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.
***
Previously undisclosed details behind the July 28 phone call between President Joe Biden and China’s Xi Jinping have been revealed Thursday, wherein the Chinese leader urged “Now isn’t the time for a bull-blown crisis.”
A fresh Wall Street Journal report relates that while Xi warned Biden of unspecified consequences should House Speaker Nancy Pelosi follow through with her visit to Taiwan, making her the highest US official to do so in 25 years, he stressed he had no intention of entering a war with the United States. Citing people briefed on the call, Xi emphasized that both sides must “maintain peace and security” while reiterating Beijing’s longstanding position on the Taiwan question.
Of course, the call failed to prevent Pelosi’s visit to Taipei, which in turn sparked over a week of unprecedented People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills encircling the island, effectively erasing the median line which separates the Taiwan Strait.
The WSJ details that “Mr. Xi decided to talk to Mr. Biden to minimize the risks of a conflict with the U.S., according to the people familiar with the decision-making process.” The main public messaging from Xi and his foreign policy officials was to warn the US that it is “playing with fire” in stoking pro-independence feelings.
Beijing in the lead-up to the crisis thought a last-ditch personal appeal by Xi was worth it, even though “China’s foreign-policy establishment has historically been careful about scheduling leader-to-leader engagements, concerned about a loss of face should the other side do something contrary to Beijing’s interests soon after the bilateral exchange.”
The WSJ report notes further that the ultra-provocative ballistic missile launch wherein 11 projectiles were fired into waters off Taiwan, some having even flown directly over the island, was just as much Xi showing strength to the domestic populace as it was a threatening message to Taiwan pro-independence forces.
It remains according to the Journal, that Xi in ordering such large-scale military exercises sought to warn of the high cost associated with any future trips to the self-ruled island by US officials, or even other world leaders:
Beijing worries that Mrs. Pelosi’s visit could trigger a “domino effect” of other world politicians traveling to Taipei, boosting its international standing and potentially encouraging a declaration of independence, according to the people with knowledge of Chinese thinking.
#GTVoice: China can calmly decide how to punish Pelosi based on the investigation results, striking precise blows step by step and making Pelosi fully feel the lasting pain and loss of Chinese sanctions. https://t.co/yqjOGVuLuw
The report also concludes that “Even though Beijing’s long-stated goal is to bring Taiwan under its rule, the people said, its focus for now remains preventing the self- governed island from moving toward formal independence.”
This week, Taiwan’s main opposition party Kuomintang began a controversial “fact-finding” trip to the mainland. KMT vice-chairman Andrew Hsia has described it as aiming toboost cross-strait communication; however, it has limited influence in Taipei and the trip has been met with angry condemnation from rival Taiwan politicians.
As “punishment”, so far the Chinese government has issued personal sanctions on Pelosi, and more importantly has canceled a series of bilateral talks ranging from energy to climate to military. The heretofore military-to-military dialogue was widely seen as of prime importance, with the risk now having grown of the potential for unintentional conflict or miscalculation as US warships continue patrolling waters near China.
Meanwhile, this about summarizes where things now stand…
The US “is vowing to continue sailing warships through the Taiwan Strait and to conduct air operations in the region in response to Chinese military drills” around Taiwan.
Translation: The US will respond to China’s response to US provocations by continuing to provoke China.
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.
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.
***
A report published last week on revamping the Government of Canada’s digital infrastructure states that the next step to making services more convenient is to introduce a federal “Digital Identity Program.”
Details of the program were scarce in the publication titled Canada’s Digital Ambition 2022 which was signed off by President of the Treasury Board Mona Fortier and the Chief Information Officer of Canada Catherine Luelo.
Citing the pandemic, the report outlines how a federal framework would also be integrated with provincial digital identities.
“The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for government services to be accessible and flexible in the digital age. The next step in making services more convenient to access is a federal Digital Identity Program, integrated with pre-existing provincial platforms,” the report explained.
“Digital identity is the electronic equivalent of a recognized proof-of-identity document (for example, a driver’s license or passport) and confirms that ‘you are who you say you are’ in a digital context.”
Steps currently underway to implement the program include “developing a common and secure framework to digital identity” and “launching public consultations on a federally managed digital identity framework.”
When first appointed to the position by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Fortier’s mandate letter for the Treasury Board included a specific directive to work “towards a common and secure approach for a trusted digital identity platform to support seamless service delivery to Canadians across the country.”
As exclusively reported by True North in May, the Trudeau government revealed that it was working with airlines to require “digital identity documents” and biometric data like facial recognition as boarding requirements.
Currently, the Liberals are facing calls from the opposition to ditch the ArriveCAN application citing airport backlogs and privacy concerns.
Canada’s privacy commissioner Philippe Dufresne was prompted to launch an investigation into the app to see whether it violated any laws or improperly collected the personal information of Canadians.
During a June House of Commons information and ethics committee, former privacy commissioner Daniel Therrien also told MPs that there is a potential for digital identity to be “harmful to privacy” if designed incorrectly.
“Digital ID, like all technologies, can be helpful and privacy protective or harmful to privacy depending on how it is designed. It is certainly conceivable that digital ID could enhance the verification process and the authentication process, allowing citizens to have access to services,” responded Therrien.
“It is certainly possible that digital ID would lead to the data being available to many players or actors, corporate or governmental, that should not have access to all of this data, but it doesn’t have to be designed that way.”
*
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.
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.
***
Children, even some who are too young for school, know you can’t make a baby without sperm and an egg. But a team of researchers in Israel have called into question the basics of what we teach children about the birds and the bees, and created a mouse embryo using just stem cells.
It lived for eight days, about half a mouse’s gestation period, inside a bioreactor in the lab.
In 2021 the research team used the same artificial womb to grow natural mouse embryos (fertilised from sperm and eggs), which lived for 11 days. The lab-created womb, or external uterus, was a breakthrough in itself as embryos could not survive in petri dishes.
If you’re picturing a kind of silicone womb, think again. The external uterus is a rotating device filled with glass bottles of nutrients. This movement simulates how blood and nutrients flow to the placenta. The device also replicates the atmospheric pressure of a mouse uterus.
Some of the cells were treated with chemicals, which switched on genetic programmes to develop into placenta or yolk sac. Others developed into organs and other tissues without intervention. While most of the stem cells failed, about 0.5% were very similar to a natural eight-day-old embryo with a beating heart, basic nervous system and a yolk-sac.
In the latest study, the scientists started with collections of stem cells. The conditions created by the external uterus triggered the developmental process that makes a fetus. Although the scientists said we are a long way off synthetic human embryos, the experiment brings us closer to a future where some humans gestate their babies artificially.
Each year over 300,000 women worldwide die in childbirth or as a result of pregnancy complications, many because they lack basic care. Even in wealthy countries, pregnancy and childbirth is risky and healthcare providers are criticised for failing mothers.
There is an urgent need to make healthcare more accessible across the planet, provide better mental health support for mothers and make pregnancy and childbirth safer. In an ideal world every parent should expect excellent care in all aspects of motherhood. This technology could help treat premature babies and give at least some women a different option: a choice of whether to carry their child or use an external uterus.
In the last few years, scientists have learned more about how to coax stem cells to develop into increasingly sophisticated structures, including ones that mimic the structure and function of human organs (organoids). Artificial human kidneys, brains, hearts and more have all been created in a lab, though they are still too rudimentary for medical use.
The issue of whether there are moral differences between using stem cells to produce models of human organs for research and using stem cells to create a synthetic embryo are already playing out in law courts.
One of the key differences between organoids and synthetic embryos is their potential. If a synthetic embryo can develop into a living creature, it should have more protection than those which don’t.
Synthetic embryos do not currently have potential to actually create a living mouse. If scientists did make human synthetic embryos, but without the potential to form a living being, they should arguably be treated similarly to organoids.
Some countries (for example Australia) have taken the position that synthetic embryos such as “blastoids” (which resemble five-to-six-day-old embryos) should be treated like natural embryos, because of similarities in structure. Other countries (such as the UK, the US, Japan) treat synthetic embryos as different from embryos because they can’t currently produce a live baby.
Another important legal issue is the source of stem cells and consent. The synthetic mouse embryo creators used stem cells from early embryos.
However, in the future it might be possible to make synthetic embryos from induced pluripotent stem cells (IPS). The worst case scenario would be a person donates a skin cell to research into producing organs to cure disease but this is used without their knowledge or consent to produce synthetic embryos.
Cloning
IPS cells are created by taking a mature cell (such as a skin cell) from a living or dead person and applying treatments which drive it backwards to a more immature state. If the cell could be driven all the way back to an embryonic stem cell, it may one day be possible to use IPS cells to make viable embryos.
That embryo would be a clone of the cell donor. The public and scientists have huge concerns about human cloning.
But it has been possible to clone a human being using a different process called nuclear transfer, for 25 years. Nuclear transfer created Dolly the Sheep in 1997 and a monkey in 2018. In the late 90s and early 2000s, a flurry of laws introduced around the world successfully banned human cloning.
We should not let our fears about cloning stand in the way of crucial research. The benefits could make organ donor waiting lists a thing of the past, save premature babies and give women an option to have children a different way. Cloning, or any other unethical use of the technology, can be prevented by regulation.
*
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.
Julian Savulescu is a Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, University of Oxford
Christopher Gyngell is a Research Fellow in Biomedical Ethics, The University of Melbourne
Tsutomu Sawai is an Associate Professor, Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University
Featured image: Synthetic mouse. Weizmann Institute of Sciences
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.
***
Days after Maryland state legislators introduced a bill aimed at protecting pollinators by restricting the use of neonicotinoid insecticides in residential areas, a group of representatives of Bayer, Syngenta, CropLife America, Maryland Farm Bureau, and the Maryland Department of Agriculture planned and executed a counter-offensive. Emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know show the strategies they used over the next two and a half years.
The emails are a rare window into the pesticide industry’s playbook for trying to keep a group of controversial pesticides on the American market. The industry group touted pesticide industry efforts to protect pollinators, collaborated closely with the Maryland Department of Agriculture, and tried to recruit a bee expert to testify on their behalf, among other efforts to defeat the bills.
The Maryland Pollinator Protection Act was signed into law in May 2016, after a stronger bill died in committee in 2015. A 2014 version limited neonic purchases to certified pesticide applicators, but was withdrawn by its sponsor.
Although the 2015 and 2016 bills required labeling all neonic-treated seeds or plants sold in the state, and limited the sale of neonic insecticides to certified applicators (with exceptions for farmers and veterinarians), the 2016 bill passed only after legislators removed the labeling requirement, exempted pet treatments, lice and bedbug treatments, and indoor pest control products, and exempted people working under the supervision of certified pesticide applicators and farmers.
The law effectively banned neonic insecticide use except for certified pesticide applicators, farmers, and veterinarians, effective January 1, 2018. It imposed a $250 fine for first-time violations.
Delegate Anne Healey and five cosponsors introduced the original bill, HB 1285, to the Maryland state house on Feb. 7, 2014. Five days later, on February 12, Lynne Hoot, who was then a lobbyist for CropLife America and the executive director of Maryland Grain Producers and Maryland Agricultural Associates, a consulting firm that lobbied and provided public relations for agricultural associations, emailed a small group detailing “what I think we need to kill HB 1285.”
Recipients included staff from neonic producers Bayer and Syngenta, lobbyists for CropLife America and the Maryland Farm Bureau, and staff from Maryland Department of Agriculture. Hoot, who said she was prompted to do so by Bayer’s Director of State Affairs Allen Ayers, offered to coordinate the “circulation of supporting documentation” to oppose the bill.
The industry group outlines their key strategies
Hoot asked the group how similar bills in other states fared and what information was used to defeat them. She also suggested the group cite research that implicated non-pesticide causes of U.S. pollinator decline, and frame the issue as one for the Environmental Protection Agency, not individual states, to decide.
“Anything we can showcase that EPA is on top of this will help us,” she wrote, before assigning “action items” to the Maryland Department of Agriculture, CropLife America and others. Hoot also noted that some people in the nursery industry said they supported the bill, because it might bring them new business. “I did ask if they were OK with the precedent of the state legislature managing their business one product at a time, hopefully they will reconsider,” she wrote.
There are few windows into the pesticide industry’s strategies to counter pollinator concerns, but many of the Maryland industry group’s tactics are reflected in an internal 2017 CropLife America memo published in The Intercept’s 2020 article The Pesticide Industry’s Playbook for Poisoning the Earth. These strategies include building strong relationships with regulatory agencies, positioning the pesticide industry as a defender of bee health, and emphasizing non-pesticide factors like disease and varroa mites as the most significant causes of pollinator decline.
Excerpt from Hoot’s “action items” in her February 2014 email. This point, which references the Maryland Green Industries Council (MAGIC) lobbying organization and the Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts (MASCD), discusses finding the best people to talk to legislators about the bill, and to “show we care” about pollinator habitat
In the next two years, the industry group’s mailing list swelled to include 32 representatives from pest and landscaping companies, nurseries, and farms, plus chemical giants Dow, Monsanto, DuPont, and GrowMark. Some were registered lobbyists, and several on the email list represented companies that manufactured neonics. Maryland Agricultural Associates’ lobbyist Lindsay Dodd took over group facilitation from Hoot. (Dodd changed her last name to Thompson after the summer of 2015.)
Dodd organized conference calls to strategize about who should testify to the state’s General Assembly, what talking points to use, and what delegates to lobby at key points in the bills’ progression, according to the emails.
Industry groups sought “industry friendly” message from U. Maryland bee researcher
On February 10, 2015, a CropLife America representative said he asked Bayer staff to recommend “any local bee expert that may be available to testify and be able to deliver an industry friendly message.” They suggested recently retired University of Maryland entomologist and bee expert Galen Dively.
Although a Bayer representative told the group Dively was “willing and available to help out” later that day, Dively never testified, he confirmed to U.S. Right to Know.
“As I recall, the opportunity to testify did not come up,” Dively said. “They probably sensed that I was not that negative on removing neonics from the homeowner uses. I would have been supportive of keeping neonic labeled uses for ag crops but that was not the main focus of this act.”
Industry’s talking points
On February 24, 2015, Dodd circulated some revised talking points for the upcoming house hearing. These points discussed the costs the state and its nursery industry would incur from labeling individual plants, determining whether plants from out-of-state were treated with neonics, testing plant material for neonics to enforce the law, and reduced sales due to a “warning label” on a product.
“Each speaker will likely only have 2-3 minutes and we have a lot to cover. After feedback from the Senate hearing, I think we really need to hammer home the science and be more assertive in refuting the proponents claims,” Dodd wrote.
In the email, Dodd outlined the “main ideas” for the industry group to present:
“-The label language is completely false according to peer reviewed science.
-Neonicotinoids are safe when used according to the labeled directions. These labels are legally binding and EPA has already updated them to further protect pollinators.
-No peer reviewed, un-debunked, scientific study using realistic environmental doses has demonstrated lethal or sub-lethal effects of neonicotinoids on pollinators.”
Anti-neonic advocates refuted these points in their testimony.
“Major knowledge gaps remain regarding the fate of neonics in the environment and their toxicity to non-target organisms,” University of Maryland Professor Carys Mitchelmore testified in support of the bill in 2015. “However, in the data that does exist, it is clear that the current use of neonicotinoids are likely to be impacting a broad range of non-target taxa, including pollinators and soil and aquatic invertebrates and hence threatens a range of ecosystem services.”
Industry group assigns speakers to deliver talking points during testimony
In the March emails, Dodd included 18 “key points” to make in testimony, including: “Neonicotinoids have never been determined to be the cause of a bee death reported to the Maryland Department of Agriculture.”
The industry group tried to discredit scientific studies that concluded neonics endanger pollinators, and promoted others that found no sublethal effects. Other talking points touted EPA and Congressional Research Service publications that emphasized non-pesticide causes of pollinator decline. One said, “talk about the positive things that industry is doing to understand and enhance pollinator health and habitat.”
By March 9, 2015, the group had assigned speakers to deliver the eighteen “key points” during the house hearing. For example, Mark Schlosberg of the Maryland Association of Green Industries (MAGI) was assigned to deliver this: “Neonicotinoids are selective insecticides that do not target beneficial insects such as bees and earth worms.” Bayer scientists Iain Kelly and Becky Langer-Curry, meanwhile, were assigned to say that “many neonicotinoid products actually help to enhance the health of bees by protecting their habitat and forage,” and speak on “the general chemistry of neonicotinoids, their life-cycle and persistence. Why we started using neonics compared to other classes (without throwing currently registered products under the bus).”
The talking points that Bayer Scientists Iain Kelly and Becky Langer-Curry were assigned to deliver at the hearing included testifying that neonics were better for pollinators than alternative pesticides, and “actually help to enhance the health of bees”
Maryland Department of Agriculture backs industry arguments
The MDA testified in person and in writing against various versions of the Pollinator Protection Act, citing a lack of department resources. For example, in their February 17, 2015 testimony, the MDA estimated they would need $1 million per year to enforce the bill’s neonic-treated plant labeling provision, which the bill did not provide.
The MDA also echoed reasons that were also on the industry group’s list of talking points, including that the bill was unlikely to help pollinators, and it was the wrong avenue for making change.
“To date, MDA has not documented any cases of neonicotinoid insecticides negatively impacting honeybees in Maryland,” they wrote.
The state already inspected honey bee hives, and were making efforts to improve hive health through different avenues, they testified.
“It is our position that EPA has always taken the lead on pesticide registration and labeling issues,” the MDA wrote. “MDA also feels that these restrictions would create confusion in the distribution chain and market place.”
Environmentalists say MDA is too friendly with the pesticide industry
Environmentalists say the emails show clear regulatory capture. “The emails validate what we have seen in so many other instances, where it appears the MD Dept of Agriculture is the mouthpiece for the agro-chemical industry. Remember, this bill had nothing to do with agriculture—it applied to consumer products only. So why was MDA a key opponent in this?” Maryland Pesticide Education Network (MPEN) Coordinator Bonnie Raindrop wrote.
“What is notable is that a lobbyist for the industry [Dodd] was the one leading the charge, actually preparing the strategy against the bill, and telling MDA what to say! This underscores the inappropriateness of allowing MDA to regulate thousands of highly toxic pesticides,” Raindrop wrote.
“MDA has no expertise concerning the public health or environmental impacts of these toxics. Their focus is advancing industrial agriculture. These emails underscore that MDA is a highly industry-captured agency.”
Raindrop and MPEN founder Ruth Berlin advocated for the various Pollinator Protection Act bills. They alerted key legislators to Maryland’s heavy pollinator losses and their related concerns about neonicotinoids, provided data, and lobbied for the bills.
The bill’s success in 2016 wasn’t the end of MPEN’s activity, either. Although the law took effect at the start of 2018, beekeeper allies reported that neonic products were still for sale to the general public in home and garden stores, Raindrop said. When MPEN volunteers checked, staff in about one in every three affected stores said they hadn’t even heard about the law change.
“Then we became aware that MDA was misinterpreting language in the law, which was intended to allow over 100 Restricted Use Product (RUP) retailers to sell neonic pesticides to certified applicators, to allow these RUP retailers to also sell banned consumer products to the public,” Raindrop wrote. “So in 2021, we provided issue education to support passage of a bill that closed this loophole.”
They succeeded in changing the law in 2021.
The Maryland Department of Agriculture did not respond to requests for comment.
The MDA’s actions were not illegal, but conflicted with some of the department’s duties
It is generally not illegal for state departments to work with advocates, including paid lobbyists, to support or oppose legislation, government watchdog group Campaign Legal Center’s Kedric Payne said.
However, the MDA did not clearly disclose it was collaborating with the pesticide industry on its testimony, making it all the more influential, State Senator Clarence Lam (D-Howard and Baltimore counties) said. Lam sponsored the 2016 version of the Pollinator Protection Act.
“I think it carries more weight,” he said, when a state department testifies, compared to an advocacy organization. “We actually, as a legislature, prefer that departments weigh in on bills… because at the end of the day, they’re the ones implementing it,” he said.
However, the MDA testified during a time when it was unusual for state departments to do so, and their strong opposition could have led some legislators to believe that the MDA was providing good information, Lam said, “but it was very clearly slanted and skewed.”
“Most legislators don’t have a background in science. They rely on other information to make decisions,” Lam said.
That can come from other legislators, state department representatives, or outside lobbying organizations like the Farm Bureau.
“The challenge for a lot of my colleagues is that they may not fully recognize or grasp… the more reliable sources of information,” he said. “It is not hard to mislead, whether intentionally or unintentionally, fellow legislators, with information that may be skewed.”
“[The MDA was] not only clearly opposed, but they were working behind the scenes to undermine it,” Lam said.
The MDA met with legislators and fellow opponents, and “put out information that is marginally accurate but carries the weight of the department,” he said.
Lam said he thought the bill would have worked better if it had been enforced by the Maryland Department of the Environment, rather than the Department of Agriculture.
“I am not a big fan of departments and agencies functioning as both the regulator and the advocate or cheerleader for an industry or sector” Lam said, due to the inherent conflicts of interest and the confusion it creates about a department’s role.
“In this instance they were very clearly a cheerleader for the farming industry and much less in their regulator role,” he said.
Other state efforts to enact neonic laws are ongoing
As of May 2020, the Maryland Pollinator Protection Act was one of six neonic-related state laws in the nation. Twenty-eight more were pending at that time, according to a table included in a joint letter that nine state Attorneys General sent to EPA in response to EPA’s neonic registration reviews.
Environmental lobbyist Chris Cowen has helped promote bills to regulate neonics in Minnesota, and said industry tactics are similar across the states.
“Bayer, Syngenta, all the big chemical companies along with the Farm Bureau, along with the big commodity organizations, along with ethanol, they’re all together. They’re all together and they support each other,” he said.
It’s common for those companies and organizations to work together with a state department of agriculture, he said.
“What these big companies are really good at doing are working behind the scenes.,” Cowen said.
One thing that keeps Cowen motivated is that the general public and a good number of legislators support environmental legislation, he said.
“I’ve done a lot of door-knocking and talked to a lot of people, and the average person understands the importance. Clean water [and] healthy soil are what you need to have happy pollinators, and nobody is against that,” he said.
Although Raindrop acknowledged it would have been better for pollinators if the neonic-treated plant labeling portion of the Maryland bill had also passed, she praised the bill that did pass as a “groundbreaking win” that would reduce neonic levels in residential landscapes and set a precedent for other states to pass similar legislation.
“Federally and at the state and local levels, we see this incredibly well-financed industry spending a lot of money to defeat any and all pesticide protections. That requires continual efforts to move protections forward, sometimes incrementally,” she wrote.
“In the arena of pesticides, we are dealing with agencies at the federal and state levels that are industry-captured. And the pesticide industry spends millions to defeat all efforts to put common sense laws in place to protect public health and the environment. It’s a David vs. Goliath battle. But if the Davids are nimble, smart, and work together, sometimes us Davids win,” Raindrop wrote.
*
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.
Abbe Hamilton is an investigative reporter covering neonicotinoid science and policy for U.S. Right to Know.
Maryland’s 2015 and 2014 bills seeking to restrict neonics, which died before a vote
An email thread from February 12-13, 2014 among Maryland agricultural lobbyists, agrichemical company reps, agricultural trade organizations, and the Maryland Department of Agriculture.
An email thread from March 7-10, 2015 among Maryland agricultural lobbyists, agrichemical company reps, agricultural and landscaping trade organizations, and the Maryland Department of Agriculture.
A February 10, 2015 email from CropLife America’s Jeff Case about recruiting a local bee expert.
A February 10, 2015 email in which Bayer’s Allen Ayers says he’s secured a local bee expert.
A February 24, 2015 email from Lindsay Dodd promoting talking points related to the cost of implementing the neonic plant labeling portion of the bill.
University of Maryland Professor Carys Mitchelmore’s 2015 testimony for the Pollinator Protection Act
An email from Carol Holko to Lynne Hoot on February 13, 2014 discussing legal precedents to the neonic bill.
An email from Carol Holko to Lindsay Dodd on February 12, 2015 discussing the MDA’s interpretation of the neonic bill language.
A screenshot of a poll the MDA presented during state senate testimony in 2016 from a recent Managed Pollinator Protection Plan (MP3) conference they held.
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.
***
“We need more rain and we need it now. We need some divine intervention. That’s why I’m asking Utahns of all faiths to join me in a weekend of prayer.” —Utah Governor Spencer Cox
Cloud seeding is perhaps the ultimate silver bullet, in which literal silver in the form of silver iodide is infused into clouds, causing ice crystals to form and water to condense into rain or snow. Cloud seeding is a form of planned weather modification. Most commonly used to increase precipitation as a drought management technique, cloud seeding is also regularly used to clear fog in airports, fight forest fires, suppress hail, and even divert rainfall, as it was used, for example, during the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
The promise of creating rain is highly appealing in the face of increasing water shortages and disruptions to water cycles exacerbated by climate change. While cloud seeding is not a new technology—the first experiments took place in the 1940s—it fell out of favor in the 1980s for being an “unacceptable ethical and environmental hazard.” It is now back on the policy agenda as a climate adaptation strategy. Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and California have all expanded their cloud seeding operations in the past two years in response to the worsening drought. Despite its potential, the risks associated with cloud seeding are high, and there is significant danger that cloud seeding may do more harm than good.
“Human consequences.” As early as 1965, the National Science Foundation called for urgent social science research into the impacts of weather modification, stating, “If the developing techniques of weather and climate modification are to be used intelligently, the human consequences of deliberate or inadvertent intervention need to be anticipated before they are upon us.” But these issues continue to be under-explored. Compared to other forms of geoengineering that have received greater attention and generated morecontroversy—such as expanding research on solar geoengineering—policy discussions about the use (and misuse) of cloud seeding are lacking, even though it has been widely deployed.
