements, but also about social media content posted by an abolitionist art collective, Decolonize This Place, that he is affiliated with. None of the collective’s posts were attributed to Husain specifically.

“I’ve been teaching for seven or eight years. Never one complaint,” Husain told me. He added that his suspension was not the result of a student complaint but evidence taken from “doxing outlets.” While he is technically suspended, Husain is an adjunct with a contract ending this month. (NYU did not respond to a request for comment.)

“I’m never going to be hired by NYU,” he told me. Of the university, he said, “You destroyed my reputation, and you never even did the due diligence.”

A letter of support for Husain, signed by over 2,000 artists, writers, academics, and students, said, “These attacks on speech (and speakers) reflect the ideology behind the logic of destruction inflicted on the cultural infrastructure of Palestine itself.”

“Now Is the Time”

The issue of academic freedom on Palestine is inseparable from the labor struggles that have been rocking universities over the past decade.

“Until recently, labor unions in this country have been incredibly weak, the impact of which is emboldened university leaders who are enacting increasingly repressive policies on their campuses,” Molly Ragan, a union organizer with UAW Local 7902, who teaches at the Parsons School of Design, part of the New School university. “What I’ve learned in my two years as a UAW staff organizer working with faculty and student workers in NYC is that the labor movement and pro-Palestine movement go hand in hand.”

Alongside the New School’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter, two student worker unions, both unionized with the UAW, organized the student-led encampment on campus. Two weeks ago, that protest camp was cleared out in a surprise police raid involving over 40 arrests.

Ragan noted that labor involvement aimed to provide “a legal shield for the encampment because any retaliation is a violation of our basic Section 7 right to concerted activity under the NLRA” — a reference to the National Labor Relations Act’s protection of workplace collective action. On Monday, ACT-UAW Local 7902 filed an unfair labor practice charge against the school over the arrests on campus and treatment of the encampment participants.

The importance of supporting scholars who speak out for Palestine, however, goes far beyond free speech and worker protections. Israel’s occupation and its ongoing brutal war are constant reminders of the more salient issues at work.

Despite continuous police raids, the protest camps are spreading. Nearly 200 campuses nationwide established encampments in the last month to demand divestment from Israel, its military apparatus, and the corporations that benefit from it.

“I don’t think the repression will work, not if its ultimate goal is to keep people quiet. If the goal is punishment in and of itself, then the tactic is effective,” Salaita, the scholar, told me. “But if silence is the desired outcome, then Zionist organizations are failing miserably, and will continue to fail miserably. Nobody’s going to stop talking about Palestine at this point.”

Clover, the Davis professor, echoed the sentiment. “If you’re going to be fired for standing up for Palestine, now is the time to do it anyway,” Clover said. “Now is the time to do it in the most serious and principled ways.”

Nowhere is this principled defiance better exemplified than among the Palestinian scholars who have lost the most.

“We will never tire, be frightened, or threatened to stop advocating for justice and peace and to stop the ongoing slaughter and genocide in Palestine,” Ahmed Alhussaina, the vice president of Israa University, one of Gaza’s most celebrated institutions of higher education and research, told me by email.

“It’s really a shame to witness such a disgrace in the American political system,” said Alhussaina. “There is a McCarthyite campaign to silence the Palestinian voice in all American universities, large and small, but there is broad determination and support for Gaza and Palestine in all universities, and it will be difficult to contain this youth tide.”

Alhussaina, who has lost 102 relatives to Israel’s onslaught, fled Gaza in November. At the start of the war, the Israeli military seized his university and turned it into a barracks and a detention center, before destroying it in a massive, controlled explosion.

*

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

This article was published in 2022.

A thriving trading nation or a land without a people? Historians and witnesses tell the other side of the Palestinian story.

“A land without a people, and a people without a land” is how the relationship between Palestine and the Jewish people was described by Christian writers in the 1800s. And the 20th-century history of the Middle East has largely been written through these eyes.

But this film from Al Jazeera Arabic looks at Palestine from a different angle. It hears from historians and witness accounts, and features archive documents that show Palestine as a thriving province of Greater Syria and the Ottoman Empire at the dawn of the 20th century.

The evidence suggests that its cities had a developing trade and commercial sector, growing infrastructure, and embryonic culture that would enable it to meet the challenges of the decades ahead.

However, the political ramifications of the Balfour Declaration, San Remo Conference and British Mandate set in motion a series of events that profoundly affected this vibrant, fledgeling society and led to the events of 1948 and beyond.

This film is the other side of the Palestinian story.

*

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

Featured image: Palestinians in Jaffa in the 1920s (From the Public Domain)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

Introduction 

Israel has stated that they are not behind the death of President Raisi. 

Israel on Monday denied involvement in the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash that also killed several officials of his entourage.

“It wasn’t us,” news agency Reuters quoted an official, who requested anonymity.

For further details click here.

***

Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi has died after a helicopter carrying him and other officials crashed in a mountainous and forested area of the country in poor weather.

The 63-year-old, a figure representing conservative and hardline factions in Iranian politics, was president for nearly three years, and appeared on track to run for re-election next year.

A former chief justice, Raisi was touted as a potential successor to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the 85-year-old supreme leader of Iran.

Raisi was born in Mashhad in northeastern Iran, a religious hub for Shia Muslims. He underwent religious education and was trained at the seminary in Qom, studying under prominent scholars, including Khamenei.

Also like the supreme leader, he wore a black turban, which signified that he was a sayyid – a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, a status with particular significance among Twelver Shia Muslims.

Raisi racked up experience as a prosecutor in multiple jurisdictions before coming to Tehran in 1985. It was in the capital city that, according to human rights organisations, he was part of a committee of judges who oversaw executions of political prisoners.

The late president was a longtime member of the Assembly of Experts, the body that is tasked with choosing a replacement for the supreme leader in the event of his death.

He became attorney general in 2014 for two years, when he was appointed by Khamenei to lead the Astan Quds Razavi. The colossal bonyad, or charitable trust, has billions of dollars in assets and is the custodian of the shrine of Imam Reza, the eighth Shia imam.

Raisi initially ran for president in 2017, unsuccessfully challenging the re-election of former President Hassan Rouhani, who represented the centrist and moderate camps.

After a short hiatus, Raisi was making headlines as the new head of the Iranian judiciary system, having been appointed by Khamenei in 2019. He presented himself as a defender of justice and a fighter against corruption, and made many provincial travels to garner popular support.

Raisi became president in 2021 amid low voter turnout and wide disqualification of reformist and moderate candidates, and appeared to have secured a firm footing for re-election.

Like other top Iranian officials, his harshest rhetoric was reserved for Israel and the United States, followed by their Western allies.

Raisi made many speeches since the start of the war on Gaza in October to condemn “genocide” and “massacres” committed by Israel against Palestinians, and called on the international community to intervene.

He promised revenge against Israel after it levelled Tehran’s consulate building in Syria and killed seven members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including two generals.

And he welcomed Iran’s response, which was to launch hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel, most of which were shot down by a coalition of Israeli allies – but left Iran claiming an overall success.

Raisi was hawkish on Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which has been in limbo after former US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from it in 2018.

He was a champion of the strategic policy of “resistance” and “resilience” that Khamenei has adopted in the face of the harshest-ever sanctions that Iran has faced – imposed after the nuclear deal fell through.

A close ally of the IRGC, the late president was also a staunch backer of the “axis of resistance” of political and armed groups that Iran supports across the region, including in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

And he was a strong backer of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who Iran has supported in his government’s war against the Syrian opposition, which has left hundreds of thousands dead.

Read the complete Al Jazeera article, click here

*

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

Featured image is licensed under CC BY 4.0

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

After the unexpected collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, there was an urgent necessity to preserve the relations between Russia and Africa. A lot of post-Soviet political changes took place at the crucial time, Boris Yeltsin became the first President of the Russian Federation. 

It is historically worthy to note that all the Soviet republics attained their political independence and territorial sovereignty. Consequently, Russia was among these new republics. The primary task at the beginning was to redesign the constitution, update several state documents and, most importantly, to decide on a new foreign policy.

Determining the new foreign policy parameters was not an easy national task, to incorporate and maintain continuity of diplomatic relations with countries in the different regions of the world. Measuring the impact of today’s experiences, the historical legacy carried over from Soviet times to the new phase (1991-1992) were made possible by a number of politicians, academics and researchers. Navigating carefully Russia’s historical chronology is paramount, and giving resonating credits to personalities, who initially supported Russia’s external relations with Africa, is duly significant here.

The post-Soviet political process entailed determining these initial tasks, reviewing policy performance with emerging challenges, highlighting various obstacles hindering policy implementation and charting future pathways into the multifaceted spheres with Africa. In addition, policy strategies were necessary tools carving new perceptions in dealing African leaders, public institutions, policymakers and the African public.

According reports, the Institute for African Studies under the Russian Academy of Sciences serves as a trusted intermediary between Kremlin/MFA and Africa, during the past three decades. It created platforms for high-level discussions and provided the necessary support, in terms of political dialogues, strengthening economic partnerships as well as education and cultural directions between Russia and Africa.

Post-Soviet Players in Russia-African Landscape: Professor Alexey Mikhailovich Vasilyev

Obviously, Russia took the most difficult task, reminiscent of the Cold War in the 1980s and early 1990s when East-West confrontation was at its heights. Unforgettable roles were taken by prominent personalities, among them Professor Alexey Mikhailovich Vasilyev, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) and the Honorary President of the Institute for African Studies (IAS). After him was appointed Professor Irina O. Abramova, who holds the position from 2016 until present. 

Professor Alexey Vasilyev was the director of the Institute for African Studies (IAS) during Yeltsin’s political administration (1992 until 2016). Later, in search for an experienced professional to positively influence Russian-African relations, Russian President Vladimir Putin appointed him as the first Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for contacts with the leaders of African states (2006-2011). Quite apart from that, he served as a member of the Foreign Policy Council of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Recipient of state awards: the Orders of Honour and Friendship, various medals.

Over five decades of academic, literary and journalistic work, Professor Vasilyev has published 40 books, including revised editions and translations, and more than 900 articles in Russian and foreign academic journals, not counting several hundred interviews given to Russian and foreign TV and radio channels. He has been the chief editor of about 50 monographs, including the two-volume Encyclopedia of Africa. 

Professor Vasilyev has pioneered the analysis of a number of socio-economic problems of Africa, in particular the assessment of the nature of the African society as multidimensional, combining patriarchal and traditional elements with modern ones. (The monographs Africa: The Stepchild of Globalization and Africa and the Challenges of the XXI Century).

Professor Vasilyev and Russia’s African Agenda

The history of the contemporary Russia’s relations with Africa largely has been built on the past, what was preserved since the Soviet times and early stages of post-Sovietism (1991 until now). 

Professor Vasilyev said, during the International Africanist Conference under the theme ‘Does Africa Need Russia or Russia Needs Africa’ held in 2010, that “this new stage and this new quality of relations should be based on common values. It is based on long-standing traditions of friendship and solidarity created when the Soviet Union supported the struggle of the peoples of Africa against colonialism, racism and apartheid, protected their independence and sovereignty, and helped establish statehood.”

This article underscores the fact that the Kremlin and MFA largely operated under the guidance of Professor Vasilyev, moreso officially recognized as the President’s Special Representative for African Affairs. He consistently offered the strategic initiatives in promoting the sustainability of relations with African countries. Undoubtedly, he created regularly platforms for high-level policy discussions and pathways for strengthening economic partnership between the Russian Federation and Africa.

Beyond that and still working under Putin, Professor Vasilyev also cooperated closely with Russian state institutions such the Federation Council and State Duma (the upper and lower legislative organs respectively) in adopting legislations and regulations relating to specific dimensions and aspects of bilateral agreements within the framework of the foreign policy for Africa.

Worth emphasizing here that Russia’s new strategy (post-Soviet strategy) on Africa was first pursued by Professor Vasilyev with the first Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Kozyrev, Evgeny Primakov (Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Foreign Relations), and later with the then Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, and now Sergey Lavrov.

According to several narratives, since Soviet’s collapse Russia has embarked on fighting “neo-colonialism” which it considers as a stumbling stone on its way to regain a part of its Soviet-era influence in Africa. 

Russia continues to convince Africans, over the years, the likely dangers of neocolonial tendencies perpetrated by the former colonial Western and European powers and the scramble for resources on the continent. In order for Africa to have a fairer treatment and unified voice on international stage, Russia is relentlessly advocating for multipolarism, for establishing a new global order.

Professor Vasilyev’s Influence on Africa’s Development

Within the situation analysis, we can readily agree that Russia’s approach towards Africa is a derivative of its foreign policy goals and objectives, the three key areas being:

a) Ensuring national security, integrity and political sovereignty. In the African context, this means primarily the danger of anything, including competition with other centers of power, that may push for negative impact on its national security. Russia stands against these negative tendencies in Africa.

b) Ensuring social and economic development of Africa. Africa is a promising market for Russia, and it factors in to facilitate the diversification and modernization of the continent’s economy, but this is implemented on bilateral basis. 

c) Strengthening the position of the Russian Federation as one of the influential centers in African world. Political dialogues with individual African countries, regional organizations and the African Union as friendly players make important diverse contributions to these efforts mentioned in (point a) and (point b) above. 

Usually referred to as hugely endowed with resources, both natural and human, it is now an attraction for the global powers. Nevertheless, Russia’s explicit position right after the Soviet era has been helping African states to protect their political sovereignty, to attain steadfast regional peace and stability, and further to accelerate the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The fact can logically be established that “the early birds caught the flies” at this point of the discussion. There are personalities who supervised and implemented the policy after Soviet’s collapse. In this context, Professor Alexey Vasilyev as Director of African Studies Institute (1992 until 2016) and as the President’s Special Representative for African Affairs, in practical terms, has to his credit – so many landmark achievements and that has made an appreciable impact on Russia-African relations.

In a nutshell, the ideological basis for cooperation at this level is provided by the conceptual documents and ideas recognized and supported by African countries: the approach of – “African Solutions to African Problems” – is being followed, working within the framework of the African Union Agenda 2063 and the UN Development Goals 2030.

*

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.

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.

Featured image is from the author

The WHO Health Tyranny – Or Not?

May 20th, 2024 by Peter Koenig

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) General Assembly, the World Health Assembly (WHA) representing all 194 member states, will take place in Geneva, from 27 May to 1 June 2024.

During that crucial week, the WHA is expected to vote on the controversial “Pandemic Treaty” and the new revised International Health Regulation (IHR, last revision 2005). With two thirds of the countries yes-vote, the treaty and the new IHR would be approved. This would give the WHO, more precisely, the WHO’s Director General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, full power in matters of health and climate change over and above individual member countries health sovereignty.

Yes, climate change too, because climate change (the hoax) is pretended to also be responsible largely for human and animal health.

This approval would be creating a One World Health — in, maybe soon to come, a One World Government.

They are both on top of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) and the UN’s agendas. The WEF/ UN alliance signed in June 2019, is officially to ‘accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, which is equivalent to the WEF’s Great Reset, that ends in “You will own nothing but will be happy”.

Dr. Tedros was put into this WHO Director General (DG) position by Bill Gates, one of the WHO’s largest donors. The WHA just rubber-stamped Tedros into the WHO-DG position. Mr. Tedros is pursued for criminal activities in his home country, Ethiopia.

Funding for UN agencies’ budgets usually comes from member countries set contributions. The case of WHO is quite different. WHO is funded up to 87% (the precise percentage depends on the year) by the private sector, of which Big Pharma including the infamous NGO, GAVI (the “Vaccination Association”), with their offices just across the drive-way from WHO – and other interest groups, like Big Tech, Big Finance and Bill Gates and more.

Therefore, WHO, created in 1948 as a Rockefeller initiative, is not a real UN agency.

Gates, Rockefeller, Rothschild foundations are known for their eugenist agendas. They are supporting WHO.

*

According to Article 55 of the WHO’s IHR, the final text to be voted on (Pandemic Treaty and revised IHR) should have been distributed to all member countries four months ahead of the WHA, i.e. on 27 January 2024. That did not happen. As of today, no official distribution of the final texts has taken place.

Still, the fear is that despite this WHO Constitutional shortcoming the vote will take place, even if muddled through behind closed doors, as has happened in the past, in particular during the most secretive negotiations for these two technocratic and world-dictatorial agreements. It is said, unwilling country representatives (in most cases they are countries’ respective Health Ministers), maybe coerced, or exchanged for more willing participants.

The proposed amendments (Pandemic Treaty and IHR) among other threats to public freedom, stand to:

  • Require surveillance of online information and censorship of information deemed “misinformation.”
  • Require health documents that could be used to restrict access and travel.
  • Force extreme lockdown measures.
  • Allow the WHO to declare a “public health emergency of international concern” at will.

According to a “Global Health Policy” article, published on 1 April 2024, there is a possibility that the vote will be “postponed” – or “indefinitely deferred” – or set up for new negotiations, due to potentially insufficient votes. This is what they say:

What are possible outcomes of the agreement negotiations?”

“WHO member states are expected to vote on the final text of the agreement during the WHA meeting this year, which starts on May 27, 2024. It is also possible that before then, member states decide to delay the vote to allow for more negotiating time. They may also choose to halt the process temporarily or permanently if sufficient agreement cannot be reached. If member states vote in favor, the agreement would be adopted as one of several different types of international legal agreements allowed under the WHO Constitution. Which form it takes is the subject of ongoing negotiations at the International Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB), but possibilities include a “treaty”, a “regulation” or a “resolution” / ”decision,” each of which has specific characteristics and implications.”

For full article, see this.

*

Dr. Meryl Nass, who has been thoroughly following the WHO “Pandemic Treaty / IHR” negotiating process, and founder and President of “Door to Freedom”, explains in a 16-min video, Why the WHO’s New Plan Should Worry Everyone. See video below.

Technocracy News further explains the wider implications of the new WHO treaty and IHR agreements, if they were to be approved. See this.

*

Just in – on a more positive outlook, Dr. Meryl Nass, explains that according to latest accounts 22 Attorneys-General in the US have told Joe Biden that the WHO will not be making public policy in their States. See this

Simultaneously, US Senators Drop another Bombshell on the World Health Organization. In a shocking but positively surprising turn of events, all Republican senators (49), led by Senator Ron Johnson, have formally urged President Joe Biden to withdraw his support in expanding the WHO’s pandemic authority. For more on Senator Ron Johnson, see this.

Given these last-minute new circumstances and turns of events – it is possible that WHO / WHA will decide not to vote in their end-May 2024 Assembly, but to bring the new documents – Pandemic Treaty and revised IHR – to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in September 2024.

What would happen there is uncertain. Even if the UNGA might vote for the new sovereignty-killing agreements, the vote might have to go to the UN Security Council (UNSC), where there is a chance that at least one of the veto countries might vote against it.

However, it is too soon to declare “victory”. The defeat of the planned WHO health tyranny – One Health Order – is not yet certain. For sure, the fight is far from over. But as the public at large is gaining more insight and awakening due to these recent events, hopes are that this Globalist agenda item in the Globalist’s plan to subdue the world into a One World Government under a One Health System – may be overturned.

It is still a Warning – but also a Big Hope. Collective Hope may have a tremendous impact on world events.

*

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 is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

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

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Antarctica, a continent about 40% larger than Europe in area, has also been called the world’s largest desert and the coldest, windiest, loneliest continent. Such descriptions do not exactly make this the most attractive continent, but in keeping with our times, those looking for minerals and geo-strategic advantages can find their own allurements.

So far this continent has been among the relatively better managed places in the world, but this can change rapidly with the increasingly emerging fearful possibilities of ecological disruption and even militarization.

.

.

If such a drift takes place, this will be a tragedy much beyond this continent as Antarctica has a very important role in protecting the badly endangered ecology of the entire planet.

The vast ice sheets which cover this continent almost entirely make an important contribution in maintaining heat balance by naturally deflecting sun rays, and this has an increasingly more protective role for earth. This continent contributes also by maintaining the water circulation system.

The glaciers here are estimated to have 70 per cent of the freshwater supply of the world.

This is a habitat for many species which are found only here, and some of the species found here, such as the larger whales, have important protective roles on their own.

Although best known for its many species of penguins and seals, Antarctica is also home to its unique krills which provide food for many species apart from playing other ecologically important roles.

Although ecologists have been warning against increasing dangers of plastics, other pollutants and above all invasive species being introduced here in recent times as well as the threat posed by destructive fishing practices, on the whole the continent has been reasonably well protected so far in terms of any locally caused ruin. However in terms of the impact of the wider climate change and global warming, of course the fragile ecology of this continent has suffered in terms of heavy melting of ice and glaciers and habitats of several species being threatened in the process.

However if future activities contribute much more heavily to local ecological ruin, then the vicious cycle will be completed as global warming melts the continent, also releasing more buried carbon, on the one hand and on the other hand local ruin disrupts the continent’s protective role and contributes further to climate change and other serious ecological ruin, pushing the continent closer towards tipping points.

So far much harm could be avoided because of the systems put in place by the Antarctica Treaty System (ATS) created by the Antarctica Treaty of 1959/1961 which put in place a system of avoiding exploitation and exploration of minerals as well as banning military activities/militarization. This was strengthened further by the follow-up protocol framed in 1998 which beautifully agreed to preserve the Antarctica as an ‘International Nature Reserve Dedicated to Science and Peace’. This protocol is supposed to last at least for 50 years up to the year 2048 when again hopefully this can be extended.

However this system could function reasonably effectively so far because most of the involved countries were not motivated to disrupt it. Now with an increasingly more divided world which is more hawkish on exploring geo-strategic advantages and which is also getting greedier for certain rare minerals or other valuable natural resources, this can change. 

While the systems on place have worked well here so far, their loopholes and susceptibilities will be exposed once the main actors involved become more aggressive. To give an example, the current system gives all exemptions for research stations, even some military personnel. This can be misused to get in more military personnel. Research is supposed to be for civilian purposes, but exploiting dual use possibilities as well as some hidden research, work of military importance can also be taken up. Similarly, research work can include secret mineral exploration work as well, which is most likely to lead to wider mineral exploration and ultimately mining work if the prospects are found to be very alluring.

There are prospects for lucrative fishing as well as for creating new sea routes. Domination of the sky here can lead to a big military advantage over a wide area. The clear sky here may delight nature lovers, but those interested in space warfare research and satellite tracking may take a very different view of the possibilities.

The original treaty was signed by 12 countries. Seven out of these have claimed territories—Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and UK. No less important is the reported fact that the USA, Russia and China have reserved rights to making future claims. Many more countries, over 30, have set up permanent research bases. Even efforts for dividing the region along imaginary lines have been discussed, making a mockery of existing treaty and protocol. However so far the treaty and the protocol are in place, and this is a saving grace. 

However clearly many more efforts for strengthening the provisions of peace and ecological protection are needed. One option is to entirely do away with territorial claims and to hand over the continent to the United Nations for governing it entirely on the basis of complete peace and ecological protection as a common heritage of all humankind and forms of life.

*

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

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

Featured image is from the Public Domain

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

In our contemporary education, a technological revolution is underway—a silent technological revolution that transcends the boundaries of ethics, law, pedagogy, sociology, and even the very essence of human existence.

At its epicenter lies the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), a force both awe-inspiring and terrifying in its potential to reshape the landscape of learning and knowledge. As educators and learners grapple with the profound implications of AI in education, they are confronted with a myriad of challenges that extend far beyond the realm of traditional academic discourse and educational praxis. 

This my present essay endeavors to delve deep into the philosophical, analytical, and critical dimensions of the challenges posed by AI in contemporary education, exploring the ethical, legal, pedagogical, technological, sociological, existential, and even the spiritual challenges that AI poses in our contemporary educational system, while examining the implications for issues of creativity, plagiarism, inauthenticity, intellectual rights breaches, academic deception, and cheating that Artificial Intelligence may pose for teachers and students alike.

Foremostly, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in our present educational system challenges our conceptions of ethics and of existential authenticity, forcing us to grapple with questions of “right and wrong”, “authentic and inauthentic” in an increasingly technologically mediated and digitalized world.

As AI algorithms shape educational experiences through personalized learning pathways and adaptive assessments, serious concerns arise about the erosion of student’s autonomy, creativity, originality, authenticity, genuine volition, and free agency in the learning process. The tension between individual freedom and algorithmic determinism underscores the need for ethical frameworks that prioritize intrinsic human values and human rights as well as social equity in the design and deployment of AI-driven educational technologies to students across digital and information divides.

In addition, the proliferation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in our present education raises complex legal issues surrounding data privacy, intellectual property rights, and algorithmic accountability.

As educational institutions collect and analyze vast amounts of student and faculty data to inform AI-driven decision-making processes, questions emerge about the ownership, access, and use of this data. Additionally, concerns about algorithmic bias, algorithmic inauthenticity, skewed algorithmic programing, algorithmic discrimination, as well as algorithmic manipulations highlight the need for transparent, ethical, and accountable algorithms that adhere to principles of fairness and equity. Legal frameworks must evolve to address these challenges, ensuring that the rights and interests of students and educators are safeguarded and protected in an increasingly data-driven global landscape.

From the point-of-view of pedagogy, the integration of Artificial Intelligence presents both opportunities and challenges for educators seeking to foster meaningful learning experiences that transcend the limitations of technology.

On one hand, AI-powered tools and platforms offer the potential to enhance teaching effectiveness through personalized learning experiences, adaptive grading rubrics, students’ output feedback mechanisms, and intelligent mentoring systems. By leveraging AI to analyze student learning patterns and adapt instructional strategies accordingly, educators can create more tailored and responsive learning environments that cater to the diverse needs and abilities of individual learners. However, the reliance on AI also raises concerns about the “de-skilling” of teachers, replacement of warm, alive and personalized mentoring, and the commodification of education, as human instructors are supplanted by automated digitalized computer systems that prioritize impersonal standardization over real authentic creativity, critical thinking and genuine reflection or reflexivity.

Moreover, the integration of Artificial Intelligence in our present educational institutions poses profound technological challenges, ranging from infrastructure and resource constraints to issues of digital/information divide and access inequality to those students who do not have access to these AI programs and applications (apps). In order to fully harness the potential of AI to transform education, investments must be made in digital infrastructure, teacher training, and educational resources to ensure equitable and accessible AI-driven educational opportunities for all learners and mentors alike. Furthermore, efforts must be made to bridge the digital divide and address disparities in access to technology and internet connectivity, particularly in marginalized and economically disadvantaged teachers and students whose access to AI-powered educational tools, programs, and apps may be limited or non-existent.

From a sociological perspective, the integration of Artificial Intelligence in our contemporary educational institutions reshapes social dynamics and power structures within educational institutions, raising questions about the role of technology in mediating interpersonal relationships and shaping social interactions.

As AI-driven algorithms influence decision-making processes related to student admissions, academic performance, and career pathways, concerns arise about the potential for algorithmic discrimination and bias to perpetuate and exacerbate existing inequalities based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, religious, and other demographic factors. Additionally, the reliance on AI-mediated communication channels and virtual learning environments may erode the sense of community and interpersonal connection in educational activities that is integral to the educational experience, leading to feelings of isolation and disengagement among students and educators alike.

From both existential and spiritual frameworks, the integration of Artificial Intelligence in our present educational system confronts us with innermost questions about the nature of human consciousness, human creativity, and the pursuit of truth in an increasingly digitalized and computerized world. As AI algorithms mimic human behaviors and generate content with ever greater efficiency, the boundaries between human and machine, genuine and artificial, real and virtual blur in so many ways that challenge our understanding of what it means to be human and what Reality truly is. In the face of AI-generated content and virtual experiences, profound questions arise about the authenticity and integrity of human expression, as well as the spiritual dimensions of learning and knowledge acquisition that transcend the limitations of technology. As educators and learners grapple with these existential and spiritual challenges, they are called upon to cultivate a deeper awareness of the interconnectedness of all beings and the sacredness of the learning process and our journey to the search for Knowledge, Truth, and Reality.

One final but very crucial point: the integration of Artificial Intelligence in our contemporary educational system gives rise to a host of philosophical, analytical, critical, reflective and cautionary questions that demand careful consideration and thoughtful engagement from all educational stakeholders. By confronting the ethical, legal, pedagogical, technological, sociological, existential, and spiritual challenges posed by AI in education, both learners and mentors can work together towards harnessing the transformative potential of AI to create more inclusive, equitable, and empowering learning environments for both students and teachers. 

Only by navigating and embracing the complexities of AI in our present educational system with openness, justice, fairness, and equity can we trailblaze and traverse the ever-changing and ever-meandering landscapes of learning and ensure that the pursuit of genuine knowledge remains a deeply authentic human endeavor grounded in the values of truth, goodness, justice, and love: an authentic learning that is founded and built-up by genuine humanity, and engaged affective humaneness, and not merely a trivial learning coming from technologies that are separated from the human experience of Life and authentic Living.

*

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.

Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu is Associate Professor-7 of Philosophy and Asian Studies at the University of the Philippines (UP), Cebu City, Philippines. He was Academic Coordinator of the Political Science Program at UP Cebu from 2011-2014, and Program Coordinator of Gender and Development (GAD) Office at UP Cebu from 2015-2016 and from 2018-2019. He is presently the Focal Point Faculty for Gender and Development in the University of the Philippines (UP) Cebu, College of Social Sciences. 

Prof. Espiritu’s research interests include Theoretical and Applied Ethics, Islamic Studies particularly Sunni jurisprudence (Sunni Fiqh), Islamic feminist discourses, Islam in interfaith dialogue initiatives, Islamic environmentalism, Classical Sunni Islamic pedagogy, the writings of Al-Ghazali on pluralism and tolerance, Islam in the Indian Subcontinent, Turkish Sufism, Ataturk Studies, Ottoman Studies, Genghis Khan Studies, Central Asian Studies, Marxian Political Thought, Muslim-Christian Dialogue, Middle Eastern Affairs, Peace Studies, Public Theology, Political Economy, The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Postmodernism in Philosophy.

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

First published by Global Research on November 16, 2022

***

Most people are bewildered by what is a global energy crisis, with prices for oil, gas and coal simultaneously soaring and even forcing closure of major industrial plants such as chemicals or aluminum or steel. The Biden Administration and EU have insisted that all is because of Putin and Russia’s military actions in Ukraine. This is not the case. The energy crisis is a long-planned strategy of western corporate and political circles to dismantle industrial economies in the name of a dystopian Green Agenda. That has its roots in the period years well before February 2022, when Russia launched its military action in Ukraine.

Blackrock pushes ESG

In January, 2020  on the eve of the economically and socially devastating covid lockdowns, the CEO of the world’s largest investment fund, Larry Fink of Blackrock, issued a letter to Wall Street colleagues and corporate CEOs on the future of investment flows. In the document, modestly titled “A Fundamental Reshaping of Finance”, Fink, who manages the world’s largest investment fund with some $7 trillion then under management, announced a radical departure for corporate investment. Money would “go green.” In his closely-followed 2020 letter Fink declared,

“In the near future – and sooner than most anticipate – there will be a significant re-allocation of capital…Climate risk is investment risk.” Further he stated, “Every government, company, and shareholder must confront climate change.” [i]

In a separate letter to Blackrock investor clients, Fink delivered the new agenda for capital investing. He declared that Blackrock will exit certain high-carbon investments such as coal, the largest source of electricity for the USA and many other countries. He added that Blackrock would screen new investment in oil, gas and coal to determine their adherence to the UN Agenda 2030 “sustainability.”

Fink made clear the world’s largest fund would begin to disinvest in oil, gas and coal.  “Over time,” Fink wrote, “companies and governments that do not respond to stakeholders and address sustainability risks will encounter growing skepticism from the markets, and in turn, a higher cost of capital.” He added that, “Climate change has become a defining factor in companies’ long-term prospects… we are on the edge of a fundamental reshaping of finance.” [ii]

From that point on the so-called ESG investing, penalizing CO2 emitting companies like ExxonMobil, has become all the fashion among hedge funds and Wall Street banks and investment funds including State Street and Vanguard. Such is the power of Blackrock. Fink was also able to get four new board members in ExxonMobil committed to end the company’s oil and gas business.

Image is by Michael Buholzer / Copyright WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM/swiss-image.ch

The January 2020 Fink letter was a declaration of war by big finance against the conventional energy industry. BlackRock was a founding member of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (the TCFD) and is a signatory of the UN PRI— Principles for Responsible Investing, a UN-supported network of investors pushing zero carbon investing using the highly-corrupt ESG criteria—Environmental, Social and Governance factors into investment decisions. There is no objective control over fake data for a company’s ESG. As well Blackrock signed the Vatican’s 2019 statement advocating carbon pricing regimes. BlackRock in 2020 also joined  Climate Action 100, a coalition of almost 400 investment managers  managing US$40 trillion.

With that fateful January 2020 CEO letter, Larry Fink set in motion a colossal disinvestment in the trillion-dollar global oil and gas sector. Notably, that same year BlackRock’s Fink was named to the Board of Trustees of Klaus Schwab’s dystopian World Economic Forum, the corporate and political nexus of the Zero Carbon UN Agenda 2030. In June 2019, the World Economic Forum and the United Nations signed a strategic partnership framework to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda.  WEF has a Strategic Intelligence platform which includes Agenda 2030’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

In his 2021 CEO letter, Fink doubled down on the attack on oil, gas and coal. “Given how central the energy transition will be to every company’s growth prospects, we are asking companies to disclose a plan for how their business model will be compatible with a net zero economy,” Fink wrote. Another BlackRock officer told a recent energy conference, “where BlackRock goes, others will follow.” [iii]

In just two years, by 2022 an estimated $1 trillion has exited investment in oil and gas exploration and development globally. Oil extraction is an expensive business and cut-off of external investment by BlackRock and other Wall Street investors spells the slow death of the industry.

Video: BlackRock, the Company that Owns the World

 
 

 

Biden—A BlackRock President?

Early in his then-lackluster Presidential bid, Biden had a closed door meeting in late 2019 with Fink who reportedly told the candidate that, “I’m here to help.” After his fateful meeting with BlackRock’s Fink, candidate Biden announced, “We are going to get rid of fossil fuels…” In December 2020, even before Biden was inaugurated in January 2021, he named BlackRock Global Head of Sustainable Investing,  Brian Deese, to be Assistant to the President and Director of the National Economic Council. Here, Deese, who played a key role for Obama in drafting the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, has quietly shaped the Biden war on energy.

This has been catastrophic for the oil and gas industry. Fink’s man Deese was active in giving the new President Biden a list of anti-oil measures to sign by Executive Order beginning day one in January 2021. That included closing the huge Keystone XL oil pipeline that would bring 830,000 barrels per day from Canada as far as Texas refineries, and halting any new leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Biden also rejoined the Paris Climate Accord that Deese had negotiated for Obama in 2015 and Trump cancelled.

The same day, Biden set in motion a change of the so-called “Social Cost of Carbon” that imposes a punitive $51 a ton of CO2 on the oil and gas industry. That one move, established under purely executive-branch authority without the consent of Congress, is dealing a devastating cost to investment in oil and gas in the US, a country only two years before that was the world’s largest oil producer.[iv]

Killing refinery capacity

Even worse, Biden’s  aggressive environmental rules and BlackRock ESG investing mandates are killing the US refinery capacity. Without refineries it doesn’t matter how many barrels of oil you take from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In the first two years of Biden’s Presidency the US has shut down some 1 million barrels a day of gasoline and diesel refining capacity, some due to covid demand collapse, the fastest decline in US history. The shutdowns are permanent. In 2023 an added 1.7 million bpd of capacity is set to close as a result of BlackRock and Wall Street ESG disinvesting and Biden regulations. [v]

Citing the heavy Wall Street disinvestment in oil and the Biden anti-oil policies, the CEO of Chevron in June 2022 declared that he doesn’t believe the US will ever build another new refinery.[vi]

Larry Fink, Board member of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum, is joined by the EU whose President of the EU Commission, the notoriously corrupt Ursula von der Leyen left the WEF Board in 2019 to become EU Commission head. Her first major act in Brussels was to push through the EU Zero Carbon Fit for 55 agenda. That has imposed major carbon taxes and other constraints on oil, gas and coal in the EU well before the February  2022 Russian actions in Ukraine.  The combined impact of the Fink fraudulent ESG agenda in the Biden administration and the EU Zero Carbon madness is creating the worst energy and inflation crisis in history.

*

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

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Notes

[i] Larry Fink, A Fundamental Reshaping of Finance, Letter to CEOs, January, 2020, https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/2020-blackrock-client-letter

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Tsvetana Paraskova,  Why Are Investors Turning Their Backs On Fossil Fuel Projects?, OilPrice.com,

March 11, 2021, https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-Are-Investors-Turning-Their-Backs-On-Fossil-Fuel-Projects.html

[iv] Joseph Toomey, Energy Inflation Was by Design, September, 2022, https://assets.realclear.com/files/2022/10/2058_energyinflationwasbydesign.pdf

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Fox Business, Chevron CEO says there may never be another oil refinery built in the US, June 3. 2022, https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/chevron-ceo-oil-refinery-built-u-s

First World War and Imperialism. Dr. Jacques Pauwels

May 20th, 2024 by Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Imperialism, the worldwide expansion of capitalism, motivated by the lust for raw materials such as petroleum, markets and cheap labour, involved fierce competition among great powers such as the British Empire, czarist Russia, and the German Reich, and thus led to the Great War of 1914–1918, later to be known as the First World War or World War I.

The First World War was the product of the nineteenth century, a “long century” in the view of some historians, lasting from 1789 to 1914. It was characterized by revolutions of a political, social, and also economic nature, especially the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, and ended with the emergence of imperialism, that is a new, worldwide manifestation of capitalism, originally a European phenomenon. This essay focuses on how imperialism played a decisive role in the outbreak, course, and outcome of the “Great War” of 1914–1918; it is based on the author’s book,

The Great Class War 1914–1918, James Lorimer, Toronto, 2016.

When the French Revolution broke out in 1789, the nobility (or aristocracy) constituted the ruling class in just about every country in Europe. But because of the French Revolution and other revolutions that followed – not only in France – in 1830 and 1848, the haute bourgeoisie or upper-middle class was able, by the middle of the century, not to unseat the nobility, but to join it at the apex of the social and political pyramid. Thus was formed an “active symbiosis” of two classes that were in fact very different. The nobility was characterized by great wealth based on large landownership, had a strong preference for conservative political ideas and parties, and tended to cultivate clerical connections. The upper-middle class, on the other hand, favored the ideology and parties of liberalism as well as free-thinking and even anti-clericalism, and its wealth was generated by activities in commerce, industry, and finance. The two had been on opposite sides of the barricades during the revolutions of 1789, 1830, and 1848, when the bourgeoisie had been a revolutionary class and the aristocracy the counter-revolutionary class par excellence. What united these two propertied classes, namely in 1848, was their common fear of a class enemy that threatened their wealth, power, and privileges: the poor, restless, and potentially revolutionary “underclass,” propertyless and therefore known as the proletariat, the “people who own nothing but their offspring.”