How cloud seeding works (Image: Naomi E Tesla/Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0)
Although “controlling the weather” sounds futuristic, cloud seeding has a long history going back to 1946, when General Electric research laboratories caused snow to fall near Mount Greylock in Massachusetts. Since 2000, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which monitors cloud seeding operations in the United States, has recorded over 50 projects. These programs receive significant governmental funding. Utah, which has one of the largest cloud-seeding programs in the United States, spends up to $700,000 annually. (Bizarrely, given Utah’s robust cloud seeding programs, the acting director of the state’s Department of Natural Resource recently seemed to pitch cloud seeding as a new thing to try to save the Great Salt Lake.) China, India, the Russian Federation, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States all have major ongoing research programs.
Policy frameworks regulating the use of cloud seeding exist but are incomplete. For example, each of the Western US states using cloud seeding to supplement natural snowpack has regulations on the appropriate time to conduct cloud seeding, as well as limits on when seeding can be done. These limits are meant to ensure that cloud seeding doesn’t cause flooding. However, broader governance systems designed to address potential risks posed by cloud seeding are not in place.
Without significant engagement with potential risks and unintended consequences, cloud seeding is likely to lead to maladaptation, or “action taken ostensibly to avoid or reduce vulnerability to climate change that impacts adversely on, or increases the vulnerability of other systems, sectors or social groups.”
“Empty promises.” Cloud seeding is emblematic of techno-optimism, or the belief that technological solutions and ingenuity can solve complex issues—an attitude deeply embedded in American political culture. Despite enthusiasm for cloud seeding, the evidence of its effectiveness is at best mixed. In the words of the World Meteorological Organization Expert Team on Weather Modification, “sometimes desperate activities are based on empty promises rather than sound science.”
A new study based on an experiment in Idaho known as SNOWIE provided more promising results, but the authors emphasize that it is primarily through the long-term build-up of snowpack that cloud seeding can contribute to water management, and it is unlikely to work as a short-term solution. As the science of cloud seeding advances, the potential to demonstratively increase precipitation grows, but narrow discussions of the potential efficacy of the technology mask broader conversations about its long-term effectiveness.
Technological fixes can obscure deeper structural drivers of vulnerability like unsustainable water use and unequal distribution of access to water. Political and policy conversations about water use can conflict with strongly held values and beliefs. But unless such questions are front-and-center in policy debates, cloud seeding is likely to reinforce existing inequalities.
Evidence of the inability, or unwillingness of policymakers and the public to engage with these difficult questions is widespread. For example, real estate developers have proposed building at least four large surf lagoons in the Palm Springs desert region of California, despite persistent water shortages. Advocates argue that these “wave resorts” will replace golf courses that are even more water-intensive, but narratives of incremental improvements belie the need for transformational changes and illustrate the level of disconnect between current development patterns and the reality of water shortages.
Surf lagoons might not be any worse than water-guzzling golf courses, but are they really the best idea for water management in arid Palm Springs? (Photo: Visitor7/Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0)
Redistributing risk. While cloud seeding is often described as “creating” rain, it can be more accurately described as moving rain from one location to another, and cloud seeding may simply redistribute risk. Cloud seeding condenses water that is already present in cloud formations. As such, some have argued that cloud seeding cannot impact hydrological cycles at a large scale. But the American Meteorological Society acknowledges that while there is currently no evidence of downwind impacts, these cannot be ruled out, and that “activities conducted for the benefit of some may have an undesirable impact on others.”
Despite claims of only local impacts, cloud seeding is already being coordinated at a regional scale across the Colorado River Basin. If adopted widely, cloud seeding could be used politically to deprive certain regions of rainfall (for example as a weapon of war), or to claim water that would otherwise be more widely distributed. These concerns are not hypothetical: in 2020 China announced its “Sky River Plan” to divert water vapor from the Yangtze River basin to the Yellow River basin, a cloud seeding initiative that would cover an area half the size of India. This raises large governance questions about how to ethically divide water and who controls the sky. Without clear policies, including international policy to address transboundary cases, it is likely that the most powerful actors will benefit at the expense of others.
Certain uncertainties. Proponents claim that there is little to no evidence of environmental or health harms stemming from cloud seeding. However, silver iodide, the chemical most commonly used to seed clouds is known to be toxic and is regulated under the Clean Water Act as a hazardous substance. Some studies suggest that the amount of chemicals used is small and the silver iodide is not biochemically available, rendering it ecologically harmless. However, other studies highlight the potential harms from bioaccumulation, particularly for aquatic life. They show that while overall levels of silver iodide are relatively low, they have exceeded health standards in areas with repeated exposure.
More broadly, the uncertainties that are widely acknowledged in the science of cloud seeding mean that potential harms are not well-understood. The World Meteorological Organization adopted guidelines in 2017 advising members not to perform weather modification activities without considering the high levels of uncertainty in effectiveness and potential harms involved.
Silver bullets are appealing because they present simple solutions to complex problems, but only by embracing complexity can leaders around the world ensure that cloud seeding doesn’t do more harm than good.
*
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.
Laura Kuhl is an Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Urban Affairs and International Affairs. Her research examines climate adaptation and sustainable transitions in the United States and internationally. She is particularly interested in questions of power and equity in processes of transformation across multiple scales from individual decision-making to international policymaking. Current work focuses on climate finance, particularly adaptation finance, energy equity after crises, and transformational adaptation.
Featured image: The Great Salt Lake is currently just a third of its former size, exposing sediment full of toxic chemicals from the region’s mining history that—once dislodged and sent airborne—can turn into toxic dust storms. Utah officials have suggested solving the drought with cloud seeding—and prayer. (Photo: Brigitte Werner)
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.
***
Contemporary Russian politics are too often analysed without sufficient knowledge of Russian history. — Orlando Figes, The Story of Russia, p 268
***
The conflict among nations in Ukraine and the breakaway Donbass oblasts/republics has been magnified in western monopoly media since Russia backed up its security demands. To the extent that people want to ascertain the verisimilitude of media information, people ought to become familiar with the region, its peoples, and the history. With this intention and with an open mind to a viewpoint counter to my orientation (I am decidedly of a socialist orientation, but, I trust, with allegiance to verifiable evidence),
I read The Story of Russia (Metropolitan Books, 2022) by the “bourgeois” historian Orlando Figes.
Thus, it did not surprise me that on page 1, Figes opines,
“Vladimir Putin… managed to look bored. He seemed to want the ceremony to be done as soon as possible.” On page 2, “Putin looked uncomfortable.”
In the introduction more bias is evident; Figes writes of “the Russian annexation of Ukrainian Crimea,” (p 2) “the ‘putsch’ in Kiev, as the Kremlin called the Maidan uprising,” (p 4) “history writing in Russia, since its beginning in medieval chronicles, has been intertwined in mythical ideas,” (p 5) and Putin’s “authoritarian regime.” (p 6) In contemporary understanding, regime is pejorative for a totalitarian/autocratic government.
In the second chapter, “Origins,” Figes says that Putin asserts “the old imperial myth that the Russians, the Ukrainians and the Belarussians were historically one people.” In succeeding chapters, The Story of Russia runs through the intercourse between myriad groups of peoples, the Vikings, Finns, Mongols, Khazars, Turks, Arabs, Germans, French, etc that have intermixed knowledge, languages, cultures, religious beliefs, and commerce with Slavs. Russia has been conquered and has conquered others many times.
Figes lays out an eminently comprehensible historical sequence that led to rule by a revered tsardom with its concomitant corruption along with an exploited and impoverished peasant class. Traditionally, tsarist Russia leaned favorably toward western Europe which did not have the same favorable inclination toward Russia. This changed with Catherine the Great who envisioned Russian greatness stemming from a southern orientation. (p 127)
Serfdom would be identified as holding Russia back in wars and competition with the West. (p 154) The tsar would, when forced, in due course relinquish some powers, such as the establishment of zemstvos (self-government in Russian provinces), but eventually the corruption of the autocratic tsarist class would lead to a revolution that violently deposed the Romanovs. (For a dramatization of the history, see the Netflix series The Last Czars.)
Post-revolution, the Bolsheviks (Majoritarians) emerged victorious over the Mensheviks (Minoritarians). Figes writes that the tsar continued afterwards in “Soviet cults of the Leader.” (p 191)
Whereas Lenin, in his cult, appeared as a human god or saint, a sacred guide for the Party orphaned by his death, the cult of Stalin portrayed him as a tsar, the ‘little-father tsar’ or tsar-batiushka of folklore … (p 225)
Unfortunately, The Story of Russia suffers from being replete with many unsubstantiated claims, rumors, and opinions. One would expect that a book written by a professor of history who specializes in Russia would source most pertinent information, especially information that is debatable. For example, Figes writes of “Nikolai Yezhov, an unscrupulous henchman, who fed Stalin’s paranoid fears.” (p 229) Maybe this is so, but what is his source for a scrupulous reader to scrutinize in order to confirm or deny this? During the Great Terror, Figes writes that in 1937, “1,500 Soviet citizens were shot on average every day…” (p 232) Elsewhere, he relates that the Gulag population reached 2 million prisoners in 1952. (p 250) There is no sourcing to evaluate this information.
Figes is derisory of Joseph Stalin and Russian militarism during World War II:
There was almost no limit to the number of lives that the Stalinist regime was willing to expend to achieve its military goals…. Only by this ruthless disregard for human life can we explain the shocking losses of the Red Army — around 12 million soldiers killed between 1941 and 1945…
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev fares no better in Figes’ estimation:
Khrushchev’s erratic leadership, his tendency to act on intuition and then attack his critics, his meddling in affairs where he lacked expertise, and his dangerous confrontation with the USA in the Cuban Missile Crisis …
It is written as if the confrontation was entirely provoked from the Soviet side, that the John Kennedy administration was not dangerously confronting the Soviet Union. Unmentioned is that, since 1959, the US had had nuclear missiles deployed in Turkiye which bordered the USSR.
Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev was “a grey and mediocre functionary” (p 253) who “had more practical than intellectual capacities.” (p 254)
The Soviet Union would collapse on President Mikhail Gorbachev’s watch. Boris Yeltsin’s ascent to the Russian presidency would coincide with the political demise of Gorbachev; however, Yeltsin would personify the Peter Principle. He was completely out-of-his-depth. Figes asks, “How can we explain the failure of democracy under Yeltsin, and the reemergence of dictatorship under Putin’s leadership?” (p 268) Figes explains that under Yeltsin, the people called the system a “shitocracy.” (p 270) Was this solely due to Russian incompetence? There is scant attribution to the role played by western nations and institutions such as the IMF that advised Yeltsin’s team to apply the shock therapy of neoliberalism (a “social disaster” says Figes, p 269) that helped precipitate the downfall of Yeltsin and pave the way for a new face and new direction.
Figes writes that Vladimir Putin became the successor to Yeltsin by agreeing to protect Yeltsin and his family from their corruption. (p 271) Putin is also accused of corruption; Figes footnotes harsh Putin critic Masha Gessen’s book The Man without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin (2012) as substantiation. As testament to her analytical prowess, Gessen predicted in her book’s epilogue, “Putin’s bubble will burst.” Yet in July 2022, Putin still enjoys immense popularity in Russia.
Figes likens Putin to a grand prince where Russian oligarchs are “totally dependent on his will” much as the boyar clans were reliant upon the royal court in Russia. (p 54)
According to Figes, Putin’s Russia is a managed democracy where electoral results are determined beforehand.
The author criticizes laws he identifies as protecting an ahistorical image of Russia; for example, a law requiring foreign-funded NGOs to register as a “Foreign Agent.” (p 278) Not mentioned is that the US has its own Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) (FIRA in Canada) and that NGOs are cited as instigators behind so-called color revolutions.
Figes further criticizes Putin for weaponizing the memory of war against foreign powers. Here a bias of Figes stands out by referring to a non-aggression pact between the USSR and Nazi Germany (commonly referred to as the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact) as the Hitler-Stalin Pact. (p 279) Is Figes unaware that the West collaborated with Nazi Germany? In his book The Myth of the Good War, historian Jacques Pauwels told of European elitists’s support for fascism as a bulwark against Bolshevism, (p 42, 47) which was also true in the US. (p 53)
Figes also takes issue with Putin for comparing “Ukraine’s nationalists to collaborators with the Nazis in the war.” (p 279) The evidence of Nazism in Ukraine is so prolific that one must be either ignorant or purposefully blind:
Not being a professional historian, I will focus on Figes’s rendering of contemporary history, which seems particularly disputable on factual and logical grounds.
1. As stated, Figes pooh poohs the “Ukraine-Nazi myth” (p 298): “The Kremlin’s Russian media outlets consistently referred to the interim Ukrainian government as a ‘junta’, backed by ‘neo-Nazis’ and ‘fascists’, an obvious propaganda tactic …. They [the Kremlin] staged protests against the new authorities in Kiev…” (p 290)
The background and implications of the 2014 far-right coup in Kiev, which overthrew the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, is critical for understanding the current Ukraine-Russia war. This coup was openly supported by US and European imperialism and implemented primarily by far-right shock troops such as the Right Sector and the neo-Nazi Svoboda Party.
When Ukrainian President Yanukovych spurned a U.S.-backed trade agreement with the European Union in favor of a $15 billion bailout from Russia, the State Department threw a tantrum.
Hell hath no fury like a superpower scorned.
2. “the Kremlin launched a new Crimean War…. At the end of February [2014], Russian special forces occupied the peninsula, … oversaw a hurried referendum … in which 97 per cent of the people voted for reunion with Russia.” (p 290-291)
Figes paints the expression of self-determinism in sinister language, but Figes doth protest too much, as he admits, “Even with a properly conducted plebiscite [in Crimea] the same decision would have been reached with a large majority.” (p 291) Since the Russians were so welcomed by Crimeans, this basically refutes Figes’s claim of a military occupation.
3. “The warring parties failed to find agreement on the Minsk II Accords…” (p 291)
Separatist’s leaders Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky
Swiss diplomat and OSCE representative Heidi Tagliavini
Former president of Ukraine and Ukrainian representative Leonid Kuchma
Russian Ambassador to Ukraine and Russian representative Mikhail Zurabov
4. Regarding Putin’s identification of NATO bases in Ukraine as a security threat, Figes writes, “From a western point of view this seemed mad and paranoid. NATO, after all, was a defensive alliance and had no reason to attack Russia.” (p 293)
To paint NATO, after all, as a purely “defensive alliance” is disingenuous. Did NATO attack ex-Yugoslavia in self-defense? Guised as a European-Canada-US alliance was Libya a threat to NATO? With all due respect to the people of Afghanistan, was a country largely populated by sandal-wearing goat herders with a Kalashnikov rifle strapped over one shoulder a threat to NATO?
Conversely, does the history of myriad western interventions not point to a potential threat for Russia?
5. Figes claims the invasion of Ukraine has revealed that the “Russian army, it turned out, was not as good as people thought.” (p 296) “Putin, it was said, was hoping to announce a victory … on 9 May, Victory Day…” (p 297) It was said? Who said this? Figes applies his military analysis and reaches the same conclusion as another non-professional military analyst Noam Chomsky. They both equate the prowess of the Russian military to the duration of the military engagement.
6. Figes writes of a mass-based opposition led by Alexei Navalny. (p 299) Yet this “mass-based” opposition leader, as Figes describes Navalny, is without any party members in the Russian State Duma.
7. “The Russians carried out a number of atrocities in towns such as Bucha…” (p 296)
Concerning the massacre in Bucha, Drago Bosnic, an independent geopolitical and military analyst, wrote:
The Ukrainian side claims Russian troops killed at least 412 people, while so-called ‘independent’ sources state there were 50 victims. The peculiar claims were completely unsupported by any actual official investigation by any neutral side. The Kiev regime and their Western sponsors flatly refused to allow an international investigation, while any claims contrary to the official narrative were immediately suppressed.
Why prevent an investigation that one claims should reveal war crimes perpetrated by the enemy? (Yes, US president Biden in a televised message tells Russian citizens: “You are not our enemy.” Biden expresses his scorn for the “war criminal” Putin.)
Former US Marines intelligence officer Scott Ritter — who graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in the history of the Soviet Union and departmental honors at Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania — names the culprit behind the Bucha massacre: Ukrainian national police murdered Ukrainians.
Without exception, without exception all of the data points to the Ukrainian national police carrying out a cleansing operation on April 1st that targeted pro-Russian collaborators and what they called saboteurs. And when we say cleansing operation, it means killing them. There is a video where a member of this national police unit asked permission to shoot people who aren’t wearing the blue armband, and he was given permission to fire.”
The US has the satellite images of this says Ritter, who emphatically states:
The US knows exactly what happened, but the US is not in the business of telling the truth. They are in the business of promulgating Ukrainian lies, and this lie was to create a narrative of Russia as a genocidal state trying to massacre innocent Ukrainian civilians. That is not what happened. The evidence is clear. If we took this to trial today Judge, I could guarantee you that I’d be able to make a very strong circumstantial case that this crime was committed by the Ukrainian national police and that they’d have nothing to defend with.
All the forensic data points to the absolute incontrovertible fact that Ukrainian security services carried out crimes against pro-Russian elements of the population of Bucha in late March, early April of 2022…. I will debate anybody, anytime, anywhere, on any platform, hell, I’ll travel to Ukraine to do it in front of the Ukrainian parliament if they want. I am not running away from these facts.
Ritter has thrown down a figurative glove. Will Figes pick it up? Ritter looks at the evidence, does his research, and applies logic in reaching a conclusion. Too often, when evidence is demanded, Figes comes up wanting.
Figes has made many claims and predictions, if the presence of Nazis breaks through the monopoly media censorship and propaganda, if Russia defeats Ukraine (and it already has according to Ritter), then what does that signify about Figes and his historical scholarship?
Given all this, it is argued that The Story of Russia is, more accurately, A Story of Russia, a story according to Orlando Figes. As for what thehistory of Russia is, that is something to be discovered by curious and discerning readers and researchers.
*
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.
Kim Petersen is an independent writer and former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be emailed at: kimohp at gmail.com.
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.
***
A preprint study of adolescents conducted during Thailand’s national COVID-19 vaccination campaign showed what one physician described as a “stunning” association between myocarditis and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
A prospective study in Thailand conducted during the country’s national COVID-19 vaccination campaign for adolescents showed what one physician described as a “stunning” association between myocarditis and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
The preprint, accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, involved 314 participants ages 13-18 who were healthy and without abnormal symptoms after receiving their first vaccine dose.
Participants with a history of cardiomyopathy, tuberculous pericarditis or constrictive pericarditis and severe allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine were excluded from the study.
Although the study included 314 adolescents, 13 were excluded from the findings as they were “lost to follow-up.”
Of the 301 remaining participants, 202 (67.1%) were male.
Researchers found that 18% of the 301 teens analyzed had an abnormal electrocardiogram, or EKG after receiving their second dose of Pfizer, 3.5% of males developed myopericarditis or subclinical myocarditis, two were hospitalized and one was admitted to the ICU for heart problems.
Cardiovascular adverse events observed during the study included tachycardia (7.64%), shortness of breath (6.64%), palpitation (4.32%), chest pain (4.32%) and hypertension (3.99%).
Fifty-four adolescents had abnormal electrocardiograms after vaccination, three patients had minimal pericardial effusion with findings compatible with subacute myopericarditis and six patients experienced mitral valve prolapse.
Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle that can lead to cardiac arrhythmia and death. According to the National Organization for Rare Disorders, myocarditis can result from infections, but “more commonly the myocarditis is a result of the body’s immune reaction to the initial heart damage.”
Pericarditis is inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart that can cause sharp chest pain and other symptoms.
According to the study, the most common symptom was chest pain, followed by chest discomfort, fever and headache.
Three patients between the ages of 13 and 18 reported chest pain and biomarkers were evaluated. All three reported the symptoms within 24-48 hours of receiving the second dose of Pfizer.
Four patients had no symptoms but had elevated biomarkers.
All patients were male and had abnormal electrocardiograms, particularly sinus tachycardia. The clinical course was mild in all cases.
The majority of the participants (257/301 or 85.38%) had no underlying diseases prior to being vaccinated.
As part of the study, participants received a diary card to record cardiac symptoms. Those who developed side effects from the vaccine could call the principal investigator and be transferred to a medical team at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases for assessment.
If the participant developed abnormal EKG, echocardiographic findings or increased cardiac enzymes, the principal investigator scheduled patients for follow-up per the study’s protocol and for day 14 lab assessments.
Individuals were monitored with laboratory tests including cardiac biomarkers, ECG and echocardiography at three clinical visits — baseline, day 3, day 7 and day 14 after receiving the second dose of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.
The diagnostic criteria for myocarditis were classified as either probable cases or confirmed cases and were based on clinical symptoms and medical tests.
The researchers concluded the clinical presentation of myopericarditis after vaccination was “usually mild,” with all cases fully recovering within 14 days and recommended adolescents receiving mRNA vaccines be monitored for side effects.
Dr. Tracy Høeg, an epidemiologist, in a tweet said the study is “unique & impressive because of the extensive workup both pre and post vaccination” as the study could “detect pre-existing cardiac abnormalities.”
This study is unique & impressive because of the extensive workup both pre and post vaccination, it could detect pre-existing cardiac abnormalities In this (albeit) small cohort, they deemed the cases "mild" pic.twitter.com/GJBPpYdl4q
Independent journalist Jordan Schachtel noted in a tweet the cardiac events witnessed during the study occurred after only one shot of Pfizer, as children with heart conditions had been excluded.
Adolescents post Pfizer:
"most common cardiovascular effects were tachycardia (7.64%), shortness of breath (6.64%), palpitation (4.32%), chest pain (4.32%), & hypertension (3.99%). 7 participants (2.33%) exhibited at least one elevated cardiac biomarker."
That's after ONE SHOT.
— Jordan Schachtel @ dossier.substack.com (@JordanSchachtel) August 10, 2022
According to the most recent data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 29, 2022, there were 1,292 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis in the 12-17 age group.
Of the 1,292 reports, 1,145 cases were attributed to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
*
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.
Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.
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.
***
It is pointless expecting the system to punish the system – I can tell you it will never ever happen now.
People are not thinking this scenario through to its natural end, I believe it will end and can only ever end in “street justice” as things descend into chaos.
Because you cannot reason with genocidal maniacs, there is no “law system” that will work, they run the law system and they already totally ignore it – it doesn’t apply to them.
How many times do you need to present undeniable evidence only to be totally ignored to see it?
Time spent going through the legal process is for me time wasted.
If we fast forward 6 months or 12 months (and this was put to Sir Graham Brady last September), the following will begin to happen.
I can tell you having looked into Sir Graham Brady’s eyes, he is a man sitting on the fence and waiting to see which side to fall on depending on the actions of the masses.
When the masses slowly come to realise what has been done (as they are doing right now) there will eventually be a murderous backlash and probably civil war raging across Europe and America – this is by design and it was made clear this was expected.
It’ll start with an isolated incident here and there and it will grow….
When this begins, the people who have had their kids sterilised, the people who have had their family members murdered and maimed by these injections delivered by those medical professionals will go on the rampage and they will target those they believe are guilty, those who they feel did it to them (as you would expect).
This won’t be everyone, but certainly a significant amount of people certainly will and they will want vengeance and they will go out to get it.
They will target those they feel have been “complicit”, those who put the needles in their arms, those who didn’t speak to truth about who it was that was laying in hospital wards (primarily the vaccinated) and kept the truth quiet and above all they will target those they can get to.
Those who have helped these genocidal bastards kill us off – it will happen.
That won’t be Boris Johnson, it won’t be Ritchie Sunak or any other WEF controlled cabinet members being nailed, they have security, they have bunkers, probably abroad and they will hide in them – they will be unreachable.
These raging people who have lost those they love the most and have nothing left to live for will target doctors and nurses targeted directly, media people and probably local MPs – the “easy to get at” soft targets – it will be the same people these genocidal maniacs had us clapping on doorsteps for a short while ago.
A huge amount of these people know what is happening, they have known as long as I/we have in many cases – in fact 130,000 of the NHS workers chose to lose their careers rather than take “the protection”, calling the governments bluff and being kept on – so they clearly 130,00 of them do know, they knew and yet most have said nothing, in fact they continued to take the money and carry out the protocols, protocols that we all know are killing innocent people who are in there asking for help.
People will wake up to that and they will rage at them and they won’t get any help or security at all.
That is the only way it can end for them I think as horrifying as it is to envisage, I think there will be a large swathe of incensed who target NHS doctors and nurses, media people and MPs directly.
I speak to a growing number of nurses and medical staff who are beginning to really panic now as they see the truth coming out, one in particular called Michelle, a nurse of 30 years, resonated particularly with me because she said this to me about 8 months ago – and I quote her word for word because she knew back then exactly what was going on and exactly what would happen.
“People stood on doorstep’s clapping for us and when they find out what we have done they will stone us to death,” she was of course totally right.
I’ve already seen videos of doctors being attacked a targeted by raging vaccine victims, people who have lost kids and family members at their hand – it will only gradually escalate as the situation escalates and the death toll in vaccine recipients rises and more and more people wake up to what has happened.
We all know there are many doctors who won’t take these vaccines themselves but inject others with them and they will get nailed as things slowly turn, I myself have spoken to many of them.
How can they not see what the future holds for them? How can they not see it ?
I also think about how I will feel personally when told my brother and mum have died as a result of these vaccines – how would I feel towards those responsible? Id feel hate and anger and I want justice.
I’m really very worried for these doctors and nurses and clinic staff who have been delivering these poisons now because they will be the first to suffer the rage and anger of these vaccine victims. I think that they have been set up perfectly as fall guys for the masses as society slowly implodes under the strain of hugely increased death rate in ever younger people and a deliberate financial destruction.
I really would urge every medical professional to speak out louder and louder right now and to collectively walk out of the NHS as one – right now, they should totally abandon it, because if they did that it would be a real game changer.
Because if they continue to go through the motions and say nothing and blindly follow government protocols, it can and will only ever end one way – in death and misery and street justice.
If you have a critical mind and think it through, as the death toll rises and the economy is deliberately destroyed as we all know it will it can only end this way – it’s a natural conclusion.
Or do we perhaps see the military guarding hospitals nationally against reprisal attacks after a few happen? They won’t be able to watch them 24/7.
How long will media reports of stories about “shaking the duvet too hard”, “hot weather”, “digging the garden” and “referees whistles at footballs games” and something called “s.a.d.s” killing young people off in record numbers do you honestly think people will swallow before going on the rampage?
I’m really surprised every single doctor simply hasn’t walked out as one after seeing what is happening before them in their practices and wards – primarily for their own safety and to bring this to a head and attempt to stop it, id urge them to do so and quickly.
The saddest thing is there will be many totally innocent doctors and nurses who suffer these murderous rages from these victims of poison – but is anyone honestly going to be surprised when these begin to happen? I really won’t be surprised and that doesn’t mean I condone them.
It’s certainly an interesting and horrifying time to be here, isn’t it.
I think we all ought to urge these people to down tools and walk out, everyone of them, to both redeem and save themselves, before it is too late for all of them.
This is how I think it will develop as time passes, the ONS numbers now tell the story.
*
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.
John O’Looney is a funeral director, distinguished analyst and a powerful voice
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.
***
An independent Dutch researcher has published a paper revealing that all-cause mortality has increased substantially in the Netherlands ever since Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” were introduced.
The preprint study looks at about 350 municipalities across the Netherlands, evaluating excess death rates in comparison to jab uptake. Every area where lots of people got injected has seen all-cause mortality skyrocket, the data shows.
Since the second half of 2021, study author and computer scientist André Redert discovered, the Netherlands has seen a sharp uptick in his country’s “vaccination-correlated mortality-rate,” which now averages around 5 percent.
“This means that 5 percent of the deaths were distributed in ways consistent with vaccination rates,” explains Patrick Delaney, writing for LifeSiteNews.
“While this pattern does not prove these deaths were caused by the shots, it does prove that there is correlation between them, and plenty of evidence already exists of excessive death rates in highly vaccinated nations around the world.”
EuroMOMO Bulletin says “an elevated level of excess mortality” persists across Europe
All this time, government authorities both in Europe and the United States have claimed that as more jabs get into more arms, sickness and death will decrease. What the data actually shows, however, is the opposite.
The EuroMOMO Bulletin continues to publish reports indicating that “an elevated level of excess mortality” is being seen all across Europe. Just in the last several weeks, some 8,000 unaccounted-for deaths have been reported – and the jabs appear to be the culprit.
“Though a 5% increase may seem modest, historically it is significant,” Delaney adds. “When applied to the United States, this would indicate an extra 175,000 deaths per year, and for Europe likely more than 400,000 … Furthermore, indications of these trends are not lacking.”
The insurance industry has corroborated this with data showing a massive increase in death claims ever since Operation Warp Speed was launched by the Trump administration.
OneAmerica, an insurance carrier based out of Indianapolis, reported a 40 percent increase in death claims for the third quarter of 2021 when the jab campaigns were in full swing.
“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10 percent increase over pre-pandemic,” announced company president Scott Davison. “So, 40 percent is just unheard of.”
Steve Kirsch performed his own calculations on the various numbers that have been released or drudged up, leading him to the conclusion that covid jabs are, in fact, responsible for most, if not all, of the excess deaths that are being reported all around the world.
The likelihood of this phenomenon happening by pure chance rather than as a result of covid injections is “basically never,” the MIT graduate declared, citing his work.
“In other words, the event that happened [to bring this about] is not a statistical ‘fluke,’” he added. “Something caused a very big change.”
In the third quarter of 2021 across the entire insurance industry, the Society of Actuaries Research Institute (SOA) discovered a 37.7 percent spike in life insurance death claims, which corroborates with OneAmerica’s data.
“That figure included an approximate 50-50 split between claims related to COVID-19 and those caused by other factors,” Delaney clarifies about how this figure was calculated.
In Europe, German health insurer BKK ProVita reported to government officials “a very considerable under-recording of suspected cases of vaccination side effects after [patients] received the [COVID-19] vaccine.”
According to board member Andreas Schöfbeck, “around 4%-5% of the vaccinated were under medical treatment for side effects,” which represents a rate about 10 times higher than what the German government was reporting.
*
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.
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.
***
The video below was initially published by Vimeo in early 2021.
It was taken down on March 5, 2022 as an act of censorship directed against Global Research.
It outlines the nature of the corona crisis focusing on the hist0ry of the crisis and the impacts of the lockdown.
Video: The Worldwide Corona Crisis: Prof Michel Chossudovsky
To view the video on Bitchute and/or enter a comment, click here.
We are dealing with an exceedingly complex process.
In the course of more than two years starting in early January 2022, I have analyzed almost on a daily basis the timeline and evolution of the COVID crisis.
From the very outset in January 2020, people were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic.
Very Summarized
1. The RT-PCR test is meaningless (now confirmed by the WHO and the CDC). The entire data base of so-called “COVID confirmed cases” is totally invalid. These are the estimates which have been used to justify ALL the COVID-19 mandates since March 2020. The figures on COVID-19 related mortality are also invalid (See Chapter III). These are the fake “estimates” used to justify the violation of fundamental human rights.
2. SARS-CoV-2 is “similar to seasonal influenza” according to the CDC and the WHO. It is not a killer virus. (See Chapter III)
3. The economic and social impacts of the lockdowns are devastating: bankruptcies, unemployment, poverty and despair. The COVID-19 mandates are destroying people’s lives. (See Chapters IV and V)
4. The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have resulted in a worldwide upward trend in mortality and morbidity which is amply documented (See Chapter VIII). A confidential report by Pfizer made public under Freedom of Information (FOI) confirms that the COVID-19 jab is a “killer vaccine”.
5. Recorded and registered for EU/UK/USA – 61,654 COVID-19 injection-related deaths and 9,755,085 injuries reported as at 28 January 2022 (only a small percentage of deaths and injuries are reported and recorded).
6. Pfizer has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice. (See Chapter VIII)
*
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.
The picture that has been presented of the war in Ukraine is completely at odds with the reality of the situation on the ground. Surprisingly, information that supports this assertion, which totally undermines the Western media narratives regarding the war, is provided by an article in the August edition of the United States Marine Corps Gazette.
The UK Medicine and Health Care Product Regulatory Agency (MHRA) released their latest Yellow Card Report, documenting the total number of reported deaths due to covid-19 vaccination from January 21 to July 22. During this nineteen-month period, the death total for the covid-19 vaccines was compared to the average number of deaths due to all other vaccines.
Louise Mensch an online blogger, former UK Conservative MP, with a sizeable following on Twitter effectively called upon the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces to assassinate Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett. Mensch responded to Bartlett’s comment that she was on the ground in Donbass recording the Ukrainian criminal use of petal or butterfly mines in residential areas of Donetsk and surroundings.
Trust in party politicians who constantly lie to and try to manipulate their own people in the most shameful way has long since been shaken. With the example of the worldwide Corona crisis, the “worst crisis in modern history” (3), science is now also moving into the field of vision of the critical public.
According to the ministry’s data, the Syrian oil sector has incurred losses nearing “about 105 billion dollars since the beginning of the war until the middle of this year” as a result of the US oil theft campaign.
We’re settling in to our daughter Orla’s sixth night in the hospital. Visiting hours are over and only ten of the beds in our 32-bed pediatric ward are occupied tonight, down from 20 a few nights ago. The patients – mostly young teens in our room – are tucked in under mosquito nets. Their carers – mainly grandmas, aunts and moms – are slouched in chairs or curled around their patients on the beds. A few of us stretch out on unoccupied beds to get some rest before the nurse turns on the lights for the next regular blood pressure and temp check.
As Israel unleashed a surprise wave of air strikes on Gaza last Friday, the two remaining Conservative politicians vying to replace disgraced Prime Minister Boris Johnsonpublicised letters vowing fealty to Israel. Their timing underscored the degree to which British politicians on both sides of the aisle have now joined their American counterparts in making commitment to Israel a defining issue in their campaigns for highest office.
Exposure to electromagnetic field (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation is an ever-growing health risk in the modern world. The Cellular Phone Task Force website1 has a long list of governments and organizations that have issued warnings or banned wireless technologies of various kinds and under various circumstances, starting in 1993.
During the 1970s, amid a draconian counter-intelligence program (COINTELPRO) launched by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against African American organizations throughout the United States, a cadre of activists in New York City sought to continue the Black Liberation Movement in the face of escalating state repression.
Because of your help over 1500 people have pledged to be part of the Free Assange human chain. Thank you for sharing the event on social media and around the United Kingdom.
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.
***
The UK Medicine and Health Care Product Regulatory Agency (MHRA) released their latest Yellow Card Report, documenting the total number of reported deaths due to covid-19 vaccinationfrom January 21 to July 22. During this nineteen-month period, the death total for the covid-19 vaccines was compared to the average number of deaths due to all other vaccines. The data show that COVID vaccines are 7,402 percent deadlier than all other vaccines combined. Historically, the COVID vaccines have caused 5.5 times as many deaths as all other licensed vaccines COMBINED over the past TWENTY-ONE YEARS! This pharmacovigilance system is not being monitored or taken seriously at all.
Freedom of Information request seeks answers from the MHRA
The MHRA did not come out and warn the public about all the injury and death that has occurred in the name of vaccination. The MHRA has been silent on the matter since the beginning of the COVID vaccine rollout. Trying not to create “vaccine-hesitancy,” the MHRA has refused to address the influx of medical issues caused by the vaccines. The MHRA has an ethical duty to stop the endless assault of spike protein bioweapons through the vaccine’s mRNA transcription process.
To address these serious issues, a man named Mr. Anderson filed a Freedom of Information request to the MHRA on August 6, 2021. The formal request asked the regulating agency to provide the total number of deaths from the covid-19 vaccines and the total number of deaths from all other vaccines prior to covid-19. The request also sought information on whether the covid-19 vaccines are still in trials, and whether or not an AI system is helping monitor the Yellow Card scheme. Finally, the request asked the MHRA “What cut off point will the MHRA say a vaccine or drug is unsafe for humans?”
MHRA reveals shocking data on COVID vaccine death statistics, but maintains that the vaccines are the “single most effective treatment”
When pressed, the MHRA confirmed that they use epidemiological studies, anonymized electronic health records from general practitioners to “proactively monitor safety alongside the spontaneous reports received via the Yellow Card scheme.”
The MHRA admitted that the Yellow Card Scheme received 404 reports of death following all available vaccines (excluding the COVID vaccines) over a time frame of 20 years and eight months. In contrast, there were a shocking 2,213 deaths in the first nineteen months of the covid vaccine rollout.
The data was also broken down per vaccine. There were 62 deaths associated with the Moderna vaccine, 808 associated with the Pfizer vaccine, and 1,294 associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. (There were an additional 49 deaths non-specified.)
Even though the Yellow Card Scheme is exploding with safety signals and a tidal wave of adverse events, the MHRA arrogantly proclaims that the covid-19 vaccines are the “single most effective treatment for preventing serious illness due to Covid-19.”
The agency also mentioned that the covid-19 vaccines were not given full marketing authorization and are therefore temporarily authorized. In other words, the trials are currently being conducted on the population without any official proclamation. The MHRA confirmed that Pfizer/BioNTech, Oxford/AstraZeneca and Moderna vaccines were given temporary authorizations based on an expedited, rolling review. The vaccines were rolled out in the UK only because the World Health Organization and the UK government maintained “a public health emergency.”
In an official email response, the MHRA deflected Mr. Anderson’s questions about ending the covid-19 vaccine program. They stated, that the “MHRA does not hold complete information on timing of death or death statistics.” The MHRA deferred Mr. Anderson to the Office for National Statistics for further clarification. How useful is a pharmacovigilance system if its data is consistently ignored by the medical authorities? What good is a regulatory agency if government officials refuse to take responsibility for their continued dereliction of duty?
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Louise Mensch an online blogger, former UK Conservative MP, with a sizeable following on Twitter effectively called upon the Ukrainian Special Operations Forces to assassinate Canadian journalistEva Bartlett.
Mensch responded to Bartlett’s comment that she was on the ground in Donbass recording the Ukrainian criminal use of petal or butterfly mines in residential areas of Donetsk and surroundings.
Video – Eva Bartlett’s on-the-ground report on butterfly mine deployment against Donetsk civilians:
One twitter account asked Bartlett if she was “on the scene”, Bartlett replied “yes” and Mensch called in the Special Forces “hear that @SOF_UKR?”. Multiple twitter accounts reacted in horror at this flagrant violation of international law applicable to cyber operations that should protect users against what qualifies as terrorism according to journalist George Eliason based in Ukraine since before 2014.
Video – George Eliason “Louise Mensch directs a UA military hit against Journo Eva Bartlett”:
What did Twitter do in response to the multiple reports of incitement to violence? It failed to respond to many reports including mine and when it did respond it claimed that Mensch “hadn’t broken their safety policies.”
This effectively means that while Twitter will suspend accounts for pointing out the criminality of Western foreign policy, it will endorse the targeting of an independent journalist reporting on the murder of civilians with prohibited weapons. Twitter has previously declared links to the CIA surveillance operations. Now it appears Twitter is involved in facilitating the potential assassination of journalists who challenge the CIA/MI6 narratives in Ukraine.
Other accounts were suspended for calling out Mensch’s leading to multiple tweets accusing Twitter of supporting fascism:
Hmm @TwitterSupport took down @FiorellaIsabelM’s tweet exposing @LouiseMensch’s call for a hit on journalist Eva Bartlett & is preventing Fiorella from accessing her account until she deletes the tweet, but it won’t remove Mensch’s call for death? Is Twitter protecting fascists? pic.twitter.com/yVPNqHryKk
Hey @TwitterSupport why are you not taking down the tweet that is calling for the death of a journalist, yet deleted & censored the tweet drawing attention to that fact? Can you explain? We would all like to know. Fiorella’s tweet was a screenshot of a tweet that’s still up also.
Steve Sweeney, International Editor of the Morning Star also demanded a response from Twitter:
So @FiorellaIsabelM is locked out of her account but @LouiseMensch tweet encouraging Ukrainian forces to kill @EvaKBartlett is absolutely fine? Care to explain this one @TwitterComms ? I’ll be writing a news story about it (again) tomorrow so will be in touch for comment.
Butterfly or Petal Mines kill and maim civilians and particularly children who don’t realise they are not toys
According to a statement from the Donetsk Peoples’ Republic Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DPR MFA):
To activate the prohibited anti-personnel mine PFM “Lepestok” requires a push force of only 5 kg. It’s scary to imagine what such a mine can do to a child. In order to avoid health hazards, the DPR Representative Office in the JCCC created an interactive map (see this) with areas most infected by PFM “Lepestok” mines.
This is not an exact map of minefields, but in areas marked with red shading, you need to take the greatest care and caution:
– drive only on paved roads, avoiding any movement on grass/ground;
– carefully watch your step;
– do not pick up any unfamiliar objects;
– in case of hazard detection, call 101.
Warning graphic image:
Eva Bartlett has tweeted about the hideous injuries caused by these mines and recorded her experiences on her Telegram channel:
Footage from Donetsk where brutal Ukrainian-fired “petal” or “butterfly” mines litter the streets.
Harrowing to walk now, when it could be so easy to make one wrong step and lose a foot or leg. Some of the mines I saw were circled in chalk or paint or other, some were curbside with a “warning, mines!!” sign nearby.
Even when the mines are identified with signs or chalk/other around, they can be difficult to actually see. So imagine how easy it is to step on them if no one has put any sort of warning. Horrors. Ukrainian-instigated horrors.
I shudder to think of the elderly selling goods in street or walking in the street. A colleague mentioned seeing an older man ready to poke at the little clump of a mine with his cane….thankfully he interviewed & prevented that older man from being maimed or killed.
These Lepestok cluster mines are banned under international humanitarian law and their use is deemed a war crime under the Geneva Convention. To children these deadly weapons appear as toys and will tear and rip limbs apart if picked up or trodden on.
‘In 2005, Ukraine ratified the Ottawa Convention, which prohibits the use, stockpiling and production of anti-personnel mines. Thus, Kyiv violates its international obligations.’
Russia has now provided the additional information requested by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and Security Council Chairman Zhang Jun which includes photographic evidence. This follows attacks by Ukrainian forces at the end of July bombarding Donetsk with the lethal mines. The missiles hit city center at the intersection of Vatutin Boulevard and Universitetskaya. Several civilians were reported to have been injured and killed by the mines and an employee of the Emergencies Ministry (responsible for mine clearance) was injured.
According to the DPR MFA there are 11 victims including a child up to the 2nd August. Several thousand mines are estimated to have been scattered in central Donetsk.
This assessment is based on the main method of mining with the help of the MLRS “Uragan” (Hurricane), the rocket which contains 12 mine distribution canisters with 320 Lepestok anti-personnel mines, the use of which has been repeatedly recorded by the DPR Representative Office in the JCCC.
It is not surprising that the UN which is nothing more than an extension of US/UK neocolonialism is not rushing to investigate the Ukrainian use of these insidious weapons against civilians and children. It will focus only on the crimes that can be attributed to Russia by NATO member states while ignoring much of the evidence that counters the conclusions they are tasked to corroborate.
While Bartlett puts her life at risk to record the war crimes being committed by Zelensky’s forces (NATO proxies) including the various Nazi battalions – Mensch is protected by another instrument of power, Twitter. Those who retweeted Bartlett’s graphic images of injuries from the mines were suspended or forced to delete the “offending” tweets. Had it existed would Twitter have also deleted the images of naked children skin-stripped by Napalm to conceal the US war crimes against women and children in Vietnam? Probably.
Many who used Eva's images of the devastating reality behind Ukraine's use of proscribed anti-personnel mines, petal or butterfly mines, will have been forced to delete them.@EvaKBartlettpic.twitter.com/WPCdU8vQN2
“If those who support aggressive war had seen a fraction of what I’ve seen, if they’d watched children fry to death from Napalm and bleed to death from a cluster bomb, they might not utter the claptrap they do.”
Bartlett is recording what must be seen if the US/UK-generated perpetual war is ever to come to an end. She is risking her life to provide the horrific insights into these wars and the crimes committed by those who violate the Geneva Convention with impunity because they are protected by NATO member states and are carrying out their orders.
Mensch is not only enabling these crimes and effectively the mutilation of civilians, she is calling for the hunting down of Bartlett by the SSO headquartered in Kyiv. The SSO duties include direct action, special reconnaissance, intelligence gathering, sabotage, psychological warfare. (Wikipedia).
The SSO has a focus on Donbass as it was formed in 2016 due to the failure by Ukrainian ultra-nationalist forces to quell the resistance in Eastern Ukraine. The SSO were modelled on the NATO Reaction Forces and it is effectively a deadly Military Intelligence unit.
Following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, a Special Forces wing made of foreign fighters was initiated by the Ukrainian Defense Ministry’s intelligence directorate (GUR). This regiment is separate from the regular international legion but recruits from the force.
Mensch chose to trigger the greatest threat to Bartlett’s life and Twitter chose to facilitate this terrorism linked to Nazism and Ultra-nationalism in Ukraine. I take this personally, not only because of my long time friendship with Eva but because the media sphere is rapidly becoming a very dangerous one for any independent journalist who is putting their lives on the line to report in high risk, high profile war zones.
Screenshot from UK Column News report on the ‘disinformation’ intelligence complex.
Soon the greatest risk will not be from the falling missiles or sniper bullets but from the concerted efforts of the NATO ‘disinformation’ clusters and their associated intelligence and military agencies who will carry out disappearances and assassinations at the behest of their line managers in the respective state departments and foreign offices.
This is the Julian Assange effect coming to fruition. We all warned about it and we all campaigned against it but unless we ALL rise up to defend the courageous few we will sleepwalk into fascism.
Thank you Eva Bartlett for what you do.
*
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.
All images in this article are from Vanessa Beeley unless otherwise stated
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.
***
Just an dem Tag, an dem der Autor den Film „Planet-Lockdown“ ansah, erschien in der deutschen Ausgabe von „The Epoch Times“ ein Essay, dessen Titel auf diesen Film zutrifft: „Wissenschaftler zerstören unser Vertrauen in die Wissenschaft: Eine Plage greift in der Wissenschaft um sich: Manipulierte Studien und gefälschte Daten sind allgegenwärtig.“ (1) Einen Tag später schreibt das Magazin „Focus“ über den deutschen Gesundheitsminister und Professor Dr. med. Karl Lauterbach: „Experten kritisieren ständiges Impfen: ‚Lauterbach verabschiedet sich von der Wissenschaft‘“ (2).
Das Vertrauen in Partei-Politiker, die das eigene Volk ständig aufs Schändlichste belügen und zu manipulieren versuchen, ist längst erschüttert. Mit dem Beispiel der weltweiten Corona-Krise, der „schlimmsten Krise der modernen Geschichte“ (3), rückt nun auch die Wissenschaft ins Blickfeld der kritischen Öffentlichkeit. Prof. Dr. med. John Ioannidis (USA) spricht angesichts der Corona-Politik von einem Schlag gegen die öffentliche Gesundheit und ihre Glaubwürdigkeit. Fazit: Habe den Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen – und gehorche nicht!
Planet Lockdown: Dokumentation eines globalen Verbrechens
Der Blog „Krisenfrei“, der den Film „Planet-Lockdown“ von „Kla.TV“ übernommen hat, bringt zunächst eine kurze Zusammenfassung: „Source News ist eine Online-Journalismusplattform mit Sitz in Schottland. Ihr Film ‚Planet-Lockdown‘ ist eine Dokumentation – so Source News – über das Leben und was mit unserer Welt durch die Covid19-Agenda geschah. Der Film umfasst Zeitzeugenberichte aus aller Welt und stellt eine Gegenstimme zur öffentlichen Berichterstattung und Geschichtsschreibung durch Politik und Leitmedien dar. Es ist aber auch ein ‚forensisches Gutachten‘ für spätere gerichtliche Aufarbeitungen. Denn die ganze Covid19-Agenda ist ein perfide geplantes und global eingefädeltes Verbrechen an der Menschheit. Da sich nach einer kurzen Lockerung der Coronamaßnahmen bereits jetzt abzeichnet, dass von denselben Strippenziehern ein verheerender Zustand der Dauerpandemien verhängt werden soll, gewinnt die Dokumentation ‚Planet Lockdown‘ an besonderer Bedeutung als Orientierungshilfe.“ (4)
Anschließend publiziert „Kla.TV“ den Videotext der Dokumentation „Planet-Lockdown“. „Krisenfrei“ empfiehlt allen Lesern, sich die Doku anzuschauen und sie weiter zu verteilen.
Statements von Persönlichkeiten aus dem Film
Bischof Schneider (Kasachstan):
„Es war eine orchestrierte und konzertierte Aktion, die überall auf der Welt gleich ablief.“
Dr. Michael Yeadon (Former Chief Scientific Officer and Vice President, Pfizer):
“Wenn man bedenkt, dass dieses Virus gegenüber der Influenza schlimmstenfalls ein leicht erhöhtes Risiko für Ältere gegenüber der Influenza und ein geringeres Risiko für jeden darstellt, der jung und körperlich fit ist, war es nie wirklich notwendig, dass wir besondere Anstrengungen unternehmen (…): Lockdowns, Masken, Massentestungen, sogar Impfungen.“
Vera Sharav (Holocaust-Überlebende):
„Diese Länder haben COVID als Gelegenheit genutzt, eine Form der Euthanasie an Alten und Behinderten durchzuführen, sich also der wirtschaftlichen Last zu entledigen, sowie die letzten Zeitzeugen der Geschichte auszurotten.“
Dr. Sucharit Bakdi (Ph. D. Professor and Mikrobiologist, most cited Biologist):
“Mich und meine Frau hat dies zutiefst desillusioniert, und wir machen uns Sorgen, dass die Öffentlichkeit, die Menschen um uns nicht begreifen, dass sie in den Untergang geführt werden, dass sie ihre Menschlichkeit endgültig preisgeben, da sie keine Menschenrechte mehr haben.“
Dr. Michael Yeadon:
„An alle Ärzte, die schweigen und an alle, die aktiv an der Verabreichung der Impfstoffe, vor allem bei jungen, gesunden Menschen tätig sind: Meines Erachtens seid ihr dafür verantwortlich, den Nürnberger Kodex zu brechen. Und meine Beteiligung an eurer Anklage wird mir eine Freude sein.“
Klaus Schwab (Gründer des Weltwirtschaftsforums WEF, Davos):
„Die Menschen gehen also davon aus, dass wir einfach in die gute, alte Weltordnung, die wir hatten, zurückkehren. Das ist, sagen wir es mal so, eine Fiktion. Das wird nicht passieren.“ (5)
Prof. Ioannidis: „Schlag gegen die öffentliche Gesundheit und ihre Glaubwürdigkeit“
Dr. John Ioannidis, Professor der Medizin der Stanford Universität in Kalifornien (USA) geht nach einem neueren Artikel der Internet-Plattform „unzensuriert“ mit der Corona-Politik hart ins Gericht (6). Da er in Corona-Zeiten nicht dem von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO und den westlichen Regierungen Gewünschten gefolgt ist, gilt der ehemalige wissenschaftliche Guru heute quasi als „Schwurbler“. Er kritisierte stets die fehlende wissenschaftliche Basis der Corona-Maßnahmen, riet zur Mäßigung und warnte vor Panikmache.