The upper-middle class ceased to be revolutionary and joined the nobility on the counter-revolutionary side after the revolutions that shook Europe in 1848. Those events revealed that the lower classes aspired to bring about not only a political but also a social and economic revolution that would mean the end of the power and wealth of not only the nobility but also the bourgeoisie. In the second half of the nineteenth century, then, and until the outbreak of the First World War, the nobility and the haute bourgeoisie formed one single upper class, one single “elite” or “establishment.” But while the bourgeois bankers and industrialists enjoyed more and more economic power, political power tended to remain a monopoly of the aristocrats in most countries, and certainly in big, quasi-feudal empires such as Russia. In any event, all members of the elite were obsessed by the fear of revolution, increasingly embodied by proletarian political parties that subscribed to revolutionary Marxist socialism.

undefined

Illustrator T. Allom, Engraver J. TingleHistory of the cotton manufacture in Great Britain by Sir Edward Baines (From the Public Domain)

The nineteenth century was also the century of the Industrial Revolution. In all countries where that revolution took place, the economy became much more productive. But this eventually caused the economic supply to exceed the demand, as was revealed in 1873 by the outbreak of a totally new kind of economic crisis, a crisis of overproduction. (Earlier economic crises had always been crises of underproduction, in which supply was insufficient in comparison to demand, for example, the infamous potato famine in Ireland in the 1840s.) In the most developed countries, that is, in Western and Central Europe and in the USA, countless small industrial producers disappeared from the economic scene as a result of this economic depression.

The industrial landscape was henceforth dominated by a relatively restricted group of gigantic enterprises, mostly incorporated, joint-stock companies or “corporations,” as well as associations of firms known as cartels, and also big banks. These “big boys” competed with each other, but increasingly, they also concluded agreements and collaborated in order to share scarce raw materials and markets, set prices, and find other ways to limit as much as possible the disadvantages of competition in a theoretically “free” market – and in order to defend and aggressively promote their common interests against foreign competitors and, of course, against workers and other employees. In this system, the big banks played an important role. They provided the credit required by large-scale industrial production and, at the same time, they looked all over the world for opportunities to invest the surplus capital made available by the megaprofits achieved by the corporations. Big banks thus became partners and even owners, or at least major shareholders, of corporations. Concentration, gigantism, oligopolies, and even monopolies characterized this new stage in the development of capitalism. Some Marxist writers have referred to this phenomenon as “monopoly capitalism.”

The industrial and financial bourgeoisie had hitherto been very much attached to the liberal, laissez-faire thinking of Adam Smith, which had assigned to the state only a minimal role in economic life, namely that of “night watch.” But now the role of the state was becoming increasingly important, for example, as buyer of industrial commodities, such as guns and other modern weapons, supplied by gigantic firms and financed by major banks. The industrial-financial elite also counted on the state’s intervention to protect the country’s corporations against foreign competition by means of tariffs on the importation of finished products, even though this violated the classical liberal dogma of free markets and free competition. (It is one of the ironies of history that the USA, today the world’s most fervent apostle of free trade, was extremely protectionist at that time.) “National economic systems” or “national economies” thus emerged, and they proceeded to compete fiercely against each other. State intervention – to be labelled “dirigism” or “statism” by economists – was now also favored because only a strong state was able to acquire foreign territories useful or even indispensable to industrialists and bankers as markets for their finished products or investment capital and as sources of raw materials and cheap labor. These desiderata were not normally available domestically, or at least not in sufficient quantities or at sufficiently low prices, they privileged a country’s industrialists and bankers vis-à-vis foreign competitors, and they helped to maximize profitability.

The kind of territorial acquisitions that could only be achieved under the auspices of a strong and interventionist state, also suited the nobility, the partner of the industrial-financial bourgeoisie within the ruling elite, and in many if not most countries still the class with a near-monopoly of political power. The aristocrats were traditionally large landowners, so it is only natural that they favored territorial acquisitions; the more acreage one controlled, the better. In noble families, moreover, the eldest son traditionally inherited not only the title but the family’s entire patrimony. Newly acquired territory overseas or – in the case of Germany and the Danube Monarchy – in Eastern Europe could function as “lands of unlimited possibilities” where the younger sons could acquire domains of their own and lord it over natives who were to serve as underpaid peasants or domestic servants, just as the Iberian Peninsula’s Reconquista had provided “castles in Spain” to junior aristocrats during the Middle Ages, the nobility’s golden age. Adventurous scions of noble families could also embark on prestigious careers as officers in conquering colonial armies or as high-ranking officials in the administration of colonial territories. (The highest functions in the colonies, for example, that of Viceroy of British India or Governor General of Canada, were indeed reserved almost exclusively for members of aristocratic families.) Finally, the nobility had started to invest heavily in capitalist activities such as mining, a branch of industry interested in overseas regions rich in minerals. The British and Dutch royal families thus acquired enormous portfolios of shares in firms that were prospecting for oil all over the world, such as Shell, so they too were likely to profit from territorial expansion.

Like its upper-middle class partner in the elite, the nobility could also expect to gain from territorial expansion in yet another way; such expansion proved useful as a means to exorcize the spectre of revolution, namely by co-opting potentially troublesome members of the lower orders and integrating them into the established order. How was this achieved?

First but not foremost, considerable numbers of proletarians could be put to work in colonized lands as soldiers, employees, and foremen on plantations and in mines (where the natives served as slaves), low-ranking bureaucrats in the colonial administration, and even missionaries. There they could not only enjoy a higher standard of living than at home but also a certain amount of social prestige, since they could lord it over, and feel superior to, the colored natives. Thus, they became more likely to identify with the state that made this form of social climbing possible and to be integrated into its established order. Second, within the mother countries themselves, a similar socialization of an even larger segment of the lower orders resulted from the acquisition of colonies. The ruthless “super-exploitation” that was possible in the colonies, whose denizens were robbed of their gold, their land, and other riches, and be made to slave away for virtually nothing, yielded “super-profits.”

In the mother country, the employers could thus offer somewhat higher wages and better working conditions to their workers, and the state could start to provide modest social services. At least some of the proletarians in the mother lands thus became better off at the expense of the oppressed and exploited denizens of the colonies. In other words, the misery was exported from Europe to the colonies, to the unhappy lands that would later collectively be known as the “Third World.” (In the USA, the prosperity and freedom of the white population was similarly made possible by the exploitation and oppression of Afro-Americans and “Indians.”) In any event, under those conditions, most European socialists (or social-democrats) increasingly developed warm feelings towards a “fatherland” that treated them better, so they gradually abandoned their traditional Marxist internationalism to become rather nationalistic; discreetly, they – and their socialist (or social-democratic) parties – also ceased to believe in the inevitability and necessity of revolution and migrated from Marx’s revolutionary socialism to socialist “reformism.” This explains why, in 1914, most socialist parties would not oppose the war but would rally behind the flag to defend the fatherland that had presumably been so good to them. Third, territorial expansion also offered an advantage much appreciated by the many members of the elite who subscribed to Malthusianism, a trendy ideology at the time, which blamed overpopulation for the great social problems that ravaged all the industrialized countries. It made it possible to dump the restless and potentially revolutionary demographic surplus in distant lands such as Australia, where they could acquire land and start a farm, for example, by expelling or even exterminating the natives.

Projects for territorial acquisitions, undertaken under the auspices of a strong and even aggressive state, then, were favored by the aristocratic as well as the bourgeois factions of the elite. And they received considerable popular support, because they appealed to the romantic imagination and, more importantly, because even some of the proletarians could help themselves to the crumbs that fell off the table. The second half, and particularly the final quarter, of the nineteenth century thus witnessed a worldwide territorial expansion of European as well as two non-European industrial powers, the USA and Japan. However, the conquest of territories, where desiderata such as precious raw materials were to be found and where there existed plenty of investment opportunities, was rarely possible “next door.” The great exception to this general rule was provided by the USA, who grabbed the vast hunting grounds of the Native Americans, stretching all the way to the coast of the Pacific Ocean, and robbed neighboring Mexico of a huge part of its territory. It was generally more realistic, however, to dream of territorial acquisitions in faraway lands, above all in the “dark continent” that was to become the object of the famous “scramble for Africa.” Great Britain and France acquired vast territories, mostly in Africa but also in Asia. The USA expanded not only on its own continent but robbed Spain via a “splendid little war” of colonial possessions such as the Philippines, and Japan managed to turn Korea into a dependence. Germany, on the other hand, did not do very well, mostly because it remained focused for too long on the establishment of a unified state; as a latecomer in the scramble for colonies, it had to settle for relatively few and certainly less desirable possessions, such as “German Southwest Africa,” now Namibia. In any event, the industrial giants of Europe, plus the USA and Japan, without exception states organized according to capitalist principles, morphed at that time into “mother countries” or “metropoles” of vast empires. To this new manifestation of capitalism, originally a purely European phenomenon, that was henceforth spreading itself over the entire globe, a name was given in 1902 by a British economist, John A. Hobson: “imperialism.” In 1916, Lenin was to offer a Marxist view of imperialism in a famous pamphlet, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism.

Imperialism generated more and more tension and conflicts among the great powers that were competing to acquire control over as many economically important territories as possible. At that time, social Darwinism was a very influential scientific ideology, and it preached that competition was the basic principle of all forms of life. Not only individuals but also states had to compete mercilessly with each other in a struggle for survival. The strongest triumphed, and thus they became even stronger; the weak, on the other hand, were the losers, and they were left behind in the race for survival and were doomed to perish. To be able to compete with other states, a state had to be economically strong, and for that reason its “national economy” – that is, its corporations and banks – had to have control over as much territory as possible with raw materials, potential for the export of goods and investment capital, etc. Thus was generated a merciless worldwide scramble for colonies, even for lands one did not really need but did not want to fall into the hands of a competitor. Considering all this, the British historian Eric Hobsbawm drew the conclusion that capitalism’s trend towards imperialist expansion inevitably pushed the world in the direction of conflict and war.

Image: Head and shoulders portrait of Kaiser Wilhelm II by Court Photographer T. H. Voigt of Frankfurt, 1902. (From the Public Domain)

Photograph of a middle-aged Wilhelm II with a moustache

However, in spite of tensions and crises, including a conflict about East African real estate that brought Britain and France to the brink of war in 1898, the Fashoda Crisis, Europe’s imperialist powers managed to acquire vast territories without fighting a major war against each other. By the turn of the century, the entire globe seemed to be partitioned. 

According to historian Margaret MacMillan, this means that the imperialist powers no longer had any reason to quarrel, and she concludes that an accusing finger cannot be pointed at imperialism when the causes of the First World War are discussed. To this it can be replied – as the French historian Annie Lacroix-Riz has done – that there remained at least one “hungry” imperialist power which felt disadvantaged compared to “satisfied” powers such as Great Britain, was not prepared to put up with the status quo, aggressively pursued a redistribution of existing colonial possessions, and was in fact willing to wage war to achieve its objectives. That “hungry” power was Germany, which had belatedly developed an imperialist appetite, namely after Wilhelm II became emperor in 1888 and promptly demanded for the Reich a “place in the sun” of international imperialism, in other words, a redistribution of the colonial possessions that would provide Germany with a larger share. Colonial possessions, Lacroix-Riz points out, may have been distributed, but they could be redistributed. That redistributing the colonial possessions was possible, but also unlikely to be achieved peacefully, was demonstrated by the case of former Spanish colonies like the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, which were transformed into satrapies of America’s “informal empire” as a result of the Spanish-American War of 1898.

Moreover, a considerable part of the world did in fact remain available for direct or indirect annexation as colonies or protectorates, or at least for economic penetration. MacMillan herself acknowledges that a “serious scramble for China,” similar to the earlier, risky race for territories in Africa, remained possible, the more so since not only the great European powers but also the USA and Japan displayed much interest in the land of unlimited possibilities that the Middle Empire seemed to be. The imperialist wolves were also keenly – and jealously – eying a couple of other major countries that had hitherto managed to remain independent, namely, Persia and the Ottoman Empire.

The competition between the imperialist powers was and remained very likely to lead to conflicts and wars, not only limited conflicts such as the Spanish-American War of 1899 and the Russian-Japanese War of 1905 but also a general conflagration involving most if not all powers. It almost came to such a conflagration in 1911 when, to the great chagrin of Germany, France turned Morocco into a protectorate. The case of Morocco shows how even supposedly satisfied imperialist powers such as France were never truly satisfied – just as immensely rich people never feel that they have enough riches – but continued to look for more ways to fatten their portfolio of colonial possessions, even if that threatened to cause a war.

Let us consider the case of the “hungry” imperialist power, Germany. The Reich, founded in 1871, had entered the scramble for colonies a little too late. It could actually consider itself lucky that it was still able to acquire a handful of colonies such as Namibia. But those hardly amounted to major prizes, certainly not in comparison to the Congo, a huge region bursting with rubber and copper that was pocketed by minuscule Belgium. With respect to access to sources of vital raw materials as well as opportunities for exporting finished products and investment capital, the tandem of Germany’s industry and finance thus found itself very much disadvantaged in comparison to its British and French rivals. Crucially important raw materials had to be purchased at comparatively high rates, which meant that the finished products of German industry were more expensive and therefore less competitive on international markets. This imbalance between extremely high industrial productivity and relatively restricted markets demanded a solution. In the eyes of numerous German industrialists, bankers, and other members of the country’s elite, the only genuine solution was a war that would give the German Empire what it felt entitled to and – to formulate it in Social-Darwinist terms – what it believed to be necessary for its survival: colonies overseas and, perhaps even more importantly, territories within Europe as well.

In the years leading up to 1914, the German Reich thus pursued an expansionist and aggressive foreign policy aimed at acquiring more possessions and turning Germany into a world power. This policy, of which Emperor Wilhelm II was the figurehead, has gone down in history under the label of Weltpolitik, “policy on a worldwide scale,” a term that was merely a euphemism for what was in fact an imperialist policy. In any event, Imanuel Geiss, an authority in the field of the history of Germany before and during the First World War, has emphasized that this policy was one of the factors “that made war inevitable.”

With respect to overseas possessions, Berlin dreamed of pinching the colonies of small states such as Belgium and Portugal. (And in Great Britain a faction within the elite, consisting mostly of industrialists and bankers with connections to Germany, was in fact willing to appease the Reich, not with a single square mile of their own Empire, of course, but with the gift of Belgian or Portuguese overseas possessions.) Nevertheless, it was above all within Europe itself that opportunities seemed to exist for Germany. Ukraine, for example, with its fertile farmland, loomed as the perfect “territorial complement” (Ergänzungsgebiet) for the highly industrialized German heartland; its bread and meat could provide cheap food for German workers, which would permit keeping their wages down. Likewise eyed by German imperialists was the Balkan, a region that might serve as source of cheap agricultural products and as market for German commodities. Germans in general were impressed with America’s conquest of the “Wild West” and Britain’s acquisition of the Indian subcontinent and dreamed that their country might similarly obtain a gigantic colony, namely by expanding into Eastern Europe in a modern-day edition of Germany’s medieval “push to the East,” the Drang nach Osten. The East would supply the Reich with abundant raw materials, agricultural products, and cheap labor in the shape of its numerous, supposedly inferior but muscular natives; and also a kind of social safety valve, because Germany’s own potentially troublesome demographic surplus could be shipped as “pioneers” to those distant lands. Hitler’s infamous fantasies with respect to “living space,” which he was to reveal in the 1920s in Mein Kampf and to put into practice during the Second World War, saw the light under those circumstances. In this respect, Hitler was not an anomaly at all, but a typical product of his time and space, and of the imperialism of that time and space.

Western Europe, more developed industrially and more densely populated than Europe’s east, was attractive to German imperialism as a market for the finished products of German industry, but also as a source of interesting raw materials. The influential leaders of the German steel industry did not hide their great interest in the French region around the towns of Briey and Longwy; that area – situated close to the border with Belgium and Luxembourg – featured rich deposits of high-quality iron ore. Without this ore, claimed some spokesmen of German industry, the German steel industry was condemned to death, at least in the long run. It was also believed that Germany’s Volkswirtschaft, its national economy, would profit greatly from the annexation of Belgium with its great seaport, Antwerp, its coal regions, etc. And together with Belgium its colony, the Congo, would of course also fall into German hands. Whether the acquisition of Belgium and perhaps even the Netherlands would involve direct annexation or a combination of formal political independence and economic dependence on Germany was a matter of debate among the experts within the German elite. In any event, in one way or another, virtually all of Europe was to be integrated into a “great economic space” under German control, The Reich would finally be able to take its rightful place next to Britain, the USA, etc. in the restricted circle of the great imperialist powers. (The historian Fritz Fischer has dealt with all this in his classical study of Germany’s objectives in World War I.)

It was obvious that Germany’s ambitions in the East could not be realized without serious conflict with Russia and the German aspirations with respect to the Balkans risked causing problems with Serbia. That country was already at loggerheads with the Reich’s biggest and best friend, Austria-Hungary, but it was supported by Russia. And the Russians were also very annoyed by Germany’s planned penetration of the Balkan Peninsula in the direction of Istanbul, since the straits between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean were at the very top of their own list of desiderata. St. Petersburg was almost certainly willing to go to war to deny Germany direct or indirect control of the Bosporus and the Dardanelles.

The German ambitions in Western Europe, and Belgium in particular, obviously ran counter to the interests of the British. At least as far back as the time of Napoleon, London had not wanted to see a major power ensconced in Antwerp and along the Belgian coast – and certainly not Germany, long a great power on land but now, with an increasingly impressive navy, also a menace at sea. With Antwerp, Germany would not only have at its disposal a “pistol aimed at England,” as Napoleon had described the city, but also one of the world’s greatest seaports. That would have made Germany’s international trade far less dependent on the services of British ports, sea lanes, and shipping, a major source of revenue of British commerce.

The real and imaginary interests and needs of Germany as a great industrial and imperialist power thus pushed the country increasingly rapidly, via an aggressive foreign policy, toward a war. But the possibility of war raised no great concerns within the elite of the military giant that Germany had already been for quite some time. To the contrary, among the industrialists, bankers, generals, politicians, and other members of the Reich’s establishment, only some rare birds did not wish for a war; most of them preferred a war as soon as possible, and many were even in favor of unleashing a preventive war. Of course, the German elite also featured less bellicose members, but among them, there prevailed the fatalist feeling that war was simply inevitable.

That the merciless competition between the great imperialist powers – a struggle of life and death, as seen from a social-Darwinist viewpoint – was virtually certain to lead to war, was also demonstrated by the case of Great Britain. That country marched into the twentieth century as the world’s superpower, in control of an unprecedented collection of colonial possessions. But the power and wealth of the Empire obviously depended on the fact that, thanks to the mighty Royal Navy, Britannia ruled the waves. And in that respect a very serious problem arose around the turn of the century. As fuel for ships, coal was quickly being replaced by petroleum on account of its far greater efficiency. Albion had plenty of coal but did not have petroleum, not even in its colonies, at least not in sufficient quantities. And so the search was on for plentiful and reliable sources of oil, the “black gold.” For the time being, that precious commodity had to be imported from what was then the world’s foremost producer and exporter, the USA. But that was not acceptable in the long run, since Britain often quarrelled with its former transatlantic colony about issues such as influence in South America, and the USA was also becoming a serious rival in the imperialist rat race.

Looking out for alternative sources, the British found a way to quench their thirst for petroleum, at least partly, in Persia. It was in this context that the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was founded, later to be known as British Petroleum (BP). However, a definitive solution to the problem only appeared in sight when, still during the first decade of the twentieth century, significant deposits of oil were discovered in Mesopotamia, more specifically in the region around the city of Mosul. The patriciate ruling Albion – exemplified by gentlemen like Churchill – decided at that time that Mesopotamia, a hitherto unimportant corner of the Middle East destined to become Iraq after the First World War, but then still belonging to the Ottoman Empire, had to be brought under British control. That was not an unrealistic objective, since the Ottoman Empire was a large but weak country, from whose vast territory the British had already previously managed to carve attractive morsels, for example, Egypt and Cyprus. In fact, in 1899, the British had already snatched oil-rich Kuwait and proclaimed it a protectorate; they were to transform it in 1914 into a supposedly independent emirate. Possession of Mesopotamia, then, was seen to be the only way to make it possible for unlimited quantities of petroleum to flow unperturbed toward Albion’s shores.

However, in 1908, the Ottoman Empire became an ally of Germany, which meant that the planned acquisition of Mesopotamia was virtually certain to trigger war between Britain and the Reich. But the need for petroleum was such that plans were nonetheless made for military action. And these plans needed to be implemented as soon as possible. The Germans and Ottomans had started to construct the Bagdad Bahn, a railway that was to link Berlin via Istanbul with Baghdad, the Mesopotamian metropolis, situated close to Mosul, and that raised the prospect that barrels full of Mesopotamian oil might one day start to roll toward Germany for the benefit of the Reich’s growing collection of battleships, which happened to be the most dangerous rival of the Royal Navy! Since the Baghdad Bahn was expected to be completed in 1914, quite a few British political and military decision-makers were of the opinion that it was better not to wait very long before starting a war that appeared unavoidable in any event.

undefined

German Baghdad Railway. (From the Public Domain)

It was in this context that London’s traditional friendship with Germany came to an end, that Britain joined two former archenemies, France and Russia, in an alliance known as the Triple Entente, and that the British army commanders started to work out detailed plans for war against Germany in collaboration with their French counterparts. The idea was that the massive armies of the French and the Russians would smash Germany’s host, while the bulk of the Empire’s armed forces would invade Mesopotamia from India, beat the Ottomans, and grab the oil fields. The Royal Navy also promised to prevent the German Navy from attacking France via the English Channel, and on land, the French army was to benefit from (mostly symbolic) assistance by the relatively tiny British Expeditionary Corps (BEF). However, this Machiavellian arrangement was concocted in the greatest secrecy, and neither the Parliament nor the public were informed about it.

On the eve of the Great War, a compromise with the Germans remained possible and even enjoyed the favor of some factions within Britain’s political, industrial, and financial elite. A compromise would have provided Germany with at least a share of the Mesopotamian oil, but London sought to achieve nothing less than exclusive control over the “black gold” of Mesopotamia. The British plans to invade Mesopotamia were prepared as early as 1911 and called for the occupation of the strategically important city of Basra, to be followed by a march along the banks of the Tigris to Baghdad. Complemented by a simultaneous attack by British forces operating from Egypt, this invasion was to provide Britain with control over Mesopotamia and much of the rest of the Middle East. This scenario would indeed unfold during the Great War, but in slow motion, as it turned out to be a much tougher job than expected, and the objectives would only be achieved at the end of the conflict. Incidentally, the famous Lawrence of Arabia would not suddenly appear out of nowhere; he was merely one of the numerous Brits who, during the years leading up to 1914, had been carefully selected and trained to “defend” their country’s interests – mostly with respect to oil – in the Middle East.

The conquest of the oil fields of Mesopotamia constituted the prime objective of Britain’s entry into the war in 1914. When the war broke out, and the German and Austrian-Hungarian partners went to war against the Franco-Russian duo plus Serbia, there seemed to be no reason for Britain to become involved in the conflict. The government in London was confronted with a dilemma; it was honor-bound to keep the promises made to France but that would have revealed that these plans had been concocted in secret. However, Germany’s violation of Belgium’s neutrality provided London with the perfect pretext to go to war. In reality, the fate of the small country was of little or no concern to the British leaders, at least as long as the Germans did not proceed to grab Antwerp. Neither was the violation of a country’s neutrality deemed to be a big deal; during the war, the British themselves would not hesitate to violate the neutrality of a number of countries, namely, China, Greece, and Persia.

Like all plans made in preparation for what was to become the “Great War,” the scenario concocted in London failed to unfold as anticipated. The French and Russians did not manage to crush the Teutonic host, so the British had to send many more troops to the continent – and suffer much greater losses – than foreseen. And in the distant Middle East, the Ottoman army – expertly assisted by German officers – unexpectedly proved to be a tough nut to crack. In spite of these inconveniences, which caused the death of about three quarters of a million soldiers in the UK alone, all was well in the end; in 1918, the Union Jack fluttered over the oil fields of Mesopotamia.

This short survey demonstrates that, as far as the rulers of Britain were concerned, World War I was not fought to save “gallant little Belgium” or to champion the cause of international law and justice. At stake were economic interests, the interests of British imperialism, which happen to be the interests of the rich and powerful British aristocratic gentlemen and bourgeois burghers whose corporations and banks lusted for raw materials such as petroleum – and for much else.

It is also obvious that for the patricians in power in London, the war was not a war for democracy at all. In the conquered Middle East, the British did nothing to promote the cause of democracy, to the contrary. Britain’s imperialist interests were better served by subtle and not-so-subtle un- and even anti-democratic arrangements. Occupied Palestine was ruled by them in approximately the same way that occupied Belgium had been ruled by the Germans. And in Arabia, London’s actions only took into account its own interests – as well as the interests of a handful of indigenous families that were considered to be useful partners. The vast homeland of the Arabs was parcelled out and distributed to those partners, who proceeded to establish states they could rule as if they were personal property. And when many denizens of Mesopotamia had the nerve to resist their new British bosses, Churchill ordered bombs to rain down on their villages, including bombs with poison gas.

On the eve of the outbreak of the Great War, in all the imperialist countries there were countless industrialists and bankers who favored a “bellicose economic expansionism.” Nevertheless, many capitalists – and possibly even a majority – appreciated the advantages of peace and the inconveniences of war and were therefore not warmongers at all, as Eric Hobsbawm has emphasized. But this observation has wrongly caused the conservative British historian Niall Ferguson to jump to the conclusion that the interests of capitalists did not play a role in the eruption of the Great War in 1914. For one thing, countless industrialists and bankers and member of the upper-middle class displayed an ambivalent attitude with respect to war. On the one hand, even the most bellicose among them realized that a war would have most unpleasant aspects, and for that reason, they preferred to avoid war. However, as members of the elite, they also had reason to believe that the unpleasantness would be experienced mostly by others – and of course mostly by the simple soldiers, workers, peasants, and other plebeians to whom the nasty jobs of killing and dying were traditionally entrusted.

Moreover, the assumption that peace-loving capitalists did not want war reflects a binary, black-and-white kind of thinking, namely that peace was the alternative to war and vice-versa. However, reality has a way of being more complex. There was in fact another alternative to peace, namely revolution. And that other alternative to peace was far more repulsive than war to most if not all capitalists and other bourgeois and aristocratic members of the elite. The aristocracy and the bourgeoisie had been obsessed with fear of revolution ever since the events of 1848 and 1871 had revealed the revolutionary intentions and potential of the proletariat. Afterwards, working-class parties subscribing to Marx’s revolutionary socialism had been founded, had become increasingly popular, and remained officially committed to overthrow the established political and social-economic order via revolution even though, as we have seen, they had in fact discreetly become reformist. The decade before the outbreak of war, finally, ironically called Belle Époque, witnessed not only new revolutions (in Russia, in 1905 and in China, in 1911) but also, throughout Europe, a never-ending series of strikes, demonstrations, and riots that seemed to be harbingers of revolution in the very heartland of imperialism. In this context, war was promoted not only by philosophers such as Nietzsche and other intellectuals, by military and political leaders, but also by leading industrialists and bankers as an effective antidote to revolution.

During the years leading up to 1914, countless members of the bourgeoisie (and the aristocracy) thus imagined themselves to be witnessing a race between war and revolution, a sprint whose outcome could be decided at any time. Which one of the two was going to win? The burghers, fearing revolution, prayed that war would be the winner. With revolution, rather than peace, as the most likely alternative to war, even the most peace-loving capitalists definitely preferred war. And since they were afraid that revolution might win the race, that is, might break out before war, the capitalists, and the bourgeois and aristocratic members of the elite in general, actually hoped for war to come as soon as possible, which is why they experienced the outbreak of war in the summer of 1914 as a deliverance from unbearable uncertainty and tension. This relief was reflected by the fact that the famous pictures of folks enthusiastically celebrating the declaration of war, taken mostly in the “better” districts of the capitals, almost exclusively featured well-dressed ladies and gentlemen, and not workers or peasants, who are known to have been mostly depressed by the news.

In its imperialist manifestation, capitalism was definitely responsible for the many colonial wars that had been waged and was also responsible for the Great War that broke out in 1914. Countless contemporaries realized this only too well. As the great French socialist leader Jean Jaurès already declared in 1895, “capitalism carries war within itself just like the thundercloud carries the storm.” Jaurès was a convinced anticapitalist, of course, but many members of the bourgeois and aristocratic elite were also keenly aware of the link between war and their economic interests, and occasionally acknowledged this. General Haig, for example, who would command the British Army from 1915 until the end of the war, declared on one occasion that he was not “ashamed of the wars fought to open up the markets of the world to our traders.” It was the fateful emergence of the imperialist version of capitalism, then, that, to use Eric Hobsbawm’s words, “pushed the world to conflict and war.” In comparison, the fact that numerous individuals among the industrialists and bankers may privately have cherished peace is of little or no importance and certainly does not permit the conclusion that capitalism did not lead to the Great War. It would be equally fallacious to conclude that Nazism was not really anti-Semitic and did not play a role in the origins of the Holocaust, because quite a few individual Nazis were personally not anti-Semitic.

It is also because imperialist aspirations were responsible for it, that the war that broke out in 1914, essentially a European conflict, developed into a world war. We should not forget that there was fighting not only in Europa but also in Asia and Africa. While the great powers would fight each other primarily, and most “visibly,” in Europe, their armies would also do battle in each other’s colonial possessions in Africa, in the Middle East, and even in China. Finally, in Versailles, the victors would divide and claim not only the relatively modest booty represented by Germany’s former colonies but especially the petroleum-rich regions of the Middle East that had belonged to the Ottoman Empire.

undefined

Japanese troops landing near Qingdao (From the Public Domain)

Let us take a quick look at the role played by Japan in the Great War. With its victory over Russia in 1905, the “land of the rising sun” revealed itself to be the only “non-Western” member of the restricted club of imperialism’s great powers. Like all other imperialist powers, Japan was henceforth keen to acquire additional lands as colonies or protectorates in order to make raw materials and such available to its industry, thus making it stronger vis-a-vis the competition – for example, from the USA. The war that broke out in Europe in 1914 provided Japan with a golden opportunity in this respect. On September 23 of that year, Tokyo declared war on Germany for the simple reason that this made it possible to conquer the Reich’s mini-colony (or “concession”) in China, the Bay of Kiao-Chau (or Kiao-Chao), as well as its island colonies in the Northern Pacific. In the case of Japan, it is obvious that the country went to war in order to achieve imperialist objectives. In the case of the Western imperialist powers, however, we continue to be told that in 1914, arms were taken up solely to defend liberty and democracy.

The Great War was a product of imperialism. Its focus was therefore on profits for the big corporations and banks under whose auspices imperialism had developed and whose interests imperialism purported to serve. In this respect, the war did not disappoint. It was admittedly a catastrophe for millions of human beings, for the plebeian masses, for whom it offered nothing but death and misery. But for the industrialists and bankers of each belligerent country – and quite a few neutral countries, such as the USA before 1917 – it revealed itself as a cornucopia of orders and profits.

The conflict of 1914–1918 was an industrial contest in which modern weapons such as cannon, machine guns, poison gas, flamethrowers, tanks, airplanes, barbed wire, and submarines were decisive. This materiel was mass produced in the factories of the industrialists, yielding gargantuan profits, profits that were taxed only minimally in most countries. Profitability was also maximized by the fact that in all belligerent countries the wages (but not the prices) were lowered, while the working hours were lengthened and strikes were forbidden. (That was possible because, as we have seen earlier, imperialism had integrated the leaders and the rank-and-file of the supposedly internationalist and revolutionary socialist parties – and labor unions – into the established order and turned them into patriots, who in 1914 revealed themselves ready to rush to the defense of the fatherland and make the sacrifices presumably required to ensure its victory.) The most famous of the arms manufacturers to be blessed with war profits was Krupp, the world-famous German producer of cannon. But in France too, “merchants of death” did a wonderful business, for example, Monsieur Schneider, known as the French Krupp, who in 1914–1918 enjoyed “a veritable explosion of profits,” and Hotchkiss, the great specialist in the production of machine guns. State orders for war materiel signified huge profits not only for corporations but also for the banks that were asked to loan the huge sums of money needed by governments to finance these purchases and the costs of the war in general. In the USA, J.P. Morgan & Co, also known as the “House of Morgan,” was the undisputed champion glutton in this field. Morgan not only charged high interest rates on loans to the British and their allies but also earned fat commissions on sales to Britain by American firms that belonged to its “circle of friends,” such as Du Pont and Remington.

In the spring of 1917, after a revolution had broken out in Russia and the French ally was rocked by mutinies in its army, it was feared that the British might lose the war and therefore not be able to pay back their war debts. It was in this context that the Wall Street lobby, headed by Morgan, successfully pressured President Wilson to declare war on Germany, thus enabling Albion to ultimately win the war and avoid a catastrophe for the US banks, especially Morgan. This development likewise illustrates the fact that the First World War was primarily determined by economic factors, that it was the fruit of imperialism, a system that purported to serve the profit-maximizing interests of corporations and banks – and did.

With respect to the entry of the USA into the great clash of imperialisms of 1914–1918, another remark is in order. It was clear that the imperialist powers that would exit the war triumphantly would pocket great imperialist prizes, and that the losers would have to cough up some of their imperialist assets. And what about the neutrals? In January 1917, the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand, publicly gave the answer, obviously anticipating a victory for the Triple Entente; neutral countries would not be invited to the peace conference and would not receive a share of the loot, that is, of goodies such as German colonies, the oil-rich regions of the doomed Ottoman Empire, and concessions and lucrative business opportunities in China. In this respect, Japan, America’s great competitor in the Far East, had already made a move in 1914 by declaring war on Germany and pocketing the Reich’s concession in China. In the USA, this conjured up the risk that Japan might end up monopolizing China economically, excluding American business. It is extremely likely that Washington took Briand’s hint and that this consideration also influenced the decision, taken in April of 1917, to declare war on Germany. In the 1930s, an inquiry by the Nye Committee of the American Congress was to come to the conclusion that the country’s entry into the war had indeed been motivated by the wish to be present when, after the war, the moment would come “to redivide the spoils of empire.”

The war provided a mighty stimulus for the maximization of profits made by corporations and banks. But was that not one of the reasons why they had looked forward to war? (Another reason was of course the elimination of the revolutionary threat.) But the conflict also yielded them other considerable benefits. In all belligerent countries, the war reinforced the trend toward gigantism, that is, the ongoing emergence of a relatively small elite of very big corporations and banks. This was so because only big firms could benefit from the state orders for weapons and other war materiel. Conversely, small producers did not profit from the war. Many of them lost their personnel, their suppliers, or their customers; their profits declined, and many of them disappeared from the scene, never to return. In this sense, it is true what Niall Ferguson has pointed out, that during the Great War, the average profits of businesses were not very high; however, the profits of the big firms and banks, the capitalist big boys who dominated the economy since the emergence of imperialism were in fact considerable, as Ferguson himself acknowledges.

Class conflict is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon, as Domenico Losurdo has emphasized in a book on that topic. It is not merely a bilateral conflict between capital and labor but also reflects contradictions between bourgeoisie and nobility, between industrialists of different countries, between the colonies and their mother countries, and also between factions within the bourgeoisie. An example of the latter is the conflict between big and small producers, big business and little business, the upper-middle class or haute bourgeoisie, and the lower-middle class or petite bourgeoisie. Imperialism was – and continues to be – the capitalism of the big boys, the corporations and big banks, and it was imperialism that gave birth to the Great War. It is no coincidence that this big war also favored the big capitalists in their struggle against the little capitalists.

The Great War also privileged the upper-middle class, the gentlemen of industry and finance, vis-a-vis their partner within the elite, the landowning nobility. The nobility had also wanted war, because it expected many advantages from it. But the conflict revealed itself as something very different from the old-fashioned kind of warfare they had expected, in which their beloved cavalry and traditional weapons such as swords and lances would be decisive but, as Peter Englund has written, “an economic competition, a war between factories.” The Great War was an industrial war, fought with modern weapons mass-produced in the factories of the bourgeois industrialists, and in the course of the war, representatives of corporations and banks – such as Walter Rathenau in Germany – played an increasingly important role as “experts” within governments and state bureaucracies. The bourgeoisie thus managed to increase not only its wealth but also its power and prestige – very much to the disadvantage of the aristocrats, whose weapons and expertise proved useless for the purpose of twentieth-century warfare. Until 1914, the haute bourgeoisie had been the junior partner of the nobility within the elite in most countries but that changed during the war and because of the war. After 1918, within the elite, the industrial and financial haute bourgeoisie was on top, with the nobility as its sidekick.

The Great War was very much determined by economic factors, and it was the product of the merciless competition among the imperialist powers, a competition about territories with considerable natural and human resources. It is therefore only logical that this conflict was eventually decided by economic factors; the imperialist powers that emerged as victors in 1918 were those who already controlled the greatest colonial and other territorial riches when the war started in 1914 and were therefore abundantly blessed with strategic raw materials, especially rubber and petroleum, needed to win a modern, industrial war. Let us examine this issue in greater detail.

In 1918, Germany managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, so to speak, because in the spring and summer of that year, the Reich had actually come tantalizingly close to achieving victory. The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, signed with revolutionary Russia on March 3, 1918, had enabled the Reich’s army commanders, led by General Ludendorff, to transfer troops from the eastern to the western front and launch a major offensive there on March 21. Considerable progress was achieved at first, but the Allies succeeded time and again to bring in the reserves of men and materiel needed to plug the gaps in their defensive lines, slow down the German juggernaut’s advance, and finally to arrest it. August 8 was the date when the tide turned. On that day, the Germans were forced onto the defensive and had to withdraw systematically until they finally capitulated on November 11. The allied triumph was made possible by the fact that they – and especially the French – disposed of thousands of trucks to quickly transport large numbers of soldiers to wherever they were needed. The Germans, on the other hand, still moved their troops mostly by train, as in 1914, but crucial sectors of the front were hard to reach that way. The superior mobility of the Allies was decisive. Ludendorff was to declare later that the triumph of his adversaries in 1918 amounted to a victory of French trucks over German trains.

However, this triumph can also be similarly described as a victory of the rubber tires of the Allies’ vehicles, produced by firms such as Michelin and Dunlop, over the steel wheels of German trains, produced by Krupp. Thus it can also be said that the victory of the Entente against the Central Powers was a victory of the economic system, and particularly the industry, of the Allies, against the economic system of Germany and Austria-Hungary, an economic system that found itself starved of crucially important raw materials because of the British blockade. “The military and political defeat of Germany,” writes the French historian Frédéric Rousseau, “was inseparable from its economic failure.” But the economic superiority of the Allies clearly has a lot to do with the fact that the British and French – and even the Belgians and Italians – had colonies where they could fetch whatever was needed to win a modern, industrial war, especially rubber, oil, and other “strategic” raw materials – plus plenty of colonial laborers to repair and even construct the roads along which trucks transported allied soldiers.