In einem Interview Ende Juli sagte Prof. Ioannidis:
„Das Argument, dass Impfstoffe Epidemiewellen brechen können, war ein Kernstück des Strebens nach aggressiven Mandaten. Das wäre zuvor undenkbar gewesen. Dies führte zu einem (…) Schlag gegen die öffentliche Gesundheit und ihre Glaubwürdigkeit.“ (7)
Seines Erachtens haben die überzogenen Maßnahmen zur „Störung des sozialen Zusammenhalts und der Marginalisierung vieler schutzbedürftiger Menschen“ geführt. Weiter schreibt „unzenuriert“:
„Und als langfristige Folge stellt der Wissenschaftler fest, dass die Angstmacherei zwar die Akzeptanz der Corona-Radikalmaßnahmen geringfügig erhöht, aber dem Bemühen um die öffentliche Gesundheit einen Bärendienst erwiesen hätte. Denn ist das Vertrauen einmal weg, so lässt es sich nicht mehr so leicht wieder herstellen.“ (8)
Habe den Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen!
Die weltweite Ausnahmesituation und die zu erwartenden Dauer-Pandemien sowie immer neu begründete Lockdowns (wie zum Beispiel Klima-Lockdowns), die bei den Menschen große Ängste und Panik auslösen, erfordern es, weise zu sein, zwischen Wahrheit und Lüge zu unterscheiden und danach zu handeln. Das ist für uns Bürger aufgrund unserer „guten“ Erziehung zum Gehorsam nicht leicht.
Nicht nur die schwer arbeitende Bevölkerung, die weder Zeit, noch Muse und Gelegenheit hat, sich umfassend zu informieren, versagt im Widerstand gegen den aufkommenden Totalitarismus und Faschismus und die damit einhergehenden Versuche der Manipulation und Täuschung der Bürger. Auch die akademischen Kreise und Intellektuellen, deren Pflicht es wäre, für die anderen Menschen mitzudenken und mit der Freiheit des Denkens die Freiheit überhaupt zu proklamieren, werden ihrer Verantwortung nicht gerecht.
Gründe für die Unmündigkeit, selbst zu denken, sind nach Kant Faulheit und Feigheit. Unmündig zu sein, sei bequem und eigenständiges Denken ein „verdrießliches Geschäft“. So werde es für andere leicht, meint Kant, sich zu „Vormündern“, dieser unmündigen Menschen aufzuschwingen. Diese Vormünder würden auch alles dafür tun, dass die unmündigen Menschen den Schritt zur Mündigkeit nicht nur für beschwerlich, sondern auch noch für gefährlich halten.
Psychologisch gesehen ist es für einen verwöhnten und denkfaulen Menschen „bequemer“, sich der Anleitung einer Autorität oder eines Führers zu bedienen Damit befindet er sich im Einklang mit einem vermeintlich Mächtigen und seinen Massenmedien und gehört dem Kreis seiner Hofschranzen an. Er befindet sich somit stets auf der „richtigen“ Seite. Zweifel und moralische Bedenken bedrücken ihn nicht, da er sich immer auf die vermeintlich unfehlbare „Macht“ berufen kann.
Es ist mühsam, selbst zu denken und für die Folgen mündigen Verhaltens verantwortlich zu sein. Zweifel überfallen den nach Wahrheit Suchenden; der nächtliche Schlaf wird unruhig. Kommt ein Selbst-Denkender auch noch zu unliebsamen Wahrheiten, die im Widerspruch zu den Mächtigen und zur politischen Korrektheit stehen, wenden sich ehemalige Weggefährten von ihm ab und der bisherige Arbeitsplatz ist in Gefahr. Das Resultat dieses Mutes kann Einsamkeit sein. Einsamkeit nicht im Sinne des Alleinseins, sondern im Sinne der Verweigerung des Dialogs.
Auch der Ehrenkodex, das ungeschriebene Regelwerk über das Wohlverhalten von Berufsgruppen, das mit entsprechenden Verpflichtungen und Privilegien verbunden ist, scheint bei akademischen und anderen herausragenden Berufsgruppen nicht mehr zu gelten. Die Menschen weltweit werden durch diesen Verrat der eigenen Berufsethik in einen Zustand der Not, Armut und Hoffnungslosigkeit, von Vereinsamung und Ausgestoßenheit getrieben.
Wie können Ärzte oder ärztliche Politikberater Verordnungen treffen, die nicht zu „Nutz und Frommen der Kranken“ sind und die sie nicht bewahren vor Schaden und willkürlichem Unrecht. Dabei ist der Beruf des Arztes nur ein Beispiel für die vielen anderen Berufsgruppen. Wirklich angeklagt werden müssten jedoch die diabolischen „Strippenzieher“ und die ihnen zu Diensten stehenden korrupten Politiker, die den anerzogenen Gehorsam der Bürgerinnen und Bürger auf schändliche Weise missbrauchen (9).
*
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.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Lehrer (Rektor a. D.), Doktor der Pädagogik (Dr. paed.) und Diplom-Psychologe (Dipl.-Psych. mit Schwerpunkt: Klinische-, Pädagogische-, Medien- sowie Individual-Psychologie). Viele Jahrzehnte unterrichtete er, bildete bei der BAYER-AG in Leverkusen Hochschulabsolventen fort, gründete in Köln zusammen mit Kollegen eine Modellschule für ehemalige Schulversager und leitete sie. An der Bayerischen Akademie für Lehrerfortbildung und Personalführung war er als Instituts-Rektor für die Ausbildung von Beratungslehrkräften für alle Schularten zuständig. Am Ende seiner Berufslaufbahn war er Staatlicher Schulberater für die Landeshauptstadt München. Als Pensionär arbeitete er viele Jahre als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und pädagogisch-psychologischen Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung und eine Erziehung zum Gemeinsinn und Frieden.
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.
***
Just on the day that the author watched the film “Planet-Lockdown”, an essay appeared in the German edition of “The Epoch Times”, the title of which applies to this film: “Scientists destroy our trust in science: A plague is taking hold in science: manipulated studies and falsified data are omnipresent.” (1) One day later, the magazine “Focus” writes about the German Health Minister and Professor Dr. med. Karl Lauterbach: “Experts criticise constant vaccination: ‘Lauterbach says goodbye to science'” (2).
Trust in party politicians who constantly lie to and try to manipulate their own people in the most shameful way has long since been shaken. With the example of the worldwide Corona crisis, the “worst crisis in modern history” (3), science is now also moving into the field of vision of the critical public. Prof. Dr. med. John Ioannidis (USA) speaks of a blow to public health and its credibility in view of the Corona policy. Conclusion: Have the courage to use your own mind – and don’t obey!
Planet Lockdown: Documentation of a global crime
The blog “Krisenfrei”, which has taken over the film “Planet Lockdown” from “Kla.TV”, first brings a short summary: “Source News is an online journalism platform based in Scotland. Their film ‘Planet-Lockdown’ is a documentary – according to Source News – about life and what happened to our world through the Covid19 agenda. The film includes eyewitness accounts from around the world and is a counter-voice to public reporting and historiography by politicians and the leading media. But it is also a ‘forensic report’ for later judicial reappraisals. For the whole Covid19 agenda is a perfidiously planned and globally orchestrated crime against humanity. With a brief easing of the Corona measures already showing that a devastating state of permanent pandemics is to be imposed by the same string-pullers, the documentary ‘Planet Lockdown’ takes on particular importance as a guide.” (4)
Subsequently, “Kla.TV” publishes the teletext of the documentary “Planet Lockdown”. “Krisenfrei” recommends all readers to watch the documentary and to distribute it further.
Statements by personalities from the film
Bishop Schneider (Kazakhstan):
“It was an orchestrated and concerted action that happened the same way all over the world.”
Dr Michael Yeadon (Former Chief Scientific Officer and Vice President, Pfizer):
“Considering that this virus poses at worst a slightly increased risk to the elderly over influenza and a lower risk to anyone who is young and physically fit, it was never really necessary for us to make any special efforts (…). Lockdowns, masks, mass testing, even vaccination.”
Vera Sharav (Holocaust survivor):
“These countries used COVID as an opportunity to carry out a form of euthanasia on the elderly and disabled, in other words to get rid of the economic burden, as well as to exterminate the last witnesses of history.”
Dr Sucharit Bakdi (Ph. D. Professor and Microbiologist, most cited Biologist):
“Me and my wife have been deeply disillusioned by this and we are worried that the public, the people around us don’t realise that they are being led to ruin, that they are finally giving away their humanity because they no longer have human rights.”
Dr Michael Yeadon:
“To all the doctors who are silent and to all those who are actively involved in administering the vaccines, especially to young, healthy people: In my view, you are responsible for breaking the Nuremberg Code. And my participation in your prosecution will be a pleasure.”
Klaus Schwab (founder of the World Economic Forum WEF, Davos):
“So people assume that we are just going back to the good old world order that we had. That is, let’s put it this way, a fiction. That’s not going to happen.” (5)
Prof. Ioannidis: “Blow to public health and its credibility”
Dr. John Ioannidis, professor of medicine at Stanford University in California (USA) is taking the Corona policy to task, according to a recent article on the internet platform “uncensored” (6). Since he did not follow what the World Health Organisation (WHO) and Western governments wanted in Corona times, the former scientific guru is now considered a “swindler”, so to speak. He always criticised the lack of scientific basis of the Corona measures, advised moderation and warned against scaremongering.
In an interview at the end of July, Prof. Ioannidis said:
“The argument that vaccines can break epidemic waves was a centrepiece of the drive for aggressive mandates. This would have been unthinkable before. This led to a (…) blow to public health and its credibility.” (7)
In his view, the excessive measures have led to the “disruption of social cohesion and the marginalisation of many vulnerable people”.
Further, “uncensored” writes:
“And as a long-term consequence, the researcher notes that while fear-mongering may have marginally increased the acceptance of the Corona radical measures, it would have done a disservice to the public health effort. For once confidence is gone, it is not so easily restored.” (8)
Have the courage to use your own mind!
The worldwide exceptional situation and the expected permanent pandemics, as well as lockdowns that are always newly justified (such as climate lockdowns), which cause great fear and panic among people, require us to be wise, to distinguish between truth and lies and to act accordingly. This is not easy for us citizens because of our “good” upbringing of obedience.
It is not only the hard-working population, which has neither the time, nor the muse, nor the opportunity to inform itself comprehensively, that fails to resist the rising totalitarianism and fascism and the accompanying attempts to manipulate and deceive the citizens. The academic circles and intellectuals, whose duty it would be to think for other people and to proclaim freedom in general with the freedom of thought, are also failing to live up to their responsibility.
According to Kant, the reasons for not being able to think for oneself are laziness and cowardice. It is comfortable to be immature and independent thinking is a “vexatious business”. This makes it easy for others, says Kant, to become “guardians” of these immature people. These guardians would also do everything to ensure that the immature people would not only consider the step towards maturity to be arduous, but also dangerous.
Psychologically, it is more “comfortable” for a spoiled and thoughtless person to follow the guidance of an authority or a leader. In this way, he is in harmony with a supposedly powerful person and his mass media and belongs to the circle of his courtiers. He is thus always on the “right” side. Doubts and moral misgivings do not oppress him, since he can always refer to the supposedly infallible “power”.
It is tedious to think for oneself and to be responsible for the consequences of mature behaviour. Doubts assail the seeker of truth; the nightly sleep becomes restless. If a self-thinker also comes to disagreeable truths that contradict the powerful and political correctness, former companions turn away from him and the previous job is in danger. The result of this courage can be loneliness. Loneliness not in the sense of being alone, but in the sense of refusing dialogue.
Even the code of honour, the unwritten set of rules about the good conduct of professional groups, which comes with corresponding obligations and privileges, no longer seems to apply to academic and other prominent professional groups. People worldwide are being driven into a state of destitution, poverty and hopelessness, of isolation and outcastness by this betrayal of their own professional ethics. How can doctors or medical policy advisors make decrees that are not for the “benefit and piety of the sick” and that do not protect them from harm and arbitrary injustice.
The medical profession is only one example of the many other professions. What should really be accused, however, are the diabolical “string-pullers” and the corrupt politicians at their service who shamefully abuse the citizens’ instilled obedience (9).
*
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.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired headmaster), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and graduate psychologist (Dipl.-Psych. with focus on clinical, educational, media and individual psychology). He taught for many decades, trained university graduates at BAYER AG in Leverkusen, and founded and ran a model school for former school failures in Cologne together with colleagues. At the Bavarian Academy for Teacher Training and Personnel Management, he was the institute director responsible for training guidance counsellors for all types of schools. At the end of his professional career, he was a state school counsellor for the state capital Munich. As a retiree, he worked for many years as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral values education and an education for public spirit and peace.
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.
***
The Syrian Oil Ministry released a statement on 9 August accusing US forces occupying Syria of being responsible for the theft of most of the country’s oil.
“The amount of oil production during the first half of 2022 amounted to some 14.5 million barrels, with an average daily production of 80.3 thousand barrels, of which 14.2 thousand are delivered daily to refineries,” the oil ministry’s statement said.
The statement went on to say that “US occupation forces and their mercenaries,” referring to the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), “steal up to 66,000 barrels every single day from the fields occupied in the eastern region,” amounting to around 83 percent of Syria’s daily oil production.
According to the ministry’s data, the Syrian oil sector has incurred losses nearing “about 105 billion dollars since the beginning of the war until the middle of this year” as a result of the US oil theft campaign.
Additionally, the statement added that alongside the financial losses incurred by the oil sector were “losses of life, including 235 martyrs, 46 injured and 112 kidnapped.”
On 10 August, footage filmed by a Russian attack helicopter was released on social media, showing a convoy of trucks operated by the US military, smuggling stolen oil destined for Iraq, out of Raqqah.
Recently, the US army, which currently occupies northeast Syria, has been consistently looting the country’s oil and smuggling it into their bases in Iraq through the illegal Al-Waleed border crossing.
Local sources in Syria’s Hasakah governorate reported on 6 August that the US army looted and smuggled dozens of oil tankers out of the country, making it the second stolen oil shipment by the US that week.
Nearly 200 tanker trucks filled with looted oil were smuggled out of Syria by US troops in July alone, as Washington has intensified its practice of stealing Syrian resources to sell abroad.
On 19 July, Russian President Vladimir Putincalled on the US government to stop its consistent looting of Syria’s natural resources.
The US military is also responsible for plundering the country’s wheat, exacerbating an acute food crisis that is plaguing Syria and the rest of West Asia.
*
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.
Featured image: A view of an oil field in Syria, 19 July 2018 [Adnan Alhusen/Anadolu Agency]
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.
***
Dengue Fever
We’re settling in to our daughter Orla’s sixth night in the hospital. Visiting hours are over and only ten of the beds in our 32-bed pediatric ward are occupied tonight, down from 20 a few nights ago. The patients – mostly young teens in our room – are tucked in under mosquito nets. Their carers – mainly grandmas, aunts and moms – are slouched in chairs or curled around their patients on the beds. A few of us stretch out on unoccupied beds to get some rest before the nurse turns on the lights for the next regular blood pressure and temp check.
Our 14 year-old was admitted to the pediatric ward with dengue fever on July 19th, Revolution Day in Nicaragua. Poor Orla sobbed in disappointment that she wouldn’t be able to celebrate the holiday. After two days of fever, I had taken her to the emergency room in our local Ciudad Sandino Primary Hospital where the blood work they ordered indicated dengue and showed that her platelet count was low enough to be of concern. “She’ll be staying here with us,” the doctor announced. Since then, either my husband Paul or I have been with her in the hospital, tasked with making sure she’s kept hydrated and informed of her progress via blood test results each day.
Dengue fever is a virus transmitted by mosquitoes that propagate in the tropics during the rainy season and it affects 50 million people annually worldwide. Nicaragua works to control outbreaks through regular house-to-house fumigation and eliminating stagnant water – the epidemiology department of the health services visited our house shortly after Orla was hospitalized to get kill any mosquitoes or larvae. There is no cure for dengue, just symptom management over its eight-day cycle. The virus attacks the body and can cause leakage in vessel walls, resulting in water loss in the circulatory system and rapid dehydration. Much rarer severe cases can cause internal bleeding and for blood platelets to drop to dangerously low levels. Hemorrhagic dengue is particularly dangerous because patients can go into shock and die before they can get the blood transfusion they need.
Because of this risk, the Nicaraguan Ministry of Health’s policy is to hospitalize anyone with dengue who shows signs of possible complications, including low blood platelets. Thanks to this prudent policy and quality care, Nicaragua is the country with fewer deaths from dengue than any other country in the region – in a normal year, zero deaths. Treatment for the 12 pediatric patients we’ve seen come through our room has been intravenous rehydration fluids and ultrasounds upon being admitted; blood pressure, temp and blood oxygen level checks every two hours; daily blood tests; and constant monitoring of liquid intake and outflow. Patients with fevers get acetaminophen, patients with suspicious pain are taken for another ultrasound, patients not getting enough fluids are put back on IVs.
Although the staff has been concerned about possible complications for at least four of our patients, including Orla, no one on our ward has been transferred to a larger Managua hospital for emergency transfusions; but the ambulance is standing by outside if its needed. Knowing that gives me incredible peace of mind – at home, how could I possibly have known what Orla’s platelets were doing?
Growing up in the U.S., I never had a close family member admitted to the hospital; in fact, visits to the doctor were rare. As a kid, I remember knowing that if I got sick over the weekend, I’d have to tough it out until Monday when we could see the doctor during office hours. A trip to the emergency room at the hospital – the only after-hours option in my rural county – was too expensive. For the most part, everyone I knew only went to the doctor if they’d been sick for more than a week – their families simply couldn’t afford more frequent care.
By contrast, Nicaraguans seem to go to the doctor all the time. If my neighbor’s kid gets diarrhea, they bring her straight to the emergency room. I used to think this was because people were afraid – in the 1990s and early 2000s, child and infant mortality rates were high in Nicaragua and many kids really did die of preventable diseases. But as child health has improved – infant mortality down by 61% and chronic malnutrition reduced by 66% over the past 15 years – I have finally begun to understand that Nicaraguans take their kids to the hospital because they can.
My mom has been telling her friends in Idaho of our woes. “My granddaughter in Nicaragua has spent the week hospitalized with dengue fever.”
“Oh dear!” Her friends all exclaim (dengue fever does sound awfully dramatic).
“Guess how much their hospital bill is so far?” She asks. They frown and shake their heads, already anticipating that my mom is about to hit them up for donations for a GoFundMe campaign to help cover our bills.
“How much?” They ask.
“Nothing at all!” My mom gleefully reports. “Nicaragua has free universal health care!” Her friends’ shock is palpable. “How,” they ask, “can a poor country like Nicaragua afford to give free health care to its people?”
The answer, of course, is because Nicaragua chooses to make free health care a priority for its people.
Nicaragua’s Trickle-Up Economics
Nighttime in the pediatric ward means little sleep for carers. In the morning I wake at three, holding a sleepy Orla upright while the lab tech gets a blood sample from her arm, and then try to coax a bit more fluid down her throat. Crash back into sleep until the nurse comes to collect the papers where we write down our patients’ intake and outflow and do the consequential math: are more fluids going in than coming out? Next the doctors arrive with the lab results for the day: who gets to go home and who has to stay. The hopeful have their bags packed, waiting. The feverish ones stay wrapped in restless sheets, in and out of consciousness, knowing they’ll be here another night.
On our third morning, I start awake at ten minutes to seven and rush to shower and change before my husband Paul arrives– bless him – with strong coffee and the car keys. I kiss Orla goodbye and drive straight from the hospital to interpret for a delegation that is in Nicaragua to celebrate the 43rd Anniversary of the Triumph of the Sandinista Revolution, when the Nicaraguan people overthrew the cruel Somoza dictatorship.
Our first meeting is with Nicaragua’s Finance Minister Iván Acosta. It’s my first time interpreting for him and I soon realize that even with a full-night’s sleep I couldn’t do him justice with my interpretation. He has an obvious grasp of details – quoting figures off the top of his head and speaking for two hours with no notes – but above all else, Minister Acosta is a Big Picture person. He connects the dots for us between policy, action and results, giving perspective to Nicaragua’s entire revolutionary project.
“When we came into office in 2007, following nearly 17 years of neoliberal governments,” he says, “we found the country in chaos.” Minister Acosta explains that the period from 1990 to 2006 when Nicaragua had followed structural adjustment policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund led to extreme inequality, seriously deteriorated infrastructure, and deep poverty, particularly in Nicaragua’s countryside. “There was no magic solution for any of this. What could we do?” He asks.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government decided on a blend of social responsibility and economic principles. They began restoring rights – to free health care, free public education and land tenure. But they also worked to find ways to ensure that Nicaragua’s poor majority became active participants in the economy as a solution to improve the country’s struggling economy. “We realized that we need to lower the cost of doing business to be competitive; in order to achieve that, we needed to increase public spending.”
To that end, Nicaragua set about building state-of-the-art roads – now the best in the region – to ensure that products could get to market cheaply and easily; improving access to basic services – now reaching 99% electrical coverage up from just 53% in 2006; ending 12-hour a day rolling blackouts and diversifying to generate clean energy – now 80% of the electricity produced is from renewables; training new teachers and building new schools; and building 24 new hospitals since 2007. Over just ten years, Minister Acosta explains, social spending went from being 10% of overall spending to making up 57% of the country’s budget. But have these policies been effective?
“We have these pro-poor policies, but in many countries only lip service is paid to political policy and it isn’t followed by action,” explains Minister Acosta. “So we do the math – all the various quotients and formulae recommended by international experts – to ensure that our policies are being translated into results: real improvements in the lives of the poor.”
The numbers show that not only has Nicaragua’s economy turned around – sustained GDP growth of 5-10%, historic international investment, and 90% food sovereignty have all been achieved – but also the lives of the country’s poor majority have improved. In 2006, GDP per capita was at $990, but by 2018 it had risen to $2,300. “We don’t have a significant middle class yet,” Minister Acosta cautions, but progress is being made.
Nicaragua’s policy could be described as “trickle up economics” – ensure the poor access to health care, education, land, markets, financing…and the economy will follow.
This is the inversion of “trickle down economics,” the U.S. policy made famous by Ronald Reagan which gives tax breaks and benefits to corporations and the wealthy on the theory that it will stimulate economic growth from the top down.
The problem with the U.S. policy is not only a moral one; in economic terms, it just plain doesn’t work.
Under four decades of “trickle down” policy, income inequality in the U.S. has grown to shocking levels: the wealthiest 0.1% have become rich beyond all comprehension, while most U.S. workers now earn less than half of what they would have been earning if incomes had continued to grow equitably.
Given what we know about how stability and quality of life for the majority can improve the overall economy, perhaps instead of asking “How can a poor country like Nicaragua afford to give free health care to its people?” We should really be asking, “How can a wealthy country like the United States afford NOT to?”
Nicaragua’s Community and Family-based Health Model
“Dengue is treacherous,” the doctor explains to me. “A patient can suddenly experience internal bleeding and become critical in the blink of an eye.” Orla’s platelets have dropped, and she is in the most crucial day in the virus’ cycle when signs of hemorrhagic dengue can appear. As I sit on the edge of her bed urging her to drink more rehydration fluid, a woman who has been visiting another patient comes over to Orla’s bed carrying a Bible.
“Would you like me to pray for your daughter?” She asks. Orla agrees and the woman asks, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?” I stop her, not wanting her to get the wrong idea. “We’re not Pentecostals,” I say, “but Orla believes in God.” The woman nods and holds her hands out, palms up. We close our eyes as she begins praying in a soft singsong voice, asking God to look after my baby and heal her. When she finishes, she surprises me by saying, “It doesn’t matter which religion we belong to, it’s all the same God.”
That day, Orla turns a corner – her fever drops and her health begins to improve. I’m grateful to all those responsible – as we say here in Nicaragua, “Thanks to God and the Revolution.” Why the Revolution? Because it has restored Nicaraguans’ rights to free quality health care.
Our entire delegation gets to see the quality of this health care up close. After our talk with Minister Acosta, we visit one of the best-equipped hospitals in the country, Velez Paíz, built new and opened in 2018. Director Dr. Virginia Garcia tells us that patients with non-urgent emergencies wait a maximum of 30 minutes to be seen by ER doctors, and that patients wait a maximum of one month for non-emergency surgeries. “We have four laparoscopic towers performing gall bladder surgeries all day every day,” she says; that surgery would cost $54,000 in my home country, but is free in Nicaragua.
I interpret for Minister of Health Dr. Martha Reyes when she describes to the delegation the advances made in public health over the past 15 years. As she speaks, it is easy for me to chart that path from policy to action to results that Minister Acosta talked about. When she finishes speaking, I thank Dr. Reyes personally for the quality care that Orla is receiving in our hometown public hospital. “Not so long ago,” I tell her, “that wouldn’t have been possible.”
When I moved to Ciudad Sandino twenty years ago, our hospital was literally an empty shell, unable to provide even the most basic services to our community of 180,000. Not only did patients in “public” hospitals have to pay for everything from gloves to sutures, but a dengue patient in Orla’s condition would have actually been safer at home – hospitals were in such appalling conditions with lack of staff, beds and even basic sanitation that it was commonly said that hospitals were where patients went to die.
Thanks to public investment in health infrastructure, increase in personnel, improved and specialized training, and tireless work to involve communities and families in their own health care, Ciudad Sandino now has seven health centers and a hospital which includes outpatient, inpatient and emergency care, a maternal wait home, rehabilitation and physical therapy services, a natural medicine center and a center for cataract surgeries – all services offered free of charge. Comparable improvements have happened all over the country – the change in people’s lives is palpable and the results in overall health are measureable: maternal mortality rates have dropped by 70%, deaths from cervical cancer are down by 25% and average life expectancy has increased.
The Privilege of Free Health Care
On the morning of Orla’s seventh day in the hospital, the doctor tells us that her platelets count is high enough to safely send her home. We leave the hospital with nothing more than her official diagnosis paper, a stamped doctor’s excuse for missing school, and a follow up appointment. We owe no money. There is no itemized bill showing how many nights (6), how many sheets were washed (3), how many cafeteria meals she ate (17), how many full blood tests (10), urine tests (1), ultrasounds (1), IVs (1), or how much oral rehydration fluid she drank (53 liters). Orla and I walk out into the sunshine of a new day, ready to rest and recover, secure in the knowledge that the Nicaraguan government has made a choice to look after us…recognizing that it is a privilege to have access to free quality health care.
*
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.
Becca Renk has lived and worked in sustainable community development in Nicaragua since 2001 with the Jubilee House Community and its project, the Center for Development in Central America. The JHC-CDCA also works to educate visitors to Nicaragua, including through their hospitality and solidarity cultural center at Casa Benjamin Linder.
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.
***
As Israel unleashed a surprise wave of air strikes on Gaza last Friday, the two remaining Conservative politicians vying to replace disgraced Prime Minister Boris Johnsonpublicised letters vowing fealty to Israel.
Their timing underscored the degree to which British politicians on both sides of the aisle have now joined their American counterparts in making commitment to Israel a defining issue in their campaigns for highest office.
Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, and Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, trumpeted their pro-Israel credentials over the weekend, as Israel killed 45 Palestinians, including 16 children, and injured hundreds more. Israel said several Islamic Jihad leaders – the intended targets – were among the dead. A ceasefire went into effect late on Sunday night.
As expected, western leaders came out solidly in support of Israel, even though on this occasion there was not even the pretence that Israel was “retaliating” for rockets fired out of Gaza. Israel initiated the hostilities, claiming its strikes were meant to prevent an alleged attack by the Palestinian resistance group Islamic Jihad with an anti-tank missile.
One can imagine how politicians in the United States and Europe would have reacted had a Palestinian faction justified firing rockets into Israel unprovoked on the basis that it wished to deter future Israeli air strikes. But in any case, if deterrence really was Israel’s aim, its attack had precisely the opposite effect. Entirely predictably, Islamic Jihad responded by firing hundreds of rockets into Israel.
In fact, though it is never mentioned by western politicians or media, Palestinians, unlike Israel, actually have a right in international law to resist Israel militarily – and not only because Israel has been belligerently occupying their lands for decades.
Israel has additionally subjected Gaza to a 15-year blockade that has tightly controlled who and what is allowed in and out of the tiny, heavily overcrowded coastal enclave. Gaza has been left in ruins by a series of Israeli attacks over more than a decade – what the Israeli army calls “mowing the lawn”. Gaza’s trapped 2.1 million inhabitants suffer serious shortages of food, clean water, medicines and electricity. Malnutrition and poverty are endemic.
Last year, the head of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, observed:
“If there is a hell on earth, it is the lives of children in Gaza.”
That hell is entirely manmade – by Israel.
Double standard
Perhaps the most flagrantly hypocritical comment on the weekend’s events came from Yevgen Korniychuk, the Ukrainian ambassador to Israel. He tweeted out a message of support for Israel that turned reality on its head.
He expressed “deep sympathy” for the Israeli public, suggesting that Israel, like Ukraine, was suffering “a very brutal attack by its neighbour”. He added: “Attacks on women and children are reprehensible.”
But it was Israel that initiated the attack, not the Palestinians. And it was women and children in Gaza, not in Israel, who died under Israeli bombs.
Korniychuk’s comments served to underscore the wider hypocrisy of western politicians who have expressed outrage at Russian aggression against Ukraine since its invasion in late February, but for years have either minimised or supported Israel’s regular aggression against Gaza.
The double standard was starkly evident in the case of the two contenders for Johnson’s crown. At the weekend, Truss and Sunak laid out their unwavering support for Israel at the very moment it was killing Palestinian civilians in Gaza. They did so to their party’s main pro-Israel lobby group, the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI).
Truss averred: “The UK should stand side by side with Israel, now and well into the future. As Prime Minister, I would be at the forefront of this mission.” Comments from Truss, the bookmakers’ favourite, particularly stick in the craw.
As foreign secretary, she has been outspoken in condemning Russia’s invasion, calling it an “illegal occupation”. She has backed Britons going to fight against Russia. She has loudly supported sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself. And she has suggested that the assets of Russian nationals frozen by the UK should be transferred to Ukraine.
Of course, Truss wishes to extend none of those supposedly principled positions supporting Ukrainians against Russian aggression to Palestinians facing Israeli aggression.
It is inconceivable that she would ever approve of sending arms to Palestinians so they could defend themselves from Israeli attack. Quite the contrary. Truss’s government has increased arms sales to Israel to record levels even as Israel chokes Gaza and Jewish settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem steal ever more Palestinian land.
It is also unthinkable that Truss would agree to freeze Israeli assets in the UK and use them to help reconstruct long-suffering Gaza. Or that she would back Britons going to fight with the Palestinian resistance against Israel’s suffocating blockade of Gaza.
Financial gain
Once again, what is treated as sacrosanct for Ukraine is denied absolutely to Palestinians, even though Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people have been going on for decades, not months. But it is not just that Truss and Sunak are failing to uphold the same ethical and legal principles they espouse so vehemently in the case of Ukraine.
Their letters to CFI deny Palestinians any right – not just a military one – to resist their oppression from Israel, while the pair also promise to reward Israel regardless of how much it oppresses the Palestinians and breaks international law.
Remember, a spate of human rights groups recently concluded that Israel is an apartheid state, in its treatment of both Palestinians under occupation and those living as a minority inside a professedly “democratic” Israel.
That is all swept under the carpet, with neither Tory minister daring to alienate CFI. The organisation’s website revealed in 2014 that four-fifths of all Conservative MPs were CFI members. Its current website reports that since the 2015 general election it has taken more than 180 of them on trips to Israel, where they have been wined and dined by Israeli leaders.
More than a decade ago, an investigation by Channel 4 described CFI as “by far Britain’s most powerful pro-Israel lobbying group”. Its members were reported to have donated more than £10m ($12m) to the party between 2001 and 2009. Which may explain why Truss wrote in her letter: “CFI members are some of our most valued, passionate and committed supporters. I have no doubt that the strength of the Conservative party’s support for the State of Israel stems in large part from the important role that you all play.”
That sounds a little too much like an admission that the Tory party’s – and her own – unconditional backing for Israel derives, at least in part, from the financial leverage exerted by wealthy pro-Israel donors. It was almost as an afterthought that Truss noted her commitment to Israel was also “because it is the right thing to do”.
‘Incentivising’ apartheid
As Truss and Sunak face separate hustings organised by CFI over the next few days, the pair will be encouraged to outcompete each other in demonstrating their loyalty to Israel.
That said, it is hard to imagine what more they can offer. Truss strongly hints that she wants to follow the example set by former US president Donald Trump and move the British embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in defiance of international law.
Peace talks that Israel has long stymied are premised on Palestinians receiving occupied East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. Israel has been actively preempting that possibility by helping Jewish settlers take over Palestinian lands in the city and making life ever harder for the Palestinian population there to drive them out.
Truss said she had been holding conversations about where the embassy is sited with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid. Lapid, who approved the latest attacks on Gaza, backed Trump’s relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem in 2018.
For Trump, the move was intended to pander to his electoral base of US evangelicals. They wish to shore up Jewish control of the region to bring about an end times in which Christians alone rise to be with God.
Now Truss appears ready to emulate Trump.
In her letter, the foreign minister also promises to “cement” Britain’s ties with Israel by expediting a Free Trade Agreement being drafted by the government. Truss has said “closer trade” is a priority.
Human rights groups like Amnesty International have warned against Britain hastily negotiating such an agreement, warning that it may “incentivise Israel’s system of apartheid”, help Israel expand its illegal settlements and give a stamp of approval to Israeli efforts to annex Palestinian land under occupation.
Truss vows too a further crackdown on the international boycott movement, backing a US-style bill to prevent public bodies, including local councils, from joining the BDS campaign to divest funds from Israel for its illegal activities in the occupied territories.
She says BDS causes “needless division”. Presumably the division that concerns her is antagonising Israel’s aggressive lobbyists in the UK, not fuelling tensions with Palestinians, their supporters and human rights groups.
Given inaction by western governments, solidarity expressed through boycotts is effectively the only non-violent way for individuals and organisations to punish Israel – whether for its continuing crimes against ordinary Palestinians, or its efforts to steal and colonise their land, or its moves to frustrate the emergence of a Palestinian state.
By outlawing peaceful resistance to Israel’s belligerent occupation, Truss would leave Palestinians and their supporters with a stark choice: either promote violent forms of resistance, or sit quietly while Israel inflicts death by a thousand cuts on Palestinian statehood and any hopes of peace.
Global power dynamics
Truss makes clear that she will characterise any effort to hold Israel to account as “antisemitism”. She intends to silence criticism of Israel for its human rights abuses at the United Nations, one of the very few international forums where Israel faces scrutiny.
And she promises to toughen the UK’s stance towards Iran, the only counterweight to Israel’s military dominance in the Middle East.
Sunak is barely less extravagant in his advocacy for Israel. He too extols the Free Trade Agreement, calls for intensified intelligence cooperation with Israel against Iran, promises to outlaw boycotts, and grossly mischaracterises the Abraham Accords – signed by some Gulf states to further isolate the Palestinians- as a “new era of peace”.
Whether it is Truss or Sunak who replaces Johnson, each is already committed to championing Israel against the Palestinians and crushing dissent at home.
The opposition Labour leader Keir Starmer is not offering any kind of corrective to the Conservatives’ lockstep support for Israel.
His predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, a strong supporter of justice for the Palestinians, faced a relentless, years’-long, evidence-free campaign tarring him as presiding over an institutionally antisemitic party. Starmer has learnt that lesson. During his campaign for the Labour leadership, he declared himself a Zionist, subscribing to an ideology that in practice insists Israel has a right to usurp Palestinian land and colonise it.
Since then, he has ignored a vote by his own party conference to declare Israel an apartheid state and deny it arms to oppress Palestinians. He has also blurred a long-accepted distinction between anti-Zionism, opposition to Israel’s oppression of Palestinians, and antisemitism, bigotry towards Jews.
Like Truss and Sunak, Starmer has unequivocally supported helping Ukrainians resist Russian aggression while denying that right to Palestinians under Israeli military occupation.
The truth, as illustrated by these bipartisan double standards, is that no UK party leader is prepared to found their foreign policy on genuine ethical principles or humanitarianism, whatever they claim.
Their kneejerk support for Israel follows from a recognition of global power dynamics. Western neocolonial interests are what sets the agenda in the oil-rich, conflict-prone Middle East, a region where the super-powerful lobbies of the fossil fuel industry and the arms manufacturers have so much at stake financially.
It is those narrow, cynical, elite interests that British governments serve, not some notion of the greater public good. Which is why Israel knows it is free to pound Gaza whenever it chooses – with no consequences, except for the Palestinians facings its bombs.
*
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.
Jonathan Cook is the the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at: www.jonathan-cook.net
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.
***
Israel’s weekend blitz on Gaza was a carefully choreographed scenario intended to boost the military credentials of Prime Minister Yair Lapid and allow Defence Minister Benny Gantz to demonstrate his tactical mastery ahead of November’s parliamentary election. Lapid made his career as a journalist and television host while Gantz was in the military and served as armed forces chief from 2011-2015.
It may be significant that this round of violence began on the seventeenth anniversary of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. The offensive is the first under Lapid-Gantz management and comes just 15 months after Israel’s May 2021 assault on Gaza which killed 256 Palestinians, including 66 children, and 13 people in Israel, two of them children. Lapid’s coalition partner Naftali Bennett took over from ousted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on June 11th, 202.Under a deal to share the post, Lapid assumed the caretaker job on July 1 after the collapse of the latest coalition.
The scenario opened with the capture of West Bank Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Bassam Saadi in an Israeli army raid on Jenin on August 1. Lapid claimed that the operation was prompted by an “immediate threat” by Islamic Jihad after West Bank fighters went on high alert and announced they awaited instructions from Gaza in case of war. This could not be construed as a serious threat since Islamic Jihad does not normally respond forcibly to arrests.
Nevertheless, Lapid and Gantz used this limited show of defiance as a pretext to launch Operation Breaking Dawn which was designed to decapitate Islamic State’s leadership in Gaza whateverthe cost to Palestinian civilians.
Lapid and Gantz had prepared the stage of the Gaza theatre by halting food and fuel deliveries to and Palestinian entry to Israel via the Erez terminal. Israel ordered citizens living in communities next to Gaza to stay in their homes, closed roads and stopped train services to and from the south, and closed schools in areas 80 kilometres from the border.
In response to this well-advertised stage setting, it is hardly surprising that Islamic Jihad fighters took up defensive positions along the border fence.
On Friday morning, military spokesman Lt. Col. Richard Hecht announced Israeli war planes struck after observing threatening movements by Islamic Jihad forces and equipment, notably units with anti anti-tank weapons. They were “flexing and moving very, very close to the border”. He added, “We took the initiative, and we haven’t finished yet.” Reinforcements were sent, leave was cancelled for active soldiers and 25,000 reservists were called up. Lapid announced the operation would last a week. In the event, it went on for three days.
Breaking Dawn’s first strike was on the seventh floor of the Gaza Tower where it killed Islamic Jihad officer Nimr Abu Amsha and nine other people. In the afternoon, another Israel missile hit a group gathered outside Abu Samra Mosque in the Shuja’yya neighbourhood of Gaza city, killing five-year-old Alaa Qadoum and wounding her father and six-year-old brother. The girl was looking forward to kindergarten. She was the 19th child slain by Israeli forces this year.
During the three-day assault, Israel slew two senior Islamic Jihad commander, Tayseer Jaabari and Khaled Mansour. As usual, Israel’s offensive was disproportionate and violated international law by harming civilians. When exchanges of missile fire, there was no fighting, ended late Sunday night, 45 Palestinians had been killed, most civilians, of whom 16 were children, and 360 wounded; a number of Israelis were lightly injured, many stumbling while hurrying to shelters.
On Tuesday, the Israeli military shifted its focus to the Old City of Nablus in the West Bank and killed Ibrahim Nabulsi, who was accused of mounting shooting attacks on Israelis, Islam Subbouh, and Hussein Jamal Taha, and wounding 40 other Palestinians.
Breaking Dawn was just another routine assault Israelis call, “mowing the grass”. Which involves reducing resistance to the occupation. Islamic Jihad was simply the most convenient target this time round. In the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority did nothing as Israel focused on Gaza where Hamas stood aside, limiting the scope of Israel’s operation.
Since Israel refuses to make peace with the Palestinians, Israeli leaders are doomed to practice “mowing the grass” from time to time with gaps shrinking between one assault and the next. Because of Israel’s domestic instability “mowing the grass” has become embedded in the electoral cycle. Even for politicians who claim to be left-of-centre, like Lapid.
However, Israel retains neither a viable “left” nor a centre recognisable as a centre. Since the Likud, a merger of rightist and expansionist factions — took power in 1977, Israeli parties have gradually shifted to the right on a once wide political spectrum which featured genuine leftists, centrists, moderate religious parties, which competed with rightist groups. The Likud’s grip on power might have been disrupted after defence minister Ariel Sharon’s 1982 disastrous invasion of Lebanon which gave rise to a popular and populist peace movement seeking todo a deal with the Palestinians.
This effort failed because, when confronted with the need to cede territory for peace, Israeli governments always not only chose territory but also acted on this choice by expanding colonisation of the land Palestinians needed for their state. By adopting this policy, Israeli politicians in office stuck to the programme adopted by the Zionist movement in the1890s. Nothing has deterred them from deviating from this programme which is ultimate goal of Israel and the Zionist movement. For them, Palestinians are merely human obstacles who can be attacked, abused, discriminated against, deported and marginalised even though in the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River Palestinians are now the majority. “Mowing the grass” will continue despite this geodemographic reality.
*
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.
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.
***
On August 5, NASA Space Flight reported that China successfully conducted the launch of two spacecraft in less than 24 hours. The first one, Ludi Shengtai Xitong Tanjiance (TECIS – Terrestrial Ecosystem Carbon Inventory Satellite), was launched at 03:08 UTC on board a Chang Zheng 4B rocket, better known as the Long March 4B, one of China’s premier launch platforms. Less than 24 hours later, a second flight of the Chinese Reusable Experimental Spacecraft was launched on a Long March/Chang Zheng 2F.
However, the exact timing of the second launch was not specified. According to various US sources, the Reusable Experimental Spacecraft is a supposed spaceplane, reportedly similar to the design and concept of the Boeing X-37 spaceplane in use by the United States Space Force. No further details were given about the Chinese spacecraft, but NASA Space Flight claims this is the Reusable Experimental Spacecraft’s second spaceflight.
The first one was launched in September 2020, with a longer ongoing test series out of space being conducted since at least the early 2010s. Chinese officials state that “the spaceplane will be used for peaceful purposes” in space, specifically for “pilot reuse and on-orbit tech validation”. The reusable spacecraft will land at an unspecified later date in China. One of the sites presumed to be the landing spot is Lop Nur, with recent satellite imagery showing what appears to be the preparation of the runway for this purpose. At the time of the launch, no NOTAMs (Notice to Air Missions, a notice containing information essential to flight personnel) have been published in preparation for a return and landing.
The Reusable Experimental Spacecraft is said to possibly originate from the earlier secretive Shenlong project, which was first mentioned in reports back in 2005. The Shenlong itself has seldom been mentioned or shown since its original reveal in 2007. No exact parameters such as weight, size or other details about the potential payload for the space vehicle have been reported either. As previously mentioned, the launch was conducted on a Chang Zheng/Long March 2F rocket.
The launch vehicle itself is mostly known for its role as the primary platform for launching the Shenzhou spacecraft, the design of which resembles the layout of the legendary Russian Soyuz spacecraft, although the Chinese space vehicle is somewhat larger. The Chang Zheng/Long March 2F is also known for launching taikonauts (Chinese space program term for cosmonauts/astronauts) to the Tiangong Space Station, China’s homegrown space platform orbiting in LEO (Low-Earth Orbit) between 340 and 450 km above the Earth’s surface.
The Reusable Experimental Spacecraft itself is known to have its own propulsion, much like the Russian 1980s Buran spaceplane, however, it is not entirely clear what kind of thrust it uses and how the spacecraft can raise its orbit. According to NASA Space Flight, for this launch, the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in China was used. It was opened in 1999 with its first launch, the Shenzhou 1 mission, and since then has been the place to launch the Shenzhou program and China’s crewed spaceflights. It can launch rockets from the CZ-4 and CZ-11 families. Both launches have been completed without complications and the launched spacecraft have reached the planned orbital altitude.
Although the spacecraft involved in this launch might indeed have primarily peaceful purposes in mind, the very fact that both the US and NATO increasingly define space as a “war-fighting domain” has pushed China and Russia to ramp up their space programs, which will invariably involve the militaries of both (Eur)Asian giants. The Chinese project itself is very likely a response to the US Space Force X-37B pilotless spaceplane. Initially a NASA project during the late 1990s, X-37 was officially transferred to the US Department of Defense in 2004. Until 2019, the spacecraft was operated by US Air Force Space Command, after which it was transferred to the newly formed Space Force, a new branch of the US military, which indicates that Washington DC was planning to expand the conflict zone to space.
The X-37B has made six spaceflights since 2010. The spacecraft likely serves several purposes, including being an in-orbit test platform for developing advanced space-based surveillance sensors, particularly for tracking hypersonic weapons, in which the US lags significantly behind both Russia and China. The US Space Force acknowledges ownership of at least two X-37B space vehicles. The spaceplane’s latest flight, launched in May 2020, has seen the X-37B set new records for spaceflight duration, with the current mission now in orbit for 815 days and counting. US military sources claim that the shorter duration of the Chinese spaceplane’s first flight may indicate that it has a special role in testing hypersonic technologies or other activities related to a high-velocity atmospheric reentry.
Although the Pentagon officials keep refusing to provide a detailed public account of its mission and activities, the X-37B is clearly seen as a threat by both Moscow and Beijing, as neither of the superpowers can afford to speculate on US intentions. The very fact that the spacecraft is operated by the US military is a clear indicator that this stance is not without merit. Russia is even building land-based laser weapons to counter US space threats and is also launching its own spacecraft to track US space assets in order to deter the belligerent thalassocracy. As the United States keeps falling behind strategically, it aims to expand the conflict zone beyond Earth.
*
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.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
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.
***
The Globe and Mail, one of Canada’s longest running newspapers, published a job-posting for the paper reserved for fully vaccinated applicants.
The job-posting, which was released July 15, stated that the paper was looking to hire a “full-time… Ottawa Bureau reporter.”
The job description included “covering federal politics and national news.”
Listed under qualifications and salary information regarding the position was the paper’s vaccination policy.
While vaccine-free journalists could in theory apply for the job, the policy states: “All offers of employment with The Globe and Mail are conditional upon the candidate being Fully Vaccinated.”
In addition, all Globe and Mail hires must “prove they are Fully Vaccinated… by emailing a copy of their vaccine dose administration receipt(s) to Human Resources prior to their start date.”
If a potential employee fails to provide proof of vaccinated, then the position will be revoked.
The posting does give lip-service to possible exemptions “based on one or more of the protected grounds in the Human Rights Code,” although does not stipulate what those might be in the posting itself.
The posting also stated that the paper is “dedicated to diversity and inclusion in the workplace,” although it is not clear how unvaccinated Canadians would be included at the Globe and Mail.
The legacy paper has received millions of dollars in subsidies from Prime Minister Trudeau’s Liberal government. In 2019 the outfit received over two million dollars in untendered contracts and in 2020 asked the federal government for more financial assistance.
Just before last year’s federal election, the Trudeau government dished out over 60 million dollars to media outlets in Canada, but refused to name the recipients.
Last month, Rebel News chief Ezra Levant tweeted his criticisms of a Globe and Mail article that opined that a recession might present a financial positive for “millennials and Gen Z.”
He stated that that the Globe and Mail “wants you to know that the recession and inflation are actually really great for young and poor people.” And he alleged that the paper receives “tens of millions of dollars a year from Trudeau’s bail-out program.”
Thomson's Globe and Mail receives tens of millions of dollars a year from Trudeau's newspaper bail-out program. (Both Trudeau and Thomson refuse to disclose the actual sum.) I don't understand why the Globe is not embracing poverty like they're advising "young people" to do.
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.
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 previously published by Mercola on June 5, 2019, and has been updated with new information.
5G relies primarily on the bandwidth of the millimeter wave, known to cause a painful burning sensation. It’s also been linked to eye and heart problems, suppressed immune function, genetic damage and fertility problems
FCC admits no 5G safety studies have been conducted or funded by the agency or telecom industry, and that none are planned
The FCC has been captured by the telecom industry, which in turn has perfected the disinformation strategies employed by the tobacco industry before it
Persistent exposures to microwave frequencies like those from cellphones can cause mitochondrial dysfunction and nuclear DNA damage from free radicals produced from peroxynitrite
Excessive exposures to cellphones and Wi-Fi networks have been linked to chronic diseases such as cardiac arrhythmias, anxiety, depression, autism, Alzheimer’s and infertility
*
Exposure to electromagnetic field (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation is an ever-growing health risk in the modern world. The Cellular Phone Task Force website1 has a long list of governments and organizations that have issued warnings or banned wireless technologies of various kinds and under various circumstances, starting in 1993.
Another long list of organizations representing doctors and scientists are also among them, including an appeal for protection from nonionizing EMF exposure by more than 230 international EMF scientists to the United Nations in 2015, which notes that:2
“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines.
Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system,3,4,5 learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”
A call for a moratorium on 5G specifically was issued in September 2017 by more than 180 scientists and doctors from 35 countries,6,7 “until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry,” noting that “RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment,” and that “5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place.”
In an article8 on the Environmental Health Trust’s website, Ronald Powell, Ph.D., a retired Harvard scientist of applied physics, notes “there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather there are only ‘bad ways’ and ‘worse ways,'” and rather than argue about who should have control over its deployment, we should focus on preventing its employment altogether.
Health Concerns Over 5G Abound
Wall Street analyst Sunil Rajgopal also warned that mounting health concerns may delay the implementation of 5G.9 Some countries have already taken steps to slow 5G deployment due to health risks, Rajgopal notes. The question is, can it be stopped?
5G testing was halted in Brussels, Belgium,10 and Switzerland is delaying its 5G rollout in order to create a system to monitor radiation.11 Syracuse, New York, is also attempting to set up some safeguards and has “negotiated the right to conduct on-demand safety inspections of 5G antennas,” to allay public concerns.12 According to Forbes:13
“In New Hampshire, lawmakers are considering establishing a commission to study the health impacts of 5G networks. And Mill Valley, Calif., near San Francisco, last year banned new 5G wireless cells.”
Many other areas, however, have chosen to trust the Federal Communications Commission and the wireless industry trade association, CTIA, which has created a “Cellphone Health Facts” website citing research showing no risk. However, if you believe the FCC is assessing health risks, you’d be wrong.