Rubber was not the only strategic type of raw material that the Allies had in abundance while the Germans lacked it. Another one was petroleum, for which the increasingly motorized land armies – and rapidly expanding air forces – were developing a gargantuan appetite. During a victory dinner on November 21, 1918, the British minister of foreign affairs, Lord Curzon, was to declare, not without reason, that “the allied cause floated to victory upon a wave of oil,” and a French senator proclaimed that “oil had been the blood of victory.” A considerable quantity of this oil had come from the USA. It was supplied by Standard Oil, a firm belonging to the Rockefellers, who made a lot of money in this type of business, just as Renault did by producing the gas-guzzling trucks. It was only logical that the Allies, swimming in petroleum, had acquired all sort of modern, motorized, gas-guzzling equipment. In 1918, the French not only had huge quantities of trucks but also a major fleet of airplanes. And in the war’s final year, the French as well as the British also disposed of cars equipped with machine guns or cannon and above all of large numbers of tanks. If the Germans had no significant quantities of trucks or tanks, it was also because they lacked petroleum; only insufficient amounts of Rumanian oil were available to them.

The Great War happened to be a war between imperialist rivals, in which the great prizes to be won were territories bursting with raw materials and cheap labor, the kind of things that benefited a country’s “national economy,” more specifically its industry, and thus made that country more powerful and more competitive. It is therefore hardly a coincidence that the war was ultimately won by the countries that had been most richly endowed in this respect, namely the great industrial powers with the most colonies. In other words: that the biggest imperialisms – those of the British, the French, and the Americans – defeated a competing imperialism, that of Germany, admittedly an industrial superpower, but underprivileged with respect to colonial possessions. In view of this, it is even amazing that it took four long years before Germany’s defeat was a fait accompli. On the other hand, it is also obvious that the advantages of having colonies and therefore access to unlimited supplies of food for soldiers and civilians as well as rubber, petroleum, and similar raw materials, as well as a virtually inexhaustible reserve labor force, were only able to reveal themselves in the long run. The main reason for this is that in 1914, the war started as a continental kind of Napoleonic campaign that was to morph – imperceptibly, but inexorably – into a worldwide contest of industrial titans. In 1914, Germany, a military superpower, still stood a chance to win the war, especially since it had excellent railways to ferry its armies to the western and eastern fronts – and more than enough of the coal needed as fuel for the steam trains. This is how a big victory was achieved against the Russians at Tannenberg. However, after four long years of modern, industrial, and in many ways “total” war, economic factors revealed themselves as decisive. By the time Ludendorff launched his spring-offensive in 1918, the prospects for a final victory had long gone up in smoke for a German Reich that was prevented by a Royal Navy blockade from reaching territories where it might have been able to fetch adequate amounts of the collective sine qua non of victory in a modern war – strategic raw materials such as petroleum, food for civilians as well as soldiers, cheap labor for industry and agriculture, and so forth.

The Great War of 1914–1918 was a conflict in which two blocks of imperialist powers fought each other for the possession of lands in Europe itself, Africa, Asia, and the entire world. The result of this titanic struggle was a victory for the Anglo-French duo, a major defeat for Germany, and the inglorious demise of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. In reality, the outcome of the war was unclear, confusing, and unlikely to please anybody. Great Britain and France were the victors but were exhausted by the enormous demographic, material, financial, and other sacrifices they had had to bring; they were no longer the superpowers they had been in 1914. Germany had likewise paid a heavy price, found itself punished and humiliated at Versailles, and lost not only its colonies but even a large part of its own territory; the country was allowed to have only a tiny army, but it remained an industrial superpower that was likely to try once again to achieve great imperialist objectives, as in 1914. Moreover, the war had been an opportunity for two non-European imperialisms to reveal their ambitions, namely, Japan and the USA. The struggle for supremacy among imperialist powers, which is what 1914–1918 had been, thus remained undecided. To make the situation even more complex, along with Austria-Hungary yet another major imperialist actor had departed from the scene, though in a very different way. Russia had morphed, via a great revolution, into the Soviet-Union. That resolutely anti-capitalist state revealed itself to be a thorn in the imperialist side, because it functioned not only as source of inspiration for revolutionaries within each imperialist country but also encouraged anti-imperialist movements in the colonies. Under these circumstances, Europe and the entire world continued to experience great tensions and conflicts that were to yield a second world war or, as many historians now see it, the second act of the great “Thirty Years’ War of the 20th Century.”

*

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

Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels was born in Belgium in 1946, moved to Canada in 1969. Undergraduate history studies at Ghent  University, Phd in history from York University in Toronto; MA and PhD in Political Science from University of Toronto. Part-time lecturer in history at various universities in Ontario from approximately 1975 to 2005.

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

Cross-References

  1. German Imperialism and Social Imperialism (1871–1933)
  2. United States, Imperialism in the Western Hemisphere
  3. United States, Imperialism, 19th century

Sources

Englund, P. (2012). The beauty and the sorrow: An intimate history of the first world war. London: Vintage.

Ferguson, N. (1999). The pity of war. New York: Basic Books.

Fischer, F. (1967). Germany’s aims in the first world war. New York: W. W. Norton.

Geiss, I. (1972). Origins of the first world war. In H. W. Koch (Ed.), The origins of the first world war: Great power rivalry and German war aims (pp. 36–78). London/Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Hobsbawm, E. (1994). The age of empire 1875–1914. London: Abacus. (Original edition: 1987).

Lacroix-Riz, A. (2014). Aux origines du carcan européen (1900–1960): La France sous influence allemande et américaine. Paris: Delga.

Lenin [Vladimir Ulyanov]. (1963). Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism (new ed.). Moscow: Progress Publishers. (Original edition: 1916). http://​www.​marxists.​org/​archive/​lenin/​works/​1916/​imp-hsc.

Losurdo, D. (2013). La lotta di classe: Una storia politica e filosofica. Bari: Laterza.

MacMillan, M. (2013). The war that ended peace: The road to 1914. Toronto: Allen Lane.

Pauwels, J. R. (2016). The great class war 1914–1918. Toronto: James Lorimer.

Rousseau, F. (2006). La Grande Guerre en tant qu’expériences sociales. Paris: Ellipses Marketing.

Featured image: Vimy Ridge, April 1917–First World War–Photograph taken during Battle of Vimy Ridge. A large Naval gun. April, 1917. (CP PHOTO) 1999 (National Archives of Canada) PA-001187


Below are the author’s books:

The COVID-19 Endgame: Global Governance, “Digital Tyranny” and the Depopulation Agenda

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 20, 2024

There is a sense of urgency. A worldwide mass movement against the adoption of the Pandemic Treaty is required. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) General Assembly, the World Health Assembly (WHA) representing all 194 member states, will take place in Geneva, from 27 May to 1 June 2024.

Two Economic and Financial Periods with Similarities, But with Different International Monetary Systems: 1920-1929 and 2008-2024

By Prof Rodrigue Tremblay, May 20, 2024

The main financial similarity between the two periods is the prevalence of an inverted yield curve in both cases, which could hint at future financial and economic troubles. It remains to be seen whether financial and economic difficulties will unfold in the coming months or years, as it was the case in 1929.

Will the Sinai Peninsula See an Influx of Palestinians? What Will be Its Impact?

By Bharat Dogra, May 20, 2024

What is more important for most analysts in the context of the tension and conflict-ridden realities of the Middle East region is the geo-strategic importance of this region. You can stand at certain points in its coastal areas and point out — look it is Israel there, Gaza there, Jordan there and Saudi Arabia there. 

The Blood-Red Sunset of the West. Strengthening of the Sino-Russian Relations

By Manlio Dinucci, May 20, 2024

After the major gas pipeline Nord Stream, which transported its gas to Europe, was interrupted by US-NATO military sabotage and the country was subjected to sanctions by the EU – Russia is supplying more and more gas and oil to China and imports from there the industrial products that it previously imported from Europe.

Behold the Real “Axis of Evil”. Option C of Israel’s “Secret Intelligence Memorandum”

By Mark Taliano, May 20, 2024

The real “Axis of Evil” is currently presenting itself to Western populations as Western-supported Zionists unabashedly commit genocide against Palestinian civilians right now, in plain view, for all to see.

Old Genocide Joe Has Got to Go! Embracing Netanyahu Does Not Constitute a Foreign Policy

By Philip Giraldi, May 19, 2024

It is extremely difficult to discern what might be the thinking behind the clueless President Joe Biden and his Blinken-Austin-Mayorkas foreign-policy-plus national security team. Or rather, the problem is that there does not appear to be any thinking about it at all if one measures it by what benefits it brings to the American people.

Aboriginal and Treaty Rights: “Grave Error” on Alleged Mass Graves Adjacent to Indian Residential Schools in Canada

By Prof. Anthony J. Hall, May 19, 2024

The discovery of mass graves is often seen as a hallmark that acts of genocide have occurred. While the association of mass graves with genocide is virtually irrefutable in Gaza, the same is certainly not the case in Canada. The discussion in Canada about the supposed discovery of unmarked mass graves adjacent to Christian residential schools is just now heating up.

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency… The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner, which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.  John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946). British economist, (in ‘The Economic Consequences of the Peace’, 1919, Ch. VI, pp. 235-236).

“The survivors of a generation that has been of military age during a bout of war will be shy, for the rest of their lives, of bringing a repetition of this tragic experience either upon themselves or upon their children, and… therefore the psychological resistance of any move towards the breaking of a peace… is likely to be prohibitively strong until a new generation … has had time to grow up and to come into power.” Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975), British historian, (in ‘A Study of History’, vol. 9, 1954).

“When every country turned to protect its own private interest, the world public interest went down the drain, and with it the private interests of all.” Charles Kindleberger (1910-2003). American economic historian, (in his book ‘The World Depression 1929-1939’, 1973).

***

Introduction

Next year will be the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War (1939-1945). It is therefore likely that the world is approaching the end of the long post-war period, which has spanned three generations.

Likewise, in just a few years, it will be the 100th anniversary of the massive stock market crash in the autumn of 1929, which preceded the advent of the Great Depression (1929-1939).

Even though economic history does not necessarily repeat itself in every detail, there are long economic cycles in capitalist economies, which tend to repeat themselves at various intervals, provided that the economic imbalances and financial excesses which activate them are strong enough. Indeed, there are presently economic, financial and geopolitical circumstances that have some similarities with those that prevailed in the past, especially during the decade of the Roaring Twenties in the 1920’s, and even later during the 1930’s.

I. The Economic and Financial Situations in the United States During the 1920’s

The end of WWI in 1918 was followed by the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919, (it was called the Spanish flu pandemic because the press in Spain was the first to report it). It was a severely contagious viral disease that created numerous social and economic problems worldwide. Schools were closed, public gatherings prohibited and mortality rates rose.

However, after the pandemic and the brief but deep economic recession that followed, in 1920-1921, the American economy embarked upon a period of strong economic growth and widespread prosperity. It strongly benefited from the postwar reconstruction boom and from the emergence of many industrial innovations in the automobile, airline, telephone, radio, cinema and electric appliances industries, etc.

Manufactured consumer goods became more widely available to households through mass production. The US economy grew by 42 percent during the rest of the decade, from 1922 to 1929, as the building of roads, airports, gas stations, etc. progressed to meet the new needs in infrastructures. Unemployment was falling sharply and there was great optimism. However, this led to an overheated economy and to asset bubbles, especially in the stock market.

Indeed, the main reason the decade of 1920-1929 is so well remembered is because it led to the Great Depression of 1929-1939. The economy collapsed, deflation prevailed and unemployment reached a record high of 24.7 percent, in 1933.

undefined

Unemployed people lined up outside a soup kitchen in Chicago. (From the Public Domain)

During the 1920’s, behind the façade of prosperity, there were major economic imbalances and financial excesses that developed, not only in the United States, but worldwide. The first consequences of these drawbacks were the Wall Street stock market crash of 1929 and the economic recession, which rapidly morphed into an economic depression that lasted a decade. Also, an important international bank, the Austrian Creditanstalt bank, failed in May 1931. This led to other bank failures and created banking panics in the U.K., in the USA and in other countries.

And when later on, countries began to adopt inward-looking protectionist trade policies, international trade contracted and the global economy as a whole collapsed.

Declining Interest Rates and Stock Market Speculation in the 1920’s

To counteract a mild economic recession in 1927, the Fed lowered its discount rate in September of that year, from 4% to 3.5%.

Nevertheless, even though short-term interest rates were still low, they were higher than longer-term rates, and this was the case in 1927, 1928, and 1929. That translated into an inverted yield curve, as opposed to a normal situation when longer rates are higher than shorter rates, since longer loans are riskier than shorter ones. Usually, this indicates a situation of tight banking credit lending conditions.

An inverted yield curve is one of the most accurate predictors of a future economic slowdown or a recession, since nearly all economic recessions since the 1920’s, including the onset of the Great Depression in 1929, have taken place after such a warning that an economic slowdown was unfolding.

During the years of 1927-1929, the financial warning sign of the inverted yield curve was ignored and speculation in the stock market only got worse. At the time, speculators big or small could buy shares in companies by investing on margin, with as little down as 10 percent of the value, while borrowing the rest from banks or brokers. This led, from 1923 to 1929, to a six-year stock market bull run, when stock prices kept rising on average by 20 percent, each year. This was clearly an unsustainable pace.  

After having vainly admonished banks and brokers to restrict their loans to speculators, the Fed finally decided to raise its discount rate three times, (the rate the Fed charges member banks for loans), between January and July 1928, from 3.5% to 5%. However, this turned out to be insufficient, because stock market speculation didn’t slow down. The Fed again raised its discount rate in August 1929, from 5 percent to 6 percent. That’s what broke the camel’s back!

The rest is history. The economic recession began in the United States in August 1929, as the economy started to shrink. However, the stock market only peaked on Tuesday, September 3, 1929, one day after Labor Day, but it began crashing for good on Black Thursday, Oct. 24, 1929.

II. The Subprime Mortgage Crisis of 2007-2008 and the Great Recession of 2008-2009

Let’s see how things stack up nowadays, financially and economically.

In the aftermath of the Subprime Mortgage Crisis of 2007-2008, and during the Great Recession of 2008-2009, governments and central banks of a number of countries changed profoundly their fiscal and monetary policies, especially in the United States.

Image: A continuous buildup of toxic assets in the form of subprime mortgages purchased by Lehman Brothers ultimately led to the firm’s bankruptcy in September 2008. The collapse of Lehman Brothers is often cited as both the culmination of the subprime mortgage crisis, and the catalyst for the Great Recession in the United States. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

undefined

Indeed, there was a real fear among government officials, during the fateful years of 2007-2008, that the entire American financial system could collapse and bring down the economy. The American banking system was already severely weakened by the collapse of the large investment bank Lehman Brothers, and by the rescue in panic of the investment banks Bears Stearns and Merrill Lynch. It was then judged necessary to adopt extreme measures to bail out the system.

That is when the Fed adopted a novel form of monetary policy of extraordinary accommodation called “Quantitative Easing” (QE). The idea was that in such a time of financial trouble, it was not sufficient to lower interest rates and to advance loans to banks in trouble.

What was required was to flood financial markets with huge amounts of newly created liquidity, which is accomplished when a central bank purchases for its own account large quantities of Treasury bonds or private securities on the secondary market. If necessary, such a practice can push nominal interest rates to zero or to close to zero. This was the case in the United States when the federal funds rate (rate at which private banks borrow from each other for very short periods) was kept by the Fed close to zero, from 2008 to 2016, and again, from 2020 to 2022. 

The Economic Consequences of Quantitative Easing on Debtors

A Quantitative Easing monetary policy risks creating two problems. First, it tends to create important price bubbles in the stock and bond markets. Secondly, artificially low interest rates run the risk of encouraging consumers, businesses and governments alike to go deeper into debt. This raises the question of moral hazard when public policies encourage people to alter their normal prudent behavior and take bigger risks.

This is an important consideration nowadays, since the sum of all consumer, business and government debts in the world, the global debt, reached the record high level of $307 trillion in 2023, according to the Institute of International Finance. This has pushed the global debt-to GDP ratio to 336 percent.

In the event of a rise in inflation, accompanied by an increase in interest rates and mortgage rates, debtors in general who have become heavily indebted while interest rates were ultra low, may find themselves caught in a dangerous debt trap. Households and consumers, for example, who are saddled with high mortgage debts and credit debts, may have to renew their loans at much higher interest rates, thereby facing the unattractive prospect of making monthly payments that are inflated relative to their incomes.

III. The Major Differences Between the 1920-1929 Period and the 2008-2024 Period

The main difference between the 1920-1929 economic decade and the current economic and financial period since 2008 is the fact that the international monetary systems were different during these two periods.

The gold standard (1879-1933) had been suspended at the start of WWI, in 1914, but it had been reinstated in most major economies, including the United States, by 1925. It was an international monetary system in which the value of a standard unit of a currency was based on a fixed quantity of gold. For instance, if the official price of one ounce of gold was set at $20, that meant the one US dollar was worth 1/20 ounce of gold and could be exchanged at that price.

The Gold Standard had the advantage of imposing a strict discipline on governments regarding spending and borrowing and thus to prevent inflation. Indeed, with such a system, a government was less able to run large fiscal deficits, because the central bank could not print money at will to accommodate its need of funds. The government had to sell Treasury bonds to the  public to cover its excess spending over its tax revenues.

For example, countries running an external deficit in their balance of payments ran the risk of losing gold, while those countries with an external surplus stood to gain gold. The consequence was that central banks could not increase their country’s money supply at will, for fear of creating an external deficit and of losing gold. In the latter case, the domestic money supply would contract and this would place a deflationary burden on the economy. That is why the Gold Standard had, in general, a deflationary bias.

The Bretton Woods Monetary System of 1944

After WWII, the Gold Standard monetary system, which had been suspended in 1933, was replaced by the Bretton Woods monetary system. It was called a Gold Exchange Standard system, which meant that only the American dollar remained freely convertible into gold, at an official price of $35 an ounce, while other countries’ currencies had an exchange rate pegged to the US dollar.

undefined

The price of gold, as denominated in US dollars, was stable until the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in the mid-1970s. (Licensed under CC0)

However, the US dollar became officially a genuine fiat currency on August 15, 1971, when the Nixon administration cancelled the official convertibility of the dollar into gold. This meant the end of the fixed exchange rate system. Shortly after, in fact, most other countries adopted a floating exchange-rate system for their fiat currencies. This is the international payment and exchange system that exists today. Contrary to the Gold Standard, the system of floating exchange rates for fiat currencies tends to be inflationary.

Digital Cryptocurrencies and Geopolitical Risks

To add to the overall speculative nature of our era, one must also mention the rise of the internet-based digital cryptocurrencies phenomenon, which began in 2009 with the creation of the Bitcoin. This is a system of digital assets with widely fluctuating prices. It is somewhat reminiscent of the exotic Tulip bubble, which took place in the Netherlands in the early part of the 17th century.

Also, it is important to note that geopolitical tensions between great powers are much more prevalent today than they were in the 1920’s. This is reflected in the current turmoil in international relations. It is a state of affairs somewhat similar to the one prevailing during the later part of the 1930 decade.

At the time, the League of Nations was incapable of preventing or of ending regional military conflicts, just as the United Nations nowadays is unable to maintain world peace. Therefore, in the coming years, serious military confrontations between great powers cannot be excluded, and this could be an additional cause of financial and economic dislocations, as it could mean higher oil prices and higher inflation.

Conclusions

There are similarities but also important differences between the economic and financial situations prevailing in the 1920’s and those unfolding int the current 2008-2024 period.

Both periods saw changing economic times, characterized by major economic imbalances and speculative excesses in financial markets.

The main financial similarity between the two periods is the prevalence of an inverted yield curve in both cases, which could hint at future financial and economic troubles. It remains to be seen whether financial and economic difficulties will unfold in the coming months or years, as it was the case in 1929.

On the other hand, the international monetary system in force during each period was completely different. In the first case, it was the Gold Standard system that prevailed. Currently, the world economy is under a system of floating exchange rates of fiat national currencies, with the US dollar serving as the main currency of exchange and for most of the official reserves of central banks.

However, such a system is presently in a flux, as many countries, especially those of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and others), are trying to escape the arbitrary financial sanctions that the US government imposes sometimes on some countries, for political reasons. This would explain the efforts of the latter countries to develop other means of payments to conduct their international trade and financial transactions.

If and when a financial crisis or a severe economic downturn were to unfold in the future, triggered by some unforeseen event, it is likely that governments and central banks would respond by adopting the same policies as they did at the onset of the Covid-related economic lockdowns in 2020.

First, the governments of major advanced economies would be expected to increase their fiscal deficits, already very high. Secondly, central banks would try to accommodate governments and financial markets alike, by injecting large amounts of liquidity into the economy, through a policy of ‘Quantitative Easing’.

However, such extraordinary interventions are not without risk. Indeed, after the initial deflationary shock of a financial crisis, which would be followed by a recession, overly expansionary budgetary and monetary policies, possibly associated with protectionist trade policies similar to those adopted in the 1930’s, could result in a period of widespread stagflation, that is a period of slow economic growth and of persistent inflation.

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay.

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals “The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles” of the book about geopolitics “The New American Empire“, and the recent book, in French, “La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018“. He was Minister of Trade and Industry (1976-79) in the Lévesque government. He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University. Please visit Dr Tremblay’s site or email to a friend here.

Prof. Rodrigue Tremblay is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).


The Code for Global Ethics: Ten Humanist Principles

by Rodrigue Tremblay, Preface by Paul Kurtz

Publisher: ‎ Prometheus (April 27, 2010)

Hardcover: ‎ 300 pages

ISBN-10: ‎ 1616141727

ISBN-13: ‎ 978-1616141721

Humanists have long contended that morality is a strictly human concern and should be independent of religious creeds and dogma. This principle was clearly articulated in the two Humanist Manifestos issued in the mid-twentieth century and in Humanist Manifesto 2000, which appeared at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Now this code for global ethics further elaborates ten humanist principles designed for a world community that is growing ever closer together. In the face of the obvious challenges to international stability-from nuclear proliferation, environmental degradation, economic turmoil, and reactionary and sometimes violent religious movements-a code based on the “natural dignity and inherent worth of all human beings” is needed more than ever. In separate chapters the author delves into the issues surrounding these ten humanist principles: preserving individual dignity and equality, respecting life and property, tolerance, sharing, preventing domination of others, eliminating superstition, conserving the natural environment, resolving differences cooperatively without resort to violence or war, political and economic democracy, and providing for universal education. This forward-looking, optimistic, and eminently reasonable discussion of humanist ideals makes an important contribution to laying the foundations for a just and peaceable global community.

Click here to purchase.

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

 

 

The Sinai Peninsula is the only part of Egypt which is considered a part of Asia. This is regarded as a bridge between Asia and Africa. The Sinai Peninsula is spread over about 60,000 square km. area or about 6% of the total area of Egypt.

However this is not its only claim to fame. This is a region known for many biblical memories and locations including Mount Sinai. This as well as its vast areas of solitude are likely to attract many spiritually inclined persons. The coral reefs and the special beauty of deserts close to beaches is likely to attract other tourists as well. 

Yes, this region has some well-liked tourism resorts, some famous places, but by and large this is an arid zone vast parts of which are very sparsely populated.

What is more important for most analysts in the context of the tension and conflict-ridden realities of the Middle East region is the geo-strategic importance of this region. You can stand at certain points in its coastal areas and point out — look it is Israel there, Gaza there, Jordan there and Saudi Arabia there. 

Perhaps most important just now is its border with Gaza. Rafah town used to be actually on both sides and after the artificial border was fenced heavily, the Sinai side of the town was gradually depopulated due to security-related factors including creation of buffer zones.

It is often said that when countries engage in avoidable but highly destructive wars, it is people in border areas who suffer the most. Yes, people on both sides of this border zone have suffered a lot, and not just during wars. To fortify their security preparations, Israeli forces have repeatedly carried out large-scale demolitions of houses in Rafah and nearby areas over the decades. Hamas and related organizations dug long and fortified tunnels and while searching for these tunnels on both sides of Israel and Egyptian authorities carried out very strong actions in which innocent people were caught badly. The Egyptian authorities have also carried out large-scale demolitions on their side of the border. In addition in the course of their other operations including anti-terror operations, Egyptian forces have carried out demolitions and forced displacement on a large scale in several parts of the Sinai Peninsula.

In the 1967 war the Sinai desert was captured by the Israeli forces and remained under Israeli control for over a decade. In 1979 an agreement was reached between Egypt and Israel which included the return of this vast territory to Egypt. Over the next decade Egypt got back this entire territory.

Subsequently there have been some incidents of violence and terrorism, including those reflecting the anger of some local people against the neglect of their welfare while promoting high-profile tourism.

However ever since the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas and the subsequent invasion of Gaza by Israel, more attention has been concentrated on whether this will lead to an influx of the people of Gaza into the Sinai Peninsula. Some extreme right wing forces of Israel actively promoted the idea of using the conflict for driving the people of Gaza outside Gaza, and the most obvious destination to them appeared to be the Sinai desert with, as one such source noted, ‘its huge expanse and endless space’. What such suggestions ignored was that if vast parts of the Sinai desert have been very sparsely populated, there are environmental reasons for this including freshwater scarcity and livelihood constraints. If even the relatively smaller number of Bedouins and other local communities have found it difficult to sustain livelihoods, how can pushing a large number of people into the desert area be justified. When asked about the prospects of being sent to Sinai, several Palestinians who were interviewed have rejected the idea very strongly.

Some other Israeli sources have suggested that the people of Gaza should move to Sinai only temporarily and they can return when the action against Hamas is over. This is seen by some as a trap while even others fail to see how this can work out in practical terms. Egyptian sources have said that if at all a temporary shelter has to be found, Israel can use its own Negev desert.

Despite all this, the idea of several people of Gaza having to move to the Sinai Peninsula has continued to be in the news for some months. In February 2024 it was widely stated in sections of media, on the basis of satellite photos, that a large security enclosure is being created in Egypt adjacent to Gaza. This was confirmed by local sources who spoke of contracts having been given for this. Various reports suggest a 12 square km. area surrounded by a 23 feet high wall, capable of probably sheltering about 100,000 people in a tented city. However, given the fact that nearby urban locations such as Rafah and Sheikh Zuweid are reported to have suffered depopulation in recent times, it may be possible at relatively short notice to arrange some sort of shelter for more people. At the same time, local people who have been displaced in Sinai may not like the idea of others moving in while they have not been rehabilitated yet.

A recent report dated May 7, 2024 published first in Middle East and then in Middle East Monitor titled ‘Rafah Invasion: Egyptian army turns to Sinai tribes to prepare for the influx of Palestinians’ indicates that preparations for an influx of Palestinians into those parts of the Sinai peninsula which are closer to the Gaza border are still being made.

One part of the preparations may be to organize some of the local people into some sort of a para-military to take case of new security responsibilities if and when a significantly large number of the people of Gaza take shelter in Sinai, or rather are forced to take shelter here.

The Egyptian authorities have been apprehensive from the start regarding Hamas and other radical Palestinian elements coming along with Palestinian refugees and increasing security risks for Egypt. If, for example, they try to mobilize more fighters for the Palestinian cause in Egypt, or if they use the Egyptian territory for launching attacks across the border into Israel, this can create serious problems for Egypt’s relations with Israel, and if the Israeli forces come chasing them into Egyptian territory then the situation becomes even more precarious for Egypt.

Despite such serious apprehensions, however, it has been widely discussed that there is one factor which can still sweeten this bitter pill of increased security problems, and this factor is the possibility of Egypt getting big debt relief and other generous economic assistance from the USA in particular but also from its allies including oil-rich allies. Egypt is a very heavily indebted country and this makes it increasingly difficult for the Egyptian regime to meet the needs of its people, increasing discontent. If this factor is taken into consideration, then the chances increase that several people of Gaza may be forced to move towards the Sinai Peninsula.

A big question is—how big this number will be and for how long will they move to the Sinai Peninsula?

However if the number is very large and if the move is seen as a more or less permanent move, then certainly this will be a big blow to the wider Palestinian cause and to the two-state solution. The cause of the people of the West Bank region too will be weakened further once a very large number of people move away from Gaza.

Hence such forced displacement should be opposed by all people who stand for peace with justice, and instead solutions based on people of Gaza remaining in or very close to their original residential places within Gaza should be advanced and supported.

*

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

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

Featured image: Sinai Peninsula, produced by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. (From the Public Domain)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

On President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping’s invitation, President Vladimir Putin paid a state visit to China.

It is not a formal act, but a further step in strengthening economic, political, and military relations between the two countries.

China produces a third of the world’s manufacturing products, more than the United States, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and Britain combined.

After the major gas pipeline Nord Stream, which transported its gas to Europe, was interrupted by US-NATO military sabotage and the country was subjected to sanctions by the EU – Russia is supplying more and more gas and oil to China and imports from there the industrial products that it previously imported from Europe.

The strengthening of relations between the two countries is part of the BRICS: this intergovernmental organization — made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — has extended to Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. Several other countries want to join this international organization, chaired this year by Russia, which aims to create a multipolar world order alternative to the unipolar one of the West.

To maintain dominance in a changing world at all costs, the West resorts to war in a scenario that ranges from Europe to the Middle East and East Asia.

In his speech at the May 9th Parade for the 79th Anniversary of the Victory of the 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War against Nazi Germany, President Putin describes this scenario as follows:

“Feeding revanchist sentiments, mocking history and trying to justify the current followers of Nazism is part of what is the common policy of the Western elites to fuel regional conflicts, inter-ethnic and inter-religious struggles and to contain the sovereign and independent centre of global development.”

*

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

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

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image: With President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping. Photo: Sergei Karpukhin, TASS

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The real “Axis of Evil” is currently presenting itself to Western populations as Western-supported Zionists unabashedly commit genocide against Palestinian civilians right now, in plain view, for all to see.

Apartheid Israel[1] is using Western financing, and Western bombs, and Western covert and overt support to bomb and snipe and bury alive Palestinian civilians who are herded from one place to another like so many heads of cattle only to be bombed and starved and further denied all rights, including the most precious one: the right to live.

Gaza itself is not unlike the WW2 Nazi-besieged Warsaw Ghetto where Jews were concentrated, besieged, starved, and ultimately exterminated.

As with the Nazi control of ghetto supplies,  Zionists control the two crossings into Gaza: Rafah and Beit Hanoun, and from there prevent international aid from entering Gaza.

See video here.

As with the Nazi persecution of Jews, the Zionist end-game is extermination and evacuation of Palestinians from Gaza.

This is Option C of Israel’s “Secret Intelligence Memorandum.”

“Option C”, writes Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, “defines and confirms Netanyahu’s criminal agenda directed against the People of Palestine:

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

“Option C” continues Chossudovsky, “defines the framework of the operation directed against the People of Palestine, with the full support of the U.S. and NATO. It confirms that the ongoing genocide against the People of Palestine was a carefully planned undertaking.

It consists in ‘the evacuation of the civilian population from Gaza to Sinai.’ ”[2]

The propaganda that Israelis are somehow “victims” is increasingly absurd especially as details concerning the October 7 false flag[3] become more apparent, even according to Israeli sources.

 The truism that “Israeli accusations are its confessions” is especially poignant.
Those of us opposing the Zionist-perpetrated genocide of the trapped,starved, bombed, sniped and caged Palestinians are not “anti-semites”. The Zionists are the anti-semites, since they are the ones mass-murdering Palestinians who, after all, are semitic peoples. Zionists, by and large, are not.

See video here.

This War of Terror, this genocide, that the West and its Zionist proxies are waging against Palestinian civilians should weigh heavily on everyone’s conscience. Certainly, student protests against the slaughter are correct and righteous, and those professing neutrality are on the side of the oppressors at a time when the wrong-doers, the evil-doers, have rarely been so transparent.

As Washington-supported Israel tries to widen the war (and destroy 7 countries in 5 years), per General Clark, Global Terrorists have revealed their hand once again.

The real “Axis of Evil” consists of those countries such as the U.S and Israel which are currently committing crimes against humanity[4] against Palestinians in Gaza, all in the context of a “long war” against humanity which features permanent warfare and international lawlessness as policy.

Any “Rules Based Order” promised by Washington would offer more of the same.

*

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.

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. He writes on his website where this article was originally published.

Notes

(1) Felicity Arbuthnot,”Palestine: Apartheid, Stolen Lives and Land, History Erased, United Nations Deaf Mute” Global Research, 04 November, 2023. (https://www.globalresearch.ca/palestine-apartheid-stolen-lives-and-land-history-erased-united-nations-deaf-mute/5601586?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR1ZWq8xQXOFhhJ2inXOFem3ZSulnw7ZAvOaKS1x-TM79l5zDWJTv3BPb14_aem_AaRT1dr_dlJMkkMVvORV0P5v5yzmXsBSTGKVpRVX1R4Hv08Fx8nDfZoLPp1KRgQ6VtCVBCwDvmCNncdZHjuoGogW) Accessed 17 May, 2024.

(2)Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Pelham, and Mohammed al-Hajjar, “Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: “Option C” of Israel’s “Secret Intelligence Memorandum.” Global Research, 27 February, 2024. (https://www.globalresearch.ca/gaza-update/5841438) Accessed, 17 May, 2024

(3) Mark Taliano, “October 7 As Seen Through the Lens of the Military-Intelligence Complex.” Global Research, 03 January, 2024. (https://www.globalresearch.ca/october-7-seen-through-lens-military-intelligence-complex/5844939) Accessed 17 May, 2024.

see also: Video: Israel-Hamas War: Netanyahu’s “Planned Operation on All Fronts”

(4) Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, “A Message to Israeli, U.S. and NATO Soldiers and Pilots: It’s Genocide, ‘Disobey Unlawful Orders, Abandon the Battlefield’. ” Global Research, 21 March, 2024. (https://www.globalresearch.ca/this-christmas-i-have-tears-in-my-eyes/5844151) Accessed 19 May, 2024.

Featured image is from the author

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Mar. 30, 2024 (image above) – NSW, Australia – 42 year old rugby coach Damien Ingram (coach for Shellharour Sharks) died suddenly, as announced on March 30, 2024

Hundreds of Sports Coaches have died suddenly since the rollout of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines. Here are 65 deaths from Oct. 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, the “Winter of DIED SUDDENLY” for the COVID-19 Vaccinated.

Mar. 28, 2024 – Auckland, New Zealand – Aaron Thompson, coach for girls softball U15, died suddenly on March 28, 2024.

Mar. 24, 2024 – Coach at California Allstars Mesa, Ricky Smith died suddenly and unexpectedly March 24, 2024. “Matt and I are fully vaccinated. That’s 3 out of 4 in our house is vaccinated. Now can you turn on the tracking chip so I can meet new friends.”

Image

Mar. 20, 2024 – Bristol, TN – Kim Peer Bright, Tennessee High girls basketball coach died suddenly on Mar. 20, 2024

Mar. 15, 2024 – Bartow County, GA – Atlanta baseball coach 47 year old Dough Davis collapsed during a game and died from a massive heart attack.

Mar. 8, 2024 – Liverpool, UK – 42 year old Andrew “Stevo” Stevenson, soccer coach, died suddenly

Mar. 4, 2024 – 46 year old Char-ron Dorsey, former NFL football player for Dallas Cowboys who went on to be a high school football coach, died suddenly from a stroke

Mar. 3, 2024 – Romania – 46 year old international volleyball player and coach Ruxandra Dumitrescu died suddenly after a heart attack.

Feb. 27,2024 – Savannah, GA – 26 year old Britni Pafford, gymnastics coach, died suddenly from a brain stem bleed.

Feb. 26, 2024 – 33 year old Assistant UK ice hockey coach Dayle Keen died suddenly on Feb. 26, 2024.

Image

Feb. 26, 2024 – Czech Republic – 43 year old David Winkler, Coach of the Czech National baseball team, died suddenly on Feb. 26, 2024.

Feb. 24, 2024 – East Dubuque, IL – 55 year old William “Bill” Reisen, baseball coach, died suddenly from complications of pneumonia.

Click here to read the full article.

*

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

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

Featured image is from COVID Intel


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

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

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

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

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

This article was first published in July 2022.

Updates and analysis. May 18, 2024

***

 

“This Pandemic Treaty, if implemented, will change the global landscape and strip you and me of some of our most basic rights and freedoms.

Make no mistake, the WHO Pandemic Treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.” (Peter Koenig)

***

Introduction

There is a Sense of Urgency. A Worldwide Mass Movement against the Adoption of the Pandemic Treaty is Required. 

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) General Assembly, the World Health Assembly (WHA) representing all 194 member states, will take place in Geneva, from 27 May to 1 June 2024.

During that crucial week, the WHA is expected to vote on the controversial “Pandemic Treaty” and the new revised International Health Regulation (IHR, last revision 2005).

The Covid-19 “Pandemic”and the mRNA “Vaccine”

These two strategic pillars of the covid-19 agenda are:  

  • The lockdown: an act of economic and social warfare which has triggered a Worldwide process of impoverishment, social marginalization and despair, 
  • The mRNA Covid “vaccine” which has resulted in a Worldwide upward trend in mortality and morbidity. 

Unprecedented in World history, these two strategic pillars are currently instrumental in triggering a process of depopulation which indelibly points to extensive crimes against humanity.

At the time of writing (June 2022) the fourth jab of the Covid-19 “vaccine” is being administered resulting in a dramatic increase in the number of victims. 

The enforcement of the depopulation agenda requires a socially repressive structure of “global governance” controlled by the financial establishment.

It also requires a cohesive propaganda apparatus with a view to enforcing social acceptance Worldwide. In turn, this process requires the demise of the institutions of representative government coupled with the criminalization of the judicial system. 

The first part of this article focusses on “digital tyranny”, namely the structures of “World Governance”,  which are slated to be implemented in late May 2024 under the auspices of the WHO Pandemic Treaty.

Were it to be adopted, the Treaty would override the authority of  WHO member states. It would create a giant data bank at the level of the entire planet, namely  “a global health governance entity”, which is the object of Part I of this article

Part II of the article focusses on the Eugenist Depopulation Agenda, its historical roots and its Worldwide implementation by the Globalists. 

.

 

Part I

“Digital Tyranny” and 

The Structures of “World Governance”

 

Towards a Digitized Global Police State 

The Worldwide QR Verification Code project lays the groundwork for the instatement of a “Digitized Global Police State” controlled by the financial establishment. It’s part of what the late David Rockefeller entitled “The March towards World Government” based on an alliance of bankers and intellectuals (See Michel Chossudovsky, Chapter XII).  Peter Koenig describes the QR Code as:

“an all-electronic ID – linking everything to everything of each individual (records of health, banking, personal and private, etc.).”