At a Senate commerce hearing (above), the FCC admitted that no 5G safety studies have been conducted or funded by the agency or the telecom industry, and that none are planned.14,15 In a speech given at the National Press Club in June 2016, Tom Wheeler, former FCC chairman and prior head of the wireless industry lobbying group, made the agency’s stance clear when he said:16
“Stay out of the way of technological development. Unlike some countries, we do not believe we should spend the next couple of years studying … Turning innovators loose is far preferable to letting committees and regulators define the future. We won’t wait for the standards …”
In light of the more than 2,000 studies showing a wide range of biological harm from EMFs, assurances from the FCC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that wireless radiation exposures, including 5G, is safe, seem disingenuous at best. As noted in a Counterpunch article:17
“Telecom lobbyists assure us that guidelines already in place are adequate to protect the public. Those safety guidelines, however, are based on a 1996 study of how much a cell phone heated the head of an adult-sized plastic mannequin. This is problematic, for at least three reasons:
living organisms consist of highly complex and interdependent cells and tissue, not plastic.
those being exposed to radiofrequency radiation include fetuses, children, plants, and wildlife – not just adult male humans.
the frequencies used in the mannequin study were far lower than the exposures associated with 5G.”
Even so, in 2022, substantial research on EMF safety has yet to be done. In fact, as of August 1, 2022, of more than 35,000 articles on EMFs, only seven have been medical or biological studies.18However, “none of these studies modulated or pulsed the signal as required by 5G or used other features of 5G technology,” according to Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., director for the Center of Family and Community Health School of Public Health at UC Berkeley.19
What Level of EMF Can Humans Withstand?
EMF exposure at many biological impacting frequencies, such as those that run cellphones and Wi-Fi, has increased about 1 quintillion times over the past 100 years.20,21 Unfortunately, EMF exposure is so widespread these days, it’s virtually impossible to conduct controlled population studies anymore, as no population is truly unexposed or unaffected. This lack of a control group makes it very difficult to determine what the real-world effects are.
That said, one controlled exposure study has been done, revealing it’s nowhere near as harmless as people think. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were two populations in the United States — rural and urban. Urban areas were by and large electrified, while rural areas were not electrified until around 1950.
Dr. Sam Milham, an epidemiologist, painstakingly analyzed mortality statistics between these two populations over time, clearly showing there was a wide difference in mortality from heart disease, cancer and diabetes between these two groups. Then, as rural areas became electrified, the two curves merged.
Today, we not only live and work in electrified surroundings, we’re also surrounded by microwaves from wireless technologies. Soon, 5G may be added to the mix, making exposures all the more complex and potentially harmful. As noted by Counterpunch:22
“5G radiofrequency (RF) radiation uses a ‘cocktail’ of three types of radiation, ranging from relatively low-energy radio waves, microwave radiation with far more energy, and millimeter waves with vastly more energy …
The extremely high frequencies in 5G are where the biggest danger lies. While 4G frequencies go as high as 6 GHz, 5G exposes biological life to pulsed signals in the 30 GHz to 100 GHz range. The general public has never before been exposed to such high frequencies for long periods of time.”
Health Concerns Linked to 5G Exposure
The added concern 5G brings is the addition of the millimeter wave (MMW). This bandwidth, which runs from 30 gigahertz (GHz) to 300GHz,23 is known to penetrate up to 2 millimeters into human skin tissue,24,25 causing a burning sensation.
This is precisely why MMW was chosen for use in crowd control weapons (Active Denial Systems) by the U.S. Department of Defense.26 MMW is also used in so-called “naked body scanners” at airports.27
Research has shown sweat ducts in human skin act as receptors or antennae for 5G radiation, drawing the radiation into the body,28,29,30,31,32 thereby causing a rise in temperature. This in part helps explain the painful effect. As noted by Dr. Yael Stein — who has studied 5G MMW technology and its interaction with the human body — in a 2016 letter to the Federal Communications Commission:33
“Computer simulations have demonstrated that sweat glands concentrate sub-terahertz waves in human skin. Humans could sense these waves as heat. The use of sub-terahertz (millimeter wave) communications technology (cellphones, Wi-Fi, antennas) could cause humans to percept physical pain via nociceptors.
Potentially, if 5G Wi-Fi is spread in the public domain we may expect more of the health effects currently seen with RF/ microwave frequencies including many more cases of hypersensitivity (EHS), as well as many new complaints of physical pain and a yet unknown variety of neurologic disturbances.
It will be possible to show a causal relationship between G5 technology and these specific health effects. The affected individuals may be eligible for compensation.”
MMW has also been linked to:34,35,36,37,38
Eye problems such as lens opacity in rats, which is linked to the production of cataracts,39 and eye damage in rabbits40,41
Impacted heart rate variability, an indicator of stress, in rats42,43,44 and heart rate changes (arrhythmias) in frogs45,46
Pain47
Suppressed immune function48
Depressed growth and increased antibiotic resistance in bacteria49
As noted in a Gaia.com article:50
“Many scientists understand that the electromagnetic radiation leaking through the doors of our microwave ovens are carcinogenic, and therefore, can cause cancer. Most of these scientists also believe that these waves are mutagenic, meaning they change the DNA structure of living beings.51
The launch of 5G will be similar to turning on your microwave, opening its door, and leaving it on for the rest of your life. There’s good reason why hundreds of scientists are taking action against the wireless industry.”
Understanding EMFs’ Mechanisms of Harm
As explained in by Martin Pall, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of biochemistry and basic medical sciences at Washington State University, the primary danger of EMFs in general is that it causes excess oxidative stress that results in mitochondrial dysfunction.
According to Pall’s research,52,53,54,55 radiofrequency microwave radiation such as that from your cellphone and wireless router activates the voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) located in the outer membrane of your cells.
According to Pall, VGCCs are 7.2 million times more sensitive to microwave radiation than the charged particles inside and outside our cells, which means the safety standards for this exposure are off by a factor of 7.2 million.
Low-frequency microwave radiation opens your VGCCs, thereby allowing an abnormal influx of calcium ions into the cell, which in turn activates nitric oxide (NO) and superoxide which react nearly instantaneously to form peroxynitrite56 that then causes carbonate free radicals, which are one of the most damaging reactive nitrogen species known and thought to be a root cause for many of today’s chronic diseases.
For an in-depth understanding of peroxynitrites and the harm they inflict, see “Nitric Oxide and Peroxynitrite in Health and Disease”57 — a 140-page free access paper with 1,500 references written by Dr. Pal Pacher, Joseph Beckman and Dr. Lucas Liaudet.
One of its most significant hazards of peroxynitrite is that it damages DNA. The European REFLEX study published in 2004 revealed the nonthermal effects of 2G and 3G radiation are actually very similar to the effects of X-rays in terms of the genetic damage they cause.58
Your body has the capacity to repair that damage through a family of 17 different enzymes collectively called poly ADP ribose polymerases (PARP). However, while PARP work well, they require NAD+ for fuel and when they run out of NAD+ they stop repairing your DNA.
This in turn can lead to premature cell death, since 100 to 150 NAD+ molecules are needed to repair a single DNA strand break. NAD+ is central to maintaining cellular and mitochondrial health, so the fact that PARP consumes NAD+ to counteract EMF damage is an important concern.
Cancer Is Not the Primary Health Risk of EMF
The voltage in your body appears to play a significant role in health and disease. Your body’s production of electricity allows your cells to communicate and perform basic biological functions necessary for your survival. However, your body is designed to operate at very specific levels and frequencies.
It seems logical that being surrounded by man-made EMFs that are 1 quintillion times higher than the natural EMF environment of the Earth may interfere with your DNA’s ability to receive and transmit biological signals.
While the controversy over EMF damage has centered around whether or not it can cause cancer, especially brain tumors, this actually isn’t your greatest concern. Since the damage is strongly linked to activation of your VGCCs, it stands to reason that areas where VGCCs are the densest would be most vulnerable to damage.
As it happens, the highest density of VGCCs are found in your nervous system, your brain, the pacemaker in your heart and in male testes. As a result, EMFs are likely to contribute to neurological and neuropsychiatric59 problems, heart and reproductive problems.
This includes but is not limited to cardiac arrhythmias, anxiety, depression, autism, Alzheimer’s and infertility. Indeed, this is what researchers keep finding, and all of these health problems are far more prevalent and kill more people than brain cancer.
What’s more, seeing how many are already struggling with electromagnetic hypersensitivity, saturating cities and suburban areas with MMW radiation will undoubtedly make the problem more widespread, and make life unbearable for those already feeling the effects of wireless radiation.
Media Ploy to Detract From 5G Concerns: Blame the Russians
In a Medium article,60 Devra Davis, Ph.D. — a well-respected and credentialed researcher on the dangers of cellphone radiation — highlights a media trend of writing off scientists who warn about 5G dangers by labeling them “untethered alarmists … linked to Russian propaganda.”
“Could it be a coincidence that following on the heels of the NY Times story, the Wall Street Journal and the UK Telegraph have echoed the same smear of guilt by association,” she writes,61 adding:
“These otherwise credible media sources ignore the substantial body of science pinpointing hazards of wireless radiation and 5G detailed in independent journalistic investigations that have appeared extensively in media throughout Europe and been covered by major networks …
Could the failure to report these critical 5G issues and correct misleading information regarding health effects of wireless and 5G in the New York Times have anything to do with the their new joint venture with Verizon in 5G journalism, or the fact that the Times board of directors includes officials from Facebook, Verizon, Media Lab, and other stalwarts of the telecom industry, while Carlos Slim, head of some of the largest telecom firms in the world, has downsized and now owns just 15 percent of its stock?”
Davis also points out a clear difference between American and Russian scientific expertise with regard to EMF:
“The history of research on the environmental and public health impacts of radio frequency microwave radiation (‘wireless radiation’) reveals some uneasy parallels with that of tobacco.
In the 1950s and 1960s, scientists who showed the harmful impacts of tobacco found themselves struggling for serious attention and financial support. The validity of their views was only accepted after the toll of sickness and death had become undeniable.
For health impacts from wireless radiation, a similar pattern is emerging. Each time a U.S. government agency produced positive findings, research on health impacts was defunded.
The Office of Naval Research, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Environmental Protection Agency all once had vibrant research programs documenting dangers of wireless radiation. All found their programs scrapped, reflecting pressure from those who sought to suppress this work.
Russian’s 50 years of research on electromagnetic radiation since the Cold War has led to their clear understanding that this exposure does have biological effects. The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection issued a 2011 Resolution62recommending persons under 18 not use a cell phone.”
Brain Cancer Risk Is Likely Real
While heart disease, dementia and infertility overshadow the risk of brain cancer, the possibility of cancer still remains, and may be a far more significant concern for young children who are growing up surrounded by wireless technologies than we realize.
The fact is, we won’t know for sure whether in utero and early cellphone use will increase brain cancer rates until a decade or two from now when today’s youths have grown up. Mounting research suggests cellphone radiation certainly influences your risk, and there are a number of compelling anecdotal reports that are hard to ignore.
In her article,63 Davis mentions Robert C. Kane, a senior telecom engineer “had willingly served as a guinea pig for Motorola and other companies developing new wireless technologies in the 1980s.”
He developed a type of malignant brain cancer the National Toxicology Program later confirmed was a side effect of cellphone radiation exposure (see video above). The NTPs results were published in 2018. Before his death in 2002, Kane published the book, “Cellphone Radiation — Russian Roulette,”64 in which he stated that:65
“Never in human history has there been such a practice as we now encounter with the marketing and distributing of products hostile to the human biological system by an industry with foreknowledge of those effects.”
FCC Is a Captured Agency That Cannot Be Trusted
Davis also highlights another crucial problem, namely the fact that the FCC has been captured by the telecom industry, which in turn has perfected the disinformation strategies employed by the tobacco industry before it. She writes:66
“… [I]n 2015 a Harvard expose tracked the revolving door between the FCC and the telecom industry and concluded that the FCC is a captured agency and that ‘Consumer safety, health, and privacy, along with consumer wallets, have all been overlooked, sacrificed, or raided due to unchecked industry influence.'”
The book in question is “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates,” written by investigative journalist Norm Alster.67
As just one example, before his role as FCC chairman, Wheeler headed up the CTIA, which is the lobbying group for the wireless industry, which explains his commentary on 5G and why the FCC doesn’t believe in studying its health risks and “won’t wait for the standards.”
The book also shows how the telecom industry is manipulating public opinion by undermining the credibility of scientists that speak of dangers, cutting funds for research, publishing manipulated studies showing no harm and claiming “scientific consensus” of no harm when no such consensus actually exists. Naturally, the telecom industry also spends millions of dollars lobbying the FCC on issues that might impact its bottom line.68
5G Threatens Weather Prediction
Interestingly, aside from potential health ramifications, a global 5G network will also threaten our ability to predict weather which, in addition to putting civilians at risk will also jeopardize the Navy.69According to a paper70 in the journal Nature, widespread 5G coverage will prevent satellites from detecting changes in water vapor, which is how meteorologists predict weather changes and storms.
Davis quotes71 Stephen English, meteorologist at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts: “This is the first time we’ve seen a threat to what I’d call the crown jewels of our frequencies — the ones that we absolutely must defend come what may.”
Alas, the FCC ignores such concerns and, according to Davis, “weather experts within the U.S. government are being muzzled.” In a letter to the FCC, Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., urge the agency to rein in the expansion of wireless communications in the 24 GHz band for this reason.72
Educate Yourself About the Health Risks of 5G
My book, “EMF*D: 5G, Wi-Fi & Cell Phones: Hidden Harms and How to Protect Yourself,” talks about EMF dangers, with a comprehensive resource on current technologies such as:
What EMFs (electromagnetic fields) actually are, where you find them in your daily life, and how they affect you
The toll that EMFs have been proven to take in conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and neuropsychiatric illnesses
Why you’ve been largely kept in the dark about this threat to your health
How you can actually repair the damage done by EMFs at a cellular level
Practical strategies to protect yourself and your loved ones from EMFs at home, at work, and out in the world
You can also download a two-page 5G fact sheet73 from the Environmental Health Trust. On their website, you can also access a long list of published scientific studies showing cause for concern.74
To reduce your EMF exposure, read through the suggestions below and implement as many of them as possible. Additional guidance and solutions for mitigating electric and magnetic fields can also be found at the end of “Healthy Wiring Practices,”75 a document created by building biologist Oram Miller, whom I’ve interviewed on this topic.
*
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.
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.
***
Bypassing normal clinical trial guidance, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday expanded the Emergency Use Authorization for the Jynneos monkeypox vaccine to allow for an alternative method of injection and for “high-risk” children under 18 to get the vaccine.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday expanded the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Jynneos monkeypox vaccine to allow for an alternative method of injection the agency said would help conserve low supplies.
The expanded EUA also allows the vaccine to be used in children under age 18 who are at “high risk” of infection.
Prior to issuing the expanded EUA, the FDA confirmed that “numerous” children were granted access to the vaccine on a “case-by-case basis” through a special permission process — even though the vaccine was not approved or authorized for emergency use in that age group — ABC News reported on Aug. 4.
News of the potential dose-sparing recommendations prompted some congressional staff — including from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services — to question federal health officials about whether using the alternative injection method could affect the efficacy of the shot.
“They seemed to have no good answers for us, other than denying that it would impact things,” an individual who attended a briefing on the matter told Politico. “But they didn’t present any data.”
According to CNBC, monkeypox is rarely fatal and no deaths have been reported in the U.S. However, some patients need to be hospitalized to manage lesions, which can be painful.
Under the expanded EUA, healthcare providers can administer Bavarian Nordic’s Jynneos vaccine through intradermal injection — meaning between layers of the skin rather than below the skin — instead of subcutaneously, or beneath the skin.
The change in injection method will increase available doses fivefold — from 441,000 to more than 2.2 million — as intradermal injection uses only a fraction of the dose but provides the same protection, health officials said at a White House briefing.
The FDA said it determined the “known and potential benefits” of the monkeypox vaccine “outweigh the known and potential risks for the authorized uses.”
FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf said in a press release:
“In recent weeks the monkeypox virus has continued to spread at a rate that has made it clear our current vaccine supply will not meet the current demand. The FDA quickly explored other scientifically appropriate options to facilitate access to the vaccine for all impacted individuals.
“By increasing the number of available doses, more individuals who want to be vaccinated against monkeypox will now have the opportunity to do so.”
Jynneos was approved in 2019 for the prevention of smallpox and monkeypox in high-risk adults 18 and older. The approval specified that the vaccine was to be administered subcutaneously, in two doses 28 days apart.
Using the intradermal method, the vaccine still will need to be administered in two doses, four weeks apart, the FDA said.
Children under 18 who are at high risk of monkeypox infection can receive the vaccine by subcutaneous injection, as it is easier to administer and there is not as much data available on the use of the vaccine in this age group.
The move to allow monkeypox vaccination in children under 18 is based on findings from the vaccine’s use in adults and on data on pediatric smallpox vaccination, CNN reported.
According to the CDC, Jynneos is approved to be administered subcutaneously into the fatty tissue over the triceps area in the upper arm.
The vaccine is administered as a “live Vaccinia virus preparation that is inoculated into the skin by pricking the skin surface.”
Although the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is conducting a dose-sparing study of the Jynneos vaccine using intradermal injection, it could take months to complete, Politico reported.
In the meantime, the FDA based its authorization to allow the vaccine to be administered intradermally on data from a 2015 study of Jynneos in 524 participants, which “found a similar immune response when the vaccine was given intradermally in doses one-fifth the size of those given subcutaneously.”
Only the abstract is publicly accessible, and it is unclear from the abstract whether researchers assessed a smallpox antigen from the variola virus or an antigen from a monkeypox virus.
“There is no traditional assessment of this vaccine … because there weren’t smallpox cases, and the monkeypox outbreaks before this were not large enough to really do a clinical trial,” Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said Tuesday.
“We want to collect outcome data, as we do with all vaccines,” Marks said. “And I’d also point out that the NIH [National Institutes of Health] will be mounting a clinical trial and is working through the logistics of that now.”
CDC guidance ‘discourages variations from the recommended route, site, volume, or number of doses of any vaccine’
On a call with reporters, Califf said the “overall safety and efficacy profile [of Jynneos] will not be sacrificed” with a dose-sparing approach, which Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief medical advisor to President Biden, touted as a ”promising solution to the vaccine shortage.”
According to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, best practice guidance for the administration of a vaccine is normally “derived from data from clinical trials, practical experience, normal intervals of health care visits and theoretical considerations.”
The committee “discourages variations from the recommended route, site, volume, or number of doses of any vaccine” as “variation from the recommended route and site can result in inadequate protection.”
The CDC website lists numerous examples where the method of administering a vaccine alters immunogenicity — the ability of a foreign substance, such as an antigen, to provoke an immune response in the human body.
A paper published in 2015, in the Expert Review of Vaccines assessed the effect of vaccine administration modality on immunogenicity and efficacy.
The authors found the “route of delivery can affect the vaccine localization that may influence the priming of immune cells as well as consequential local and systemic immune responses.”
They went on to say that “the choice of one strategy over the other depends on the type of vaccine and protective immunity needed to conquer the disease based on the route of infection and transmission.”
The FDA’s decision to authorize a new route of administration for Jynneos comes less than a week after the Biden administration declared monkeypox a public health emergency, allowing government health agencies to authorize unapproved medical products or uses of approved medical products to fight the spread of the virus.
*
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.
Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.
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.
***
Saleh Kadri, a young farmer from Leubok Pusaka village in North Aceh district, was on his way to his plantation when he spotted eight elephants on the riverbank. From his canoe, he recorded a video with his phone. The animals looked stunned. One seemed to be staring at Saleh’s moving canoe, while the others turned to flee. “Elephants! Elephants!” Saleh and his friends shouted until all the animals were gone behind the trees.
“They were trapped,” said Nurdin, a conservation official in North Aceh, a district near the northern tip of Indonesia’s Sumatra Island. The herd, he told Mongabay, had nowhere else to go. They couldn’t cross the river and they couldn’t return to the forest due to land-clearing activities in the opposite direction, in the neighboring village of Cot Girek.
A few days later, the herd finally managed to escape during a downpour. But the story didn’t end there. When they reached Cot Girek, the elephants found food in the villagers’ farms and destroyed four houses. The villagers were not happy.
In the past few years, there’s been massive land clearing in North Aceh, which lies along Sumatra’s eastern coast in the province of Aceh. Despite the district’s enforcement of a moratorium on issuing new permits for corporate oil palm plantations, conservationists report ongoing deforestation on the ground. The North Aceh government has granted permissions for land clearing for smallholder oil palm farms, some of which are said to be controlled by powerful people in the region. This land-use change, conservationists say, has further fragmented the habitat of Sumatran elephants. “If we don’t take this problem seriously, I believe the animals will soon go extinct,” Nurdin said.
According to the latest population assessment by the Indonesian Elephant Conservation Forum, known by its Indonesian acronym FKGI, Aceh is home to 42% of the Sumatran elephants (Elephas maximus sumatranus) thought to remain in the country. The rest of the estimated population of 924-1,359 is struggling to survive in oil palm and pulpwood concessions in Riau and Jambi provinces, while a few are in national parks in Lampung province. “Aceh is our [best] hope,” said Wahdi Azmi, a conservationist who leads CRU Aceh, a local conservation group. Across the province, 392-456 elephants still remain, according to the latest assessment, doing their best to survive in the fast-changing environment.
“More than 85% of Sumatran elephants live outside conservation areas,” Azmi said. In Aceh, there are four to five human-elephant conflicts reported every day, he added. In June, conflict intensity escalated in North Aceh, where much of the land has been cleared for oil palm.
Cot Girek sits between a vast palm oil plantation and Leuser ecosystem. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
Members of the government’s local Conservation Response Unit on their way to see one of their captive elephants in the jungle. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
Living on the front lines
In Cot Girek, a loud bang from a PVC air cannon woke Junaidi at 2 a.m. The 41-year-old farmer heads the village’s elephant patrol team. Hearing the sound, he knew it was a sign that wild elephants were moving in. “Shoot the canon five times if you find wild elephants around your house” — that’s how the villagers have been told to communicate with others who might live kilometers away with poor cellular service. Junaidi only heard one shot that night, but as patrol leader he had to get up and investigate despite the rain. In the darkness, he walked some 10 kilometers (6 miles) along muddy roads around the village to check the situation.
Since early June, Junaidi and other villagers in Cot Girek and Leubok Pusaka have been staying awake at night. In the space of a month, four wooden huts were reportedly destroyed by elephants. Asnawi, a smallholder oil palm farmer who lives 3 km (nearly 2 mi) from Junaidi’s hut, was shocked to see 400 oil palm shoots in his plantation chewed up by elephants. Looking at the damage, “we couldn’t sleep well,” said Ida, Asnawi’s sister, who didn’t want her crops to meet the same fate.
Husna, an environmental activist from a local NGO called People’s Conscience, or SAHARA by its Indonesian acronym, said the increasing cases of human-elephant conflict are caused by habitat loss. Cleared land can be seen from Junaidi’s hut, showing the forested hills from afar. Deforestation has eliminated the transition zone between the hills and the village. No lowland forest is visible in between.
“Elephants are coming from that hill,” Junaidi said, pointing to a forested area over the horizon.
An oil palm farmer in Cot Girek showing palm shoots demolished by an elephant and its calf the night before. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
According to Lukmanul Hakim, the geographical information system manager at Forest, Nature, and Environment Aceh (HAkA), a conservation group focused on Sumatra’s Leuser Ecosystem, North Aceh has long had one of the highest deforestation rates in Aceh province. His analysis of satellite data generated by Planetscope, which he called the most accurate satellite image provider, shows the district lost 7,508 hectares (18,553 acres) of forest from 2017-2020.
Satellite data generated from forest monitoring platform Nusantara Atlas show significant deforestation in Leubok Pusaka and Cot Girek, in the northern part of Leuser, over the past two years.
One of the recently cleared lands on the way to Alue Buloh, Cot Girek. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
Nurdin, the conservation agency official, said data he had collected from GPS collars tagged to elephants in North Aceh from 2016-19 showed that rainforest had been cleared within the elephants’ migration routes.
Lilis Indriyani, the head of the North Aceh Plantation, Livestock and Animal Disease Agency, acknowledged land-clearing activities in Cot Girek. “But these lands are classified as non-forest,” she said. Lilis also said most of this clearing was done by local people rather than corporate actors. In general, she said, the district is pro-environment. Since 2016, the district has actively applied a freeze on new oil palm permits. “We no longer give permit for companies to open up new oil palm plantations,” she said. “Nor do we give oil palm seeds to smallholder farmers.”
But on the ground, people are looking at different facts. Junaidi said the cleared land around his hut is owned by powerful government officials. There’s also more of a chance of new deforestation under a central government policy granting 8,000 hectares (19,800 acres) of land to ex-combatants of the Free Aceh Movement, or GAM, a now-disbanded armed insurgent group. Partai Aceh, the governor’s political party, is the political extension of the movement.
Ricky, a Conservation Response Unit mahout, with Marni, a 46-year-old captive elephant that assists the mahouts to herd wild elephants back to the rainforest. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
It has always been poor villagers and elephants who suffer from conflict. In Aleu Buloh, Junaidi’s hut sits between the forest and oil palm plantations owned by state-owned PT Perkebunan Nusantara I. Junaidi said the company relies on the villagers’ patrol team to mitigate elephant conflicts, but don’t give them any compensation. “We are guarding their gate … all information about wild elephant movement comes from us,” he said. (PTPN I did not respond to an interview request.)
People like Junaidi and Saleh Kadri have to rely on their own resources to herd the elephants away from their village. “We have reported about elephant conflicts in our village so many times but there has been no response from the government,” Saleh said. “Conflict, always conflict. We are tired of this … We hope the government can help farmers like us.”