Towards a Worldwide Digital Currency System (CBDC)  

Consultations are also ongoing between the World Economic Forum (WEF) and central banks with a view to implementing a so-called Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) network. According to David Scripac 

“A worldwide digital ID system is in the making. … The aim of the WEF—and of all the central banks [is] to implement a global system in which everyone’s personal data will be incorporated into the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) network.  

The QR Verification Code Software

In early 2022, the WHO signed a major contract with Deutsche Telekom T Systems to develop a QR Verification App and Software which is to be applied Worldwide.

The QR code-based software solution is slated to be used:

“for other vaccinations as well, such as polio or yellow fever, T-Systems said in a statement … adding that the WHO would support its 194 member states in building national and regional verification technology.”  (emphasis added)

According to a Deutsche Telekom I-T Systems Communique  “The WHO’s gateway service also serves as a bridge between regional systems“, which essentially implies a coordinated global structure of QR surveillance, which oversees the entire population of Planet Earth.

And once established: it will police “every aspect of our lives”, wherever our location.  “It can also be used as part of future vaccination campaigns and home-based records.

According to the CEO of Deutsche Telecom T Systems:

“Corona has a grip on the world. Digitization keeps the world running”.

Bill Gates had a long-standing relationship with Deutsche Telekom’s  former CEO Ron Sommer going back to the late 1990s.

Tracing and Tracking

T-Systems had previously set up the European Federation Gateway Service (EFGS). The service ensures that member states’ corona tracing apps work across borders.

The Telekom app is categorized as “one of the most successful tracing apps in the world”.

Who has the Grip on the World?

A giant data bank pertaining to the Planet’s 8 billion people is controlled by “Big Money”.

People are tagged and labeled, their emails, cell phones are monitored, detailed personal data are entered into a giant “Big Brother” data bank.

“Digital tyranny” requires repelling all forms of political and social resistance. 

People become Numbers

Individual human beings are categorized as “numbers”. Once these “numbers” are inserted into a Global digital data bank, humanity in its entirety is under the control of the Globalists, namely The Financial Establishment. 

The history, culture and identity of nation states is foreclosed. People become numbers inserted into a global data bank. In turn the formulation of societal projects (projets de société) at national, local and community levels is erased.

Social democracy, socialism, libertarianism: Under global governance, all forms of representative democracy and class struggle are precipitated into the dustbin of history.

“Progressives” should understand who is behind this hegemonic project, it’s part of a neoliberal agenda, it’s an endgame which destroys the identity of human beings, it destroys humanity.

It is important to organize a broad movement of resistance leading to the outright dismantling of this diabolical agenda, which is embedded in the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Gates Foundation.

The Infamous WHO Pandemic Treaty is Slated to be adopted in Late May 2024

In March 2022, the WHO launched an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) with a mandate to create “A Pandemic Treaty”, i.e. a global health governance entity which would override the authority of  WHO member states.

“The Global Pandemic Treaty on pandemic preparedness would grant the WHO absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities / vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, lockdowns, standardized medical care and more.

This Pandemic Treaty, if implemented, will change the global landscape and strip you and me of some of our most basic rights and freedoms.

Make no mistake, the WHO Pandemic Treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.” (Peter Koenig, June 2022)

The Pandemic Treaty is tied into the WHO’s QR Verification Code project and the Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine.

The  legitimacy of both the Pandemic Treaty and the QR Verification Code under WHO auspices rests on the presumption that the alleged “Covid-19 Pandemic is Real” and that the mRNA vaccine constitutes a SOLUTION to curbing the spread of the virus. 

Fraud and “Fake Science”. There Is No Pandemic 

What is the legitimacy as well as the science behind this diabolical project?  NONE. Amply confirmedTHERE IS NO PANDEMICThe alleged Covid-19 Pandemic is based on “Fake Science” (See Michel Chossudovsky, Chapter III)

Both the EU Digital COVID Certificate Framework as well as the WHO QR Verification Code are predicated on outright lies and fabrications.

The Pandemic Treaty is the “Back Door” towards “Global Governance” and “Digital Tyranny” 

It is the End of “Representative Democracy”

“In the words of the late David Rockefeller:

“…The world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” (quoted by Aspen Times, August 15, 2011, emphasis added)

The Global Governance scenario imposes an agenda of social engineering and economic compliance. It constitutes an extension of the neoliberal policy framework imposed on both developing and developed countries. 

It consists in scrapping “national auto-determination” and constructing a Worldwide nexus of pro-US proxy regimes controlled by a “supranational sovereignty” (World Government) composed of leading financial institutions, billionaires and their philanthropic foundations.” 

The Global Governance scenario attempts to impose an agenda of social engineering and economic compliance.

The World government envisaged by the Globalists is predicated on obedience and acceptance.

One of its major objectives is to carry out a Worldwide Depopulation Agenda. (See Part II below)

Part II

Depopulation and The History of Eugenics

 

Introduction 

The contemporary eugenics movement sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the billionaire philanthropists hinges upon two strategic pillars: the Covid lockdown and the mRNA vaccine, which are instruments of global population reduction.

The manipulation of energy prices, which trigger bankruptcies as well as US-NATO led wars are also instruments of depopulation. 

What we are living now is unprecedented. Today’s depopulation agenda is by no means comparable to the eugenist movement which unfolded in the U.S. as of the early 20th century. Eugenics at the outset was based on legislation directed against specific population groups with so-called “learning or physical disabilities”:

“The 1907 law denied entry to anyone judged ‘mentally or physically defective, such mental or physical defects being of a nature which may affect the ability of such alien to earn a living.’ It added ‘imbeciles’ and ‘feeble-minded persons’ to the list. …

By 1938, 33 American states permitted the forced sterilisation of women with learning disabilities and 29 American states had passed compulsory sterilisation laws covering people who were thought to have genetic conditions. Laws in America also restricted the right of certain disabled people to marry. More than 36,000 Americans underwent compulsory sterilisation before this legislation was eventually repealed in the 1940s.” (Victoria Brignell)

Depopulation Directed against Third World Countries

Inspired by the eugenist ideology, depopulation in the post World War II era became an integral part of a Neo-colonial Agenda. It was carefully embedded into the tenets of US foreign policy, largely directed against so-called “Developing Countries”.

We recall U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s National Security Study Memorandum 200 entitled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.”

According to Kissinger (NSSM 200, 1974):

“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the Third World, because the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”

The Vaccine Campaign Directed against Third World Countries

In regards to Third World countries, depopulation was carefully instrumented through vaccines. The “tetanus vaccines” project implemented under WHO-UNICEF auspices was intended to “secretly sterilize women in poor countries all over the planet”.

Kenya’s Catholic bishops are charging two United Nations organizations with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus inoculation program sponsored by the Kenyan government”

Kenya: Gates Killer Vaccine

Bill Gates, who is now at the forefront of the Globalists’ mRNA “vaccine” program was intricately involved.

“The Gates Foundation was sued by governments around the world, Kenya, India, the Philippines – and more” (Peter Koenig, April 2020)

Robert F Kennedy Jr, an avid Defender of Children’s Rights and anti-vaccination activist, in April 2020 launched a petition sent to the White House, calling for “Investigations into the ‘Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’ for Medical Malpractice & Crimes Against HumanityQuoted in Koenig 

Screenshot 

“At the forefront of this is Bill Gates, who has publicly stated his interest in “reducing population growth” by 10-15%, by means of vaccination.

Gates, UNICEF & WHO have already been credibly accused of intentionally sterilizing Kenyan children through the use of a hidden HCG antigen in tetanus vaccines”. (Excerpt from text of Petition)

The Globalists’ Depopulation Agenda.“What to Do with All These Useless People?”

Following in the footsteps of Henry Kissinger’s 1974 National Memorandum 200, the WEF Globalists consider that Planet Earth is overpopulated. They do not formally acknowledge that the Covid-19 mandates including the mRNA “vaccine” constitute the means to reducing the World’s population.

The “vaccine” is casually upheld as a means to “save lives”.

Klaus Schwab’s protégé Prof. Yuval Noah Harari, nonetheless begs the question, “what to do with all these useless people?”  

Harari is an influential member of the World Economic Forum (WEF) who supports the idea of creating a dystopian society managed by a handful of globalists who will rule over every human beings on earth from the day they are born. (Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 2022)

 .

Secret 2009 Meeting of “The Good Club”. “Billionaires Try to Shrink World’s Population”

Flashback to April 25, 2009: the World Health Organization (WHO) headed by Margaret Chan declared a Public Health Emergency of International concern (PHEIC) pertaining to the H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic, which in many regards was a “dress rehearsal” of the Covid pandemic. (See Michel Chossudovsky Chapter IX). 

Barely two weeks later in early May 2009, at the height of the H1N1 “pandemic”, the billionaire philanthropists met behind closed doors at the home of the president of the Rockefeller University in Manhattan.

This secret gathering was sponsored by Bill Gates. 

They call themselves “The Good Club”. Among the participants were the late David Rockefeller, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey and many more:  

“Some of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.” (Sunday Times, May 2009)10

The emphasis was not on population growth (i.e. Planned Parenthood) but on “Depopulation”, i.e. the reduction in the absolute size of the world’s population.

To read complete WSJ article, click here.

According to the Sunday Times report:

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Another guest said there was “nothing as crude as a vote” but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.

“This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big-brain answers,” said the guest.  …

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said. (Sunday Times)11

The decision-making is intricate and complex. The reports of this secret May 2009 meeting largely reveal the Depopulation Narrative. It was one among numerous similar meetings (which are rarely the object of media coverage).

What is significant is the criminal intent of these billionaire “philanthropists” to depopulate Planet Earth.

Bill Gates’ 2010 Depopulation Statement. The Role of “New Vaccines”

Was an absolute “reduction” in world population contemplated at that May 2009 secret meeting? A few months later, Bill Gates in his TED presentation (February 2010) pertaining to vaccination, stated the following:

“And if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [the world population] by 10 or 15 percent”.12

(See quotation in the video starting at 04:21. See also screenshot of transcript of quotation below)

TED Talk at 04:21:

Transcript of quotation from the video13

Bill Gates’ “Absolute Reduction” in World Population 

The World’s population in 2022 is of the order of 8.0 billion. 

Bill Gates’ proposal is implement an “absolute reduction” in the World’s population based on 2022 data using “new vaccines” is as follows:

  • An absolute reduction of 10% in 2022 would be of the order of 800 million. 
  • An absolute reduction of 15% of the World Population in 2022 would be the order of 1.2 billion.

The same group of billionaires, who met at the May 2009 “secret venue”, has been actively involved from the outset of the COVID crisis in designing the lockdown policies applied worldwide, the mRNA vaccine and the “Great Reset”, the endgame of which is depopulation. 

Crimes against humanity are beyond description.

We are dealing with a criminal cabal which must be confronted. 


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

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

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.

You may also wish to make a donation in support of the book project at DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page(NOTE: User-friendly

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on The COVID-19 Endgame: Global Governance, “Digital Tyranny” and the Depopulation Agenda

Il Tramonto Rosso Sangue dell’occidente

May 19th, 2024 by Manlio Dinucci

Il Presidente Vladimir Putin, su invito del Presidente della Repubblica Popolare Cinese Xi Jinping, ha effettuato una visita di Stato in Cina. Non è un atto formale, ma un ulteriore passo nel rafforzamento delle relazioni economiche, politiche e militari tra i due Paesi. La Cina produce un terzo dei prodotti manifatturieri mondiali, più di Stati Uniti, Germania, Giappone, Corea del Sud e Gran Bretagna messi insieme. La Russia – dopo che è stato spezzato con un sabotaggio militare USA-NATO il maggiore gasdotto, il Nord Stream, che trasportava il suo gas in Europa, ed è stata sottoposta a sanzioni da parte della UE – sta fornendo sempre più gas e petrolio alla Cina e importa da questa i prodotti industriali che prima importava dall’Europa.

Il rafforzamento delle relazioni tra i due Paesi si inserisce in quello dei BRICS: questa organizzazione intergovernativa – formata da Brasile, Russia, India, Cina e Sudafrica – si è estesa a Arabia Saudita, Iran, Egitto, Etiopia ed Emirati Arabi Uniti. Diversi altri Paesi vogliono entrare in questa organizzazione internazionale, presieduta quest’anno dalla Russia, che mira a creare un ordine mondiale multipolare alternativo a quello unipolare dell’Occidente.

Per mantenere a tutti i costi il predominio in un mondo che cambia, l’Occidente ricorre alla guerra in uno scenario che va dall’Europa al Medioriente e all’Asia Orientale. Nel discorso alla Parata del 9 Maggio per il 79° Anniversario della Vittoria della Grande Guerra Patriottica del 1941-1945 contro la Germania nazista, il Presidente Putin così descrive questo scenario: “Nutrire sentimenti revanscisti, farsi beffa della Storia e cercare di giustificare gli attuali seguaci del nazismo fa parte di quella che è la politica comune delle élite occidentali per alimentare i conflitti regionali, le lotte interetniche e interreligiose e per contenere i centri sovrani e indipendenti dello sviluppo globale.”

Manlio Dinucci

 

VIDEO :

Un’altra multinazionale del farmaco, questa volta Pfizer, batte in ritirata per evitare guai peggiori. In discussione vi sono quei prodotti definiti “sicuri” ma che forse tanto sicuri non lo erano poi mica tanto.

Sembrerebbe essere il caso dello Zantac, perché secondo il Financial Times l’azienda ha deciso di pagare 250 milioni di dollari per risolvere 10.000 cause negli Stati Uniti.

L’accusa per Pfizer è quella di avere nascosto i rischi di cancro associati al farmaco utilizzato per problemi di stomaco.

Zantac e rischio cancro: non solo Pfizer

Tra le altre società coinvolte vi sono anche i produttori GSK e Sanofi, che ha invece versato 100 milioni di dollari per 4.000 cause legate allo Zantac. Queste aziende hanno perso insieme 45 miliardi di dollari per via delle azioni legali.

La Food and Drug Administration aveva ritirato il farmaco dal mercato statunitense nel 2020 proprio per i possibili rischi cancerogeni.

Negli ultimi decenni Zantac è stato uno dei prodotti più venduti. Al suo interno vi era la ranitidina, ritirata in Italia tra il 2019 e il 2022 per un’impurità potenzialmente cancerogena.

Cancro: cause contro Pfizer per Zantac

Pfizer spiega che non commercializza lo Zantac da oltre 15 anni, oltre ad averlo fatto solo per un periodo di tempo limitato. La multinazionale fa sapere che continuerà a difendersi dalle cause legali.

“Riteniamo che non siano supportate da dati scientifici affidabili”, commenta la società, aggiungendo però che valuterà delle soluzioni per alcuni casi “se appropriate”.

L’obiettivo di Pfizer sarebbe quello di chiudere i casi prima di andare in tribunale, dove sarebbe accusata da gente malata di cancro. Nel frattempo, nell’ultimo anno, le azioni sono scese del 27% anche per il calo della domanda dei vaccini anti Covid.

Pfizer e AstraZeneca in ritirata dopo le cause

Un altro produttore in quest’ultimo ambito è AstraZeneca, che ha recentemente optato per il ritiro del vaccino Vaxzevria. Anche la società anglo-svedese è alle prese con decine di cause per via dei danni denunciati dalle persone a seguito della somministrazione.

Effetti collaterali, come la trombosi, ora peraltro ammessi dalla stessa azienda. Prima, però, come avvenuto con Pfizer per lo Zantac, l’utilizzo del vaccino era stato approvato in Europa e veniva definito “sicuro“.

Ma che problema c’è per queste multinazionali? Tanto, male che vada, ritirano il prodotto e propongono un risarcimento.

Andrea Murgia

VIDEO :

https://www.byoblu.com/2024/05/17/pfizer-in-ritirata-paga-per-evitare-le-cause-contro-il-cancro/

 

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.

First published on May 8, 2024

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The following is a transcript on a an interview with Richard C. Cook conducted by Ahmed Danyal Arif, Editor of the Economics Section for The Review of Religions.

Ahmed Danyal Arif (ADA): Mr. Cook, first of all thank you so much for giving us a little of your precious time. We are very grateful for this. I have to be honest I don’t know where to start as you have had such a long career in the US Government where you have essentially served (please correct me if I am wrong) as a policy analyst in the 70s and 80s. You then worked for NASA and ended your career in 2007 as a Project Manager in the US Treasury Department. You are now retired and writing with a particular focus on monetary reform. What led you to write about this?

Richard C. Cook  (RCC): I began to study monetary reform in 1979-1980 when I worked for the Carter White House in the office of consumer affairs. I had discovered the ideas of British engineer C.H. Douglas who explained the chronic gap in developed economies between GDP and national income, which meant that society never had enough money to purchase what their economies were able to produce. Some very notable people like Winston Churchill and Henry Ford were also aware of this. The system of Keynesian economics was developed to address the problem through government borrowing. But all this accomplished was to ‘kick the can down the road’ by creating debt that eventually had to be paid off, usually through war or hyperinflation.

A decade later I found myself working for the US Treasury Department, when I was able to carry out an in-depth study of the history of the US monetary system. I learned that the banking system existed to fill the GDP-income gap but that the debt it created in doing so led to massive profits to the banks but ruin for the nation at large. I also learned that the only successful alternative had been the spending of Greenbacks by the government during the Civil War. I then came into contact with Stephen Zarlenga who had founded the American Monetary Institute and was studying the same problems. Together we wrote the American Monetary Act which became Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s NEED Act introduced in Congress in 2011 but not yet passed. This would create a modern version of Greenback money. So one thing led to another, and I am still writing about these things. My latest is my new bookOur Country, Then and Now to be published soon by Clarity Press.

ADA: In your book We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform (Tendril Press, 2009), you have a whole chapter about morality and economics. What is the correlation between the two and do you still believe this is the ‘key issue of the 21st century’?

RCC: Our Declaration of Independence states that every person has a right to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ Of course along with these rights come responsibilities. One is that we act with kindness and compassion in accepting the rights of others. Our predatory financial system does not do this. The system is based on putting people into debt. That’s how money is generated in the economy. But this is wrong.

Of course we are all responsible for working to earn a living. But the system should assure that people can earn enough that they can live decently and respectably as well as save for the future. Naturally, the work of some will support the lesser financial contributions of others, but this is part of life. If people are dissatisfied with their opportunities for work they should be free to seek elsewhere or be able to improve their skills so as to earn more. But all of this requires a monetary system that supports individual freedom and initiative. We do not have such a system today. What we have is debt slavery where the 1% make out like bandits and the 99% struggle to survive. Such a system also promotes crime and war, where people and nations feel they must steal from their neighbour in order to get by.

ADA: When we take a look at the current economic climate and the news on a daily basis, there is clearly a popular discontent. I am obviously thinking about inflation which really is giving us a hard time. Price rises have slowed in some parts of the world, but they are still significant. How did we get there? Is it only Putin’s fault or did the unconventional monetary policies of the central banks following the 2008 crisis also play a role?

RCC: We have a war, with the West supplying billions of dollars of weapons to the Ukrainian regime. And Russia is winning that war.

The West also cut itself off from cheap Russian energy in order to cause the Russian economy to collapse. That didn’t work. So energy prices are skyrocketing. Then for reasons no one understands, the Federal Reserve and other Western banks began raising interest rates, making every purchase of consumer goods more expensive. I certainly don’t begrudge the payment by the government of stipends to citizens during the pandemic. People have to live. But that was not the cause of the present crisis. The cause is the banking system.

ADA: Interest rates are also soaring as you rightly mentioned, and many are now questioning whether they can still afford to pay their mortgage while prospective first-time homeowners are considering putting off buying in the hopes of securing a better deal in the future. I even came across  a company called ‘SimpleClosure raising $1.5m in less than 24h to help businesses shut down’ (especially startups). I mean, it seems to be the perfect recipe for… a systemic crash, no?

RCC: There have been previous times in history that the Federal Reserve raised interest rates that crashed the economy. This is what started the Great Depression in 1929. The Fed started the recession of 1979 when it raised interest rates to over 20 percent. There were periodic increases in the 1980s and 1990s that took down the economies of entire nations in Latin America and Asia. It is happening again now after the zero percent interest rates the Federal Reserve put in place during the 2008-2009 Great Recession. The Federal Reserve always claims that they raise interest rates to ‘fight inflation.’ But there is an equally sound argument that higher interest rates cause inflation by making every business transaction more expensive. The fact is that the Federal Reserve is a black hole.

No one but the bankers themselves know what they are doing or why. At the present time banks like JP Morgan Chase are making record profits while the economy is moving toward a recession and ordinary people increasingly cannot afford food, housing, education, or transportation.

The US federal government is now $33.1 trillion in debt.

State and local governments are $3.17 trillion in debt. Private sector debt is over $30 trillion.

This is just within the US.

It means that every individual is $211,000 in debt on average. According to the Federal Reserve, the average net worth of American families in 2019 was $746,820, with the median $121,760. We can deduce that a large majority of American families literally own nothing. It’s no different in most other countries. And with the Federal Reserve raising interest rates, mainly to attract overseas investment and shore up the dollar, the debt continually grows even if no new debt is added.

ADA: Turning to your latest insightful article titled ‘Is World War III About to Start’ (part I and part II), you say of the Ukraine war that ‘anyone with a discernible pulse is aware of the danger that the conflict could escalate into a conflagration large and destructive enough to morph into World War III.’ You also give a detailed analysis of the US military-industrial complex employing tens of millions of people. Do you think that military production is the only area where the “saturation” point can be postponed indefinitely as long as the ‘adversaries’ or ‘enemies’ are equally able to develop faster and better weapons?

RCC: The problem here are the words ‘adversaries’ and ‘enemies.’ Who says so? Personally, I have no ‘adversaries’ or ‘enemies.’ These are buzzwords used by governments to get people to kill other people and to get themselves killed. Why? So the fat cats can make money. It’s been that way for a long time, but it doesn’t have to be that way any longer. We have the knowledge and the understanding today to stop wars. Of course, there will always be competition, and some people will still try to cheat their competitors. So, we still need a system of law enforcement. But we don’t have to kill each other so the rich can get richer.

ADA: This brings me to the crucial issue of the dollar’s global hegemony. We know that this gives the US government power to impose crippling sanctions and wage other forms of financial warfare against adversaries. But this hegemony of the dollar is increasingly contested and the Sino-Russian agenda of opposition to the American currency has intensified with the Ukrainian conflict. Several historical allies of the United States (Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc.) or Brazil have affirmed their desire to gradually get rid of the dollar. Do you think that this geo-monetary tug of war and the recent gold accumulation of central banks could lead to World War III and, in the medium/long term, to a different international monetary system from the one we have known since 1944 and the Bretton Woods Agreement?

RCC: Yes, it does seem clear that the collapse of dollar hegemony could lead to World War III if the US decides, out of desperation, to simply knock over the chessboard now that it is in danger of being checkmated.

The U.S. had previously been heading toward bankruptcy around 1970 due to huge budget and trade deficits coming from the Vietnam War. So, the Nixon government, also acting in desperation, removed the gold peg, while the banking/oil cartels raised oil prices by a factor of four. It was done by the US/British financial class, not by the Arab oil producers. What it really represented was a gigantic theft of international resources by these cartels. The world has never been the same since, with real GDP and incomes not having grown at all since then. So, the Bretton Woods Agreement actually ended then. Obviously, we need a new Bretton Woods, one that recognizes parity among all national currencies. This is what BRICS is aiming at, even as the West goes bankrupt.

ADA: As you already know, and you mentioned it in your book, interest is strictly forbidden in the Islamic paradigm. But as a Muslim, I also know that the Qur’an actually quite explicitly links interest with war (Ch. 2: V. 280). I just wanted to take your view, as a defense analyst or economist, on the role of debt in this whole global warfare that we have been seeing for decades now.

RCC: The view of the Islamic nations on lending and interest is absolutely correct. In the West, the regime of usury based on compound interest is criminal psychopathy.

What really happened was that gradually the money lenders took over the U.S. economy during the late 19th century in exactly the same way the Bank of England took over the British economy after it was founded in 1694.

The British got rich by plundering India, China, and South Africa, but the profits went to the bankers in the City of London, who put the entire British ruling class into debt.

The British Empire and today the American Empire were both founded on bank-created debt. Global warfare, including the West’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, are manifestations of this financial imperative. It is no accident that the US hedge fund BlackRock is in process of buying up the assets in Ukraine now that Ukraine has been depopulated by the war. This is what they wanted to do with Russia when they enticed Russia to invade Ukraine in 2022 then imposed sanctions. Russia was supposed to collapse, but it didn’t happen.

ADA: Ultimately, dialogue with other nations and communities is vital. Is it possible, in your opinion, for nations and leaders to conciliate a focus on their own national interests and at the same time consider what is best for the world at large?

RCC: Is a multipolar world possible? Only if the people of the West, acting through their own governments, take back the unconstitutional power of the banks. The US banking system, going back to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and beyond, is in fact an ongoing insurrection against the U.S. Constitution. It’s the Constitution that gives Congress, not the banks, the authority to create and oversee the monetary system of the nation. In Russia and China, the central banks report to the government.

In the US, the Federal Reserve reports only to the wealthiest 1%. This is what has to change. Until then, there can be no peace in the world. Of course, we also need a spiritual renewal.

My inspiration has been the German spiritual master Bô Yin Râ (Joseph Anton Schneiderfranken–1876-1943). His books are becoming available in English translation from Kober.com. I would urge all your readers to take a look. One thing he writes about is the necessity for people and nations to live within their means.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Review of Religions.

Richard C. Cook is a retired US government analyst who worked for the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Jimmy Carter White House, NASA, and the US Treasury Department. While at NASA he became a whistleblower at the time of the January 1986 space shuttle Challenger disaster by disclosing NASA’s past knowledge of the problems that destroyed the shuttle and killed the 7-person crew. At Treasury, he developed and taught training courses on the American monetary system. After retirement in 2007, he published several books and numerous articles on public policy issues, including ‘We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform’. Most recently he has published articles on the dangers of World War III and the urgent need to confront the crimes of international finance in driving the world to destruction. He will soon be publishing a new book, ‘Our Country, Then and Now’, through Clarity Press.

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.

First published on May 16, 2024

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intentionally sabotaged the recent ceasefire agreement in order to resume his long plotted Rafah campaign last week, Biden halted one shipment of US bombs headed for Israel. The only reason “the pause” on the US weapons latest bomb delivery occurred, was simply to provide an illusion that the Biden regime “cares” about the ongoing Gaza carnage during an election year to stop the bleeding of his political base – young pro-Palestinian protesting voters and the Midwest’s swing state Arab population.

Bibi’s response to Biden’s first attempt ever to withhold aid was to defiantly proceed with his IDF offensive into Rafah, regardless. His latest “fuck you” refusal toward the weak Biden clown show, masquerading as the US presidential administration, has the Middle East war racing unimpeded towards growing regional turned world war. The melodrama queen martyr Netanyahu stated last week:

If we must stand alone, we shall stand alone. If we must, we shall fight with our fingernails. But we have much more than our fingernails, and with that strength of spirit, with God’s help, together we shall be victorious.

One major indication that Bibi’s previous cocksure bravado last December declaring Israeli forces had successfully neutralized Hamas’ command structure in northern Gaza is now clearly false.

The fact that last weekend Israel was forced to resume fighting in northern Gaza, only shows that Bibi’s earlier claim was either foolishly premature or an outright lie, and based on his history, most likely the latter.

On Saturday May 11th, Israel relaunched its ground invasion in north Gaza. On Sunday and Monday videos emerged amidst the deadly chaos depicting Palestinian families in the Jabalya refugee camp running for their lives, in desperate effort to escape Israeli drones, artillery shelling and automatic gunfire in the background. Civilians were observed on foot leaving a UN school in the refugee camp amidst the heavy explosions. IDF tanks were threatening the safety of these fleeing thousands of children and their families that had taken shelter in the schools within the refugee camp. According to ambulance personnel, Israeli soldiers indiscriminately shot at ambulances and civilians trying to escape.

As always, the IDF military claimed it had announced its warning for civilians to leave Jabalya camp to another camp location in west North Gaza City in response to a supposed intelligence report that Hamas militants had “reassembled” in north Gaza. This was Israel’s reported excuse for renewed IDF fighting in the north. Bottom-line, cocky Bibi the Butcher was wrong, claiming months earlier in December that Hamas was defeated with only four battalions left in the south Gaza city of Rafah. Moreover, it serves as more clear-cut evidence that Israel’s mighty military forces are unable to defeat Hamas. On Sunday May 12th on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” for the first time, even US Secretary of State Antony Blinken cast doubt that Israel will be able to ultimately destroy Hamas, framing it:

Israel is on the trajectory potentially to inherit an insurgency with many armed Hamas left or if it [Hamas] leaves [Gaza, there will be] a vacuum filled by chaos, filled by anarchy, and probably refilled by Hamas.

With more than 300,000 Palestinians fleeing Rafah this last week avoiding the ground invasion crossfire, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestinian refugees on Monday May 13th stated on X:

In north #Gaza bombardments & other evacuation orders have created more displacement & fear for thousands of families. There’s nowhere to go. There’s NO safety without a #ceasefire.

The day before on Sunday May 12th, commissioner general of UNRWA Philippe Lazzarini wrote on X:

Since the war began, most people in Gaza have moved multiple times: on average once a month. They desperately sought safety that they never found. Some have no choice but to stay in bombed out @UNRWA shelters. The claim of ‘safe zones’ is false and misleading. No place is safe in #Gaza. Period.

And just as many of us suspected, Joe Biden is still Israel’s ball-less eunuch lapdog operating for his globalist masters in their unholy crusade to wipe Palestinians and Palestine off the face of the earth. On Tuesday May 14th, Braindead informed Congress that the next billion-dollar weapons are heading off to Israel, to further aid this pariah rogue state in its relentless genocidal slaughter, as its bloody invasion of Rafah continues. On top of this latest giveaway to Israel reported on Tuesday, it comes less than four days after late on Friday May 10th, the State Department’s delayed investigative findings quietly confirmed what the world knew for months. According to the Middle East Eye , the State Department concluded:

There are reasonable grounds to believe Israel on several occasions used American-supplied weapons ‘inconsistent’ with international humanitarian law.

So, after the US government found reasonable evidence indicating that Israel violates humanitarian law with US supplied weapons, while Israel defies the US continuing its Rafah ground invasion, despite Biden pausing the next bomb shipment, on Tuesday we learn that Biden has again rewarded a criminal Jewish State, sending a billion more in weapons. This is so egregious, making absolutely no moral or legal sense whatsoever, unless Israel’s higher paygrade in this lawless world entitles it to continue using US weapons to complete its genocide in Gaza. That’s the only logical conclusion. Again, America’s dementia-ridden White House weakling submits every time to the Khazarian mafia pecking order, obviously deferring to Bibi as an anointed Rothschild Khazarian mafia chieftain.

A Wednesday May 15th Associated Press article states:

The [$1 billion US] package disclosed Tuesday includes about $700 million for tank ammunition, $500 million in tactical vehicles and $60 million in mortar rounds, the congressional aides said.

Now while still riding high off Bibi’s recent “victory,” sucking its US “Golden Calf” dry, comes the latest PR announcement from Israel. On Monday May 13th, Israeli government spokesman Avi Hyman insists that 14,000 Hamas terrorists and only 16,000 civilians have been killed since October 7th last year. Hyman sanctimoniously scolded the world for blindly accepting previous “inflated” figures released by the Palestinian health ministry with its latest number over 35,000 (that includes both identified and unidentified arriving at hospitals), 5,000 more than Avi’s “official” Israeli count. Hyman maintains that Israel has been globally condemned, wrongly accused and victimized by Hamas controlled Palestinian health ministry’s “fake and fabricated” numbers, adding:

We would expect everyone to now take these figures as a genuine estimate from a free democratic country that fights in strict accordance with the laws of armed conflict in one of the most challenging urban warfare scenarios in history. In reality, Israel is setting the new gold standard for urban warfare with what appears to be the lowest civilian-to-combatant casualty ratio in history.

Apparently also on Monday, the same day Israel released its lower estimated casualty count, the UN revealed its also revised lowered death toll, based on only fully identified cases. According to CNN:

The [UN’s] fully identified death toll comprises of 7,797 children, 4,959 women, 1,924 elderly, and 10,006 men.

As a result of incurring the overwhelming wrath of the increasingly appalled global nation majority and all decent people everywhere on earth, calling Israel out for its blatantly evil genocide, especially for the fatal majority of innocent Palestinian children and women, Israel has recalibrated its PR machine to answer and refute this charge.

Moreover, Israel now has the audacity to boast that the Jewish State painstakingly ensures its Gaza war actually has the lowest civilian casualty rate in all of history’s wars. You can’t make up this demonically false shit.

Again, we are dealing with a group of people that are proven masters of deception for over a millennium that have effectively used falsehoods as their unscrupulous, twisted propaganda weapon to literally get away with rape, murder and plunder, more so within this last century than any prior time. These evildoers plaguing humanity are tightening their noose around our necks through nonstop lies in virtually every domain of reality – history, religion, science, education, medicine, politics, economics and mass media. Virtually everything we’ve been taught in Satan’s world to allegedly be true is actually false.

Look how Israel’s owned and controlled US Congress recently made it a hate crime to dare criticize its ungodly bloodbath against Palestinians as falsely conflated antisemitism. And now these masterful deceivers are telling the world that they are the most scrupulous at preserving innocent civilian lives in the fog of war than any other war in human history. Its latest PR propaganda manipulation is geared to get the world to back off and let it finish its agenda wiping out all the Palestinian people right under our stench-filled noses, disregarding our very eyes watching so many thousands brutally die. For what? It’s unbelievable how these Satanic worshippers continue being able to prevail with total immunity in their inverse, upside-down world where good to them is actually evil, and evil to them is actually good. Again, they are such experienced masters at this demonic game, and is why they still hold such impugn, seemingly unchallenged power in this world.

Again, this is just one more in-our-face reminder of who rules our planet. The Zionist Rothschild City of London moneychangers have been granted supreme power by Satan to rule over this earthly devil’s dominion, through follow-the-money, usury debt-theft control system, and are not about to let anyone or anything stop them from plunging humanity right off their Armageddon depopulation cliff.

Everything presented as mainstream media news today has an underlying false hidden agenda behind it, because we live in an age of lawless deception and rampantly unchecked evil, where a total absence of ethics is played out daily before our eyes on this chessboard stage of geopolitics cloak and daggery. Be it another world war timed with the planned economy crash and CBDC “Great Reset,” or the next bioweapon pandemic (H5N1 bird flu) via the WHO’s latest Pandemic Agreement aka medical dictatorship, an increasing number of discerning minds have learned some recent harsh lessons. Though still a minority, enough of us are now onto the elites’ genocidal wet dream, and “won’t be fooled again” by the “same as the old boss,” be it the WHO or Satan himself.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Government Rag.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate, former Army officer and author of “Don’t Let the Bastards Getcha Down” exposing a faulty US military leadership system based on ticket punching up the seniority ladder, invariably weeding out the best and brightest, leaving mediocrity and order followers rising to the top as politician-bureaucrat generals designated to lose every modern US war by elite design. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In Los Angeles he found himself battling the largest county child protective services in the nation within America’s thoroughly broken and corrupt child welfare system.

The experience in both the military and child welfare system prepared him well as a researcher and independent journalist, exposing the evils of Big Pharma and how the Rockefeller controlled medical and psychiatric system inflict more harm than good, case in point, the pandemic hoax and kill shot genocide. As an independent journalist for the last decade, Joachim has written hundreds of articles for many news sites, including Global Researchlewrockwell.com and currently https//jameshfetzer.orgInteldrop.org and  https://thegovernmentrag.com. As a published author of a 5-book volume series entitled Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy & the Deep State, Joachim’s books and chapters are Amazon bestsellers in child advocacy and human rights categories. His A-Z sourcebook series fully document and expose the global pedophilia scourge and remain available free at https://pedoempire.org/contents/. Joachim also hosts the weekly Revolution Radio broadcast “Cabal Empire Exposed” on Friday morning at 7AM EST (ID: revradio, password: rocks!).

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Dr. Waleed al-Tabtabai, a former Kuwaiti member of the National Assembly, and a man integrally involved in the fundraising of the Radical Islamic terrorists who invaded Syria and killed thousands of unarmed civilians, was arrested by Kuwaiti authorities on May 12, after he posted on his X account, formerly Twitter.

In the post, al-Tabtabai accused unnamed countries of interfering in Kuwait’s internal affairs, calling this “unacceptable” and expressed hope that the National Assembly would be reinstated “with all its constitutional powers”.

Experts suspect al-Tabtabai was referring to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who have both cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood in an effort to reform their countries into places of peace and prosperity.

On Sunday, Kuwait’s public prosecution issued a statement saying it had ordered the arrest of one person and the detention of others, on the grounds that they had posted “expressions” on their X accounts “containing attacks on the rights and authority” of Kuwait’s emir.

Al-Tabtabai obtained a PhD in Islamic studies from Al-Azhar University, and was an assistant professor at Kuwait University before being elected to the National Assembly in 1996.

Kuwait is in a process of reform, and purging the National Assembly of Muslim Brotherhood influence and domination. Egypt and Tunisia both threw off their “Arab Spring” cloak of Muslim Brotherhood domination which had been imposed on them by President Barak Obama, to benefit American and Israeli interests.

During the US-NATO attack on Syria for regime change, Kuwaiti MPs, as well as Salafi clerics were funding and exporting armed terrorists, who they referred to as “jihadis”.

The Kuwaiti ruling family did not publicly support the funding of terrorists in Syria beginning in 2011, but instead turned a blind eye to the operation to overthrow the Damascus government, which was unsuccessful.

Kuwait had been a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system. The National Assembly consists of 50 elected members who represent different constituencies across the country.

The Emir holds extensive powers, including the ability to dissolve the National Assembly, dismiss the Prime Minister, and issue decrees. The ruling Al-Sabah family has been in power for centuries, and this has led to criticism of limited political reforms.

Emir of Kuwait, Sheikh Mishal Al Ahmed Al Sabah, said on May 11 he would suspend the parliament for up to four years, declaring that he had made the move “to save the country”.

“Unfortunately, we have faced some unimaginable, unbearable difficulties and impediments,” the 83-year-old said on Friday, according to the state news agency, a reference to the gridlock that has held back Kuwait’s development.

“We were left with no option other than taking this hard decision to rescue the country and protect its higher national interests and resources of the nation,” said Sheikh Mishal, and he added, “I will not allow that democracy will be exploited to destroy the state.”

The leader of Kuwait was wrestling with the ever present gridlock in the National Assembly due to the overwhelming chaos produced by its’ members following the Muslim Brotherhood, which stands on the same political platform as ISIS, Al Qeada, and other such terrorist groups cut from the same cloth.

Al-Tabtabai is a follower of Radical Islam, which is a political ideology, and is not a religion or a sect. He is one of the chief supporters of funding the terrorist groups in Syria.

Kuwait, one of the few semi-democratic countries in the Middle East, and the parliament had only been in existence for one month, having been elected in April 2024, with opposition MPs gaining the majority of the seats. It had not even met yet before the Emir’s dissolution decree.

Al-Tabtabai has been convicted of numerous crimes in the past, but while serving in the National Assembly enjoyed immunity. In December 2019, the former Emir of Kuwait pardoned him of past crimes. Now, with a new leader on the throne since December 12, 2023, al-Tabtabai has been arrested, and will face the full wrath of the law.

His arrest is not just the downfall of one man, but is a collective punishment of all the Muslim Brotherhood followers in Kuwait in the National Assembly or clerics, who have prevented the Kuwaiti government from necessary reforms to promote the peace and prosperity of all citizens.

The Muslim Brotherhood Threat to Kuwait

Although, Kuwait has among the largest oil reserves in the world, it lags far behind the dramatic pace of development as compared to its neighbors Saudi Arabia and UAE.

According to Hussain Abdul-Hussain, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), all Arab countries that witnessed change between 2004 and 2011 saw Islamists climb the ladder of democratic election to take over government. In Kuwait a hybrid system emerged that allowed for a free press and the democratic election of the National Assembly, but kept the last word for the Emir. Kuwait came close to being a constitutional monarchy.

Every time Kuwait elected its representatives and formed a cabinet, the gridlock returned. With a population of a million or so, it was expected to compete with Dubai and Abu Dhabi in terms of growth and attraction. Yet, the democratic gridlock inhibited growth, and the once-shiny Kuwait City became shabby and backward compared with its oil-rich peers.

One of the main problems of the Kuwaiti democracy was its Muslim Brotherhood, whose lawmakers undermined the government at every turn. Democracy had become synonymous with Islamist tyranny, where elections are held routinely, but the rule of law is always absent.

Al-Tabtabai the Fundraiser

Since 2011, al-Tabtabai and other Kuwaitis were donating millions of dollars to fund the terrorists in Syria, who were not only targeting the government, but who were killing unarmed Syrian civilians in their homes and in the streets. The monies were flown from Kuwait to Turkey and Jordan, where the cash was distributed to the various terrorist groups.

Because Kuwait has been a US ally for decades, it was compliant with a directive from the Obama Oval Office to support the US-NATO attack on Syria.

The US, UK, France, Turkey and Jordan set up the “Friends of Syria” group which allowed for donations outside the official channels to supply funds and supplies to the terrorists. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar were among the biggest supporters of the US-NATO project, which supported Jabhat al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, Jaysh al-Islam, and Al Qaeda.

In 2014, the Kuwaiti role involved not only creating military operation rooms and directing the course of certain battles, but also giving direct orders to commit massacres and then boasting about them.

Al-Tabtabai in Syria with the Terrorists

Al-Tabtabai is known as the director of the siege and massacre of Nubl and al-Zahraa. He made sure that the aid collected in Kuwait reached the terrorists either in the form of cash to cover the fighters’ salaries, or in the form of arms shipments, by numerous personal visits to Syria. One of his visits to Idlib lasted four months during which he participated in planning some attacks on civilians. Today, Idlib is the last terrorist controlled area in Syria, and is commanded by Mohammed al-Julani, formerly of ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Jibhat al-Nusra and currently the head of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. The US, UK and the UN continue to supply Idlib with truck-loads of humanitarian aid which first passes through the hands of Julani and his militia.

In September 2013, al-Tabtabai appeared in a video clip on Youtube during his participation in preparing and launching Grad missiles at Latakia, west of Idlib. The terrorists thanked al-Tabtabai for his support during the siege imposed on the two towns of Nubl and al-Zahraa in the Aleppo countryside. Those villages were populated by civilians who were Shite Muslims. The massacre of men, women and children carried out over months of attacks by the al-Tabtabai supported terrorists were purely sectarian in nature, and had no military objective of bringing down the Syrian government.

In June 2013, a massacre was committed in the village of Hatla in Deir al-Zour’s countryside in which 60 victims were killed. People were killed with Kuwaiti knives and purely for sectarian reasons. Just like al-Nusra Front boasted at the time that it “cleansed Hatla of the Shia,” Kuwaiti Sheikh Shafi al-Ajami boasted of “slaughtering Shias with knives” amidst cheers and cries of “God is great.”

Saudi, Qatari and Kuwaiti media outlets celebrated the massacre each in its own way. When a journalist from Asia News Agency asked Ajami a few days later “if he feared that the Kuwaiti authorities might arrest him,” he replied: “This is an issue that concerns me and the Kuwaiti authorities,” who did not lift a finger.

The Council of Supporters, of Kuwait, was behind the creation of the Damascus operations room in September 2013. It included Jaysh al-Islam, al-Furqan Brigades, al-Habib al-Mustafa Brigades, the Islamic Ahrar al-Sham Movement, the Companions Brigades and Battalions and the Army of the Muslims Brigade.

One Salafist group in Kuwait, the Great Kuwait Campaign, had been so successful in raising money for terrorist groups that twelve thousand terrorists were fully armed as a result of their pledges in 2013.

The campaign was publicly launched in June 2013, at the same time as the Hatla massacre, and was titled: “Kuwait’s Major Campaign to Prepare 12,000 Invaders for Syria.” The campaign collected 8.4 million Kuwait dinars (about US$ 30 million), and its main promoter was al-Tabtabai.

In June 2013, al-Tabtabai was working alongside a terrorist group in Syria’s Aleppo that gathered and trained armed men to fight in Syria. Tabtabai spoke to al-Jazeera TV and said it was the final day of training for more than 3,000 armed men who have newly arrived in Aleppo. He said another 1,000 militants will be “graduated” in northwestern city of Idlib the following day. Al-Tabtabai said they had promised the Syria militants to train 12,000 terrorists to send to Syria.

Hypocrisy

On January 28, 2019 a Kuwaiti court sentenced al-Tabtabai to seven years in jail for failing to tell his wife he divorced her and continuing to have sexual relations with her. She only found out about the divorce when he refused to support his newborn daughter. Regardless of his pious Islamic reputation, he broke Islamic law by having relations with a woman outside of marriage, and forced his ex-wife to also commit a sin, unknowingly, for his pleasure. At the time, he was outside Kuwait and already facing a 42-month jail term handed down in July 2018 in another case for storming parliament and assaulting police.

Kuwait Reforms

Kuwait has been actively pursuing major developments and reforms to diversify its economy and revamp its infrastructure.

Kuwait’s Vision 2035 has taken center stage, aiming to transform the nation into a regional powerhouse by diversifying its economy, reducing reliance on oil revenues, and increasing private sector participation. The government is actively working to attract foreign investment, foster innovation, and enhance the ease of doing business.

Kuwait is steadfast in improving its infrastructure and enhancing connectivity to position itself as a business and tourism hub. Remarkable advancements have been made in renewable energy sources, with the country aiming to produce 15% of its electricity from renewables by 2030.

In Syria, where the Kuwaitis helped to destroy the country and infrastructure, currently the people have only three hours of electricity per day.

Kuwait deeply values its cultural heritage and is investing in the revival and preservation of its historical sites and landmarks, such as the UNESCO World Heritage Site nominations for Failaka Island and the city of Al-Jahra.

In Aleppo, Syria, according to the UN, the oldest continuously inhabited city on earth, the Kuwaitis participated in the wholesale destruction of antiquities far surpassing anything that Kuwait has.

Kuwait’s new initiatives aim to promote artists, galleries, museums and cultural centers to boost tourism.

Before the Syrian war began in 2011, in which the Kuwaitis participated, Syria was voted as the safest tourist destination in the Mediterranean region by the French Association of Tourist Agents in their annual conference.

Kuwait now wants to increase women’s participation in the workforce, while in Syria women have full rights the same as men in the civil code, and are doctors, lawyers, judges, and a past Speaker of the Syrian Parliament was a woman.

*

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

This article was published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

China-Russia Far East Development

May 19th, 2024 by Karsten Riise

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The China-Russia Expo promoting Regional Development between China’s Heilongjiang Province and Russia’s Primorsky Krai (Vladivostok, Far East). See this.

Like last year, Putin goes to this event and promotes the China-Russia Far East economic-industrial-scientific-cultural development. Last year, I know this event attracted representatives from not only China and Russia, but from all South East Asia and beyond. Both countries are investing lots and LOTS in co-developing the Heilongjiang-Vladivostok Region – it’s ideally located for strategic high-level projects across borders. As Russia turns away from the West, this is where the future grows.

From my experience with cross-border Regions Denmark-North Germany (where I lived) and Denmark-South Sweden where I worked in both countries, these Regions can have enormous potential. Many such border regions are a bit isolated from the main-dynamism in their respective countries – but when looking across the border, they become centers of connectivity, diversity, and new ideas.

Viewed separately, Heilongjiang and Primorsky Krai (Vladivostok) are remote border areas.

Heilongjiang, for instance, is historically an isolated poor province, and since it reverted from being Russian to again become part of China, it doesn’t even have sea access. But with Vladivostok, and working with North Korea, Heilongjiang becomes a central region with great international connections, incl. sea access.

 

 

Viewed separately, two “remote” provinces – in China and Russia respectively.

 

 

Together, these provinces become dynamic crossing points for not only China and Russia, but even for Korea, Japan, rail-connection with Europe, and global maritime trade.

*

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

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Tornados of controversy are swirling around the subject of mass graves in Canada and Gaza. In recent months mass graves were created along with the Israeli occupation and destruction of hospitals in Gaza. These grave sites are being dug up between rounds of Israeli bombing of Palestinian civilians. The evidence of mutilated humans coming out of Gaza’s mass graves have reportedly contained evidence of organ removal, handcuffing of doctors and patients, as well as point-blank executions including shots to the head. See this.

The discovery of mass graves is often seen as a hallmark that acts of genocide have occurred. While the association of mass graves with genocide is virtually irrefutable in Gaza, the same is certainly not the case in Canada. The discussion in Canada about the supposed discovery of unmarked mass graves adjacent to Christian residential schools is just now heating up.

From the late 1800s until the 1970s these federally-funded institutions were a core institution in providing education to Indian students. Issues concerning the provision of education to Indian groups often figured prominently in Crown-Aboriginal treaty negotiations with Indian groups east of the Pacific watershed. To this day, this watershed marks much of the border of British Columbia with the rest of Canada.

The claims concerning the discovery of unmarked graves adjacent to Indian residential schools have been accepted as established fact by the government of Canada and much of the media since 2021. The story was quickly absorbed and adopted by the government of Justin Trudeau.

The mass grave story provided the Canadian PM with a wide open political arena to throw around big talk and bundles of cash outside the stifling theatre of expensive legal gabble channeled into land claims litigation. In 2022 the story further reified when it was adopted by Parliament without investigation as if unsubstantiated claims of the mass graves were already proven.

These claims have been subjected to vigorous scrutiny and a concerted effort of debunking. This project is being advanced by a formidable group of academics, editors, journalists, retired judges and such. The volume is entitled Grave Error: How the Media Misled Us (and the Truth About Residential Schools)

Before and After Pictures were a staple of Indian Residential Schools in Canada and the United States.The Idea was to illustrate the success of a “civilizing” process.

The Foreward to Grave Error is written by the legendary neocon elder, Conrad Black. Black is the former Zionist media mogul and prison inmate who some see with justification as an authentic embodiment of a renaissance man. Besides making business history with his edgy (too edgy?) handling of Hollinger Inc., Black has written many important history books. I remember when I was working on my Ph.D. in Canadian history at the University of Toronto in the late 1970s that Black’s biography of former Quebec Premier, Maurice Duplessis, was required reading.

The co-editors of Grave Error are C.P. Champion and Tom Flanagan.

Professor Flanagan’s career as an academic and political quarterback rivals the importance of Conrad Black’s exploits in terms of the mark he has made, for better or worse, on Canadian history. Flanagan was at the core of the transformation of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada into the Conservative Party of Canada.

The “Progressive” part was removed by design. The iconic leader of the CP and then the government of Canada was Stephen Harper. As Prime Minister from 2006 to 2015, Harper led one of the few Canadian governments not dominated by Laurentian elites. It could not have happened without the advice and guidance provided by Prof. Flanagan.

In the 1990s, Flanagan took hold of the Social Credit legacy of Alberta that came to be embodied in Preston Manning’s Reform Party. Flanagan and Manning teamed up. Coming in from the edges was Torontonian Stephen Harper. By performing well as a student in Flanagan’s circle, Harper helped advance his successful quest to present himself as a credible Albertan politician.

Flanagan mixed the Manning heritage with Reagan-Thatcherite enthusiasms of his circle of students who pretty much saw their prof as the rock star of the Texas North University in Alberta’s rising oil and gas metropolis. Among the Flanagan’s devotees were Harper, Ezra Levant, and the current Alberta Premier, Danielle Smith.

In the 1990s when I was a member of the Native American Studies Department (NAS) at the University of Lethbridge, I saw Tom Flanagan as something of a professional nemesis.

I invited Prof. Flanagan to speak in some of my classes so my students could hear an academic voice that went against the grain of my interpretation of “Aboriginal and treaty rights.” Our governments have a constitutional obligation to “recognize and affirm” these existing Aboriginal and treaty rights. (See Section 35, Canada’s Constitution Act, 1982) My colleagues in NAS were not pleased by my decision to have Tom Flanagan give guest lectures but I thought it correct to model open academic debate between proponents of competing interpretations.

This American political scientist was one of the the original hires in 1968 at the nascent University of Calgary. In seeking to fit into his new adopted country as well as his new academic home, Prof. Flanagan chose as his first Canadian subject the life and times of Metis Rebel Leader Louis Riel. Did Prof. Flanagan picture himself as the ring leader of an Alberta rebellion in the making?

Flanagan built on this base to become sufficiently expert on Aboriginal Affairs in Canada that he was able to hire himself out to federal agencies as a source of expert advice including appearances in court as an expert witness. I saw it then and as see it now, Prof Flanagan’s main expertise lay in directing judges how to undermine the exercise of Aboriginal and treaty rights as they have come to be defined in key court rulings that often reflected his interpretations.

Regardless of my view of these matters, this aspect of Flanagan’s career has put him in a good position to intervene with insight into the growing furor driven by the supposed discovery of unmarked mass graves adjacent to Indian residential schools.

Thus it is that Black and Flanagan, both heavy hitters, have joined forces with a high-powered team of devoted writers and thinkers. Their shared aim is to say enough is enough to what they see as woke opportunists.

It is well known that Justin Trudeau tends to be especially generous with his patronage dollars to those who attach themselves to his agendas for First Nations peoples. Trudeau inherits a long Liberal tradition of using large concentrations of money to keep hand-picked leaders in partisan line with Liberal policies.

Not surprisingly, Trudeau did not do his homework as he has latched onto yet another divisive boondoggle to float his “post-national” contention that Canada is a genocidal country that should be enwrapped asap into more globalist webs of conniving intrigues. In my view, neither Black nor Flanagan have been exempt from implicating Canada in their own forms of globalist intrigue.

This background helps explain how it is that a seemingly obscure book on an seemingly narrow subject is suddenly selling lots of copies in spite of its being banned here and there. As far as I know there hasn’t been a ritual book burning yet but the volume has definitely been removed from the shelves of several libraries and book stores.

In the BC town of Quesnel, just being caught looking at Grave Error was made to seem like an act of heresy to be punished by spurning, economic boycott, and various forms of deplatforming. As in many small communities throughout Canada, Quesnel businesses depend on the ample purchasing power of many First Nations people in the region.

See this.

Dr. Frances Widdowson attended the meeting of the Quesnel town council with the intention of explaining her own essay, “Billy Remembers.” Even before she made the long drive from her home in Calgary to Quesnel, she was interrogated by a CBC journalist, Jordan Tucker. The flamboyant, combative and ill-read Jordan Tucker embodies the transcend priorities of the Liberal government’s state broadcaster these days.

It seems Dr. Widdowson has been appointed by some overseeing committee of high wokedom as the main embodiment of a new type of heresy designated as a “residential school denialism.” This title was invented by people in and around the Canadian version of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Investigation.

Dr. Widdowson has long wrangled with her former employer at Mount Royal in Calgary because her discourse was allegedly not in line with the College’s pedagogical policy of “Indigenization.”

Then in February of 2023 the then-President of the University of Lethbridge, Dr. Mike Mahon, gave the green light to silence Dr. Widdowson by overwhelming her scheduled talk with well-organized drumming, chanting and electric guitar screeching. The object of this attack on free speech and open debate was to overwhelm her capacity to make herself heard.

When witnessing this troubling spectacle, I thought back to the time in the mid-1990s when I invited Prof. Tom Flanagan to give lectures to NAS students. My aim was to present them with interpretations that ran contrary to those emanating from the dominant viewpoint regularly conveyed by my colleagues and I in Native American Studies. See this.

Many in Alberta and beyond saw the silencing of Dr. Widdowson at the University of Lethbridge as a very powerful symbol of the DEI intolerance. The episode shines a light on the phenomenon that independent thought and articulation are giving way to enforced group think in increasingly authoritarian universities throughout the West.

As a result of the extension of the debacle in Gaza to sharp divisions on university campuses, this pattern of sacrificing to large donors control over curriculum and faculty staffing is being put on full display by many prominent IVY League schools in the USA. This phenomenon has been described by Norman Finkelstein as “the greatest threat ever to the principle of academic freedom.”

See Mike Whitney here.

Conclusions

I agree with the authors in Grave Error that the existence of unmarked mass graves adjacent to Indian residential schools has not been proven. The great weight of evidence points against the narrative introduced in a press release in May of 2021. The release came from Rosanne Casimir, Chief of the Tk’emlúps te Secwepemc (Kamloops Indian Band). Without presenting credible evidence, Chief Casimir made the startling claim that an unmarked mass grave containing 215 bodies had been discovered in an apple orchard beside Kamloops Indian residential school.

The authors of Grave Error’s prove that a solid evidentiary basis has not been established to support the new thesis that mass murder and mass graves constitute an integral part of the history of Indian residential schools in Canada.

I do not agree, however, that these findings preclude the need to look at the possible role of various forms of genocidal activity in the transformation of northern North America from pre-Columbian times to the Canada that exists today. I find the conclusion that because certain claims about the existence of mass graves attending Indian residential schools have been conclusively disproven, the possibility of genocidal expressions in Canadian history need never be raised again.

I think it ill-advised to declare that all of Canadian history is devoid of genocide before and after the UN’s creation of the Genocide Convention in 1948. Canadian history does not exist in an isolated void. I have repeatedly put forward the view that the entire Western Hemisphere has been the site since 1492 of an inter-generational genocide that can be pictured as a single monumental event whose commemoration might be marked by a different kind of holocaust memorial.

For now, however, I’ll leave it at that. I’ll simply add that Dr. Widdowson and I are working together these days. We are engaged in a case study of the assault on free speech and open debate at University of Lethbridge, where I taught for 26 years. See the announcement of our upcoming meeting on the matter in the Appendix below.

*

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

This article was originally published on Looking out at the World from Canada.

Dr. Anthony Hall is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982. Dr. Hall, has recently finished a big two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”.

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

All images in this article are from the author


Appendix

10 May, 2024
Dear Friends, Colleagues and Associates;

Above is the poster for an important upcoming public event on the afternoon of Saturday May 25 at the main branch of the Lethbridge Public Library. Many of you will remember when Dr. Frances Widdowson was overwhelmed by chanting, drumming and the screech on an electric guitar. The object of the ruckus was to prevent the speaker from delivering a public presentation in the Atrium of the University of Lethbridge. The censorship action proved to be a “success.”

Dr. Widdowson was silenced and those who came to hear her talk were deprived of her articulation. Certain faculty members had decided Frances Widdowson was afflicted with a malady they labelled “residential school denialism.” 

Some faculty members decided to act on this judgment. For their students, these faculty members painted a picture of Dr. Widdowson as an embodiment of a constituency they identified as hostile to the idea that all residential schools at all times should be equated with genocide.

Disgruntled faculty and others pressured U of L President, Dr. Mike Mahon, to cancel Dr. Widdowson’s lecture after he had already announced that his Office approved of her talk. Some interpret what happened as a cave in by Dr. Mahon to political pressure. He ordered that a speaker on campus should be cancelled because she was the bearer of interpretations that some faculty and students wanted to censor. The rest, as they say, is history.

The key point in this matter is not that one side or the other is right or wrong. Individuals especially in the hallowed Halls of Academia have a right and sometimes even a responsibility to decide such matters for themselves. The key point is that academics must be able to research, argue and articulate issues in an environment of protected free speech and academic freedom regardless of the prevailing group think. Certainly it is not the role of academic administrators to jump in arbitrarily by making themselves instant experts in whatever academic debate they want to dominate and/or disrupt.

Dr. Widdowson has written academic essays and books in and around the topic of the history of Indian education in Canada. Whether one agrees with her views or not, it was wrong to have tried to silence her at an Alberta University. I attended the organized shutdown of her talk. In my view and in that of many other people I have since met and talked to about what happened, the shutdown of Dr. Widdowson in February of 2023 was not a proud moment. It was a very troubling occurrence in the history of the institution of higher learning where I taught from 1990 to 2016.

I moved to Lethbridge in 1990 to be Associate Professor of Native American Studies. In the early weeks of 2016 this tenured full professor was abruptly suspended without pay completely outside the rules of the Board’s collective agreement with the Faculty Association. Then in 2017 the matter went to court in the Lethbridge Court of (then) Queen’s Bench. 

By court order the judge ruled that I should be reinstated into my academic position at the U of L. As I plan to discuss, there is every reason that the Board’s objective in trying to deplatform me was to silence my interpretations because my views went contrary to the agenda of a very rich and powerful lobby. I would still like to know how this lobby gained such a tight grip on the policies and actions of the administration of the University administration. 

As the commentator in Frances’ forthcoming presentation on 25 May, I’m sure I will disagree with her on many points. Agreeing to disagree is a vital attribute of healthy academic life. But trying to shut down those with whom one disagrees, undermines the entirety of the whole academic project that is supposed to be a fair and balanced meritocracy.

When I met Frances after the event where her talk was shut down, we of course compared notes about our treatment at the University of Lethbridge. Eventually we came up with the idea of mounting the initiative we started earlier this year. In due course, as this process unfolds I intend to talk about my own experiences with the process of being deplatformed in ways that include many elements outside the set of facts outlined above.

I never did get back into the classroom. In 2018 I decided to retire. I did retire as a full professor in good standing. I gained the new title of Professor Emeritus. I am announcing here that I am henceforth acting in my capacity as a Professor Emeritus of the University of Lethbridge in the remaining part of the process that Frances and I have mounted. I think my taking on this responsibility in unusual times and under unusual circumstances is entirely consistent with the duties of an individual carrying the title of Emeritus Professor. 

As I see it, I shall be speaking and acting in this process from within the U of L’s faculty. I have devoted some of the best years and professional efforts of my life to my academic endeavours at the University of Lethbridge. I would like to see the institution thrive and prosper. 

As a senior faculty member I want to help in the process of making some suggestions that might assist our school in getting back on track. A University simply cannot fulfil a mission to be a school of authentic higher learning without creating a sound foundation for the expression of unhindered speech and academic freedom.

Since retiring from teaching I have continued to involve myself in research and publication as well as in very active community involvement starting with the manufactured COVID crisis. The questions come up in my community work: Where are all the hundreds of University professors and why are they not contributing more actively to working through issues of immense import– life and death issues in, for instance, public health matters. 

What kind of message does our university send when it shuts down, rather than encourages, the highlighting of a diversity of perspectives in public discourse in local, regional, national and global contexts? The community wants and deserves better than what we have seen from the University of Lethbridge in recent years.

In this context I am not making any claim about who is right or wrong in the matters we have recently faced and are facing. But in my view there is no doubt that the University of Lethbridge has become way too isolated and partisan in key aspects of the community life of this region.

Please consider attending the public event at the Lethbridge Public Library on Saturday May 25 at 2 pm.

Sincerely,

Dr. Tony Hall

Professor Emeritus,

University of Lethbridge

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

While very serious life-threatening conditions have existed at the planetary level for several decades due to the accumulation of nuclear weapons, a number of emerging technologies are aggravating this danger in several serious and complex ways. The Arms Control Association and author Michael T. Klare have made a very important contribution to the understanding of this grave danger in the form of their very timely report titled ‘ Assessing the Dangers—Emerging Military Technologies and Nuclear (In) Stability’. 

This report says,

“Increasingly in recent years, the major powers have sought to exploit advanced technologies— artificial intelligence (AI), autonomy, cyber, and hypersonic, among others—for military purposes, with potentially far-ranging, dangerous consequences. Similar to what occurred when chemical and nuclear technologies were first applied to warfare, many analysts believe that the military utilization of AI and other such “emerging technologies” will revolutionize warfare, making obsolete the weapons and the strategies of the past. In accordance with this outlook, the U.S. Department of Defence is allocating ever increasing sums to research on these technologies and their application to military use, as are the militaries of the other major powers. But even as the U.S. military and those of other countries accelerate the exploitation of new technologies for military use, many analysts have cautioned against proceeding with such haste until more is known about the inadvertent and hazardous consequences of doing so. Analysts worry, for example, that AI-enabled systems may fail in unpredictable ways, causing unintended human slaughter or uncontrolled escalation.”

More specifically this report warns,

“Of particular concern to arms control analysts is the potential impact of emerging technologies on “strategic stability,” or a condition in which nuclear armed states eschew the first use of nuclear weapons in a crisis. The introduction of weapons employing AI and other emerging technologies could endanger strategic stability by blurring the distinction between conventional and nuclear attack, leading to the premature use of nuclear weapons.”

On the positive side, this report informs us that arms control advocates and citizen activists in many countries have sought to slow the weaponization of AI and other emerging technologies or to impose limits of various sorts on their battlefield employment. To give an example, state parties to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) have considered proposals to ban the development and the deployment of lethal autonomous weapons systems—or “killer robots,” as they are termed by critics.

Providing more details of these trends, this report tells us that among the most prominent applications of emerging technologies to military use is the widespread introduction of autonomous weapons systems— devices that combine AI software with combat platforms of various sorts (ships, tanks, planes, and so on) to identify, track, and attack enemy targets on their own.

At present, each branch of the U.S. military, and the forces of the other major powers, are developing— and in some cases fielding—several families of autonomous combat systems, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), unmanned surface vessels (USVs), and unmanned undersea vessels (UUVs). Russian and Chinese forces are also developing and deploying unmanned systems with similar characteristics.

Coming to the problems created by this, the report says,

”The development and the deployment of lethal autonomous weapons systems like these raise significant moral and legal challenges. To begin with, such devices are being empowered to employ lethal force against enemy targets, including human beings, without significant human oversight—moves that run counter to the widely-shared moral and religious principle that only humans can take the life of another human. Critics also contend that the weapons will never be able to abide by the laws of war and international humanitarian law, as spelled out in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 and the Geneva Convention and 1949. These statutes require that warring parties distinguish between combatants and non-combatants when conducting military operations and employ only as much force as required to achieve a specific military objective.” 

In recognition of these dangers, a concerted effort has been undertaken under the aegis of the CCW to adopt an additional protocol prohibiting the deployment of lethal autonomous weapons systems.

Regarding hypersonic weapons this report tells us that hypersonic weapons are usually defined as missiles than can travel at more than five times the speed of sound (Mach 5) and fly at lower altitudes than intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which also fly at hypersonic speeds. At present, the United States, China, Russia, and several other countries are engaged in the development and fielding of two types of hypersonic weapons (both of which may carry either nuclear or conventional warheads): hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs), unpowered projectiles that “glide” along the Earth’s outer atmosphere after being released from a booster rocket; and hypersonic cruise missiles (HCMs), which are powered by high-speed air-breathing engines, called “scramjets. All three major powers have explored similar types of hypersonic missiles. 

Regarding the dangers related to this, the report tells us,

”Analysts worry, for example, that the use of hypersonic weapons early in a conventional engagement to subdue an adversary’s critical assets could be interpreted as the prelude to a nuclear first-strike, and so prompt the target state to launch its own nuclear munitions if unsure of its attacker’s intentions.”

Coming to cyber-attack related threats this report tells us these range from cyber-espionage, or the theft of military secrets and technological data, to offensive actions intended to disable an enemy’s command, control, and communications (C3) systems, thereby degrading its ability to wage war successfully. Such operations might also be aimed at an adversary’s nuclear C3 (NC3) systems; in such a scenario, one side or the other—fearing that a nuclear exchange is imminent—could attempt to minimize its exposure to attack by disabling its adversary’s NC3 systems.

Analysts warn, this report says, that any cyber-attack on an adversary’s NC3 systems in the midst of a major crisis or conventional conflict could prove highly destabilizing. “Upon detecting interference in its critical command systems, the target state might well conclude that an adversary had launched a pre-emptive nuclear strike against it, and so might launch its own nuclear weapons rather than risk their loss to the other side.” The widespread integration of conventional with nuclear C3 compounds these dangers. 

The major powers also plan, this report tells us, to rely increasingly on AIenabled battlefield decision-making systems to aid human commanders in processing vast amounts of data on enemy movements and identifying possible combat responses. The increased automation of battlefield decision making, especially given the likely integration of nuclear and conventional C3 systems, gives rise to numerous concerns. Many of these technologies are still in their infancy and prone to often unanticipated malfunctions.  

This import report concludes,

“The drive to exploit emerging technologies for military use has accelerated at a much faster pace than efforts to assess the dangers they pose and to establish limits on their use. It is essential, then, to slow the pace of weaponizing these technologies, to carefully weigh the risks in doing so, and to adopt meaningful restraints on their military use.”

The following proposed action steps, derived from the toolbox developed by arms control advocates over many years of practice and experimentation, are suggested in this report to reduce risks.

  • Awareness-Building: Efforts to educate policymakers and the general public about the risks posed by the unregulated military use of emerging technologies.
  • Track 2 and Track 1.5 Diplomacy: Discussions among scientists, engineers, and arms control experts from the major powers to identify the risks posed by emerging technologies and possible strategies for their control. “Track 2 diplomacy” of this sort can be expanded at some point to include governmental experts (“Track 1.5 diplomacy”). 
  • Unilateral and Joint Initiatives: Steps taken by the major powers on their own or among groups of like-minded states to reduce the risks associated with emerging technologies in the absence of formal arms control agreements to this end. 
  • Strategic Stability Talks: Discussions among senior officials of China, Russia, and the United States on the risks to strategic stability posed by the weaponization of certain emerging technologies and on joint measures to diminish these risks. These can be accompanied by confidence-building measures (CBMs), intended to build trust in implementing and verifying formal agreements in this area.
  • Bilateral and Multilateral Arrangements: Once the leaders of the major powers come to appreciate the escalatory risks posed by the weaponization of emerging technologies, it may be possible for them to reach accord on bilateral and multilateral arrangements intended to minimize these risks.

One hopes that the warnings and recommendations presented in this report get wide attention of peace activists as well as policy makers.

*

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

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

There appears to be no limit to Russophobia in the Baltic countries. In a new de-Russification measure, the Estonian government decided to abolish Russian language teaching in a region where almost the entire population is ethnic Russian. The case adds to a series of recent measures taken by Estonia and other Baltic countries to end the historic Russian presence in their territories.

In the Narva region, on the border between Estonia and Russia, 97% of the population is Russian.

The city is just 130km from Saint Petersburg, which is one of the main centers of Russian culture.

Considering these particular circumstances of the city, the local authorities submitted a special request to the Estonian government to allow the Russian language to continue to be taught and spoken in schools. The letter sent by the Narva City Council demanded authorization for at least 40% of the school curriculum to be taught in Russian during the next school year.

However, the Estonian government rejected the proposal, not alleviating its strongly Russophobic position.

According to the country’s authorities, there is no “legal basis” to reduce de-Russification measures in the Narva region. More than that, in her official statement on the case, Minister of Education and Science Kristina Kallas stated that studying in the Estonian language is “in the students’ interest”, which sounds absolutely false and hypocritical, considering that local children are mostly Russian and they obviously have no “interest” in studying a language other than the one they speak at home with their families.

The negative response from the Estonian government was actually expected, considering the advanced level of anti-Russian paranoia among the country’s authorities. The measure in Narva comes amid a series of cultural genocide policies whose objective is to gradually eradicate the use of the Russian language throughout Estonian territory. Not only are students victims of this type of measure, but also the teachers themselves.

Many children’s teachers are also ethnic Russians. Some of them even speak Estonian, but they do not have advanced knowledge of grammar or great fluency in speaking. Now, with the new rules, these teachers will have to study Estonian and prove their knowledge of the language to continue working. If they fail to learn Estonian, these professionals risk losing their jobs.

It is not just the Russian Federation that is denouncing this situation. The attempted cultural genocide in Estonia is already beginning to be criticized by international organizations, such as the UN itself. The United Nations human rights office recently classified Estonia’s policies as “potentially discriminatory” due to the fact that they affect the rights of an ethnic minority.

25% of Estonia’s population are Russian citizens. Estonia, like all post-Soviet states, has a strong presence of ethnic Russians due to the fact that until 1991 all Soviet republics belonged to the same country. Many experts describe the Soviet collapse as a humanitarian tragedy precisely because it suddenly made millions of Russians “foreigners.” Currently, Russians are not only living in countries other than their own, but also suffering discriminatory policies simply because they are Russians.

Estonia is not alone in its Russophobic measures. Latvia and Lithuania are also advancing policies to eradicate the Russian language.

The Latvian government, as well known, is promoting Latvian language proficiency tests for Russian citizens. Citizens who fail the tests can simply be expelled from the country. As expected, those who have the most difficulty in this situation are elderly Russians, who have lived their entire lives speaking Russian only and are now being forced to learn a new language at risk of cancellation of their citizenship.

Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine has served as an excuse for countries allied with the West to openly take actions of cultural genocide and apartheid. Russians are simply being treated as “inferior” citizens in states that until recently belonged to the same country as Russia. For now, such measures are being implemented against the language and civil rights of Russian citizens, but it is possible that Russophobia will escalate to the point where the physical safety of Russian speakers begins to be threatened.

There is a process of “Ukrainization” in the Baltic countries. Now, their main “enemy” is the language, but it remains to be seen how governments will react to the Russians’ insistence on preserving their ethnic and cultural heritage. For the Russian Federation, there is a clear red line when it comes to its international relations, which is precisely the security of its citizens abroad. If the Baltic states begin to physically threaten the Russians, there will be a serious escalation with Moscow.

*

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

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Note: This statement was submitted at the request of the All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (GC) for its African Liberation Day rally being held on Sunday May 19, 2024 in Malcolm X Park in Washington, D.C. The event was organized under the theme: “From Cape Town to Cairo, the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, Pan-Africanism and Palestine Liberation are Indivisible! Smash the Genocide of International Zionism and Apartheid!”


This commemoration of African Liberation Day comes at a critical conjunction in the overall struggle against imperialism and for the total liberation of our continent along with other oppressed and exploited peoples throughout the globe.

Since October 7, the people of Palestine have once again renewed their leading role in ending the yoke of Zionism and imperialism over their land and people.

Some 76 years ago on May 15, 1948, the Zionists regime was recognized by the United States under President Harry S. Truman as the purported “legitimate” entity over the land of Palestine. Even prior to 1948, the Zionist project had been advanced by the French and British imperialists.

From its inception in the 1890s, the World Zionist Movement was committed to an “ironclad” alliance with western imperialism. This is why today the U.S. national security capitalist state is the main supporter of the oppression and genocide against the Palestinians.

Our solidarity and close operational work with the Palestinian liberation movement is rooted in the actual history of the most revolutionary forces to emerge over the last seven decades. In many years past, ancestors such as Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik El Shabazz), Ethel Minor, Kwame Ture, John Watson and others representing organizations such as the Nation of Islam, Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU), Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), Black Panther Party, League of Revolutionary Black Workers, All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP), etc., spoke out strongly against the Zionist state and its imperialist backers. Within Africa itself, the work of Presidents Gamel Abdel Nassar, Kwame Nkrumah, Ahmed Sekou Toure, Nelson Mandela, Col. Muamar Gaddafi, etc., remains a living force in the overwhelming support for the Palestinians throughout the continent in this latest phase of the war to liberate Palestine and the entire West Asia and North Africa regions.

Stokely Carmichael, Ethel Minor and Kwame Nkrumah in Guinea

There must no cooperation with the genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza and throughout the Occupied Territories. Those elements posing as representatives of the African people in the U.S. who continue to side with Zionism in defiance of the mood of billions around the world, should be denounced. They are not in accord with the interests of their own people in the U.S., around the world and all other oppressed and exploited masses globally.

Students and Youth Expose the Links with Zionism and Imperialism

The movement for the liberation of Palestine has impacted the university and college campuses around the U.S. and in other centers of imperialism such as the UK, Western Europe and Australia. The conscious students and faculty members are demanding documents related to the investments by their educational institutions which perpetuate Zionism.

These students have constructed encampments and seized buildings in their call for the end of the genocide and the freedom of the Palestinians. The White House and majority of officials within both Houses of Congress decided recently to send additional weapons to the Israeli regime so they can displace, injure and kill more Palestinians. This same aid package for imperialist war also included funds to undermine the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China, to harass and kill more people crossing the southern border as well as additional weapons to the neo-fascist government in Ukraine for a war in which they have no prospect of winning against the Russian Federation.

Over the last month, a coordinated effort engineered by President Joe Biden’s White House and the Justice Department to crush the campus protests against the genocide in Gaza and for the complete disinvestment from Israeli apartheid, has resulted in nearly 3,000 arrests. The ruling class propaganda against the students falsely accusing them of being “outside agitators”, has not hampered the capacity to mobilize thousands. These are the same slanderous accusations made decades ago against the organizers of the Civil Rights, Black Power and Pan-African Movements.

The mass arrests of students and faculty members has only fueled the anti-Zionist movement in the U.S. In the most recent period, many young and older Jewish people who previously bought into the myths of Zionism related to the fundamental rights of the Palestinians along with other Arabs, related ethnic groups and Africans in the region, have joined demonstrations and rallies not only demanding an immediate ceasefire some are now calling for the creation of a unitary Palestinian state.

An independent Palestinian state would be a profound contribution to the anti-imperialist struggle worldwide. Consequently, Africans within the various sectors, whether it be education, labor or religion, will undoubtedly intensify their efforts aimed at ending the genocide and bringing about the liberation of Palestine.

Labor for Palestine committees have been established in many states. The African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME) and African Methodist Episcopal Zion (AMEZ) Church issued a joint statement demanding a shift in the policy of the Biden administration on Palestine. These denominations represent 4.9 million Africans in the U.S. and other regions of the world.

There is a tremendous level of political ferment surrounding the anti-Zionist movement worldwide. The revolutionary organizations in the U.S. should provide maximum solidarity with the students and faculty opposing the genocide in Gaza.