A week after they strayed into Cot Girek, the elephants managed to leave the village, Nurdin said. They were last seen heading to Paya Bakung, a subdistrict of North Aceh where a huge infrastructure project is being constructed. To mitigate the annual flooding in Lhoksukon, the capital of North Aceh, authorities are building the Kreung Keureto reservoir in Paya Bakung, which would end the herd’s movements. “It’s a dead end. They will have to come back to … Cot Girek and finally Langkahan, where they can’t cross the river and start their journey all over again,” Nurdin said.
“Poor elephants … they are chased from every side,” he added. “They don’t know where else to go.”
*
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.
Featured image: A Sumatran elephant with its calf. Image by Fieni Aprilia for Mongabay.
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.
***
During the 1970s, amid a draconian counter-intelligence program (COINTELPRO) launched by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) against African American organizations throughout the United States, a cadre of activists in New York City sought to continue the Black Liberation Movement in the face of escalating state repression.
One key figure in these efforts was Dr. Mutulu Shakur who worked consistently to address the problems of economic underdevelopment and drug addiction gripping the neighborhoods of the South Bronx and Harlem.
Eventually, Shakur would travel to Montreal, Quebec in Canada and the People’s Republic of China to study acupuncture in order to apply this medical approach in treating people suffering from heroin addiction which had reached epidemic proportions in New York and scores of other urban areas around the country. Many strongly believed that the scourge of narcotics addiction was part and parcel of the government’s COINTELPRO project. He was the co-founder and co-director of the Black Acupuncture Advisory Association of North America (BAAANA).
After the rebellions which swept the U.S. during the mid-to-late 1960s spawning the emergence of the organizations such as the Black Panther Party (BPP) and the Republic of New Africa (RNA), the FBI under the direction of the Justice Department along with local and state police departments embarked upon a series of tactics with the strategic goals of neutralizing and liquidating the leadership of revolutionary formations. Although the bulk of documented COINTELPRO operations were launched against the BPP and similar tendencies, the entire African American movement for Civil Rights, Black Power and Socialism fell victim to the machinations of the FBI as well as other spying and destabilizing apparatuses including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Military Intelligence Corps.
Hundreds of organizers operating in communities throughout the U.S. were arrested, framed and railroaded into prisons. The BPP reported in 1970 that over a period of two years, 28 members of their organization had been killed as a direct result of police and FBI machinations.
Detroit meeting to win compassionate release for Dr. Mutulu Shakur, Aug. 5, 2022 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
In March of 1968, the Republic of New Africa was formed in Detroit at the then 20 Grand Club, one of the most popular gathering places on the city’s westside during the 1950s and 1960s. Initially, the organization brought together a broad spectrum of activists from across the U.S.
The RNA demanded the creation of a Black Nation encompassing five states in the southern U.S.: Louisiana, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi. The idea was based upon several legal and political arguments which advanced the notion that people of African descent were due reparations for their enslavement and subsequent oppression and exploitation which did not end with the conclusion of the Civil War and the enactment of several constitutional amendments and Civil Rights Acts during the 1860s and 1870s.
The acquisition of a land mass along with an independent government would serve to compensate and liberate the African American people, labelled “New Africans” by the RNA and its subsequent mass organizations. After the formal founding of the RNA, leaders of the organization delivered a document to the U.S. State Department declaring their independence and demanding land to establish a separate Black nation.
“Two brothers, Milton and Richard Henry, who were associates of Malcolm X, formed an organization called the Malcolm X Society, which was devoted to the creation of an independent Black nation within the United States. Milton and Richard subsequently changed their names to Gaidi Obadele and Imari Abubakari Obadele, respectively. The brothers organized a meeting of 500 Black nationalists in Detroit, Michigan in 1968. Exiled former North Carolina NAACP leader Robert Williams was chosen as the first President of the Republic of New Africa. The group wrote a declaration of independence and established the Republic of New Africa. The group anticipated that the U.S. would reject their demands and made plans for armed resistance and a prolonged guerrilla war.”
Mutulu Shakur and the Black Liberation Movement
Dr. Shakur has stated in an interview that he was present in Detroit during the first anniversary of the RNA in late March of 1969. A gathering was held at the nationally known New Bethel Baptist Church, pastored at the time by the Rev. C.L. Franklin, the father of legendary vocalists and composers Aretha, Erma and Carolyn Franklin, on March 29 of that year.
A clash outside the church when the meeting was concluding between two rookie white Detroit police officers and security personnel for the RNA resulted in the death of one officer and the critical wounding of another. Within minutes dozens of police officers invaded the church firing randomly despite the fact that people were still inside the building. Nearly 150 people inside and outside the church were arrested as suspects in the shooting of the police officers.
Nonetheless, then Recorder’s Court Judge George Crockett Jr. accompanied by Rev. Franklin and former State Representative James Del Rio arrived at the detention facilities. Judge Crockett immediately set up court proceedings where those arrested without probable cause were released. The incident fueled the already tense racial situation in Detroit which had been the scene of the largest urban rebellion during late July of 1967.
Judge Crockett was subjected to an attempted impeachment led by the notorious Detroit Police Officers Association (DPOA) and its supporters in the white community and the corporate press. However, Crockett remained in office while three people who were charged in the shooting were never convicted.
There were several other armed confrontations involving the RNA, the Black Panther Party and its military wing, the Black Liberation Army (BLA) between 1967 and the early 1980s. Dr. Shakur, a target of the COINTELPRO operations of the federal government, was eventually forced underground while working as an acupuncturist in New York City in 1980.
He was eventually captured by the FBI in 1986 and prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) adopted by the U.S. Congress in 1970. The FBI tagged Dr. Shakur as the “ringleader” of an alliance encompassing the BLA, RNA, the Weather Underground and the May 19 Communist Organization. Due to the political atmosphere in existence in the U.S. during the years of the administration of President Ronald Reagan, he as well as several of his comrades were unable to receive fair trials within the legal system.
Nationwide Campaign Demands His Release on Compassionate Grounds
Although there was no DNA or independent credible eyewitness evidence linking Dr. Shakur to any of the armed confrontations with law-enforcement agencies, he was sentenced to 60 years in prison in 1988. Under the previous federal sentencing guidelines, he should have been eligible for parole in 2016. All of the other activists captured and charged in the events involving the liberation of BLA member Assata Shakur in 1979, the Brinks robbery in upstate New York in 1981, among other confrontations, have already been released from prison. Only Dr. Shakur remains in federal prison despite his terminal health condition at the age of 72.
“Dr. Shakur received his ninth parole denial in January 2021. After being diagnosed with life-threatening bone cancer yet denied compassionate release, his lawsuit against the U.S. Parole Commission and the Bureau of Prisons for unjust denials was expedited…. The acts of which Dr. Shakur was convicted some thirty years ago were committed in the context of a movement seeking equal opportunities for Black people who, it is widely conceded, were suffering catastrophically from disenfranchisement, segregation, poverty and exclusion from many of the fundamental necessities that make life worth living…. Dr. Shakur has accepted full responsibility for the acts that resulted in his conviction and for many years has expressed the deepest remorse for those who were killed and their families pleading that there is no justification for the loss of life for the victims. For over twenty-five years, Dr. Shakur has been a leading voice in the Black community calling for peace, reconciliation and healing for the countless lives lost in pursuit of basic justice and human rights.”
Organizers are continuing their work aimed at winning compassionate release. Appeals are being made to U.S. Congressional lawmakers and President Joe Biden. An educational campaign is underway to inform the public about the plight of Dr. Shakur and the need for his immediate release. Anyone interested in getting involved with these efforts can log on here in order to sign the petition and obtain detailed information on his medical and legal status.
*
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.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Detroit press conference outside the Levin federal courthouse on Aug. 8, 2022 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
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.
***
Below is the initiative of the Free Assange human chain.
Because of your help over 1500 people have pledged to be part of the Free Assange human chain. Thank you for sharing the event on social media and around the United Kingdom.
Stella Assange has 2 new video interviews that have just been released – watch her interview with Freddie Sayers on the UnHerd podcast and watch the interview with DW news.
“If Julian is extradited, he will be driven to take his own life in a US prison” -Stella Assange
His wife’s plea: The case for Julian Assange. Freddie Sayers meets Stella Moris, lawyer and wife of Julian Assange.
*
Watch the new ~2 min interview with Stella Assange on DW.
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.
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.
***
Guest is Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer, a human biologist and immunologist. Among her relevant books are:
“The Ketogenic Diet for Cancer. The best foods for tumor diseases” (2016, with Christina Schlatterer,
Gerd Knoll. Neuafulage: 2019)
“Cancer Cells Love Sugar – Patients Need Fat.” (2020, with Christina Schlatterer)
This session talks about Dr. Kammerer’s contribution to an approach of preventive and also curative health maintenance through nutrition: the ketogenic diet.
By means of this nutrition-induced metabolic change (energy production via ketones instead of glucose), certain autoimmune diseases, such as those triggered by the mRNA injections, but also cancer diseases, can be brought under control.
*
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.
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.
***
Cambodia has often featured in the Western imagination as a place of plunder and pilfering. Temples and artefacts of exquisite beauty have exercised the interest of adventurers and buccaneers who looted with almost kleptocratic tendency.
In 1924, the French novelist and future statesman André Malraux, proved himself one of Europe’s greatest adventurers in making off with a ton of sacred stones from Angkor Wat. It is estimated that 20 statues were taken. Malraux, along with his wife Clara and collaborator Louis Chevasson, were subsequently apprehended for their pinching efforts on the order of George Groslier, founding director of the National Museum of Cambodia. According to the culturally eclectic Groslier, Malraux deserved the title of le petit voleur (the little thief) for such brazen exploits.
The assortment of crises from the 1960s to the 1990s also did their fair share in creating conditions of instability. Where genocide, unrest and a collapse of social order unfolds, plunderers thrive. Archaeological sites offered rich pickings to looters, often in collaboration with local military authorities. The pilfered items would then be taken to the Cambodia-Thailand border and taken to Thai brokers.
With the collapse of the Khmer Rouge, things worsened further. Hundreds of temples were left vulnerable, rich prey to opportunistic authorities and rapacious individuals. Over the course of November and December 1998, the 12th-century temple of Banteay Chhmar fell prey to a raid that saw some 500 square feet of bas-relief hacked into pieces and transported. Antiquities expert Claude Jacques considered it “a case study for looting, every kind of looting, big and small.”
With such a record of extensive, relentless theft, any return of antiquities is bound to be seen as a squiggle upon paper – hardly an achievement. But the recent return from the United States of 30 looted items, including bronze and stone statues of Hindu and Buddhist deities, was a positive note in a field otherwise marked by disappointments. It is, at the very least, a modest addition to other repatriations that have begun to take place from various collections and auction houses.
The system of recovery and repatriation is never easy. Museums are often reluctant to part with goods obtained in questionable circumstances. The larger the museum’s collections, the less innocent its administrators tend to be. Stolen artefacts pack and fill museums globally, and the trend is unlikely to change.
In the case of the 30 items of concern here, they had been procured by the object itchy Douglas Latchford, a Bangkok dealer also known as Pakpong Kriangsak and gifted in the art of forging documents to conceal the way the various samples had been obtained. Along the way, this Malraux-like incarnation, an “adventurer scholar”, had also become an authority on Cambodian art, co-writing three books on Khmer antiquities with scholar Emma Bunker.
In 1951, he settled in Thailand and proceeded to concoct fabulous stories of innocent acquisition. In 2010, Latchford gave the Bangkok Post a taste of his storytelling, spinning a horrendous fib by claiming that “most of the pieces he has come across have been found and dug up by farmers in fields.” The enterprising Latchford, for his deceptive labours, managed to acquire a collection of Khmer Empire antiquities so vast it constituted the largest outside Cambodia itself.
Along the way, a number of trusts were also set up in tax havens to further complicate problems of ownership. The establishment of the Jersey-domiciled trusts was a direct response to interest shown by US authorities in Latchford’s empire of ill-gotten gains.
In fact, Latchford’s activities had interested the US Department of Justice for some years, and was charged in 2019 with wire fraud conspiracy and various crimes related to the sale of looted Cambodian antiquities through creating false provenance documents and falsifying shipping documents and invoices. His death in 2020 terminated the proceedings against him.
On this occasion, a number of private collectors and various US museums succumbed to three civil forfeiture claims made by Manhattan-based federal prosecutor Damian Williams in the Southern District of New York. In November 2021, Williams, in filing a civil complaint against a museum in Denver, Colorado, noted how Latchford had “papered over the problematic provenance of Cambodian antiquities with falsehoods, in the process successfully placing stolen goods in the permanent collection of an American museum.”
According to the press release from the US Department of Justice, the stolen items had been obtained by “an organized looting network” and duly sold by Latchford. They included “a 10th century sculpture of Skanda on a Peacock and a monumental 10th century sculpture of Ganesha, both looted from the ancient Khmer capital Koh Ker.”
Williams, reflecting on the 30 returned artefacts, was basking in some glory. “Today, we celebrate the return of Cambodia’s cultural heritage to the Cambodian people, and reaffirm our commitment to reducing the illicit trafficking of art and antiquities.”
Ricky J. Patel, Acting Special-Agent-in-Charge of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), also added his bit, noting that HIS New York’s dedicated Cultural Property, Arts and Antiquities Unit had worked “alongside our government partners, hunted down leads, examined origin, reviewed financial records, and conducted dozens of interviews to find and recover these pieces we are returning today.”
The HSI unit in question is advertised as an elite gathering of 10,400 employees comprising 6,800 special agents located in 225 cities across the United States and 86 overseas locations across 55 countries.
Such efforts deserve some lowkey cheer. Other culprits are getting off rather easily in this whole affair. The success of Latchford and his ilk must, in the end, be based on a degree of connivance and understanding from those who received his stolen goods. He had attained sufficient notoriety as far back as the early 1970s, when he began supplying a UK auction house with looted Khmer antiquities. Even amateurs mildly interested in Cambodian artefacts would have been familiar that anything coming out of the country should have been subjected to glares of suspicion.
Tess Davis, director of the Antiquities Coalition, is blunt about the implications of this. “If I were a museum curator, I would check every Cambodian piece acquired after 1965 just to be safe; that’s how prolific [Latchford] was.” New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art is one institution that has admitted to doing so, “reviewing the pieces that came [into its] collection via Latchford and his associates”.
Ironically, the relinquished antiquities will also be displayed in a museum – in this case, the National Museum of Cambodia, located in Phnom Penh. When they do feature, it will be worth noting where they were to begin with, unmolested in shrouded, jungled history, only to be tampered with by warriors in search of moneyed glory.
*
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.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
Featured image: Angkor Wat temple (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)
Since our foundation in September 2001, Global Research has been committed to delivering unchained news and underreported, unreported and misreported facts to you, our dear readers. We have always remained true to this objective despite being on a shoestring budget and limited number of hands to work around.
With your continued support throughout the years, we have been able to slowly build up and improve our website, by introducing new features for your use.
First, we have rolled out an internal search functionality that enables you to access an extensive list of articles from our archive. To use this feature, kindly refer to the instructions below.
Type keyword in the “Search” field at the top banner of our website.
As results come out, you can choose specific authors by clicking their names at the right navigation bar.
Scroll through the bottom to proceed to the next page of search results (if available).
Similarly, you can search for a particular author by inputting his/her surname in the “Search Authors” field (4) at the top banner of our website. See below.
Second, we have implemented an Artificial Intelligence Translation (AI Translation) feature for all our articles. To use this, simply click on the drop-down menu (5) at the top banner of our website and select the language. See below.
Sample translation into Deutsch:
Another example: The entire website available in Chinese
Moreover, in light of Big Tech’s efforts to suppress independent media, Global Research articles are no longer picked up by external search engines like Google, DuckDuckGo, Bing, etc. In this regard, we encourage you to follow, subscribe and share our active social media accounts.
Finally, as we maintain our complete independence, we do not accept government or corporate funding. Therefore, we ask you, our readers, to show some support by making a donation and/or starting a membership (which includes a free book offer) and ensuring that the message reaches as many people as possible:
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg recently addressed the Workers Youth League (AUF) summer camp in Utøya, Norway. The AUF is Norway’s largest political youth organization and is affiliated with the Norwegian Labor Party. The AUF summer camp is of course famous for being the scene of the horrific terrorist attack perpetrated by neo-Nazi Anders Breivik in 2011.
By now, the images of the oil explosion that erupted in the Cuban province of Matanzas on Friday, August 5 and continues blazing have become international news. When lightning struck an oil tank in Cuba’s largest oil storage facility, it quickly exploded and began to spread to nearby tanks. As of now, four of the eight tanks have caught fire. Dozens of people have been hospitalized, over 120 have been reported injured, at least 16 firefighters are still reported missing and one firefighter has died.
Since December of 2018, the Republic of Sudan has undergone general strikes, mass demonstrations, the forced removal of longtime former President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and the failed formations of several interim administrations. Hundreds of people have lost their lives due to the repression carried out by the military and its supporters against protests which have been led by the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC) and its Popular Resistance Committees (PRC).
The geostrategic pieces are all falling into place one after another to create the compelling impression that the US-led NATO proxy war on Russia through Ukraine has failed to achieve the grand strategic goals that were expected of it, which is why Washington is now willing to speed up the inevitable resumption of its “Pivot to Asia” in response instead of waiting at least several years like many observers expected.
The invasion of Ukraine has been going on for more than five months now, and hostilities may continue for quite some time. In military terms, the outcome is still uncertain, but what is already clear is who the big winners and losers of this conflict are. An overview.
People love the digital revolution.It allows them to work from home and avoid stressful commutes and office politics.The young love their cell phones that connect them to the world. For writers the Internet offers, for now, a far larger audience than a syndicated columnist could obtain.But while we enjoy and delight in its advantages, the tyranny inherent in the digital revolution is slowly closing its grip on our lives.
Major General Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of the Kyiv regime’s military intelligence directorate, admitted in an interview with the British daily Telegraph, that the U.S. government is involved in targeting decisions regarding U.S. supplied Lockheed Martin’s High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS).
Early last week, President Joe Biden announced that the United States had killed al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul, Afghanistan. The news initially sparked widespread media attention, but in the end it came and went with relatively little fanfare, especially for the death of a long-time American enemy with a $25 million bounty on his head.
The lives of the latest fifteen Palestinian children to be murdered by Israel in Gaza, lives ripped from their small, terrified bodies with devastating violence, do not seem of much concern to the powerful in the West, or indeed anywhere.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is moving ahead with plans to enact a new or revised international pandemic preparedness treaty, despite encountering setbacks earlier this summer after dozens of countries, primarily outside the Western world, objected to the plan.
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.
***
Now, it is the health sector that is suffering from decisions made by Trudeau and his government in the past. Hospitals are complaining of a shortage of nurses which has affected their emergency departments in that such departments are either being shut down completely or are on the verge of being shut down. What makes this worse is that it is not isolated to a particular area, instead, it is spreading within both rural and urban communities.
Nurses represent a core part of the health care system and essential employees at any hospital or clinic. They are the ones who take care of patients and guide them through their recovery among other duties that are solely performed by them, hence it is a big risk and significant damage for a hospital to lack the sufficient number of nurses needed to maintain the efficient running of the hospital.
Carleton Place and District Memorial Hospital, both located outside the city of Ottawa, closed their emergency department for 24 hours over staffing issues, which of course is the nursing shortage we are talking about. They were soon followed by Montfort Hospital, which is located within the city of Ottawa. The management of Montfort Hospital pointed at CO VID 19-related absences, vacations, staff fatigue and burnout, on top of a nursing shortage.
*
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.
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.
***
By now, the images of the oil explosion that erupted in the Cuban province of Matanzas on Friday, August 5 and continues blazing have become international news. When lightning struck an oil tank in Cuba’s largest oil storage facility, it quickly exploded and began to spread to nearby tanks. As of now, four of the eight tanks have caught fire. Dozens of people have been hospitalized, over 120 have been reported injured, at least 16 firefighters are still reported missing and one firefighter has died.
This latest disaster – the largest oil fire in Cuba’s history – comes at a time when Cuba is currently undergoing an energy crisis due to soaring global fuel costs, as well as over-exploited and obsolete infrastructure. The raging fire will undoubtedly further exacerbate the electricity outages that Cubans are suffering from as a result of the on-going energy crisis that is occurring in the middle of one of the hottest summers on record globally.
Almost immediately, the Cuban government requested international assistance from other countries, particularly its neighbors that have experience in handling oil-related fires. Mexico and Venezuela responded immediately and with great generosity. Mexico sent 45,000 liters of firefighting foam in 16 flights, as well as firefighters and equipment. Venezuela sent firefighters and technicians, as well as 20 tons of foam and other chemicals.
The U.S., on the other hand, offered technical assistance, which amounted to phone consultations. Despite having invaluable expertise and experience with major fires, the U.S. has not sent personnel, equipment, planes, materials, or other resources to its neighbor that would actually help minimize the risk to human life and the environment. The U.S. Embassy in Havana instead offered condolences and stated on day four of the blazing fire that they were “carefully watching the situation” and that U.S. entities and organizations could provide disaster relief. They even posted an email, [email protected], for people who want to help, saying “our team is a great resource for facilitating exports and donations of humanitarian goods to Cuba or responding to any questions.” But people who have contacted that email for help receive an automated response in return, telling people to look at their fact sheet from a year ago.
Contrast this to Cuba’s response to Hurrican Katrina in 2005, when the Cuba government offered to send to New Orleans 1,586 doctors, each carrying 27 pounds of medicine—an offer that was rejected by the United States.
While the U.S. government pays lip service to helping in Cuba’s emergency, the truth is that U.S. sanctions on Cuba create real and significant barriers to organizations trying to provide assistance to Cubans, both in the United States and abroad. For example, Cuba sanctions often require U.S. organizations to get Commerce Department export licenses. Another obstacle is the lack of commercial air cargo service between the U.S. and Cuba, and most commercial flights are prohibited from carrying humanitarian assistance without a license. Cuba’s inclusion in the State Sponsor of Terrorism List means that banks, in both the United States and abroad, are reluctant to process humanitarian donations. And while donative remittances (which can be sent for humanitarian purposes) have been recently re-authorized by the Biden administration, there is no mechanism in place to send them, as the U.S. government refuses to use the established Cuban entities that have historically processed them. Moreover, payment and fundraising platforms such as GoFundMe, PayPal, Venmo and Zelle, will not process any transactions destined or related to Cuba due to U.S. sanctions.
In any case, the response to this disaster should come primarily from the U.S. government, not NGOs. An Obama-era Presidential Policy Directive specifically mentions U.S. cooperation with Cuba “in areas of mutual interest, including diplomatic, agricultural, public health, and environmental matters, as well as disaster preparedness and response.” Despite the 243 sanctions imposed by the Trump administration – and overwhelmingly maintained by the Biden White House – the Policy Directive appears to remain in effect. In addition, Cuba and the United States signed a bilateral Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Agreement in 2017 prior to Trump taking office, which the U.S. noted means both countries “will cooperate and coordinate in an effort to prevent, contain, and clean up marine oil and other hazardous pollution in order to minimize adverse effects to public health and safety and the environment.” The agreement provides a roadmap for bilateral cooperation to address the current humanitarian and environmental disaster. In addition, the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, which is part of USAID, “is responsible for leading and coordinating the U.S. government’s response to disasters overseas,” including sending technical experts as they have in more than 50 countries. Neither OFDA nor any other part of USAID, which spends approximately $20 million annually in regime change funding in Cuba (primarily to Florida-based groups), have offered humanitarian aid thus far.
As Congress takes important steps to advance legislation to address climate change and disasters, the Biden administration is watching a potential ecological disaster 90 miles from the U.S. coastline without offering meaningful assistance to contain it, both to protect the Cuban people but also to mitigate any potential marine damage to the narrow strait that separates the two countries.
Withholding assistance at this critical time indicates to Cubans, Cuban Americans and the world that the Biden Administration is not really interested in the well-being of the Cuban people, despite statements to the contrary. This is an opportunity to show compassion, regional cooperation, environmental responsibility, and, overall, to be a good neighbor. It is also an opportunity for the Biden administration to finally reject the toxic Trump administration policies towards Cuba and restart the broad bilateral diplomatic engagement that was so successfully initiated under the Obama administration.
*
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.
Natasha Lycia Ora Bannan is a human rights lawyer and has written extensively about the principles of self-determination, democratic norms and gender justice. She is on the steering committee of ACERE (Alliance for Cuba Engagement and Respect).
Important article by F. William Engdahl first published on December 25, 2020 at the very outset of the Covid “vaccine” project
***
Bill Gates is actively financing and promoting new untested vaccines supposed to keep us at least somewhat safe from a ‘ghastly” death from the novel coronavirus and supposedly allow us to resume somewhat “normal” lives. The Pharma giant Pfizer has now announced what they claim were spectacular results in initial human tests. They use an experimental technology known as gene editing, specifically mRNA gene-editing, something never before used in vaccines. Before we rush to get jabbed in hopes of some immunity, we should know more about the radical experimental technology and its lack of precision.
The financial world went ballistic on November 9 when the pharma giant Pfizer and its German partner, BioNTech, announced in a company press release that it had developed a vaccine for Covid19 that was “90%” effective.
The controversial US head of NIAID, Tony Fauci (right) rushed to greet the news and the EU announced it had purchased 300 million doses of the costly new vaccine. If you believe financial markets, the pandemic is all but past history.
Suspicious events
However it seems Albert Bourla, the CEO of Pfizer, doesn’t share the confidence of his own claims. On the day his company issued its press release on the proposed vaccine trials, he sold 62% of his stock in Pfizer, making millions profit in the deal. He made the sell order in a special option in August so it would not appear as “insider selling”, however he also timed it just after the US elections and the mainstream media illegitimately declared Joe Biden President-elect. It seems from appearances that Bourla had a pretty clear conflict of interest in the timing of his press release on the same day.