Neo-Colonialism and the Struggle for Pan-Africanism

In order for the unification and liberation of Africa to occur the external elements which conspire to contain and dominate the continent will have to be defeated. We have witnessed over the last year the upsurge of anti-imperialist sentiment in the Sahel region of West Africa.

France and the U.S. have been ordered to leave Niger despite the presence of the Pentagon’s Africa Command (AFRICOM) which staffs drone stations and 1000 troops. A scheme to prompt an imperialist-backed military intervention in Niger was rejected by various political parties and mass organizations throughout the West Africa region. These developments led to the formation of an Alliance of Sahel States encompassing Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali. After this coalition was formed, the sanctions leveled by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) were lifted.

The failures of U.S. imperialism and NATO in various geopolitical regions of the world have emboldened working and oppressed peoples to fight against exploitation and hegemony. This political upsurge will play an important role in the struggle to achieve African unification, sovereignty and socialism.

As noted by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah in 1965 when he published “Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism” that:

“The ideal neo-colonialist State would be one which was wholly subservient to neo-colonialist interests, but the existence of the socialist nations makes it impossible to enforce the full rigor of the neo-colonialist system. The existence of an alternative system is itself a challenge to the neo-colonialist regime. Warnings about ‘the dangers of Communist subversion’ are likely to be two-edged since they bring to the notice of those living under a neo-colonialist system the possibility of a change of regime. In fact, neo-colonialism is the victim of its own contradictions. In order to make it attractive to those upon whom it is practiced it must be shown as capable of raising their living standards, but the economic object of neo-colonialism is to keep those standards depressed in the interest of the developed countries. It is only when this contradiction is understood that the failure of innumerable ‘aid’ programs, many of them well intentioned, can be explained.” 

African people around the world who are politically educated and organized can overcome the legacies of enslavement, colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism. African unification will achieve its full realization through a socialist path of development.

*

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

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

Featured image: South African President wearing keffiyeh (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Things are looking dire for the Ukrainian war effort.  Promises of victory are becoming even hollower than they were last summer, when US President Joe Biden could state with breathtaking obliviousness that Russia had “already lost the war”. The worst offender in this regard remains the United States, which has been the most vocal proponent of fanciful victory over Russia, a message which reads increasingly as one of fighting to the last Ukrainian.

Such a victory is nigh fantasy, almost impossible to envisage.  For one thing, domestic considerations about continued support for Kyiv have played a stalling part. In the US Congress, a large military aid package was stalled for six months. Among some Republicans, in particular, Ukraine was not a freedom loving despoiled figure needing props and crutches. 

“From our perspective,” opines Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul, “Ukraine should not and cannot be our problem to solve.  It is not our place to defend them in a struggle with their longtime adversary, Russia.” 

The assessment, in this regard, was a matter of some clarity for Paul. 

“There is no national security interest for the United States.”

Despite this, the Washington foreign policy and military elite continue to make siren calls of seduction in Kyiv’s direction.  On April 23, the Senate finally approved a $US95.3 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, with the lion’s share – some US$61 billion – intended for Ukraine’s war effort.

On April 24, a press release from US Secretary State Antony Blinken announced a further US$1 billion package packed with “urgently needed capabilities including air defense missiles, munitions for HIMARS, artillery rounds, armored vehicles, precision aerial munitions, anti-armor weapons, and small arms, equipment, and spare parts to help Ukraine defend its territory and protect its people.”

On May 14, in his address to the Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute, Blinken described what could only be reasoned as a vast mirage. 

“Today, I’m here in Kyiv to speak about Ukraine’s strategic success.  And to set out how, with our support, the Ukrainian people can and will achieve their vision for the near future: a free, prosperous, secure democracy – fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community – and fully in control of its own destiny.” 

This astonishingly irresponsible statement makes Washington’s security agenda clear and Kyiv’s fate bleak: Ukraine is to become a pro-US, anti-Russian bastion, with an open cheque book at the ready.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has made the prevention of that vision an article of faith.  While Russian forces, in men and material, have suffered horrendous losses, the attritive nature of the conflict is starting to tell. While Blinken was gulling his audience, the military realities show significant Russian advances, including a threatening push towards Kharkiv, reversing Ukrainian gains made in 2022.

There are also wounding advances being made in other areas of the conflict.  US and NATO artillery and drones supplied to Ukraine’s military forces have been countered by Russian electronic warfare methods.  GPS receivers, for instance, have been sufficiently deceived to misdirect missiles shot from HIMARS launchers.  In a number of cases, the Russian forces have also identified and destroyed the launchers.

Russian airpower has been brought to bear on critical infrastructure. Radar defying glide bombs have been used with considerable effect.  On the production and deployment front, Colonel Ivan Pavlenko, chief of EW and cyber warfare at Ukraine’s general staff, lamented in February that Russia’s use of drones was also “becoming a huge threat”.  Depleted stocks of weaponry are being replenished, and more soldiers are being called to the front.

Despite concerns, one need not scour far to find pundits who insist that such advances and gains can be neutralised.  Michael Kofman of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace admits to current Russian “material advantage” and holding “the strategic initiative,” though goes on to speculate that this “may not prove decisive”.

The gong of deceit and delusion must, however, go to Blinken.  Americans, he claimed, understood “that our support for Ukraine strengthens the security of the United States and our allies.”  Were Putin to win – and here, that old nag of appeasement makes an undesirable appearance – “he won’t stop with Ukraine; he’ll keep going.  For when in history has an autocrat been satisfied with carving off just part, or even all, of a single country?”

Towards that end, “we do have a plan,” he coyly insisted.  This entailed ensuring Ukraine had “the military that it needs to succeed on the battlefield”.  Biden was encouraged by Ukrainian mobilisation efforts, skipping around the logistical delays that had marred it.  Washington’s “joint task” was to “secure Ukraine’s sustained and permanent strategic advantage”, enabling it to win the current battles and “defend against future attacks.  As President Biden said, we want Ukraine to win – and we’re committed to helping you do it.”

Even by the standards of US Secretaries of States, Blinken’s conduct in Kyiv proved brazen and shameless.  A perfect illustration of this came with his musical effort alongside local band, 19.99, involving a rendition of Neil Young’s “Rockin’ in the Free World.”

Local indignation was quick to follow. “Six months of waiting for the decision of the American Congress” had, fumed Bohdan Yaremenko, legislator and former diplomat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s party, “taken the lives of very, very many defenders of the free world”.  What the US was performing “for the free world is not rock ’n’ roll, but some other music similar to Russian chanson.”

As for the performance itself, the crowd at Barman Dictat witnessed yet another misreading – naturally by a US politician – of an anthem intended to excoriate American failings, from homelessness to “a kinder, gentler machine gun hand”.  Appropriately, the guitar, much like the performer, was out of tune.

*

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

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

Featured image: Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in Kyiv, Ukraine, on May 6, 2021. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha]

Estônia impede que crianças russas aprendam sua língua nativa.

May 18th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Parece não haver limites para a russofobia nos países bálticos. Numa nova medida de desrussificação, o governo estônio decidiu abolir o ensino da língua russa numa região onde quase toda a população é de etnia russa. O caso junta-se a uma série de medidas recentes tomadas pela Estônia e outros países bálticos para acabar com a histórica presença russa nos seus territórios.

Na região de Narva, na fronteira entre a Estónia e a Rússia, 97% da população é russa. A cidade fica a apenas 130km de São Petersburgo, que é um dos principais centros da cultura russa. Considerando estas circunstâncias particulares da cidade, as autoridades locais apresentaram um pedido especial ao governo da Estônia para permitir que a língua russa continuasse a ser ensinada e falada nas escolas. A carta enviada pela Câmara Municipal de Narva exigia autorização para que pelo menos 40% do currículo escolar fosse ministrado em russo durante o próximo ano letivo.

No entanto, o governo estônio rejeitou a proposta, não aliviando a sua posição fortemente russofóbica. Segundo as autoridades do país, não existe “base jurídica” para reduzir as medidas de desrussificação na região de Narva. Mais do que isso, na sua declaração oficial sobre o caso, a Ministra da Educação e Ciência Kristina Kallas afirmou que estudar em estoniano é “do interesse dos estudantes”, o que soa absolutamente falso e hipócrita, considerando que as crianças locais são maioritariamente russas e obviamente não têm “interesse” em estudar uma língua diferente daquela que falam em casa com as suas famílias.

A resposta negativa do governo estônio era esperada, tendo em conta o nível avançado de paranóia anti-russa entre as autoridades do país. A medida em Narva surge no meio de uma série de políticas de genocídio cultural cujo objectivo é erradicar gradualmente o uso da língua russa em todo o território estônio. Não só os alunos são vítimas deste tipo de medidas, mas também os próprios professores.

Muitos professores de crianças também são de etnia russa. Alguns deles até falam estoniano, mas não possuem conhecimentos avançados de gramática ou grande fluência na fala. Agora, com as novas regras, esses professores terão de estudar estoniano e comprovar o seu conhecimento da língua para continuarem a trabalhar. Se não conseguirem aprender estoniano, esses profissionais correm o risco de perder os seus empregos.

Não é apenas a Federação Russa que denuncia esta situação. A tentativa de genocídio cultural na Estônia já começa a ser criticada por organizações internacionais, como a própria ONU. O gabinete dos direitos humanos das Nações Unidas classificou recentemente as políticas da Estônia como “potencialmente discriminatórias” devido ao fato de afetarem os direitos de uma minoria étnica.

25% da população da Estônia são cidadãos russos. A Estônia, como todos os estados pós-soviéticos, tem uma forte presença de russos étnicos devido ao facto de até 1991 todas as repúblicas soviéticas pertencerem ao mesmo país. Muitos especialistas descrevem o colapso soviético como uma tragédia humanitária precisamente porque de repente transformou milhões de russos em “estrangeiros”. Atualmente, os russos não só vivem em países que não o seu, mas também sofrem políticas discriminatórias simplesmente por serem russos.

A Estônia não está sozinha nas suas medidas russofóbicas. A Letônia e a Lituânia também estão a avançar com políticas para erradicar a língua russa. O governo letão, como é sabido, está a promover testes de proficiência na língua letã para cidadãos russos. Os cidadãos que não passarem nos testes podem simplesmente ser expulsos do país. Como esperado, quem tem mais dificuldades nesta situação são os russos idosos, que viveram a vida inteira falando apenas russo e agora são forçados a aprender uma nova língua sob risco de cancelamento da sua cidadania.

A operação militar especial da Rússia na Ucrânia serviu de desculpa para os países aliados do Ocidente tomarem abertamente acções de genocídio cultural e de apartheid. Os russos estão simplesmente a ser tratados como cidadãos “inferiores” em Estados que até recentemente pertenciam ao mesmo país que a Rússia. Por enquanto, tais medidas estão a ser implementadas contra a língua e os direitos civis dos cidadãos russos, mas é possível que a russofobia aumente ao ponto de a segurança física dos falantes de russo começar a ser ameaçada.

Existe um processo de “ucranização” nos países bálticos. Agora, o seu principal “inimigo” é a língua, mas resta saber como os governos reagirão à insistência dos russos em preservar a sua herança étnica e cultural. Para a Federação Russa, existe uma linha vermelha clara no que diz respeito às suas relações internacionais, que é precisamente a segurança dos seus cidadãos no estrangeiro. Se os Estados Bálticos começarem a ameaçar fisicamente os russos, haverá uma grave escalada com Moscou.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês :

https://infobrics.org/post/41202/

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, jornalista, pesquisador do Center for Geostrategic Studies, consultor geopolítico.

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

.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

David Skripac’s Book, first published on January 22, 2022

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Our Species is Being Genetically Modified

Are We Witnessing

Humanity’s March toward Extinction?

Viruses Are Our Friends, Not Our Foes  

 

by David Skripac

 

Global Research E-Book, December 2021


 

About the Author

 

David Skripac has a Bachelor of Technology degree in aerospace engineering. During his two tours of duty as a captain in the Canadian Air Force, he flew extensively in the former Yugoslavia, Somalia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Djibouti.

Using an inquisitive mind, a keen eye for detail, and problem-solving skills honed during his university years and throughout his career, David devoted close to 200 hours researching the latest scientific findings in the fields of virology and microbiology to bring this book to fruition.

Since the spring of 2020, he has also written several essays on the subject of COVID-19 for Global Research.

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


 

Table of Contents

 

Preface

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Chapter I

The Microbiome and The Virome

Chapter II

Our War against Nature

Chapter III

What Happened in 2020

Chapter IV

Ignoring the Wreckage


 

Preface

 

When the alleged “pandemic” was declared in March of 2020, I, like millions of other people around the world, was paying close attention to politicians and public health officials as well as to bureaucrats from the Rockefeller Foundation-created World Health Organization (WHO), all of whom announced, in almost perfect synchronicity, “This is the new normal until a vaccine can be developed.”

How odd, I thought. Why is it that the immediate default position is a vaccine? And why is it that a single coronavirus is being blamed for causing people to fall ill in every corner of the earth? Could something else—perhaps one or more toxins in the environment—be the real culprit?

It was impossible to stop myself from asking question after question and pondering possible answers. For, if public health authorities in nearly every jurisdiction (from international healthy organizations to national health agencies to state and local health departments) on the planet were truly concerned about citizens’ well-being, then:

  • Why was it that natural immunity, which has been a key component to human health and survival for over 200,000 years, was suddenly being treated as if it didn’t exist anymore?
  • Why was no one in charge urging us to eat a healthy, nutritionally balanced, organic diet, low in sugar content?
  • Why did no one mention the importance of getting enough sleep?
  • Why were we not being encouraged to go outdoors and exercise?
  • Why was no one suggesting we increase our zinc and vitamin D intake? After all, scientists have known for over fifty years that vitamin D, either absorbed naturally from the sun or taken orally in tablet form, is extremely beneficial to the human body in many ways, especially in building a strong innate immune system.

All of the preceding points, if taken seriously, could have helped us improve our immune system and given us an opportunity to combat the negative effects of the syndrome known as COVID-19.

Even more bizarre was the fact that, from the very start of the “pandemic,” the corporate-controlled media had been continually seeking the opinion of Bill Gates, who is neither a doctor nor a scientist, on what course of action governments around the world should be taking to combat the spread of the so-called SARS-CoV-2 virus.

As two weeks of global lockdowns—allegedly “to flatten the curve”—dragged on and turned into several months of lockdowns, it became painfully obvious that none of the “public health measures”—ranging from physical distancing to masking to self-isolation—being implemented by governments around the world had anything to do with their stated purpose of keeping everyone COVID-free.

These measures did, however, perform two key roles completely unrelated to public health:

First, they were calculated from the beginning to create a polarized population. Indeed, we have been made the subjects of a social engineering experiment intended to divide humanity—thus preventing us from communicating, converging, cooperating, and rising up together against a diabolical plan designed to eradicate representative democracy, sovereign nation-states, and individual liberties.

Second, they had the intended consequence of shutting down the global economy, sending millions of people into bankruptcy, extreme poverty, and despair. The vultures devouring the dead and decaying pieces of the shattered economy are powerful financial interests—big banks and businesses and billionaires whose goal is to control every sector of the economy, including all natural resources and all public and private assets. These predators, though few in number, have wreaked the havoc requisite for them to buy—for pennies on the dollar—every possible possession in the entire world. But they are neither content to be wealthy beyond belief nor satisfied with owning everything. Rather, it seems they will not rest until they have achieved complete world domination by exploiting and enslaving all of us.

In the two years of a “pandemic”-driven panic that most of the world seems to have succumbed to, many nations have been ruled by illegal executive orders and health department guidelines, all promulgated in the name of “following the science.” What this hijacked term really means is that scared-out-of-their-wits citizens are following the worldwide mandate to believe a false narrative that lays all the blame for all the destruction on an alleged virus—a non-isolated, unpurified, computer-generated, allegedly “novel” virus. Meanwhile, the enshrined constitutional and civil rights of billions of human beings are being shredded.

Of all the thoughts that ran through my mind, the one that struck the deepest chord was the realization that a naturally occurring, helpful element in the environment was being blamed as the source of the pseudo pandemic. I understood that, just as there are “global warming” swindlers who falsify climate data and write inaccurate academic reports so they can pretend to vilify carbon dioxide (an element that generateslife on earth—the opposite of killing life!) and thus make scads of money from their scam, so are there “pandemic” gangsters who pretend to vilify another marvel of the natural world—the virus—for the same venal purpose.

I knew I must do something with my realization. That is, I had to research to prove my theory was fact, not fancy. For four solid months, I spent all my free hours reading countless articles and watching umpteen interviews. (See my acknowledgements below to find out who my main sources were.) Next, I amassed everything I had learned and wrote a four-part article. When it was published on the Global Research website, it received so many views and positive comments that the Global Research editor encouraged me to turn it into a short book.  This is that book.

My hope is that I have succeeded in deconstructing the official narrative: first, by explaining how viruses have been blanketing the earth with their genetic codes for eons, creating biodiversity and allowing for adaptation throughout the ecosystem, and, second, by pointing out the myriad ways reckless human behaviour is creating a real environmental catastrophe—not the carbon-is-the-culprit con, but actual pollution and deforestation and species extinction, to name a few such scourges. These real problems are being ignored by the fake “climate change” crowd, who hide their mercenary motives behind euphemisms like “sustainable development goals” (SDGs) and “environmental, social, and governance” benchmarks (ESGs) and florid phrases such as the “Great Reset” and “Build Back Better.”


 

Acknowledgements

 

I would like to give special thanks to Dr. David Martin, Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, and Dr. Byram Bridle. From the very outset of the “pandemic,” they have distinguished themselves with a high degree of intelligence and courage—calling upon these qualities to challenge the official narrative. Their scientific expertise, sound reasoning, and logical questions enabled me to grasp the bigger picture—not just the facts that were being hidden, but also the underlying agenda of the “pandemic” players.

In addition, I humbly credit Dr. Zach Bush for helping me learn about the complex and minute intricacies of the natural world. Had I not had access to the vast body of work he has produced and the important insights he has gained over the years, it would have taken me a lifetime to pull together the material you are about to read.

Furthermore, I truly appreciate Global Research editor Michel Chossudovsky for suggesting the idea of turning my original four-part article into a short book. If it were not for Professor Chossudovsky’s decision to create his news aggregator website and his incredible efforts to sustain it for more than two decades, this book would probably not exist.

Finally, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my editor, who, for personal reasons, prefers to remain anonymous.


 

Introduction

 

The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. —George Orwell

This year marks a seminal turning point in human history.

For the first time since human civilization began, our species is being genetically modified.

Vaccine manufacturers have now made it possible for the human genome to be permanently altered—and humanity’s relationship with nature forever changed—by means of an experimental pharmaceutical injection that is being falsely referred to as a “vaccine.”

In light of this defining event, I believe we must take a sober look at the motives and acts that are revamping humanity as we know it. Simultaneously, we must examine our increasingly destructive treatment of the natural world.

In order to investigate the many variables that are hastening the demise of humanity and sabotaging our unique role as stewards of the earth and its billions of plant and animal species, I have divided this short book into four main chapters.


 

Chapter I

The Microbiome and The Virome

 

In this chapter, we will discover that, contrary to what Western allopathic medicine has been teaching us for over a century, viruses are not here to attack our cells or harm us in any way. In fact, rather than being our mortal enemies, viruses are actually our friends.

Does this assertion sound too outlandish to be true? If your answer is “yes,” I wouldn’t be surprised. But I believe if you were to study the intricate ecosystem of microorganisms that make up the microbiome and delve into the fascinating world of the virome, you would come to the same realization I finally did: We are literally swimming in a vast sea of viruses, which, from the beginning of time, have been essential for life to form and flourish on this precious earth. The information communicated by these viruses helps all species of life survive—even thrive.

The Microbiome

The microbiome (derived from the Greek words micro, meaning “small,” and biotikos, meaning “pertaining to life”) is a massive ecosystem consisting of trillions of microorganisms. Incredibly, some 40,000 species of bacteria, 300,000 species of parasites, 65,000 species of protozoa, and between 3.5 million and 5 million species of fungi inhabit the environment around us and live in or on the human body. This complex world of microorganisms continually secretes a sea of viruses, which serve as a communication network for the bacteria, parasites, protozoa, and fungi. And, as we will discover shortly, these viruses have always been here to help us, not hinder us. In other words, they are life-affirming, not death-inducing.

Here’s a hint of the microbiome’s intricacy, incredible diversity, and infinitesimal size: The number of genes within the fungal kingdom is at least 125 trillion! The human genome, by comparison, consists of a mere 20,000 genes. A fruit fly has 13,000 genes, a flea 31,000. Thus, in terms of genetic complexity, the human genome has just a tiny fragment of genetic information compared to the vast world of genomic information contained within the microbiome.

One intriguing aspect of the microbiome is its symbiotic communication network, which allows the transmission of protein information from one microorganism to one another. For example, the mycelial network (a matrix of fine white filaments) in fungi allows the fungi to communicate with each other over distances that can stretch to several kilometers. These mycelial structures are capable of transferring mineral and protein resources more than a kilometer. How? They use light energy and electrons that flow through the pathways within the soil system. In this way, the microbiome helps plants and other multicellular life forms flourish. It is no exaggeration to call the mycelial network in the fungal kingdom the literal “brain” of the planet. Incidentally, all of the tiny, intelligent organisms that make up the microbiome are powered by the biophotonic energy of the sun.

Hard as it is to fathom, at least 1.4 quadrillion bacteria and 10 quadrillion fungi live inside the human body. Within the human colon alone are 3.8 x 1013bacteria cells. Every single organ in the body, including the brain, has its own microbiome. The purpose of the bacteria and fungi in our bodies is to nourish and nurture our cells, keeping us healthy and in equilibrium with the larger microbiome surrounding us.

The Virome

The virome is the immense world in which Mother Nature’s messengers exist. It is composed of trillions upon trillions of viruses produced by the aforementioned microbiome’s bacteria, parasites, protozoa, and fungi. The average adult human body contains 1 x 1015 viruses. By contrast, in the air enveloping the earth there are 1 x 1031viruses; in the earth’s soil there are 2.5 x 1031 viruses; and in the earth’s oceans there are 1.2 x 1030 viruses. To provide some perspective on these awe-inspiring numbers, 1 x 1031is 10 million times greater than the number of known stars in the entire universe.

Simply put, a virus is genomic information, either DNA or RNA, wrapped in a protein envelope. The small strands of protein protruding outward from the outer surface of a virus’s protein envelope are called spike proteins. Viruses are not living organisms. They do not produce their own fuel. They have no metabolism for producing energy. And they cannot reproduce.

Viruses have been traveling globally, above the atmospheric boundary layer, for millions of years, long before machines for air travel were invented. Their genetic codes have been blanketing the earth for eons, creating biodiversity and allowing for adaptation throughout the ecosystem. By adaptation, I mean that viruses are always seeking to adapt their genetic codes for the purpose of creating resilient health in all of the planet’s life forms. It is ridiculous to suggest that, in order to travel from one region of the globe to another, a virus must hop on an aircraft, as RAND’s National Security Research Division would have us believe.

Furthermore, viruses—including coronaviruses—do not come in waves and then disappear without a trace, only to miraculously reappear later in the same spot or a different one. Instead, viruses never leave, never expire. They inhabit every element in the environment around us. In short, they are omnipresent and ever-present.

Our relationship with particular viruses can change as a consequence of our harmful actions toward nature. Whenever humans poison and pollute the air, soil, and water, they create an imbalance between humanity and the virome—an imbalance that can cause us to come into disequilibrium with a particular virus.

Unfortunately, the allopathic medicine regime, which plutocrats John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie forced on most of the world with their 1910 Flexner Report, still has a large segment of the scientific community believing that bacteria, fungi, and viruses are our enemies.

The foundation of Rockefeller’s allopathic medicine scheme is Louis Pasteur’s flawed “germ theory,” which claims that outside microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses attack, invade, and infect the body, thereby causing disease. Though he had no formal education in science, most of the Western world credits Pasteur (1822–1895) with playing a fundamental part in establishing what we call “modern medicine”—a paradigm that traces the origin of each disease to a single germ. Without Pasteur’s theory, most modern drugs would never be produced, promoted, or prescribed—a fact that explains why today’s medical establishment and its codependent pharmaceutical industry refuse to recognise their flaws or own up to their ineffectiveness.

By contrast, “terrain theory,” which was initiated by Claude Bernard (1813–1878) and later built upon by Antoine Béchamp (1816–1908), alleges that the terrain—that is, the internal environment of the body—and not an external germ determines our health or lack thereof. What Béchamp referred to as “terrain” is very close to what modern medicine has now termed the innate immune system. As we will see in the following paragraphs, Béchamp was definitely on the right track in discovering how the human body really interacts with the outside environment.

Unlike Pasteur, Béchamp did have an academic background in science. He believed disease to be a biological result of the changes that take place in the body when its metabolic processes become imbalanced. When the body is in a state of imbalance, Béchamp alleged, germs become symptoms that in turn stimulate more symptoms, which eventually lead to disease.

Although Béchamp was moving in the right direction with his terrain theory, Rockefeller’s germ-dependent pharmaceutical tyranny has prevailed, due largely to substantial infusions of money, which Rockefeller and Carnegie gladly supplied in the form of grants to universities, hospitals, and medical research facilities. Their “philanthropic” largess, which easily exceeded $100 million ($2.9 billion in current dollars), enabled them to influence the policy of the entire US medical establishment and eventually most of the Western nations, steering them toward an exclusively chemical-based allopathic regime.

I contend in this book that, contrary to what Rockefeller medicine has been teaching us for over one hundred years, viruses are not here to attack our cells or to harm us in any other manner. On the contrary, the DNA and RNA genetic molecular information contained within the viruses are literally the building blocks of life on earth. To use a modern analogy, we can think of a virus’s information stream as a software update carrying important molecular intelligence that can be uploaded, when required, to any cell of a living multicellular organism—including any one of the 70 trillion cells contained in the human body. Our cells regulate which new genomic information is received and which information is not received. The viruses are simply seeking to adapt to the cells for the purpose of creating resilient human health.

Innate and Adaptive Immunity

A word here about the immune system. There are two kinds of immunity: innate and adaptive.

The innate immune system is the initial and primary means by which our bodies interact with a virus. The innate system helps the body find a genetic balance with each new viral update that is being presented to it. The body does not need to replicate or reproduce the new viral information after more than four or five days of updates. The innate immune system functions on healthy boundaries in the human body, such as the physical barriers between the gut and the bloodstream, or on the blood vessels that tightly regulate the movement of ions, molecules, and cells between the bloodstream and the brain (termed the blood-brain barrier), or at the genetic level in our cells (like the mutagen proteins in our cells). Also, the innate immune system operates through a variety of enzymes—like the APOBec3A/3G and CAS9. These enzymes are now considered central to innate immunity.

The adaptive immune system is the secondary means by which our bodies interact with viruses. The adaptive system mounts a highly specific response to a virus by utilizing the body’s white blood cells, known as lymphocytes (B cells and T cells). The B cells are responsible for releasing antibodies into the bloodstream.

Antibodies are the body’s second—not first—method of interaction with a virus after it receives a new viral update or after it develops an imbalance with a particular virus. Antibodies are specific, targeted defences. They usually show up on the scene 3 to 6 weeks after the body’s initial exposure to a virus. Simply put, antibodies act like a cleanup crew, assisting the body in cleaning out viruses and bacteria that are no longer needed. Meanwhile, the T cells are responsible for stimulating the B cells into making antibodies.

To understand how quickly the human body adapts when exposed to the virome, consider a seven-day-old infant. He has 1 x 108 virus particles in just one gram of feces. Even though that child does not have the capacity to develop any antibodies at such an early stage in life, he nonetheless instantly adapts to these virus particles and stays perfectly healthy. Instead of developing a fever, he remains in stable equilibrium—homeostasis—with the virome, both microbially and genetically. That fact alone proves that we do not interact with the virome through our adaptive immune system but, rather, interact with it through our innate immune system.

What is the key takeaway from these facts? To me, it is that the body’s decision to take in genetic information is a highly intricate and controlled biological process. There are numerous ways our bodies stay in equilibrium with the huge sea of genetic information that we breathe in and come into contact with every moment of our lives.

Since a virus is not a living organism, our innate immune system cannot kill viruses—nor would it want to. Instead, as mentioned above, the innate immune system simply comes into genetic balance with a new virus. It does this by replicating or receiving updates from that virus—and by immediately responding to that new viral upload. Once genetic balance has been achieved, typically four to five days after initial exposure to the virus, our innate immune system refuses to receive further updates.

From these facts, we may conclude that humans cannot stop an “epidemic” or a “pandemic” from occurring, nor can they change the trajectory of either one. In other words, it is useless—actually, worse than useless: it is harmful—to try to check an always-helpful virus by deploying an unapproved experimental gene-editing device that is designed to produce an antibody response (otherwise known as an adaptive immune system response induced by the injection). That antiquated scientific model is biologically illogical and can never work. We now know that it interferes with our beautifully designed innate immune system, which is perfectly capable of handling any virus with which we may develop a temporary imbalance. (Exactly how we develop an imbalance with a particular virus, like the HIV virus or any coronavirus, will be explained later in the book.)

Furthermore, contrary to the official narrative propagated by vaccine makers and governmental health agencies around the world, our immune systems do retain a memory of the viruses that our bodies have interacted with and of the genes that were inserted naturally—upon receiving a new viral update—into our cells. In the innate immune system, for instance, the Cas9 enzyme, which is responsible for cleaving excess DNA when too much of a viral upload is presented to a cell, is the natural memory data bank that will remember which DNA pattern it encountered.

In addition, the permanent records kept by an innate immune system are passed down to succeeding generations of humans, who therefore will never have an inflammatory-inducing reaction to a particular virus. Even in the adaptive immune system, the B cells (the source of antibodies) and T cells (the B cells’ stimulus) provide lasting immunity.

A multipronged NIH study presented by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) in 2008 proved conclusively that antibody immunity can last for a lifetime. In that study, a group of scientists, led by Dr. Eric Altschuler, collected blood samples from thirty-two survivors—between the ages of 91 and 101—of the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. (Actually, the correct name for that pandemic is the Kansas Flu—its place of origin.) To their amazement, the scientists discovered that, almost a century later, all of the study’s participants still carried the antibodies to the same strain of influenza.

Based on the findings of that twenty-one-year-old study, we can dismiss the propaganda foisted upon us by the mainstream media and medical organizations. It is not true that natural immunity to the SARS-CoV-2 virus may wear off six months to a year after initial exposure. And it is not true that an experimental injection is the only way one can reach immunity. Such unfounded claims are simply ruses invented to further the avaricious agenda of the pharmaceutical industry and the other technocrats operating behind the scenes.

Bottom line: The power of natural immunity will always outperform any perceived immunity to a virus said to result from an injection, whether experimental or government-approved.

The HIV-leads-to-AIDS Hypothesis

Biologically speaking, all life on earth is built from the RNA and DNA molecular genetic sequences contained in viruses. These viruses are exquisitely designed genetic delivery systems essential to initiating and sustaining life on earth. In fact, more than 50% of the 20,000 genes inherited by today’s humans were inserted millions of years ago into the mammalian genome by these tiny marvels of nature. At least 8% of those genes were inserted by RNA retroviruses similar to the HIV retrovirus. (A retrovirus is an RNA virus which inserts a DNA copy of its genome into the host cell in order to replicate itself.) Equally intriguing is the fact that millions of years ago retroviral updates played a key role in the emergence of placental mammals.

Interestingly, a 2017 study published by the National Institute of Health (NIH) demonstrates that many of us are carrying the HIV retrovirus without even knowing it. In this study, the researchers “explored non-human sequence data from whole-genome sequencing” the blood of 8,240 adults living in the US and Europe—none of whom were ascertained to have any infectious disease. They found that a full 42% of the participants tested positive for the presence of ninety-four known viruses. These viruses included the HIV virus, the hepatitis B virus, the hepatitis C virus, and the influenza virus.

We have been trained by the medical community and the corporate-controlled media to believe that the HIV virus should predominate in people living in Sub-Saharan Africa. After all, we are told, 95% of all “HIV positive” cases come from that region of the globe. If that were the case, we would expect to see in other regions very little HIV and a far higher prevalence of, say, hepatitis C or influenza. Not so: It is just the reverse! In fact, the 2017 study found a fivefold higher prevalence of the HIV virus than of hepatitis C and influenza in those 8,240 asymptomatic Americans and Europeans. Remarkably, each one was completely in balance with the HIV virus, even though none of them had ever travelled to Africa. We must conclude from this study that not only has the world completely misunderstood the prevalence of the HIV virus in all corners of the globe but that our fear of it—and of the virome in general—is entirely unjustified.

Given that many powerful organizations, both public and private, profit from the huge grants and donations that perpetuate the endless AIDS movement, it is unsurprising that no scientific peer-reviewed study has been done to provide conclusive evidence that a virus called HIV causes a disease named AIDS. Were any such study to be undertaken, it would prove that the HIV-leads-to-AIDS hypothesis is baseless and, more to the point, fraudulent.

The question scientists should be focusing on is: What is taking place in Sub-Saharan Africa that is creating such an abnormal relationship between people living in that area and the HIV retrovirus, causing 95% of them to test HIV-positive?

For an answer to that question, we need to look at the terrain where viruses reside and stay in balance with the human body. (By “terrain” I mean a geographic area with its associated ecosystem. I am not referring here to the aforementioned Bernard/Béchamp terrain theory.) When a terrain is disrupted by anything unnatural to it—for example, poisoning of the environment by irresponsible human behaviour—the viruses become overexpressed and the body’s balance with the virome is lost.

Taking account of the terrain, we find that the number one factor common to all so-called infectious disease epidemics or pandemics is the destruction of the ecosystem. In other words, the natural terrain has been altered by irresponsible human behaviour to such an extent that our innate adaptation to all the genetic information surrounding us is undermined.

It is not that the viruses are causing a disease. Rather, it is that they are simply presenting the body with a new genetic adaptation option. The body’s innate immune system then determines how much of that new information it will absorb. If the cells are in dire need of repair—perhaps as a result of poor dietary choices, a sedentary lifestyle, or toxicity in the environment—the virus will create an inflammation event as the body goes through its regenerative process. This is usually accompanied by a fever, loss of appetite, and an elevated white blood cell count. Such an inflammatory event is what we commonly refer to as “the flu.”

What we derogatively call a viral infection or an inflammatory event—implying it is bad for the body—is actually a part of the body’s healing process. The inflammation is needed to create regeneration within the body. It is acting on behalf of the body, not against it. But if the body’s microbiome is replete instead of wanting, it will not need an update, and therefore no inflammation will take place.

In the case of Sub-Saharan Africa, the ecosystem is dying. The collapse of nutrient-rich soil systems, poor water hygiene, a lack of basic sanitation, a chronically undernourished population, and the complete elimination of traditional organic farming—overtaken by the oxymoronic Green Revolution, foisted on developing countries by industrial agriculture—have caused a large portion of that population to develop an imbalance between their innate immune system and the environment. The syndrome known as “AIDS” is an expression of that imbalance. The HIV virus, which was first discovered by French virologist Luc Montagnier, has been falsely accused of being the primary culprit responsible for AIDS—a form of guilt by association. In actual fact, the HIV virus is benign and is not trying to take over the mechanics of any cell.

The real root of the problem is that the innate immune system of the Sub-Saharan African people has been degraded by a lack of nutrition to such an extent that they are falling prey to a myriad of illnesses (tuberculosis, pneumonia, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, endocarditis, etc.), which have been collectively grouped under the single title “AIDS.” However, instead of coming to terms with the reality of what the dire ecological disaster is causing, “scientists” are blaming the HIV virus as a cover to hide decades of government and corporate environmental and economic crimes.

From the information covered thus far, we can rightly conclude that it is impossible for viruses or pathogens to create infectious disease pandemics and epidemics—for there is no such thing as an infectious disease in the traditional sense of the term—examples being “AIDS,” “Ebola,” and other unfounded “viral” pandemics. Yes, pharmaceutical propaganda has been pushing the infectious disease paradigm on world thought for centuries. But the belief that such diseases exist is no more than an outgrowth of Pasteur’s debunked germ theory. What we commonly refer to as an epidemic or a pandemic is simply the result of a degraded innate immune system showing up in a segment of the planet’s population. The reasons for this degradation can include chemical poisoning from herbicides, pesticides, or genetically modified foods, which we will look at in more detail below.

As we can see by the above description of the virome, it is no exaggeration to say that the virome is the language of all life on earth. We are literally swimming in a vast sea of genomic information that was essential for life to begin and flourish on this precious earth and that is still trying to help all species survive. The matrix of organisms that make up the microbiome have built a viromic information stream that has allowed for adaptation and biodiversity to occur on the planet. And that very same viromic information stream is responsible for building the human species.

Thus, humans are not separate from the virome and the microbiome but are, rather, integral to the virome and microbiome’s vast, complex ecosystem. Yet we have increasingly placed ourselves in direct opposition to the very living system of which we are an intrinsic part: nature.


 

Chapter II

Our War against Nature

 

In this chapter we will explore how our own reckless behaviour is destroying the environment, thereby moving us toward the sixth mass extinction. By that I mean, I will be covering the real environmental catastrophe, not the billionaire-funded “global warming/climate change” hoax initiated by the Club of Rome and further promulgated by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

The species known as Homo sapiens is the only one on this planet that is actively seeking to eradicate itself and its habitat. All of the earth’s life support systems—soil, water, and air—are in decline as a direct result of our current economic activity, which is geared to extract as much from the sacred earth as possible without any regard for the consequences that ensue.

By embracing such an intolerable economic paradigm, we fail to respect ecological and ethical limits. Our consumption-driven economic model, which we have designed and are now enslaved by, causes perpetual deficiencies—resource depletion, biodiversity loss, and contamination by toxic substances, all of which wreak perpetual havoc on the entire ecosystem and its surrounding environment. Megacorporations continue to propagate the ideology of endless economic growth, which they intend to squeeze out of a planet with finite resources and from which they alone will benefit financially. Their self-centered aims clash with the generous motives of the masses, who favor the concept of equal opportunity, including the equal right of all humans to live in a healthy environment. The billionaire set’s relentless quest for profits at the expense of everyone’s social well-being is fueling worldwide competition for resources and causing an eco-holocaust. In short, what we are witnessing is a new form of colonialism that is being imposed by the predator class on all of humanity as we enter what is commonly referred to as the sixth mass extinction.

Consider what we are doing to our fresh water. A full 80% of our planet’s surface is composed of water, of which 97% is salt water. The remaining 3% of our available supplies of drinking water have been treated so recklessly that they are highly polluted and rapidly depleting. Of that 3% fresh water, at least 29% is siphoned off by the water-intensive meat and dairy industries. The United Nations estimates that over the next decade two billion people will suffer extreme water scarcity and that by the end of this century half of the world’s population will experience some kind of water scarcity.

The mining and oil industries are no friends of the environment either. In the US, mining companies have removed over 500 mountains in the Appalachians, causing immense ground pollution and surface water pollution. In other parts of the country, drilling for shale oil and gas, called hydraulic fracturing but better known as fracking, pumps carcinogens and toxins into the air, water, and soil, further exacerbating the pollution problem. Though touted as a solution to America’s dependency on foreign oil, fracking is in fact the final act of stupidity by a petrostate.

The aforementioned meat and dairy industries do more harm than just hogging water.  Animal agriculture—encompassing huge factory farms and small family farms—is also the leading cause of greenhouse gases, deforestation, species extinction, and ocean “dead zones.” The industrial intensive farming of animals and their feed crops is largely to blame for the highest rate of species mass extinction in 65 million years. Moreover, no other industry on the planet needs as much acreage as animal agriculture: It hoards 45% of all ice-free land on the planet. According to the World Animal Foundation, 70% of the Amazon rainforest is being destroyed for the sole purpose of growing GMO soybean or corn crops that feed livestock in South America and Europe. Between 1970 and 2019, a total of 718,927 square kilometers of the Brazilian portion of the Amazon rainforest was deforested.

A few more facts to consider:

  • Fully half of the world’s grain supply is destined for food animals at the same time that one billion people face starvation.
  • In the US, 54% of all fresh water is diverted by animal agriculture at a time when 99.8% of the geographic area of California is in a critical drought.
  • Worldwide, the animal agriculture industry, which kills at least 72 billion land animals every year (200 million every day), contributes 51% of all “greenhouse gas emissions”, far exceeding the 13% contributed by all modes of transportation combined.

The most surprising “fact” about the devastation wrought by animal agriculture, though, is that almost all of the purported environmental nonprofits are silent on this issue.

The environmental calamity is even direr in the world’s oceans. The commercial fishing industry is destroying ocean life, including ocean floors, at a pace never seen in recorded history. No other industry kills more animals than this trade. A report by Matthew Zampa for Sentient Media observes that between 37 billion and 120 billion fish are killed in manmade commercial fish farms each year and at least another trillion aquatic animals living in natural water bodies are killed for food each year. Research presented on the Oceana website contends that this staggering total does not include the 100 million sharks and 650,000 whales, dolphins, and seals that are killed every year as bycatch. (Bycatch is the total number of sea animals who fishermen unintentionally catch in their nets and kill, either by discarding at sea or bringing back to port.)

As a result of all this extraction and extermination, global populations of numerous species of aquatic life are plummeting to near-extinction levels. A scientific study presented in The New York Times predicts that if commercial fishing around the world continues at its present pace, by 2048 the oceans will be practically empty.

Equally worrisome, the oceans are used as a dumping ground for manufacturing and mining enterprises around the world. It should come as no surprise that researchers at UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography have found that fish populations in the oceans are contaminated with heavy metals like mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides (DDTs and CHLs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), plastic compounds, and hexachlorobenzene.

Chemical Farming and GMOs

The makers of synthetic chemicals, pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, and fertilizers are among Earth’s worst enemies. The newest threat to our environment comes from genetically modified industrial crops, known as genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. With the introduction of these new crops we have accelerated our ability to manipulate nature at a rate unimaginable in any earlier era. Unfortunately, as a consequence of our meddling, we are seeing an explosion of chronic disease.

How does our aforementioned discussion of the microbiome, the virome, and immunity fit into this picture of environmental desolation?

For one thing, ever since the introduction of chemical farming and the use of GMOs on a global scale in 1996, we have altered our natural surroundings to such an extent that we are decimating our innate immune system. (Remember that date: 1996.) As a result, autoimmune and other chronic diseases that at one time affected only a minute percentage of the general population are now exploding in prevalence. The timing of this surge is not lost on us: These diseases began afflicting humans in a big way beginning in, yes, 1996. It is not farfetched, then, to conclude that the profligate use of GMOs is related to the marked decline in human health over the past two-and-a-half decades.

I’ll cite a few examples: one in four people worldwide now suffer from allergies; one in three in North America are obese; one in two women and one in three men in the US will develop cancer in their lifetime. In addition, the developmental disability termed autism spectrum disorder has risen from one in 5,000 children in 1975 to one in thirty-six in 2016. If the current trend continues, we can expect to see one in three children plagued by autism by 2035. Meanwhile, in the same time period, we have seen a dramatic rise in other immune system disorders, such as Crohn’s, celiac disease, Parkinson’s (in men), Alzheimer’s (in women), dementia, and type 1 diabetes.

GMO crops are sprayed with herbicides, such as Bayer’s Roundup, which contains the active ingredient glyphosate and which is the most ubiquitous cancer-causing herbicide/antibiotic on the planet. In 2014, over 747 million kg of glyphosate was used worldwide. Now, a mere seven years later, that figure has more than doubled, to two billion kg. Being a water-soluble compound, glyphosate contaminates ground water everywhere, from China to North America. As if that weren’t bad enough, glyphosate is also contaminating the air we breathe. A study from the US Geological Survey conducted in 2007 reveals that Roundup (aka glyphosate) and its toxic by-product aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) were found in over 75% of the air samples and rain samples tested in Mississippi in 2007.

Meanwhile, the longest river in the United States, the mighty Mississippi, and its hundreds of tributaries collect more than 80% of the Roundup sprayed on crops in the entire USA. The Mississippi River is also the recipient of thousands of other chemical pollutants that are dumped into it by petrochemical companies. It’s no surprise that the people residing along the last 140 km stretch of the river, which runs through Louisiana—specifically in the Baton Rouge and New Orleans area—have some of the highest rates of cancer in the entire world.

With the Roundup patent once owned by Monsanto (now Bayer) having expired in 2000, China has become the leading user and exporter of glyphosate in the world. In 2017, China exported over 300,000 tons of glyphosate globally. It turns out that Hubei Province, where the infamous Wuhan sits, is one of the leading users of glyphosate in China. The combined toxic effects of pork production, heavy manufacturing, and chemical farming in Hubei have made this region one of the most polluted places on earth. The once-diverse and clean ecosystem in Wuhan has been utterly ravaged by manmade pollutants and the massive use of glyphosate in industrial farming.

There is an indisputable link between the current high rate of cancer and the extensive use of glyphosates. Within a single generation, the rate of cancer diagnosed in men has doubled. Paralleling that rise, in the 25 years (roughly a generation) between 1990 and 2015, the toxicity of the environment also doubled.

Statistical data compiled by Nancy L. Swanson et al. in the Journal of Organic Systems provides overwhelming evidence of a precise correlation, from 1975 to 2010, between glyphosate usage and the incidence of many different types of cancer, including urinary/bladder cancer, liver cancer, thyroid cancer, and myeloid leukemia. The graphs presented in the Swanson study show that the increased prevalence of cancer perfectly overlaps the increased use of glyphosate.

Another link that cannot be ignored is the decline in male sperm counts in Western countries. Shanna Swan, an epidemiologist at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York and a leading scholar of reproductive health, projects that sperm counts of the median man are set to hit zero by 2045. With the introduction of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), male sperm counts have dropped 50% to 60%—an average of 1% to 2% per year—between 1973 and 2011. Granted, endocrine-disruptor microplastics in our drinking water pose a problem, but that problem pales in comparison with the damaging effects of chemical farming and the use of glyphosate, contends internal medicine, endocrinology, and metabolism specialist Zach Bush, MD, on his Global Health Education website.

Moreover, writes Dr. Bush, “glyphosate functions as a potent chelation agent, locking up the nutrients within soil, plant, and water systems such that we can now find ourselves in the equivalent biologic state of starvation in the midst of the most extreme caloric excess that humanity has ever produced.”

Worldwide warnings from other scientists, doctors, and environmentalists abound. For instance, Dr. Vandana Shiva, an environmental and food sovereignty activist and ecofeminist based in Delhi, India, has been continually cautioning, in books and articles she pens and in speeches and interviews she gives around the world, that GMOs have ruined soil and plant life by inhibiting their ability to maintain microorganisms and minerals, such as zinc, iron, and magnesium, which are vital for immune response in animals and humans. In her 2012 opinion piece titled “Myths About Industrial Agriculture,” Dr. Shiva cited a 1995 study that found industrial agriculture (which began in 1965) to be responsible for 75% of the earth’s biodiversity erosion, 75% of its water destruction, and 40% of its greenhouse gases, while producing only 30% of humans’ food supply.

Ever since the mid-1990s, industrial/chemical farming has decimated the microbiome in the soil on a global scale. Consider: In 2014, a senior United Nations official, Maria-Helena Semendo of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), explained to a forum that unless new approaches to farming were developed, the global amount of arable and productive land per person in 2050 will be only one-quarter of the 1960 level. Also consider: In a study conducted by Lancaster University in September 2020, researchers found that 90% of the earth’s conventionally farmed soils were thinning, and 16% of them had a lifespan of less than a century.

In short, the aforementioned reduction in male sperm counts, combined with soil degradation around the globe, are the two key factors that are driving humanity toward extinction.

Every time we spray Roundup or any of the other even-more-toxic herbicides that are now being widely used—such as 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic is a primary ingredient in the chemical warfare herbicide widely known as Agent Orange) or dicamba (an herbicide 200 times more toxic than the glyphosate in Roundup)—we are destroying the microbiome in the soil, in weeds and plants, in animals, and in our own microbiome. And, to hammer home a previously made point, Roundup disperses not only in the soil but also in the air. So do its rival products.

Lamentably, herbicides are not the only toxic substance found in the air we breathe. Many other pollutants—mercury, arsenic, sulfur, and cyanide, to name but four—likewise circulate in the atmosphere. These toxins, which are produced by the transportation and energy sectors, are adept at binding with carbon particulate matter. Fine carbon particulate, referred to as PM2.5 (that is, particulate matter that is less than 2.5 micrograms per cubic meter, or 100 times thinner than a human hair), is a by-product of burning fuel and chemical reactions. It is of particular concern to human health when levels of PM2.5 in the air are high, as these two 2017 studies from the NIH National Library of Medicine and The New England Journal of Medicine demonstrate.

It turns out that not only toxins bind to PM2.5; so do viruses. Before the Industrial Revolution, viruses dispersed themselves equally throughout the atmosphere. However, now that carbon particulate matter is ubiquitous in the air, viruses are abnormally concentrating themselves around this substance. The greater the concentration of PM2.5, the greater the concentration of viral material.

Every single year, beginning in the last week of September and ending by late June, nature goes into its sleep cycle in the Northern Hemisphere. During this period, concentrations of carbon particulate and CO2 emissions and other pollutants that would normally be absorbed by trees, plants, oceans, and soil are unable to be absorbed. The result is very high concentrations of pollutants traveling in an easterly direction with the wind currents. (Along for the ride: clumps of spiked viruses that have hooked themselves onto the carbon particulates.) Compounding the problem—and reminiscent of the damaging effects of chemical farming—are increased concentrations of PM2.5 in areas where the soil has been degraded to the point that its living, breathing microbiome has lost the ability to absorb carbon at any time of year, regardless of the season.

Through NASA satellite imagery, we can see, starting in mid-October every year, a huge plume of carbon material floating from the heavy-industry hubs in China and other industrial regions of the world and dispersing in an easterly flow pattern across the Northern Hemisphere. By the month of May, this toxic haze blankets the Northern Hemisphere. You can check out IQAir for real-time data analysis of PM2.5 toxicity around the world.

Strangely, what we call “the seasonal flu” perfectly coincides with the time period when nature goes into its sleep cycle in the Northern Hemisphere. During the months we refer to as “flu season,” our bodies are more apt to experience an inflammatory event—fever, congestion, coughs, and a loss of appetite. This phenomenon takes place as our bodies adapt and come into balance with the industrial toxins in the environment. When summer arrives in late June, nature resumes its regenerative cycle: The plumes of PM2.5 slowly dissipate and finally disappear, reducing our risk of respiratory illness. That is why we seldom, if ever, experience influenza during the summer months in the Northern Hemisphere. Hence, by following the carbon particulate flows, we can actually map out and predict exactly where the hot spots of respiratory infections, of “pandemics,” and of seasonal influenza will occur.


 

Chapter III

What Happened in 2020

 

We will now examine how this real environmental devastation has contributed to the “pandemic” that was rolled out in 2020—a “pandemic” that led to the mass experimental injection of unknown substances into human “subjects” in 2021 and that has no foreseeable end. (Throughout this book, I have been putting quote marks around “pandemic” because of its fraudulent character. Indeed, it is more accurately and aptly described as a plandemic, a scamdemic, a pseudo pandemic or any other term indicating fakery.)

In the months leading up to 2020, the earth experienced a series of unprecedented wildfires from Australia to the Amazon and from Indonesia to California. In California alone, the wildfire season of 2019 destroyed more than 250,000 acres of land, along with 732 structures. All told, global wildfires in 2019 sent 7.8 billion metric tons of CO2 and carbon particulate into the stratosphere—the highest level of PM2.5 since 2002. Once in the stratosphere, the carbon particulate was able to travel thousands of kilometers from its source. Many cities around the globe, such as Canberra, Wuhan, New York, and Milan, experienced extremely low air quality as a result of the extremely high levels of PM2.5.

It turns out that one of the most toxic substances generated by the combustion of synthetics such as plastics, nylon, wool, and silk—combustion caused either by wildfires or by industrial chemical reactions—is cyanide. Specifically, hydrogen cyanide gas. Cyanide is a highly toxic agent that causes vascular hypoxia and even death if not treated properly.

Thus, as we entered “flu season” in the latter half of 2019 and the start of 2020, we had the perfect storm of toxicity circulating the globe. The abnormally high levels of PM2.5, in conjunction with high levels of industrial by-products like sulfur, mercury, arsenic, carbon, glyphosate, and cyanide, created ideal conditions for suppressing the innate immune system, especially in the frail and elderly, who are in many instances already dealing with serious underlying medical conditions.

To make matters worse, most of the patients afflicted with these underlying conditions—hypertension, diabetes, obesity, coronary artery disease, and renal disease—are placed on commonly prescribed drugs, which include angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) to control blood pressure and statins to lower cholesterol. However, we now know, thanks to a study first published on March 31, 2020, in the American Journal of Physiology Heart and Circulatory Physiology (Volume 318, Issue 5), that ACE-I and statin drugs upregulate the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor by which the coronavirus enters the body. ACE2 is a protein that sits on the surface of many types of cells in the human body, including the intestine, kidney, uterus, testes, brain, heart, and, most importantly for our coverage of this topic, the lungs and nasal and oral mucosa.

The ACE2 enzyme plays an important role in helping the body to regulate blood pressure and in the healing of wounds and inflammation. In addition, the ACE2’s amino acids help capture and chop up a harmful protein called angiotensin II, which drives up blood pressure and damages tissues. That is why physicians in the Western world will normally prescribe ACE-I in an effort to boost ACE2 expression, thereby reducing the risk of high blood pressure. What’s more, when the ACE2 enzyme is upregulated, it can very easily capture—or snag—any one of the numerous spike proteins emanating from the surface of a coronavirus.

Gain-of-Function Research

While we are on the topic of spike proteins, I would like to make a few comments, in the form of a Q&A, on gain-of-function (GoF) research in this field. Gain-of-function research, which in October 2021 was intentionally and misleadingly redefined by the National Institute of Health (NIH) to enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (EPPPs), is research that seeks to alter the functional characteristics of a virus with the aim of enhancing a viruses’ ability to infect a species and to potentially increase its impact as an airborne pathogen.

By making a virus more “deadly,” it is believed that it could then be used as a biological warfare weapon (bioweapon) against a potential foe. We know there are GoF labs in Wuhan, China, and at the US Army installation at Fort Detrick, Maryland. (As of 2018, at least fifteen other countries beside the US and China, including Canada, the UK, France, Israel, Germany, and Russia, had documented biological weapons programs and bioweapon research laboratories.)

(1) Is it possible that either both or one of the Wuhan and Ft. Detrick labs may have manipulated one of the spike proteins on a coronavirus that would make it even more apt to connect to the ACE2 receptor, as this document from the Human Microbiology Institute in New York suggests? Absolutely.

(2) Does Dr. Anthony Fauci have deep financial ties to the Wuhan lab through his position as director, since 1984, of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious diseases (NIAID)? Absolutely.

(3) By extension, is the US government either indirectly or directly involved in funding the Institute of Virology in Wuhan? Absolutely.

(4) Have both Dr. Fauci and University of North Carolina GoF specialist Ralph Baric received millions of dollars in research grants from several federal agencies—NIH, DARPA, and NIAID—to study GoF in coronaviruses, as this dossier by Dr. David Martin clearly outlines? Absolutely.

Nevertheless, we mustn’t lose sight of the fact that all of this coverage of GoF may actually be a cleverly disguised psychological operation meant to conveniently distract us from the fact that we have zeropeer-reviewed scientific proof that a coronavirus causes the respiratory syndrome known as COVID-19.

In addition, the sudden, intense media focus on Dr. Fauci and the Wuhan connection may be a tactic designed to deflect the blame to China for creating the “crisis,” all the while cleverly obscuring the fact that numerous players from many nations and organizations, like the WEF, the World Health Organisation (WHO), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, are working in concert with China to enslave all of humanity in a technocratic dystopian nightmare.

Or, is it possible that the real gain-of-function bioweapons are the unapproved experimental injections (called COVID-19 vaccines) now being rolled out around the world? Time will tell.

Toxins or Viral Infections?

Returning to the events of 2020, we can see that by upregulating the ACE2 receptor that is sitting on the surfaces of the lungs and nasal mucosa, we made it very easy for a coronavirus, in conjunction with the PM2.5 particles that were carrying with them cyanide and other possible pollutants, to get snagged and pulled into the respiratory track. Once in the respiratory track, the toxins eventually go into the bloodstream and enter the body’s red blood cells. When a toxin enters the red blood cell, it changes the shape of the hemoglobin protein that carries the oxygen in the red blood cell and causes the red blood cell to become unable to carry oxygen. This process literally starves the body of oxygen. Therefore, with that combination of variables, the stage was set in the latter half of 2019 for the perfect delivery system enabling cyanide poisoning to take place.

Cyanide poisoning causes a condition known as histotoxic hypoxia. The condition includes these symptoms:

  • Changes in the colour of the skin (ranging from blue to red)
  • Confusion
  • Cough
  • Elevated heart rate
  • Rapid breathing
  • Shortness of breath (loss of red blood cells’ capacity to carry oxygen)
  • Sweating

Consequently, in late 2019 and the early part of 2020, health professionals in Hubei Province, in northern Italy, in the New York metropolitan area, and elsewhere were dealing with patients who were presenting symptoms of cyanide poisoning. As outlined by an April 2020 JAMA article, these symptoms have all the hallmarks of histotoxic hypoxia but none of the symptoms of either pneumonia or respiratory failure. In other words, they had no fever (afebrile), no fluid buildup in the lungs, and no white blood cell elevation (which one would expect to see if there were an infection present).

We must conclude, then, that these patients in acute distress, many of whom were in their senior years, had to have been initially suffering from hypoxia, not from pneumonia and not from respiratory failure. The pneumonia and micro blood clots, which eventually killed them, occurred several days or weeks after the initial poisoning event—and that was only because their innate immune system had been so weakened that their bodies succumbed to the cascading effects of secondary infections.

Incidentally, all of the people who were acutely affected by SARS in 2002 and by MERS in 2012 showed the same symptoms of histotoxic hypoxia—not of viral infection. That is to say, their symptoms were identical to the acute cases in 2020 of what was erroneously labeled COVID-19.

Ultimately, most of the patients hospitalized in 2020 died from a toxicology event—which was misleadingly named “COVID-19” after what was called a new strain of coronavirus—not from the so-named infectious disease. Even at the height of the “pandemic,” the purported COVID-19 accounted for a very small percentage of the total deaths in Italy and elsewhere.

Fortunately, the reported overall infection mortality rate of the COVID-19 syndrome is only slightly higher than the alleged seasonal flu. Equally fortunately (though not for its victims), the syndrome posed a danger to only one major population group—elderly people who had two or more major chronic diseases. The presence of comorbidities—heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer—made up the vast majority of their deaths. But for people under age 70 without these comorbidities, the risk of dying in a car accident is higher than the risk of dying from what is being billed as the disease COVID-19. Indeed, severe illness and death from COVID-19 occurred only in younger people who had immune deficiency disorders—obesity, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, and hereditary immunodeficiencies.

Nevertheless, these deaths, though tragic, in no way justify any government violating citizens’ natural rights. These rights include the freedom to:

  • move about (including leaving one’s home at any time of day or night)
  • travel (including between states, provinces, countries, and continents)
  • associate (that is, gather with friends and family in person)
  • assemble (in peaceful protests against unjust edicts, corrupt practices, and censorship)
  • worship (including meeting together with fellow believers)
  • express one’s individuality (including choosing whether or not to wear a mask)
  • enjoy bodily autonomy (including not being psychologically coerced or physically forced into receiving experimental injections of any kind)
  • stay in business (instead of being deemed by tyrannical politicians and public health bureaucrats to be “nonessential”—a label that forced millions of small companies to shut their doors, often permanently).

Dr. Bush summarizes the cases of severe acute respiratory illnesses he saw in 2020 this way:

“Unfortunately, we didn’t look at this as a poisoning; we looked at this as an infection. We kept believing that these people who were dying were dying of infection. I believe they were very clearly being overloaded with PM2.5 bound to cyanide that was being trafficked into the lung environment and ultimately into the bloodstream by the virus. The virus is naturally designed to actually enter the body through lung and vascular tissue and neural tissue like our nasal sinuses. We see all of this loss of taste and scent in people exposed to this virus because it’s trafficking through the ACE2 receptor on the surfaces of all these tissues. The ACE2 receptor binds to the coronavirus and pulls cyanide straight into the [red blood] cell to poison the human body with high amounts of air pollution that were not being breathed in but were literally being smart-targeted into the bloodstream by the innocent bystander of a virus that was in our environment for a very long time.”

From his detailed description, we can clearly see that people were dying from environmental toxicity, not from a viral infection. That is precisely why there is no scientific, peer-reviewed study providing conclusive evidence that a virus called SARS-CoV-2 causes a fatal disease named COVID-19. Such evidence doesn’t exist, because the coronavirus, so-called, is not out to harm anyone but is merely presenting a viral update to those who need it.

Not surprisingly, as of November 30, 2021, 127 health/science institutions in over twenty-five countries have failed to provide or cite even one record describing the purification of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus from any patient sample. Though some scientists—notably, in Australia, China, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, and New Zealand—claim to have purified a coronavirus from a patient sample, upon closer examination, their allegations appear to be baseless in light of the meticulous research conducted by biostatistician Christine Massey, M.Sc.

Calling upon that research, Massey has sent, over the span of a year, numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to more than one hundred health institutions around the world. The results of her requests are alarming, yet not surprising. All of the responses confirm that there is, as she puts it, no record of “isolation/purification of SARS-CoV-2 having been performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.”

(For those of you who are unfamiliar with the isolation/purification procedure, I refer you to Dr. Andrew Kaufman’s analysis of the process. He uses six criteria (developed by Dr. Thomas Rivers, who modified Koch’s postulates) for detecting viral disease in the following manner: first, isolate the virus from the diseased host; second, cultivate the virus in host cells; third, provide proof of filterability; fourth, produce the same disease in a new host; fifth, re-isolate the virus; sixth, detect a specific immune response to the virus.)

Also, according to Massey’s research, not only has the original SARS-CoV-2 never been isolated/purified, but it is no surprise that, as of this book’s publication, no lab had isolated/purified samples of the alleged “Delta variant” either.

Most importantly, the World Health Organisation—the main fear-mongering machine driving people into a state of panic by its unsubstantiated claims—does not have in its possession an isolate of the original 2019 novel coronavirus, nor does it have in its possession an isolate from any other variant—including the latest “Omicron variant.”

What the WHO does have in its possession, though, is a computer-generated genomic sequence of the purported 2003 SARS-CoV virus, transmitted in early 2020 by Dr. Christian Drosten and his colleagues from the Berlin Virology Institute at Charité Hospital (an institution that, not incidentally, is generously financed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). Eurosurveillance, a weekly peer-reviewed medical journal based in Europe, confirmed this point at the onset of the pseudo pandemic on January 23, 2020, when it made the following assertion:

“We report on the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation [using the RT-PCR test], designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”

Therefore, given the preceding facts, we can conclude that, not only has no one isolated/purified the virus, but there is no scientific evidence to support the fraudulent claim that we are dealing with a “novel” variant of the 2002/03 SARS coronavirus.

Summary of 2020 Scenarios

We had two different scenarios taking place in 2020. I will summarize each below.

In one scenario, we saw people with an inflammatory event marked by fever, congestion, loss of appetite, elevated white blood cell count, and malaise. All of these symptoms are what would be expected when a possible new variant of a coronavirus or any other virus triggers the innate immune system—and eventually the adaptive immune system—to do what it always does in order to bring us back into balance with a new genomic update from a virus. Let’s remember, coronaviruses provide genetic information that regenerates our bodies; they work on our behalf and are not infecting us with diseases.

In the other scenario, we saw people with serious, sometimes multiple comorbidities eventually succumbing to a toxicology event, as described by Dr. Bush in the long quotation above.

Granted, in both scenarios the coronavirus is present, but only benignly. As I clarified earlier, a virus does not try to take over the mechanics of any cell in the body. It does not cause or force anything. It is simply present—another example of guilt by association, just like the false link between the HIV virus and AIDS that I related in Chapter One.

However, instead of differentiating between the two scenarios, public health officials everywhere, instructed by the utterly corrupt WHO leadership, conveniently grouped them under a single category: COVID-19. They did this by using the monstrously inappropriate and inaccurate RT-PCR test, which its inventor Kary Mullis insisted (before his untimely death in August 2019) was not meant to diagnose disease but was designed simply to ascertain the presence of a viral load.

Despite its easy-to-falsify-and-thus-frequently-falsified results, the PCR test is still being used around the world as a replacement for clinical analysis. Why? The only logical answer is that testing for the coronavirus is a form of control meant to create public hysteria. Not understanding that most positive readings are fraudulent, that the scary words “positive case” do not signify the presence of an infection, and that asymptomatic people can neither have nor spread disease, the public has been deceived into believing that a dangerous pathogen is killing a large percentage of the population. Therefore, what we are witnessing, in reality, is nothing more than a pandemic of “PCR test positive cases,” not of “COVID-19 positive cases.”

By fanning fear, governments around the world have been able to justify harmful, totally ineffective lockdown measures and mask mandates as well as nonsensical physical distancing measures.

But why intentionally induce panic and why clamp down like dictators?

Politicians and public health officials must be either obeying threatening orders or taking irresistible bribes or just following instructions from their superiors, naïvely believing that they are doing the “right thing” in the interest of public safety. In most cases, they have to be induced, by hook or by crook, to persuade citizens to take part in the largest medical experiment in history—a worldwide mass “vaccination” campaign devised for the purpose of injecting every compliant human with an untested, unapproved, experimental gene-therapy called COVID-19 mRNA. (In many places, like parts of Europe, parts of North America, Saudi Arabia, China, and Tajikistan, even the unwilling are compelled to submit to the COVID-19 needle.)

The parallels between the “AIDS epidemic” and the “COVID-19 pandemic” are too striking to ignore. Both feature, as the central actor, a benign virus that can conveniently be blamed as the root cause of a professed disease, despite the absence of any peer-reviewed, truly scientific evidence to support that assertion. Also, in both cases the virus can be used as a cover to obscure decades of environmental degradation spawned by government and corporate entities, whose ringleaders never pay for their crimes in fines or jail time. Finally, in both cases, the virus story provides immense profits to the global pharmaceutical industry, which is never held financially liable for the injuries and deaths caused by its vaccines or its drugs—the latter as long as they are not discovered to be the real cause of death (think AZT).


 

Chapter IV

Ignoring the Wreckage

 

Instead of coming to terms with how we are destroying our habitat, instead of learning the lessons nature has been trying to teach us over the past twenty months, most of us have ignored the wreckage and have refused to be taught. If anything, humanity has only intensified its war against nature during the past year’s pseudo pandemic.

For example, since January of 2020, 129 billion face masks (most of them made from polypropylene) and 65 billion latex gloves have been disposed of every month, according to a study published in Environmental Science & Technology. A significant portion of this waste will eventually end up in the world’s oceans, where it will take the form of polluting microplastics. Then there are the billions upon billions of plastic and paper food containers that have been used—and discarded—as a result of the pandemic-created surge in takeout food orders when restaurants were closed to dine-in customers.

And that’s only part of the environmental damage being wrought by this scam of all scams. Governments around the world—notably, in China and Italy—are spraying cancer-causing biocides into the atmosphere. That act of madness, an effort to contain or destroy the unjustifiably feared virus, subjects pedestrians to still more harmful chemicals. These disinfectants will eventually end up in the tap water of millions of households. In short, we have no idea of the consequences that biocides may be having on the microbiome and on our long-term health.

Medical Professionals Silenced

Meanwhile, hundreds if not thousands of medical professionals and scientists around the world have dared to stand on their oath to do no harm and to follow their conscience by telling the truth about the devastating consequences of adhering to the fake pandemic’s mandates.

These brave men and women—all of whom are either physicians or PhDs and thus have the title “Dr.”—include Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine technology; pediatrician Lawrence Palevsky; primary care physician Vladimir Zelenko; former NIAID scientist Judy Mikovits; attorney, physician, and America’s Frontline Doctors founder Simone Gold; family physician Stephen Malthouse; microbiologist Sucharit Bhakdi; associate professor of viral immunology Byram Bridle; pediatrician Paul Thomas; cardiologist Richard Fleming; emergency room and family physician Patrick Philips; pathologist Roger Hodkinson; and former Pfizer Chief Science Officer Mike Yeadon, to name but a few.

Each has raised serious concerns about the potential side effects these never-tested-or-approved-or-used “vaccines” may have on human health. And, for speaking out, each is being threatened and censored and worse. Collectively, their apprehensions range from (1) the possible effects that Lipid Nano Particles (LNPs) may be having on the human brain to (2) how the use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) may be causing anaphylactoid immune reactions to (3) how the artificially induced spike proteins that travel throughout the human body may be producing blood clotting disorders in different parts of the body to (4) how these excess spike proteins, which are a neurovascular toxin to the body, may be causing myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) in children and young adults.

One way medical practitioners are being bullied is through the strong-arm tactics of the agencies that licence them to practice. For instance, Canada’s College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) issued an ominous statement in late April 2020 threatening to remove the licence to practice medicine of any doctor who publicly spoke out against—or even raised questions about—the harmful side effects of lockdowns and/or the COVID vaccines that they witnessed while working on the frontlines in their local hospitals and communities. In the US, the process of removing a doctor’s license is slightly different, but the end result is the same. Each state has its own Medical Board that can temporarily suspend a medical license without a hearing if “the Board finds that Licensee’s conduct has breached the standard of care and has placed the health and safety of many of his patients at risk of harm.”

Other attempts to prevent vital scientific information from reaching the public include the discrediting and stifling of medical practitioners, doctors, and scientists by Big Tech mainstream social media platforms like Google’s YouTube. This should come as no surprise, since Google, which was created by the CIA, also has major ties to pharmaceutical companies like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), registered in England. These individuals are also being deplatformed from Facebook—another DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)/CIA-created private company—as well as by Instagram, Amazon Web Services (AWS), LinkedIn, and Twitter.

Alternative Treatments Available?

Worse yet, doctors have faced extreme censorship for providing evidence that there are indeed viable, effective, and inexpensive treatments for COVID-19—treatments that obviate the need for a “vaccine.” For instance, all of the physicians mentioned above, plus hundreds more from many countries, have not only praised but have repeatedly demonstrated the effectiveness of anti-malarial drugs chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and other remedies like Ivermectin, azithromycin, doxycycline, and zinc, in treating their COVID-19 patients. They have proven, for example, that CQ and HCQ, when administered in small prescribed doses, exert relatively few to no adverse effects. Numerous studies out of South Korea, China, and France bear further witness to that fact.

Nevertheless, government health agencies—the FDA, the NIH, and the CDC in the US, the MHRA in the UK, and Health Canada—as well as the WHO continually ban these inexpensive treatments, try to discourage people from using them, and, with the mainstream media’s complicity, make provably false claims about them.

To find out why this suppression of effective treatments is occurring, we need look no further than the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines (EUA) to Prevent COVID-19 that was issued in October 2020. On page six of this document, under Section lll, Criteria and Consideration for the Issuance of an EUA for a COVID-19 Vaccine, the last bullet point clearly states that the FDA may issue an EUA only if the FDA has determined that “there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating the disease or condition.” This statement means that the entire premise of the EUA is based on a presupposition that there is no alternative intervention available.

In reality, there are several inexpensive off-patent products to choose from, as we cited above—and as the FDA well knows. However, if it were to allow a cheap and readily available product like HCQ to dominate the market, the pharmaceutical industry—which appears to dictate policy to the FDA—would stand to lose billions in sales of COVID-19 vaccines.

So, is greed behind Big Pharma’s concealment of life-saving information on these efficacious alternative products? Most assuredly. And will Big Pharma’s cozy relationships with government agencies (think “revolving door,” “regulatory capture,” and “big payoffs”) and with the news media (heavily dependent upon pharmaceutical advertising) continue to prevent word of the alternatives from reaching the public? It would seem so. In other words, the EUA for the COVID-19 vaccines would surely have run into a major roadblock had the truth about other cures and treatments been allowed to be widely shared instead of censored, ignored, and hidden.

Inconvenient Data

But because that truth has been suppressed, “COVID-19 vaccine” deaths are mounting. As of September 2021, at least 24,000 people in the twenty-seven countries comprising the European Union (EU) have died from being injected with these gene-altering devices, according to data collected by EudraVigilance. In the US, meanwhile, more than 19,000 people have succumbed to the shots, according to the data supplied to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

The US figure is shocking: It means that these experimental injections have caused more deaths in a six-month period than has the combination of seventy different approved vaccines in circulation over the last thirty years. As if that weren’t bad enough, a Harvard Pilgrim Health Care study concluded that only 1% of injuries and deaths from all vaccines in the US are ever reported to VAERS. Even if the reporting is as high as 10%, that’s still low compared to the actual statistics.

Equally dire, VAERS data reveals there has been a fiftyfold increase in ectopic pregnancies following the introduction of the gene-therapy COVID-19 injections. That is, fifty times more pregnant women have suffered from this condition after taking the COVID-19 shot than they did from all vaccines given to them over the previous thirty years. (Ectopic pregnancy, also referred to as extrauterine pregnancy, is when a fertilized egg grows outside a woman’s uterus, somewhere else in her belly. It is life-threatening to the mother and needs medical attention immediately.)

Yet the COVID-19 gene-modification injections are still being aggressively pushed by the propagandists and their unscientific, unproven theories—and this despite overwhelming evidence that asymptomatic spread is not possible; that to remain healthy we do not need these injections, which have been proven to be neither safe nor effective; that COVID-19 is nowhere near as life-threatening as it was predicted to be; and that children need no protection from this virus. Besides, notwithstanding their insistence to the contrary, there is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 exists, much less causes COVID-19.

Governments around the world continue to bribe, threaten, and coerce citizens—in direct violation of the Nuremburg Code and only ostensibly “in the interest of public health”—into submitting to these injections. For instance, on December 1, 2021, the president of the European Commission (EC), Ursula von der Leyen, urged European Union member states to consider implementing mandatory COVID jabs within the EU. Since one-third of Europe’s population is not “vaccinated,” this draconian measure, if put into effect, would strip approximately 150 million people of their right to bodily autonomy.

Those of us who have been researching and reading about this subject since its inception know that it has never been about preserving public health. It has always been about the goal of implementing a global biosecurity plan and a transhumanist control grid that, if allowed to come to fruition, would signify the end of the human species.

This manufactured crisis has provided the perfect launching pad for biodigital convergence to take place. For those of you who think the notion of combining the human body with digital systems is hyperbole or fantasy, may I draw your attention to the “Exploring Biodigital Convergence” paper issued February 11, 2020, by Policy Horizons Canada. The document indicates that the Canadian policy steering committee has discussed the frightening concept of altering the evolution of the human body through the integration of biological and digital nano-technologies. Indeed, it turns out that the broad genetic modification of the human species being engineered by the experimental COVID-19 injections is just the first phase of this transhumanist convergence.

As if the Canadian paper were not alarming enough, elsewhere an even greater menace to humanity is being rolled out. In May of 2021, the UK Ministry of Defence issued a “Human Augmentation—The Dawn of a New Paradigm” document. It was worked on by the UK’s Development, Concept and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) in partnership with the German Bundeswehr Office for Defence Planning. Their purpose is “to understand the future implications of human augmentation (HA), setting the stage for more detailed defence research and development.” By incorporating research from German, Swedish, Finnish, and UK defence specialists, the DCDC project attempts to better apprehend how emerging technologies, such as genetic engineering, brain-computer interfaces, and bioinformatics, can further enhance security and defence capabilities. Although it is being touted as a strategic tool for military use, HA will undoubtedly, like the development of so many military programs throughout history, be eventually deployed for use in the civilian sector.

The vaccine passports (vaxxports) being rolled out by a large number of national governments are just the tip of the dystopian iceberg. Granted, for the moment they are being used only as a tool to punish individuals who refuse to surrender their bodily autonomy to the biomedical gene editing injection. But vaxxports will soon extend beyond that purpose: They are the transition from our would-be controllers not being able to completely dominate us (by not complying, we manage to retain some of our individual autonomy and sovereignty) to our total subservience to the IoT (Internet of Things) and IoB (Internet of Bodies) and the CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency). In the latter stage, unelected technocrat rulers become our supreme masters and we their “own nothing and be happy” slaves.

I must say in no uncertain terms: The transhumanist projects in Canada, in the UK/Europe, and likely surreptitiously in other countries, combined with our willful destruction of the ecosystem, are the two greatest existential threats facing humanity today. Perhaps ever.

Concluding Remarks

We are being relentlessly bombarded by a belief that lays blame squarely on one ancient virus (including its variants) as the sole culprit causing a global health crisis. Yet there exists not a shred of evidence proving that the virus called SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease named COVID-19. This myopic view is preventing us from understanding the true, helpful nature of viruses, as we have detailed above. For, viruses are our friends.

Moreover, this view is blinding us to the real ecological disaster unfolding around us, which viruses are trying to help us uncover and recover from. Not only is humanity marching towards its own extinction but it is also moving rapidly away from science and is instead suffocating in technocratic anti-science dogma—a dogma that has turned into a rigid religion whose adherents worship many deities, two of whom are named “Vaccines” and “Technology.”

As I observed at the beginning of this book, we are living in unprecedented times, in which humans can be genetically altered beyond recognition and the natural world is being ravaged almost beyond repair.

Yet, though these threats are lethal, there are also signs of hope. It is not too late to envision another possible path—one that does not point to our doom but, rather, invites us to accept that humanity has been made, from the beginning, to be an intrinsic part of nature. If we learn from the errors of our ways, we have a window of opportunity to step back from the abyss of transhumanism and species extinction. We can instead embrace our beautiful planet with all of its glorious biodiversity—an earth teeming with abundant life that offers a glimpse of the perfect universe made by God, Spirit, and bestowed on divinity’s spiritual creation.

Let us allow our good earth and our innate goodness to be made apparent instead of obscured and eventually annihilated. Earth and every man, woman, child, and creature inhabiting it are actually infinite, eternal, divine ideas created by an infinite, eternal, divine Mind. It is time for us to acknowledge this truth—and demonstrate it in our lives.


Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Our Species Is Being Genetically Modified. Are We Witnessing Humanity’s March Toward Extinction? Viruses Are Our Friends, Not Our Foes

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

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

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

First published on April 23, 2023

The Pandemic Treaty  scheduled for May 27, 2024 must be the object of a Worldwide mass movement against the Globalists Power Grab 

*** 

Mr. Andrew Bridgen, Member UK Parliament, slams the new WHO International Health Regulation (IHR) and Pandemic Treaty as an unheard-of Power Grab – robbing all 194 WHO, member countries, the entire world, of their sovereignty over national health issues.

The new IHR and the Pandemic Treaty would be transferring the authority to decide what is a pandemic and what deserves the status of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), and literally how any matters of health ought to be treated – a limitless mandate of dictates – to the Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO).

The WHO Director General may call an outright prohibition with punishment on using “WHO-banned” medication, even though proven effective. This is precisely what happened during COVID. Medical doctors and pharmacies were not allowed to prescribe, recommend, and sell medication that was effective against COVID, because WHO prohibited to do so.

This WHO power would be expanded as an International Law, or rather as a “rules-based order”, the new tyrannical term chosen by the elite, to circumvent literally any national and international laws.

Both the IHR and the Pandemic Treaty will be voted on by the upcoming World Health Assembly, from 21-30 May 2023. The vote is planned on 24 May 2023. A two-thirds majority is needed by the 194-member delegates to pass.

See this 20-min video of Mr. Andrew Bridgen, UK Member of Parliament, explaining to the UK Parliament why the new WHO IHR and Pandemic Treaty must be voted against.

This universal authority over world health issues would rest solely in the hands of a non- medical doctor, nor health scientist, Bill Gates-implanted WHO General Director, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who was previously a Board member of GAVI, the Vaccination Alliance and close partner of WHOs. GAVI is a creation of and funded by Bill Gates.

WHO is registered as a UN agency, which it is not really. WHO was created in 1948 at the behest of David Rockefeller (1915 – 2017), a known eugenist and globalist, to control the world population’s “health” – and death.

WHO has full immunity from criminal prosecution, and its senior employees have diplomatic and tax-free status in Switzerland.

WHO is more than 80% funded by private sources, mostly from the pharmaceuticals industry, the Gates Foundation, and other private sponsors. WHO is clearly working for the interests of its donors, mostly the pharmaceuticals and Bill Gates, also an eugenist – not for the people.

We have seen how badly – or better, criminally – WHO has handled COVID since the beginning of 2020, with worldwide lockdowns, social distancing, tremendous fear-mongering, destroying economies, people’s livelihoods, and causing death, not by COVID but by fear-induced diseases, depression and misery, for a disease which at the worst is very similar to the annual flu. And for a virus that to this date has NEVER been isolated.

And later, in December 2020, by imposing and coercing every government in the world to force its people to get injected with what they called a vaccine, a gene-modifying trial vaxx of the mRNA-type, never tested before. People were threatened and lost their jobs, were banned from public places – and much worse – if they would not submit to the untested, dangerous and even deadly vaxxes.

According to WHO’s orders, COVID hit the entire world, all its 194 member states at once, thus, justifying declaring on 16 March 2020 general lockdowns around the globe. This is an absolute impossibility. Even if a virus would exist – let me repeat, the COVID “virus” was NEVER isolated – a virus does not hit the entire globe at the same time.

As of March 16, 2020, the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (JHSPH) reports 179,165 confirmed “COVID cases” in 155 countries, with 7,081 deaths. The JHSPH is largely financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. These figures, even if they were true, would be far from justifying a global lockdown.

Already on 30 January 2020 WHO declared COVID a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).

Coincidentally, The World Economic Forum (WEF), infamous Davos meeting took place from 21-24 January 2020. WHO’s DG Tedros, Gates, the world’s power brokers and power structure, Big Pharma, Big Finance, most UN and other international organization were present at the 2020 WEF, when the pandemic decision, with global lockdowns, mask-wearing and all the social humiliating measures and dictates were decided.

These “decisions” were following a desk top dry-run called Event 201, simulating a “corona” virus, where also all the international, financial and pharma key players were present, on 18 October 2019 in NYC, barely three months before the infamous and unreal “outbreak” took place.

The powers behind the WEF put WHO in charge of committing this colossal, never-before witnessed crime on humanity, a “corona” virus, later called by WHO’s DG Tedros COVID-19.

This background on WHO’s COVID crime on humanity is just a forerunner to what may follow if the new International Health Regulation (IHR) and the intimately related Pandemic Treaty were to pass the World Health Assembly’s vote on 24 May 2023. It would take a two-thirds majority to be ratified.

If accepted, the new IHR and Pandemic Treaty would become law to be enforced by each and every country by WHO in 2024.

If approved, the members of WHO would just have passed a ”rule” eliminating a key human right, peoples right to decide over their bodies.

There is not much time to lobby against this “rule-based order”. Do whatever you can to have your government vote against this tyrannical power grab  — which would put humanity into a worldwide open air Health Prison.

If the new IHR and Pandemic Treaty are approved, We, the People, must take the necessary action and massively, in an organized and peaceful fashion, but relentlessly and decisively requesting our governments to Exit WHO, with immediate effect.

*

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

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

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

Featured image is from Reclaim the Net


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

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

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on WHO’s Worldwide Power Grab: Beware of the New International Health Regulation and Pandemic Treaty, a Health Tyranny Never Heard of Before in Human History
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Armenia is one of the oldest continually existing countries (and civilizations) in the world. Spanning millennia and starting with the ancient Kingdom of Urartu nearly 3000 years ago, the now small nation has been limited to the South Caucasus region, particularly after the Turks committed the Armenian Genocide, one of the worst in known history, killing up to 1.5 million Armenians (in addition to well over a million native Greeks and Assyrians).

In such a long span of its undoubtedly magnificent history, Armenia most likely never had a worse “leader” than Nikol Pashinyan. A man who has been promoting closer ties with Turkey instead of Russia since the 1990s pushed his way into power through the so-called “anticorruption” agenda. Pashinyan argued that the supposedly “pro-Russian” (i.e. actually patriotic) government that was in power until 2018 was allegedly “corrupt” and that he would “make things better”.

Well, he certainly changed things since 2018. In just two years of his power, Pashinyan lost most of Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), the complete fall of which was prevented only by Russia’s intervention. For approximately three years, Moscow’s peacekeepers were the only thing standing between the Azeri military and the remaining population of native Armenians. And yet, instead of building closer ties with Russia in order to ensure that whatever was left of Artsakh survives, Pashinyan focused on building phantom “alliances” with the political West, particularly after the latter escalated its crawling aggression against Moscow. The Kremlin was left with a rather difficult choice – either help its historical ally which was (slowly but surely) turning into anything but, or leave Yerevan to its own devices so as not to risk derailing the strategically important rapprochement with Ankara and Baku.

Unfortunately for the Armenian people, things have only gotten considerably worse in recent months. Pashinyan, a Sorosite who came to power by insisting that the government prior to 2018 was allegedly “corrupt” and “autocratic”, turned out to be truly corrupt, while his rule is effectively a dictatorship. His brutal crackdown on protesters is unprecedented, never seen under any of the previous Armenian governments. Any opposition to Pashinyan’s dictatorial rule is being quashed, including through the suppression of free press, one of the principles of “democracy” that he was so insistent on back in 2018, when press freedom actually existed. Pashinyan, once a journalist, is now sending his henchmen to arrest other journalists who oppose his suicidal policies. And yet, no matter how bad his internal schemes are, his foreign policy is far worse. Namely, Pashinyan keeps distancing himself from Russia.

According to his assessment, Yerevan is “ready to join the European Union as early as 2024”. Pashinyan actually said so at this year’s Copenhagen “Democracy” Summit. Such a statement is not only ridiculous to anyone who knows anything about the EU’s current state, but also because of the simple fact that the troubled bloc has long been exposed as a mere geopolitical pendant of NATO. Even the most naively optimistic spectator would laugh at the idea of Armenia joining the EU in 2030, let alone 2024. To put that into perspective, the neighboring Georgia has been trying to join the troubled bloc for over 20 years. In that time, its suicidal pro-Western government managed to lose around 20% of its territory and turn Russia into an enemy, destroying their centuries-old historical alliance. It seems Pashinyan is pushing Yerevan in the exact same direction. Worse yet, he plans to ally himself with Moscow’s other enemies.

Namely, Armenia will appoint a military attaché to the United Kingdom for the first time. This inexplicable move comes at a time when the latter is essentially looking to start a war with Russia. This is even worse than trying to establish closer ties with the EU, as London has no capacity to help Yerevan in any way, be it economic or military assistance. Its only motivation is to hurt Moscow’s interests in the region. However, the Kremlin is not exactly jeopardized by this, while Armenia is the one paying the price of its government’s suicidal tilt towards the political West. Earlier, the Speaker of the Armenian Parliament Alen Simonyan stated that the country is “ready to take a course towards European integration” and that “this will provide it with the greatest security”. However, in around half a decade of Pashinyan in power, Armenia’s security situation has never been this bad, perhaps even worse than during the Armenian Genocide.

Namely, the country is in serious danger of being overrun by Turkey and Azerbaijan. The opposition sees it, which is why protests have been raging for months. According to Garegin Miskaryan, Director of the Democratic Platform Foundation, the country’s geopolitical choice is the central point of contention between the Pashinyan regime and the opposition, as the former chose to focus on the political West without calculating the risks. Miskaryan believes that, in the context of a changing world order and tensions in the region, turning away from Russia is an adventure that could result in disastrous consequences. His concerns are also shared by the Armenian Apostolic Church. Namely, the Head of the northeastern Tavush diocese, Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, demanded Pashinyan’s resignation, supported by everyone at a last week’s rally that involved thousands of people gathered in the center of Yerevan.

“Nikol Pashinyan, we give you an hour to resign. I am ready to meet within this hour and discuss all the conditions for resignation. You no longer have any power in Armenia,” Archbishop stated, adding: “They destroyed the entire security system, from the first day of their rule they turned the Church into a target, struck a blow at the pillars of our identity, denied the fact of the Armenian Genocide, destroyed the educational system, lost Artsakh. But most importantly, for the current authorities, in foreign relations, there is nothing to be said anywhere, not at any negotiating table.”

It should be noted that Archbishop Galstanyan certainly didn’t do this on his own, as the Catholicos (Church leader) of All Armenians Karekin II gave his blessing for the procession that the Archbishop has been leading since May 4. It started precisely in his Tavush region, when Galstanyan announced protests in Yerevan (starting from May 9) against Pashinyan’s border delimitation agreement with Azerbaijan. The heads of all other dioceses of the Armenian Apostolic Church joined the protest, starting processions from their respective regions of Armenia. The Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin, the governing body of the Church, stated that “[we] consider processes carried out under the pretext of border demarcation in the Tavush region of Armenia to be extremely dangerous without comprehensive and guaranteed solutions”. However, Pashinyan outright rejected the Armenian Church’s appeals.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The High Risks of AI and Robotic Weapons

May 18th, 2024 by Bharat Dogra

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Recent tragic experiences in Gaza have confirmed the fears of those scientists who have been warning about the use of AI and robotics in weapon systems and warfare. The use of AI in targeting systems was supposed to facilitate more precise targeting and thereby spare innocent civilians– using Lavender system to target personnel and Gospel system to target buildings where militants were supposed to be located. However this AI technology, used hastily, has actually resulted in a lot of indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

This is not the only recent example of high risk use of AI weapons. Highly scary but fact-based warnings by well-recognized experts have been followed by increasing investments by big powers to strengthen their preparations for developing a wide range of robot weapons.

While some of the civilian applications of robots have also faced increasing criticism regarding fears of large scale unemployment likely to be caused by them in several lines of work in a world already suffering from the adverse impacts of jobless growth, the adverse impacts of military use of robots are likely to be much more dangerous. Yet one of the arguments given for not checking military use of robot weapons (also called lethal autonomous weapons or LAWs) is that work for civilian and military use of robots, particularly in the context of scientific research and innovation, can be closely related. The message given is that as civilian research on robots advances, there will be accompanying implications for military use of robots which cannot be ignored by any leading military power.

Hence on the one hand it is stated that civilian advances in robots by cutting costs and offering other narrow advantages regardless of social costs will inevitably lead to the spread of robotics in civilian applications and on the other hand it is stated that the military possibilities that arise in the context of this technological development will equally inevitably be used by various military establishments in various parts of the world. Of course once the importance of robots for military becomes clearer and clearer, then military establishments will also invest a lot in purely military development of robots. This stage has already been reached in the case of the leading military powers of the world. Hence we are in a situation where despite increasing expert warning about robot weapons, the trend towards development of more and more destructive robot weapons appears unstoppable just now. In the USA several new start-ups are appearing to take forward the increasing willingness of Pentagon to invest in AI weapons, and other powers are unlikely to lag behind.   

As early as 2012-13 as a part of the efforts of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control as many as 270 computing experts, AI experts and engineers had called for a ban on the development and deployment of weapon systems that make the decision to apply violent force autonomously, without any human control. They said clearly that the decision about the application of violent force should not be delegated to machines. These experts questioned how devices controlled by complex algorithms will interact, warning such interactions could create unstable and unpredictable behavior that can initiate or escalate conflicts or cause unjustifiable and serious harm to civilian populations.              

In August 2017 as many as 116 specialists from 26 countries, including some of world’s leading robotics and artificial intelligence pioneers, called on the United Nations to ban the development and use of killer robots. They wrote,

“Once developed lethal autonomous weapons will permit armed conflict to be fought at a scale greater than ever, and at time scales faster than humans can comprehend. These can be weapons of terror, weapons than despots and terrorists use against innocent population, and weapons hacked to behave in undesirable ways.”

“We do not have long to act.” This letter warned. “Once this Pandora’s box is opened, it will be hard to close.”

Ryan Gariepy, the founder of Clearpath Robotics, has said,

“Unlike other potential manifestations of AI which still remain in the realm of science fiction, autonomous weapon systems are on the cusp of development right now and have a very real potential to cause significant harm to innocent people along with global instability.”

The Economist (January 27, 2017) noted in its special report titled ‘The Future of War’,

“At least the world knows what is like to live in the shadow of nuclear weapons. There are much bigger question marks over how the rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning will affect the way wars are fought, and perhaps even the way people think of war. The big concern is that these technologies may create autonomous weapon systems that can make choices about killing humans independently of those who created or deployed them.”

This special report distinguished between three types of AI weapons or robot weapons

(i) in the loop (with a human constantly monitoring the operation and remaining in charge of critical decisions,

(ii) on the loop (with a human supervising machines that can intervene at any stage of the mission) or

(iii) out of the loop (with the machine carrying out the mission without any human intervention once launched).

Fully autonomous robot weapons (third category) are obviously the most dangerous. 

A letter warning against the coming race of these weapons was signed in 2015 by over 1000 AI experts. An international campaign called ‘Campaign to Stop Killer Robots’ is working on a regular basis for this and related objectives. Elon Musk has stated that competition for AI superiority at national level as the “most likely cause of World War 3.”

Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk and many other experts said in a joint statement that, handled badly, AI as weapon could be an existential threat to the human race. 

Paul Scharre, an expert on autonomous weapons, has written that “collectively, swarms of robotic systems have the potential for even more dramatic, disruptive change to military operations.” One possibility he mention is that tiny 3D-printed drones can be formed into smart clouds that can permeate a building or be air-dropped over a wide area to look for hidden enemy forces.

In my novel A Day in 2071 I visualize such a situation in which powerful elites use such a force of very tiny robot soldiers to suppress a revolt of common people.

Several countries are surging ahead with rapid advances in robot weapons. In 2014 the Pentagon announced its ‘Third Offset Strategy’ with its special emphasis on robotics, autonomous systems and ‘big data’. This is supposed to help the USA to maintain its military superiority. In July 2017 China presented its “Next-Generation Artificial-Intelligence Development Plan”, which gives a crucial role to AI as the transformative technology in civil as well as military areas, with emphasis on ‘military-civil fusion’.

The campaign called Stop Killer Robots wants a legally binding international treaty banning LAWs. But there are certain questions whether this can be effective without the big military powers signing it and these big powers are going ahead with big investments in robot weapons. Certainly whatever efforts that are being made at present to check robot weapons should continue and should be strengthened but beyond this it is also important to take a very serious look at why our world, the way it is organized at present, is increasingly found to be incapable of checking some of the most dangerous threats.

*

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

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

Featured image source

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The naming of the former First Deputy Prime Minister Andrei Belousov as the Defense Minister in Russia’s new government is perhaps one of the most important decisions President Vladimir Putin ever made.

It sent shockwaves in diplomatic circles and among people familiar with Belousov’s stellar career.

Namely, the new Defense Minister is not a soldier like his predecessor Sergei Shoigu. The mainstream propaganda machine likes to call him a “technocrat”, but that’s not only far too simplistic.

It also serves as an attempt to denigrate Belousov. In reality, he is one of the architects of Russia’s economic renaissance.

What’s more, his accomplishment is all the more praiseworthy given the circumstances of the political West’s siege. It’s precisely the wise policies of the likes of Belousov and his associates from the country’s other economic and financial institutions that made sure Russia not only survives, but also thrives in a highly contested (and ever more dangerous) geopolitical environment.

The mainstream propaganda machine is even speculating that the replacement of Shoigu is a supposed “reshuffling” of the power structure in the Kremlin, even suggesting that he and Belousov essentially got “demoted”. However, nothing could be further from true.

In reality, both of them effectively got promoted, as Shoigu will be the Head of the Security Council, while Belousov will be leading Russia’s most powerful ministry.

This reshuffling in the Russian government suggests that President Putin certainly realizes the necessity of turning the country’s growing economic power into even greater military might. Namely, the extremely volatile global security situation is being exacerbated by NATO’s incessant aggression against the world. The Kremlin would certainly rather invest any surplus income into other sectors of the economy, but that’s not really possible at a time when the most powerful countries of the political West are simply pushing for a confrontation with Russia.

This includes not only the United States, but also the United Kingdom and other European NATO members such as France and even Germany. There are many other vassals and satellite states that are keen on picking a fight with Moscow, but their military power is far too inconsequential to be taken seriously. Washington DC is not only surrounding the Eurasian giant with military bases and long-range weapons, but is also encouraging the likes of the Neo-Nazi junta to keep attacking Russia and even organizing sabotage and terrorist attacks within the country.

London is even worse in this regard, while Paris and Berlin are also trying to get more directly involved. In such a hostile environment, Moscow is left with no other choice but to be prepared for a direct confrontation of continental and perhaps even global proportions. Precisely Belousov as the new Defense Minister is there to ensure that the transition of Russia’s economy to a war footing runs as smoothly and as efficiently as possible.

In a recent statement during a meeting with his closest associates, President Putin announced that military spending in 2024 will reach 8.7% of the country’s GDP.

If Russia’s nominal GDP of $2.24 trillion is taken into account, it would mean that its military budget will reach a massive $195 billion. However, in reality, the figure is far bigger.

Namely, estimates of Russia’s GDP PPP (which shows the actual size of its economy) stand anywhere between $4.2 and $5.8 trillion, depending on the source. If the latter is taken into account, we can calculate that Russia’s real defense spending transcends the unprecedented $500 billion mark. In an analysis of Moscow’s military budget policies, written more than half a decade ago, I calculated that its real military spending at the time was around $250 billion. This explains why the Kremlin has been able to resist the combined might of NATO powers for so long, while the latest increase is in line with that, especially considering just how much the world has changed ever since.

Namely, ever since they restarted the Cold War, the US and NATO have announced the doubling of their “defense” spending well over a year ago, despite the fact that such a move could easily lead them into bankruptcy. Last year, I argued that Russia would be left with no choice but to rebuild its Soviet military power, which is precisely what’s happening with the latest government reshuffling. Terrified of this prospect, the political West was determined to prevent Moscow’s previous 2030 military program. However, all they’ve managed to accomplish is that the Kremlin adopted a more proactive strategic doctrine. Worse yet (for NATO), the massive increase in Russian military spending will not only speed up the current rearmament program, but it will also incorporate previously frozen projects, such as the new advanced IRBM (intermediate-range ballistic missile) that Moscow tested recently. Such weapons put the entire European NATO in range of Russia’s unrivaled long-range missiles.

In addition, the massively expanded manufacturing capacity of its military industry means that everything from infantry weapons and equipment to tanks, armored vehicles, attack helicopters, fighter jets and even space-based assets are produced in greater numbers than seen in decades. When it comes to tactical fighting capabilities, the Russian military has massively expanded its drone and electronic warfare (EW) capabilities. The now legendary ZALA “Lancet” drones are not only being improved incrementally, but are also getting domestic competition which is further pushing the development of such systems. The drones are now longer-ranged than ever, as evidenced by regular drone strikes on the Kiev regime forces even 100 km away from the frontlines. These unmanned systems are a perfect alternative to the much more expensive long-range missiles that should be reserved for much more high-priority targets. And yet, Moscow also massively increased the production of such weapons.

This is particularly true for hypersonic weapons that have proven to be immune to NATO’s air and missile defenses.

Worse yet for the political West, it’s simply unable to match Russia in the development of such missiles.

Even the US is lagging decades behind the Kremlin in this regard. Russia also adapted regular strike aircraft to carry hypersonic weapons (they were previously limited only to the modified superfast, high-flying MiG-31 jets). This has significantly expanded its already potent strike capabilities against NATO. At the same time, Moscow keeps upgrading other high-tech systems, such as its virtually unrivaled electronic warfare (EW) assets, as well as new directed energy weapons (DEW). Many of the latter were just prototypes for decades, but as their usefulness on the battlefield is being proven on a daily basis, an increase in funding has finally put them in mass production. This will help Russia create an unmatched fighting force that will rely even more on various high technologies.

Namely, as automation and technological prowess take the lead over the human factor, this new approach will both increase the overall capabilities of the Russian military and reduce the need for massive increases in manpower.

As former US Army Colonel Douglas McGregor stated, the result is that the Eurasian giant’s forces are now more capable than they were in the 1980s. To put that into perspective, the Soviet Union was allocating up to 14% of its GDP on military spending, which was well over twice that of the Russian defense budget previously projected for 2024 (around 6% of GDP). In other words, Moscow is spending much less and investing several times less resources and manpower to accomplish the same or greater tactical and strategic military power than was the case during the (First) Cold War, when the USSR reached its peak. At the same time, the Russian economy is more robust than ever before. NATO will surely regret its decision to wake up the sleeping Bear.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, suffered an assassination attempt on May 15th. The politician was shot during a visit to the city of Handlova, being hospitalized in serious conditions. According to the latest updates, however, his surgery was successful, and he is expected to recover well.

The attacker was arrested and then identified as Juraj Cintula, 71 years old. Cintula was described by the media as a poet and member of the “Progressive Slovakia” party, which is opposition to Fico. He confessed to the police that he shot Fico due to political agenda disagreements, further stating that his shots were aimed “against Russian-Slovak relations.”

The aggressor’s pro-Ukrainian fanaticism makes it clear what is behind the attack: the desire to stop Fico’s sovereigntist policies. Since returning to power in October 2023, the prime minister has taken a series of measures to protect Slovak national interests amid the anti-Russian madness that is currently affecting the EU and NATO.

Described as “pro-Russia” by Western media, Fico has been a critic of the military aid to Kiev, as well as admitting that the war did not start in 2022, but “in 2014, when Ukrainian Nazis and fascists started murdering the Russian population of Donbass.”

This is Fico’s third term. Previously, he governed Slovakia between 2006 and 2010 and between 2012 and 2018. His policies are seen as aligned with left-wing nationalism, mixing strong patriotism and social concerns – what the Western media often calls “populism”. Fico is a social democrat who prioritizes Slovak interests over EU and NATO agendas – which is enough for these organizations to see him as an enemy.

Being a strong critic of American military influence in Europe, Fico adopted a pro-peace stance in the current conflict. He correctly identifies Ukraine as being responsible for the conflict due to its genocidal actions in Donbass, which is why the Slovak prime minister rejects any possibility of supporting Kiev. His policies have broad popular support as friendship between Slovaks and Russians is extremely strong.

“Russophilia” is common among Slovak citizens, who preserve the memory of the Second World War, when their territory was liberated by the Red Army. Brainwashing and fascist historical revisionism, which affected Ukraine, the Baltics, Poland and other Eastern European countries, do not appear to have been successful in Slovakia. Fico’s election and popularity reflect this.

Fico’s foreign policy, focused on friendship with Russia, is not only the explanation for the assassination attempt – according to the criminal himself – but also a key factor in understanding why some international actors are interested in removing the Slovak prime minister. Fico has advocated for Ukraine to remain outside NATO, stating that Kiev’s membership is a risk to European security. He advocates Ukrainian neutrality, which is one of the points also demanded by Moscow in its peace terms.

In practice, Fico represents a dissident position in NATO and the EU, as does Viktor Orban, in Hungary.

There is fear on the part of NATO and the Kiev regime that this dissent will begin to grow. With Ukraine losing the war and Western citizens seeing their tax money wasted in assisting the Kiev regime, it is possible that dissident politicians will start to be elected, which would be terrible for Western interests.

In this sense, it is very likely that the attack was not just a voluntary act by a Russophobic “lone wolf”. It is necessary to investigate whether there was international involvement and whether foreign agents financed or in any way influenced the attack. Knowing that there are groups interested in removing Fico, it is possible that there is a big plot behind the case.

It must also be remembered that recently there have been cases of terrorism outside Ukrainian territory involving the Kiev’s security service. Russian authorities have already identified Ukrainian participation in the Crocus City Hall attack, for example. In the same vein, on April 26, the Russian Embassy in Brasília suffered a bomb attack threat that generated a major police operation, paralyzing activities around the embassy for several hours.

At the time, Brazilian political analyst Raphael Machado commented in an article that the Kiev regime could be preparing a wave of attacks against Russian and pro-Russian targets outside Ukraine. He recalled on the occasion that there are even heads of state on the Ukrainian kill list, such as Brazilian president Lula da Silva, who’s included in Kiev’s “Myrotvorets” website.

Knowing that Kiev openly wants to kill “pro-Russian” politicians, Slovak authorities must expand their investigations beyond the country’s borders.

*

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

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Last Wednesday marked the 76th anniversary of the great tragedy of Palestine. A day when hundreds of thousands of homes were destroyed and desecrated, their peaceful inhabitants killed or expelled and for what? The crime of Palestinian people was their vulnerability. They could not counter the aggression of Zionist militias. They were the original inhabitants of this Holy Land. They did not believe in any Nazi ideology, they had nothing to do with any crimes against the Jewish people. Muslims, Christians and Jews were living peacefully in this Holy Land. The church, the mosque and wall had coexisted.

Humanity begins at home. A sanctuary that provides love and care to nurture a generation but sadly several generations of Palestinian people have been deprived of this basic human right. A refugee camp can never become a home.

What the world has been witnessing since last October is like a recall of this great tragedy. A second Nakba where Gazans are being deprived of their homes.

Most of our generation has recently become aware of the Palestinian cause but in reality this is a 76 year long continuous tale of unilateral aggression.

This serves as an example of how manipulative our sources of information are and how many other atrocities that are hidden from general human consciousness. We have been chasing one shadow after another with out actually realising our true adversaries.

If we follow the “controlled” trends of our global mainstream media as well as social media, climate crises would be at the top of the list; from academia to the vendors sitting at a tea stall we are discussing this imminent threat, pseudo-representatives of the young generation are cursing the elders for destroying the future but oddly praising the banks for being instrumental in transitioning to an eco-friendly future. The ugly truth is that institutions like World Economic Forum (WEF) and their proposed solutions like carbon exchange will only ensure the ever increasing profits of the mega corporations while the suffering of humanity and environmental pollution will further increase. Climate has always been changing and we need to adapt accordingly. The biggest polluters are the global war machines and the mega corporation, don’t put a humble farmer on the stake. Why are we so gullible? Why have we forgotten about the population crises? How supposedly people would resort to eating each other due to the immense scarcity of food by the early 2000 or how we are all going to die from the beaming radiation penetrating from the gaps in the ozone layer?

The “powers that be” have figured out that fear is the best motivation for masses because we have this “self preservation” instinct that takes charge when we perceive a threat that is deadly.

Carrot or the stick just don’t provide such a kick; any how, there are certain strings that even the people at the very top can’t control. It seems to me that Israel, the illegitimate child of these fearmongers has come under the spotlight. Like a conman, this apartheid state is becoming uncomfortable from this unwanted attention. One of the ugly scars on its hideous underbelly is the Jewish law of return.

Israeli law of return is no law and there is no returning.

It’s an instrument of ethnic cleansing, land grab, loot and plunder.

They are not returning but forcing themselves upon an innocent population.

Law of return is not a Jewish belief but the belief of a fringed minority, an extremist group called Zionists.

They do not represent Judaism. In 1950 this illegality was falsely termed a law, according to which “every Jewish person has a right to Israeli citizenship and a claim to the land of Palestine.”

They had already committed Nakba, displaced millions and settled hundreds of thousands of people but they wanted an instrument for perpetual land grab.

Later on in the 70s this law was amended to make sure only a certain minority might benefit from it.

Judaism is a religion, not a settlement if you follow its ideology you can be a Jew, you don’t have to relocate to follow its teachings.

Moses, peace be upon him, was against the oppressor and struggled for the oppressed, which the Pharaoh is chasing these new age settlers. Rather they are lured by free housing provided by the Zionist lobby.

A movement that started at the end of 19th century cannot claim absolute authority over a religion almost 4,000 years old. Specially when the original inhabitant of Palestine, whether Muslim, Christian or Jew, have more claim over the descent of Israelites then people of Eastern European descent.

There is no doubt in the hardships faced by Jewish people. It is wrong to judge, penalise and punish a community as a whole specially when you’re talking about a group of people with such diversity as the Jewish people.

It sickens me to my core when some ignorant keyboard warriors post pictures of innocent victims of global power politics, people who suffered in the Nazi war camps, they absolutely deserve our sympathy and to celebrate their suffering is incredibly evil.

Hitler and his movement was not based on any religious identity rather it was a nationalistic idealogy based on the superiority of the Arian race.

Like any leader, he tried to use every emotion to his advantage. Germans hate for Jews was based on the biases that most Europeans had against Jewish people but after the loss of the previous war, many Germans blamed the Jewish people for their defeat because it was the Jewish Zionist lobby that brought America into the war against the Germans.

If law of return is a scar, the tumor hiding inside this scar is the Balfour Declaration.

The Balfour Declaration is drenched in so much misery, suffering and deceit that no article can fully explain its treachery.

Germany had the upper hand in the First World War. Its Uboats had surrounded England, if the United States had remained neutral, the outcome of the war would have been much different. When the British crown was under immense burden, a shadowy group of international bankers dictated this declaration and changed the course of history.

So even before the tragedy of the holocaust, this evil plan was conceived to rob the people of Palestine of their homes.

Even though the British government had declared to safeguard the rights of local Palestinian population, Zionists not only attacked the local population they also attacked the hand that fed them.

The Bombing of the King David Hotel

The British administrative headquarters was housed in this building and it’s a known fact that Irgun a Zionist militia was responsible for this attack. They had disguised themselves as Arabs, such acts of terrorism persuaded the British to leave the Holy Land in a haste.

Zionist use of propaganda and deception is evident in the recent escalation. The story of beheaded Jewish babies is a prime example of this deception. They control the global economy and countries like Pakistan are enslaved by a dubious debt so we are reluctant even to verbally condemn the Zionist regime.

We need to become self-reliant in order to support this righteous cause. We should support “made in Pakistan” products and become part of the global BDS movement.

Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions is a way the masses can get the attention of global powers. In our recent history, this BDS movement was instrumental in getting the people of South Africa their basic rights.

Awareness is the key. We should not lose focus of this tragedy.

Gaza, this small strip of land, has been leveled by bombs and innocent civilians are being starved to death. The Zionist are not even letting the much needed humanitarian aid to reach them. They deserve our attention, our sympathy and our loyalty.

If this fire is not contained, it won’t end in Palestine; this fire will engulf every home on this planet. We are not dealing with a fringe minority. It’s a state armed to teeth with nuclear weapons.

Peace in Palestine is not essential for Peace in the Middle East but it is necessary for global peace.

May Allah have mercy on the deceased and help with victims of this Zionist aggression.

*

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

Featured image: Where Have All the Flowers Gone – by Mr. Fish

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

The shooting of Robert Fico, Prime Minister of Slovakia, on May 15th was a clear move by hidden forces around the world that represent global finance, to intimidate all politicians and leaders, and determine the fate of humanity. The shooting of Prime Minister Fico was an unmistakable act of war.

This war has been launched in secret against those who have worked to reject the World Health Organization’s infamous Pandemic Treaty, a false treaty created by organizations pretending to be governments, that provides the rich and powerful unlimited powers.

It does so by creating opaque multinational institutions run in secret which usurp the rights of the citizens, of local governments, of nation states, and of all other institutions of civil society that refuse to bow before the puppets and puppy dogs that are propped up by hidden hands of the money changers.

The WHO Pandemic Treaty will do so specifically through revised “International Health Regulations” that introduce a modern form of slavery.  

We may not understand, or agree, with everything Prime Minister Robert Fico, has said and done, but we should be clear as to the message we have been sent through his shooting. 

It is a fact that Slovakia has rejected the Pandemic Treaty and that the administration of Prime Minister Fico has launched investigations into the corruption surrounding the COVID-19 operation, the vaccine regime, and that he has personally called for investigations of the deaths that have resulted from those vaccines.

Those moves were connected with efforts to reject global mandates for the control of energy and the economy supposedly in order to prevent climate change. Those mandates are not aimed at protecting the environment, but rather at creating absolute dependency on multinational corporations and banks for survival, for all the citizens of the world.

 

Click here to watch the video

This shooting is an act of war not unlike the shooting of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary on June 28, 1914, almost exactly 110 years ago in Sarajavo, just to the south of Slovakia.

This event is tied to both globalist efforts to destroy civil society and to render all inhabitants of the earth as slaves, and tied to nationalist battles between NATO states like Germany, Britain, and the US, and Russia and its allies and associates. We do not know the full story yet but we can be sure, as the old saying goes, that all wars are bankers’ wars.

The cancerous growth of private equity and investment banks that has captured the government of the United States, and that represents a handful of the richest families has once again crossed the Rubicon in its campaign to destroy humanity and we can be certain that they are making it clear to the entire world through this attack that any political figure who dares to oppose their campaign to enforce the universal slavery that they will affect by seizing control of food supplies, energy, transportation, information, money and land—and combining that operation with the control of the human mind through mindless entertainment and news, and the human body, through vaccines and foodstuffs, will be extirpated.

I look around at the other candidates for president, expecting them to recognize the danger inherent in this declaration of war, hoping that they will denounce this crime, that they will expose its purpose and that they will stand with me against the rule of global finance. But sadly, this attack has had, so far, the intended effect of increasing even more the already towering cowardice of politicians.

Yet, this shall not stand!

I speak to the citizens of the United States, and to the citizens of the world.

To my fellow citizens of the United States of America, I call on you all to recognize this declaration of war for what it is: a war of the few against humanity itself. We must stand up against this rule by a handful of the rich on their yachts, their private islands and their jet planes, and we must reject their push to destroy our bodies through false international agreements that neuter nation states like the WHO Pandemic Treaty.

That means that our entire defense and intelligence system must be transformed, rebuilt from the ground up, starting today, so as to defend the citizen and to resist oppression by the powerful. It matters not if it be but a handful of the brave who will lead the first charge against great odds.

I promise you that we will be there with you, and that there will be others who will follow you. Go forward bravely and transform through your courageous acts the very firmament that shelters our humble lives.

Security and defense will no longer consist of the protection of profits for the rich and powerful or the promotion of multinational banks and corporations over citizens and over nature itself. Remember that most of those multinational banks and corporations behind these attacks, although they may seem to be “American” are in fact incorporated abroad, pay little or no taxes, and their stock is held by the wealthy few, psychopaths who have only contempt for local governance and sovereignty. Why should our children shed their blood, or other’s blood, to generate profits for the few at our expense?

No, security must be entirely about protecting the minds, the bodies, the intellectual autonomy, and the spiritual integrity of the citizens of our country in accord with the words and the import of the Constitution.

That means, fellow soldiers, that you are entrusted to defend the people, not the rich, and it means that those orders that task you with promoting or defending the totalitarian regime of the pandemic must be rejected and, when necessary, a new chain of command that represents the people in accord with the Constitution must be established. You, fellow soldiers, are sworn to defend the Constitution and, through it, our citizens. There is not a single word about the privately held “World Health Organization,” billionaires, investment banks, private equity, or the Democratic and Republican parties to be found anywhere in the Constitution.

Once we are clear that the United States is a constitutional republic that reports to the citizens in a democratic manner, then we will be ready to clean house, to cut all ties with the financial interests who have taken over wide swaths of our government, and to respond effectively against the war on human sovereignty represented by this attack on an individual politician. Similar attacks are taking place right now in the United States as well.

To the citizens of the world, I ask for cooperation. We must form an international alliance against this full-blown techno-fascism, and we must fight on every front against these powers who strive to reduce citizens to idiocy through foolish education and insipid journalism and to pump their bodies full of poisons using foods, drinks, medicines, and the very air that we breathe.

We must do so without falling pray to the canny political operators who would trick us into joining movements that are controlled by those very same financial interests who would slaughter us.

Join with us today, not as part of a corrupt alliance system that brings profits to the merchants of death, but rather as part of an alliance of the citizens of the earth, everywhere, who stand for truth, for freedom, for sovereignty and for intellectual, spiritual, and bodily integrity of the citizen at every level.

Do join me, join us, in condemning this attack on Prime Minister Robert Fico, and also join me in organizing the next stage of citizens’ resistance based on America’s most sacred text, the Declaration of Independence. That Declaration of Independence states, based on natural law dating back to the distant past of humanity,

“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce the citizens under absolute despotism, it is the citizens’ right, it is their duty, to throw off such a government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

*

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

This article was originally published on Fear No Evil.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source