Bourla lied and denied to the Press that his company had received any funds from the Trump Administration to develop the vaccine when it came out they contracted in summer to deliver 100 million doses to the US Government. Further adding to the suspect actions of Pfizer was the fact the company first informed the team of Joe biden rather than the relevant US government agencies.
But this is far from the only thing alarming about the much-hyped Pfizer announcement.
The German Partner
Pfizer, famous for its Viagra and other drugs, has partnered with a small Mainz, Germany company, BioNTech, which has developed the radical mRNA technique used to produce the new corona vaccine. BioNTech was only founded in 2008. BioNTech signed an agreement with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in September, 2019, just before announcement in Wuhan China of the Novel Coronavirus and just before BioNTech made its stock market debut. The agreement involved cooperation on developing new mRNA techniques to treat cancer and HIV. Curiously that press release, “The Gates Foundation sees BioNTech potential to ‘dramatically reduce global HIV and tuberculosis’” 05. September 2019, has now been deleted.
BioNTech also has an agreement with one of the largest drug producers in China, Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd (“Fosun Pharma”) to develop a version of its mRNA vaccine for novel coronavirus for the Chinese market. Ai-Min Hui, President of Global R&D of Fosun Pharma said in an August statement, “Dosing the first Chinese subject with BNT162b1 marks a milestone of the global co-development program in China. We are closely working with BioNTech and regulatory authorities to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BNT162b1 and other mRNA vaccine candidates…”
This means that the same German biotech company is behind the covid vaccines being rushed out in China as well as the USA and EU. The vaccine is being rushed through to eventual approval in an alarmingly short time.
Both US and EU authorities and presumably also Chinese, waived the standard animal tests using ferrets or mice and have gone straight to human “guinea pigs.” Human tests began in late July and early August. Three months is unheard of for testing a new vaccine. Several years is the norm. Because of the degree of global panic engendered by WHO over the coronavirus, caution is thrown to the wind. Vaccine makers all have legal indemnity, meaning they can’t be sued if people die or are maimed from the new vaccine. But the most alarming fact about the new Pfizer-BioNTech gene edited vaccine is that the gene edited mRNA for human vaccine application has never before been approved. Notably, two year peer reviewed tests with mice fed genetically modified corn sprayed with Monsanto glyphosate-rich Roundup first showed cancer tumors after nine months as well as liver and other organ damage. Earlier Monsanto company tests ended at three months and claimed no harm. A similar situation exists with the gene edited mRNA vaccines that are being rushed out after less than 90 days human tests.
“Explicitly experimental”
Dr. Michael Yeadon replied in a recent public social media comment to a colleague in the UK; “All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been… in development for more than a few months.” Yeadon then went on to declare,
“If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent. This is because there are precisely zero human volunteers for…whom there could possibly be more than a few months past-dose safety information.”
Yeadon is well qualified to make the critique. As he notes in the comment, “I have a degree in Biochemistry & Toxicology & a research based PhD in pharmacology. I have spent 32 years working in pharmaceutical R&D, mostly in new medicines for disorders of lung & skin. I was a VP at Pfizer & CEO…. of a biotech I founded (Ziarco – acquired by Novartis). I’m knowledgeable about new medicine R&D.” He was formerly with Pfizer at a very senior level.
Human guinea pigs?
The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is experimental and far from guaranteed safe, despite the fact that Pfizer, the EU and the notorious Dr Tony Fauci seem ready to roll it out even before year end to hundreds of millions of humans.
The experimental technology is based on a rather new gene manipulation known as gene editing. In a major article in the 2018 New York Council on Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, Bill Gates effusively promoted the novel gene editing CRISPR technology as being able to “transform global development.” He noted that his Gates Foundation had been financing gene editing developments for vaccines and other applications for a decade.
But is the technology for breaking and splicing of human genes so absolutely safe that it is worth risking on a novel experimental vaccine never before used on humans? Contrary to what Bill Gates claims, the scientific answer is no, it is not proven so safe.
In a peer reviewed article in the October, 2020 journal Trends in Genetics, the authors conclude that “the range of possible molecular events resulting from genome editing has been underestimated and the technology remains unpredictable on, and away from, the target locus.”
Dr. Romeo Quijano, retired professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology at the College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila, noted some of the dangers of the experimental gene editing when applied to human vaccines. Quijano warns of,
“the danger that the vaccine might actually “enhance” the pathogenicity of the virus, or make it more aggressive possibly due to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), as what happened with previous studies on test vaccines in animals. If that should happen in a major human trial the outcome could be disastrous. This serious adverse effect may not even be detected by a clinical trial especially in highly biased clinical trials laden with conflicts of interest involving vaccine companies. Even when a serious adverse event is detected, this is usually swept under the rug.”
He cites the case of another Gates mRNA vaccine candidate, Moderna, where “three of the 15 human experimental subjects in the high dose group suffered serious and medically significant symptoms. Moderna, however, concluded that the vaccine was “generally safe and well tolerated,” which the corporate-dominated media dutifully reported, covering-up the real danger…”
He notes,
“Exogenous mRNA is inherently immune-stimulatory, and this feature of mRNA could be beneficial or detrimental. It may provide adjuvant activity and it may inhibit antigen expression and negatively affect the immune response. The paradoxical effects of innate immune sensing on different formats of mRNA vaccines are incompletely understood.” Quijano adds, “A mRNA-based vaccine could also induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity… and may promote blood coagulation and pathological thrombus formation.”
Quijano writes in the extensively documented article,
“among other dangers, the virus-vectored vaccines could undergo recombination with naturally occurring viruses and produce hybrid viruses that could have undesirable properties affecting transmission or virulence. The…possible outcomes of recombination are practically impossible to quantify accurately given existing tools and knowledge. The risks, however, are real, as exemplified by the emergence of mutant types of viruses, enhanced pathogenicity and unexpected serious adverse events (including death) following haphazard mass vaccination campaigns and previous failed attempts to develop chimeric vaccines using genetic engineering technology.”
Bill Gates, the mRNA vaccine makers including Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, and their close allies such as Dr. Tony Fauci of the NIAID are clearly playing fast and loose with human lives in their rush to get these experimental vaccines into our bodies. Notably, the same Dr. Fauci and his NIAID owns the patent on a vaccine for dengue fever known as Dengvaxia, marketed by Sanofi-Pasteur and promoted as an “essential” vaccine by Tedros’ WHO since 2016. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (right) noted that Fauci and NIAID “knew from the clinical trials that there was a problem with paradoxical immune response,” but they gave it to several hundred thousand Filipino kids anyway. It was estimated that as many as 600 vaccinated children died before the government stopped the vaccinations.
Clearly the well-established Precautionary Principle–if in serious doubt, don’t– is being ignored by Fauci, Pfizer/BioNTech and others in rushing to approve the new mRNA vaccine for coronavirus. Messenger RNA technology has yet to produce an approved medicine, let alone a vaccine.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
Featured image is from NEO
Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation
Author Name: F. William Engdahl
ISBN Number: 978-0-937147-2-2
Year: 2007
Pages: 341 pages with complete index
List Price: $25.95
Special Price: $18.00
This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”
This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.
The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.
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.
***
Lo fa tramite le attività dell’Associazione Per un mondo senza guerre, il canale Pangea Grandangolo su Byoblu, e tramite campagne che concorrono all’obiettivo primario. Tra queste:
FUORI L’ITALIA DALLA GUERRA – si chiede a tutti i movimenti, i partiti e i singoli, pur mantenendo ciascuno la propria identità e il proprio percorso, di convergere verso questo obiettivo urgente e prioritario. Il conflitto in Ucraina è stato cercato e provocato dalla NATO ed è parte della strategia di guerra USA contro la Russia.
L’Italia deve dire no all’invio di armi all’Ucraina ed alle sanzioni contro la Russia. E’ in gioco il nostro futuro e la nostra stessa vita.
NATOEXIT – Le strategie della NATO ci hanno portato sull’orlo del precipizio:
la corsa agli armamenti nucleari mai arrestata, la distruzione della Federazione Jugoslava e dello Stato libico (dove ancora adesso si impedisce il riemergere della democrazia), la guerra provocata in Siria tuttora in atto, l’allargamento ed est della NATO, l’annullamento di tutti gli accordi con la Russia che mantenevano un equilibrio nucleare, la folle escalation contro Russia e Cina, la distruzione sistematica di ogni autonomia e sovranità dell’Europa.
L’Italia spende 80 milioni di Euro AL GIORNO per la NATO, mentre sanità, scuola, welfare e tutto ciò che necessita ai cittadini viene sacrificato. La presenza di più di 90 basi USA e NATO sul suo territorio e di armi nucleari illegali, rende l’Italia il primo bersaglio di un attacco. E’ dunque vitale uscire dalla sua strategia globale di guerra, morte e conquista.
CONTRO I RIGASSIFICATORI – imposti a sostegno della suicida scelta di rottura dei rapporti con la Russia e interruzione delle sue forniture energetiche, che ci farà precipitare in una crisi economica senza precedenti oltre che mettere a rischio ambientale il nostro paese.
ASSANGE LIBERO PER LA NOSTRA LIBERTÀ – la libertà di Julian Assange è la libertà di tutti noi. I crimini di guerra e gli illeciti meccanismi delle strategie dei governi occidentali da lui rivelati non possono restare impuniti. Toglierci la libertà di stampa, di parola, di espressione, toglierci la possibilità di conoscere l’operato dei nostri governi fa parte di questa guerra globale.
La strategia di guerra di cui siamo tutti vittime, e di cui il governo italiano è complice usa molte armi, non solo quelle convenzionali. Sono strumenti di questa stessa guerra la costante violazione della Costituzione Italiana, del diritto internazionale, della democrazia, dello stato di diritto e delle libertà personali. Il controllo, i lockdown, il greenpass, le vaccinazioni obbligatorie, l’attacco alla libera informazione e al dissenso, la distruzione del tessuto dell’economia reale e del lavoro, la ricerca utilizzata ormai solo per scopi militari, l’attacco alla socialità e alla cultura, l’eliminazione del contante, sono infatti tutte armi camuffate da politiche emergenziali.
Fa parte di questa strategia di attacco ai diritti dei cittadini indire le elezioni politiche italiane in modo da rendere difficile per i movimenti che dissentono di riuscire a raccogliere le necessarie firme per presentare le proprie liste elettorali.
Il COMITATO NO GUERRA NO NATO invita quindi tutti a firmare per permettere la partecipazione alle elezioni a
QUELLE LISTE CHE SOSTENGONO IN MODO CHIARO, COERENTE E NON EQUIVOCO LE SUDDETTE
BATTAGLIE FONDAMENTALI E PRIORITARIE.
*
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.
Comments Off on Il Comitato No Guerra No NATO (CNGNN) Si Batte Per Un’italia Sovrana, Neutrale, Bfuori Da Ogni Sistema Di Guerra E Per Un Mondo Multipolare.
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.
***
Since December of 2018, the Republic of Sudan has undergone general strikes, mass demonstrations, the forced removal of longtime former President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and the failed formations of several interim administrations.
Hundreds of people have lost their lives due to the repression carried out by the military and its supporters against protests which have been led by the Forces for Freedom and Change (FFC) and its Popular Resistance Committees (PRC).
The FFC was spearheaded by the Sudanese Professional Association (SPA) as well as other organizations. Since December 2018, the alliance which came about as a direct result of the overall economic and political crisis in Sudan, has undergone several realignments involving the military leadership and within its own ranks.
After an extended sit-in outside the Ministry of Defense during the early months of 2019, the top military leadership staged a coup against then President al-Bashir vowing to create the conditions for the realization of a democratic dispensation inside the country which had experienced the rule of the National Congress Party (NCP), an entity formed by the military-turned civilian officials of the government that had remained in power since 1989.
However, despite the promise of reforms, the Transitional Military Council (TMC) led by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) attacked thousands of pro-democracy activists in Khartoum on June 3, 2019. It was estimated that at least 100 people died that day as 10,000 well-armed troops used live ammunition, teargas and concussion grenades to clear the demonstrators from in front of the military headquarters and the entire streets of the capital of Khartoum.
After the June 3, 2019 massacre in Khartoum, regional states coordinated by the African Union (AU) feverishly negotiated a truce between the FFC and the TMC. By August 2019, a Sovereign Council was created which outlined a 39-month transitional period where the military would serve as chair of the arrangements for the bulk of this time period which ostensibly would result in multi-party elections.
Nonetheless, the Sovereign Council consisting of FFC members and military leaders was dissolved on October 25, 2021. Interim Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok was placed under house arrest while yet another crackdown on the mass organizations proceeded. Hamdok was briefly brought back into the government after being released from detention. Soon enough, however, Hamdok resigned from the second interim administration accepting his failure to stabilize the political and security situation in Sudan.
Communist Party Announces New Anti-Military Coalition
Just recently in late July, the Sudanese Communist Party (SCP), which had resigned from the FFC on November 7, 2020, citing what it perceived to be the indecisiveness of the alliance as it relates to the continued role of the military within society and government, announced the establishment of another alliance. The SCP has categorically rejected any governance role for the Sudanese Armed Forces within a future democratic administration.
Calling itself the Forces for Radical Change (FRC), the SCP-led alliance consists of various mass organizations and trade unions. The FRC is demanding the immediate establishment of a civilian government which would force the military back to its barracks.
A report published by the Middle East Monitor on July 25, stated that:
“According to Sudanese media, the new alliance hopes to bring down the coup authorities to implement radical revolutionary change. SCP Political Secretary Mohamed Mokhtar Al-Khatib said that the FRC rejects ‘the military institution’s interference in politics and rejects any partnership with it.’ The alliance statement stressed the need to take decisions related to all ‘deferred issues’ and resolve them during the transitional period. Al-Khatib added that the FFC will not be part of the new alliance because it adopted a social-political approach ‘that caused the destruction of national resources.’ He claimed that the FFC still believes in an agreement with the military component and ruled out the participation of the Sudanese Revolutionary Front because it is cooperating with the military. The SCP leader did not speak about the National Consensus coalition which is seen as part of the coup.”
This new FRC grouping has called for an end to the economic underdevelopment of Sudan, a citizens-based civilian administration along with the acquisition of genuine independence which would discontinue any reliance on foreign imperialist interests. These events represent a further fracturing of those claiming to represent the democratic movement of the people which erupted during December 2018. At present there is the FFC Executive Office, the National Consensus Forces which appears to want a continued role for the military in the administrative structures of the country and the SCP-led Forces for Radical Change (FRC).
Mass Demonstrations for Democracy are Continuing in Sudan
Two large-scale protests were reported during June and July centered around the capital of Khartoum and its twin city of Omdurman. On June 30, four protesters were reportedly killed by the security forces during demonstrations calling for the reversal of the October 25 coup.
Later, on July 17, another demonstration was met with repression by the military and other security forces. Thousands participated in the protest actions prompting the security forces to utilize teargas and other crowd control weapons designed to disperse the crowds. Activists waved Sudanese flags and barricaded major thoroughfares in various locations in the Khartoum and Omdurman areas. Bridges leading to the cities were cordoned off by the military to prevent others from joining the demonstrations.
After the rejection of the October 25 coup, many of the FFC leaders who held positions in the Sovereign Council have expressed their reluctance to reenter another alliance with the military leadership of General al-Burhan. At the same time, the military regime has maintained its agreements with several armed opposition groupings known as the Sudan Revolutionary Front (SRF), an amalgam of rebel organizations based in Darfur, Blue Nile and South Kordofan states. The SRF has sided with the Sudanese military leadership since al-Burhan has pledged to address their grievances during the putative transitional process.
The SRF played a political role in encouraging the October 25 coup by staging a sit-in Khartoum demanding the dissolution of the Sovereign Council. After the coup, the SRF expressed its support for the latest putsch.
Meanwhile, another alliance of 10 Islamist groupings have put forward a proposal for the establishment of a new regime. This alliance dubbed The Broad Islamic Current consists of members of the banned former ruling National Congress Party (NCP), now known as the Islamic Movement and the State of Law and Development Party of Mohamed Ali al-Jazouli, who is a supporter of the Islamic State (IS) recently released from prison. At the founding of the Broad Islamic Current, supporters chanted slogans against the left organizations and coalitions in Sudan while expressing support for the October 25 coup and the military leadership.
Interestingly enough, the Broad Islamic Current does not include the Popular Congress Party (PCP) in its alliance. The PCP is one of the largest Islamist parties in Sudan founded by Hassan al-Turabi. The PCP grew out of a split between al-Turabi and former NCP leader and President al-Bashir in 1999. The Broad Islamic Current is seeking to take advantage of the political climate which emerged in the aftermath of the October 25 coup.
General al-Burhan delivered an address on July 4 calling once again for dialogue among all political groupings inside the country. He also commented on the role of the military in Sudan even after the holding of democratic elections. The military leader proposed what he called a “Supreme Council of the Armed Forces” which would have an undefined role in the economic and political structures within the country.
The FFC along with the FRC are saying publicly that they are not interested in further talks with the military regime. Noting that all other previous agreements between the FFC and the TMC have been broken by the military and its allies within the now reconfigured Sovereign Council, which is staffed by former rebel leaders, supporters of the rule by the armed forces and Islamist groupings which were formally associated with the government of ousted President al-Bashir.
Political analyst Osman Mirghani wrote during early July in the Sudan Tribune noting:
“Simply rejecting al-Burhan speech will be a continuation of the reactive approach that has enabled the military component to always be one step ahead of the civilian forces. If these forces overcome their differences and set a clear charter, they could turn the tables by agreeing on a civilian government that would close the way for any other attempts to obstruct the transitional period and be the starting point for full civil rule after the failure of the partnership formula.”
Obviously, greater unity among the democratic forces would be a tremendous step forward in the process of genuinely transforming Sudan into a people’s state. Nonetheless, without the purging and dismantling of the military apparatus, which is supported tacitly by the United States, the State of Israel and the Gulf monarchies, any transitional process to a just and humane society will remain elusive.
*
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.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Sudan women protest for democratic transition, June 26, 2022 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
Comments Off on Mass Demonstrations for Democracy: Sudan’s Coalition to End Military Rule, Demanding the Immediate Establishment of a Civilian Government
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.
***
The geostrategic pieces are all falling into place one after another to create the compelling impression that the US-led NATO proxy war on Russia through Ukraine has failed to achieve the grand strategic goals that were expected of it, which is why Washington is now willing to speed up the inevitable resumption of its “Pivot to Asia” in response instead of waiting at least several years like many observers expected.
US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman said during her trip to New Zealand that her country would be interested in having a “conversation” about that island nation’s future interest in joining AUKUS. In her words,
“We’ve always said that going forward as we look at other emerging technologies and what that may mean for everyone’s security in the world, that there may be scope for others to join so certainly if that time comes, New Zealand is a country with whom we would have conversation.”
It would be a regionally destabilizing development if this anti-Chinese military bloc expands, but no one should be surprised that New Zealand will probably be its next member.
The author predicted in early June that “New Zealand’s Training of Kiev’s Forces in the UK Hints at Its Interest in Joining AUKUS”, explaining that Wellington was participating in this unnecessary military mission halfway across the world in order to prove its commitment and worth to that anti-Chinese alliance. That interpretation of events has since been vindicated in hindsight by Sherman’s latest statement, which also follows New Zealand’s participation in the US-led “Partners in the Blue Pacific” (PBP) bloc for containing China in the South Pacific. That newly established structure is basically AUKUS+ since it includes the first-mentioned’s three members alongside Japan and New Zealand.
This observation as well as Sherman’s statement of intent very strongly suggests that New Zealand will probably be the next member of AUKUS.
It also extends credence to the prediction that Japan will likely follow in its footsteps too, thus leading to the northern and southern expansions of the so-called “Asian NATO”.
Other prospective members include the US’ Philippine mutual defense partners who Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently pledged to “defend” from China in the South China Sea during his trip to Manilla last weekend. As for South Korea, despite its new conservative leadership’s philo-Americanism, it remains unclear whether Seoul will formally or even only informally join AUKUS+.
In any case, this bloc’s likely expansion to New Zealand in the coming future confirms prior criticisms from multipolar countries that it’s a regional variant of NATO intended to contain China just like its inspiration attempts to do to Russia. The larger pattern at play is that the US is seeking to replicate the structural model that it employed in the Old Cold War in Europe against the erstwhile USSR in the New Cold War against China after having recently rejuvenated NATO following Moscow’s specialmilitaryoperation in Ukraine that none other than Washington itself provoked. The discussion about New Zealand’s prospective membership in AUKUS is also coming at a unique time for the US’ “Pivot to Asia”.
US Speaker Nancy Pelosi just stirred up trouble with the People’s Republic through her latest trip to Taiwan, which was arguably intended to artificially manufacture the pretext for resuming the prioritization of her declining unipolar hegemon’s anti-Chinese containment policy. As the author analyzed last week, the unexpected timing of this development after so many observers thought that it wouldn’t take place again until sometime (perhaps far) later in the future due to the US-led NATO proxy war on Russia through Ukraine is occurring precisely because that aforementioned proxy war has failed to achieve its grand strategic goals.
Bloomberg dealt a major soft power blow to the US by acknowledging Russia’s strategic gains in Africa and admitting that only half of the G20 complied with America’s demands for them to sanction Moscow, which proves that it’s far from isolated. Other Mainstream Media (MSM) outlets also recently released damning reports that decisively shifted the official narrative about the Ukrainian Conflict and what it’s supposedly achieved vis a vis Russia. Amnesty International proved that Kiev is illegally militarizing residential areas and thus exploiting civilians there as human shields while CBS News warned that Western weapons sent to Kiev might end up in terrorists’ hands.
The Guardian, meanwhile, criticized the extremely low level of military training that Kiev’s forces have received up until this point. That was then followed by CNNadmitting that the global food crisis isn’t entirely due to the Ukrainian Conflict unlike what was previously claimed by US officials. Norwegian academic Glenn Diesen also picked up on the MSM’s signals to ask in his latest article, “As the tide turns in Ukraine, is the US preparing to throw Zelensky under the bus?” Regardless of how long it takes for that prospective scenario to play out, it certainly seems like the writing is already on the wall, to which end it naturally follows that the US is actively preparing to resume its “Pivot to Asia” to contain China.
These background dynamics help make better sense of the timing of Sherman’s statement related to New Zealand’s possible membership in AUKUS. The geostrategic pieces are all falling into place one after another to create the compelling impression that the US-led NATO proxy war on Russia through Ukraine has failed to achieve the grand strategic goals that were expected of it, which is why Washington is now willing to speed up the inevitable resumption of its “Pivot to Asia” in response instead of waiting at least several years like many observers expected. Expressing public interest in formally expanding AUKUS is most likely meant to signal to the Asia-Pacific that the aforementioned assessment is indeed accurate.
It’ll of course take time for the US to reorient its grand strategic focus back to that region after abruptly prioritizing the containment of Russia upon provoking its special military operation in Ukraine, but there shouldn’t be any doubt that everything is moving in this direction. AUKUS might also not expand right away, whether through New Zealand becoming its next member or whoever else, but that too appears to be a fait accompli considering the larger trends at play. While this insight bodes negatively for China, it nevertheless suggests to Russia that some relief from the unprecedented US-led Western containment campaign might eventually be forthcoming.
*
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.
Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
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.
***
The invasion of Ukraine has been going on for more than five months now, and hostilities may continue for quite some time. In military terms, the outcome is still uncertain, but what is already clear is who the big winners and losers of this conflict are. An overview.
The winners
For the arms manufacturers, this war is like a gift from heaven.
At the behest of NATO, European countries will increase their armament efforts by hundreds of billions in the coming years. In Central Europe we may expect a new arms race, just think of the threat to deploy nuclear weapons in Belarus.
In the Arctic region, the same thing threatens to happen with the entry of Finland and Sweden into the Atlantic Alliance.
The push for a so-called “Global NATO” may also lead to a dangerous and new arms race in Asia.
This militarization and new threats of war make the shares of defence companies in the U.S. skyrocket.
The same goes for the big fossil fuel companies. The spectacular rise in gas and petroleum prices has increased their profits by 350 percent.
The third big winner is NATO.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the alliance’s raison d’être ceased to exist and under Trump the alliance was even declared brain dead. Today the military alliance is alive and well.
In Europe, two members are added and operational combat troops are increased from 40,000 to 300,000 troops. In Asia, as well as other continents, expansion is in the works, either through new partnerships[i] or by increasing existing military presence[ii].
Over the past quarter century, NATO has waged wars against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, resulting in nearly one million deaths[iii]. With a vibrant and expanded alliance, there will be many more military adventures.
Unmistakably the fourth winner is the US. Twenty-five years ago, Zbigniew Brzezinski, top advisor to several US presidents, wrote that for the US, control of the Eurasian continent was essential to maintaining hegemony[iv]. Close cooperation between Europe, Russia and China was to be avoided at all costs.
In his words:
“The three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”
Over the past decade, stronger economic relations between Europe, China and Russia have been growing. This war is reversing that trend. For example, Europe’s dependence on Russian gas is quickly being decreased, mainly in favour of gas from the US. The sanctions cut almost all other economic ties between Russia and Europe.
But with this war, China is also being targeted. Mike Pompeo, former director of the CIA and Secretary of State under Trump said it plainly:
“We must prevent the formation of a Pan-Eurasian colossus incorporating Russia, but led by China,” Pompeo implored.
“To do that, we have to strengthen NATO, and we see that nothing hinders Finland and Sweden’s entry into that organization”.
It is in this context that the recent speech byLiz Truss, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, should be understood. She calls for an “economic NATO.” Such an economic bloc would largely cut off China and Russia from Western economies. This would make the integration of the Eurasian continent impossible, allowing the U.S. to continue exercising its hegemony.
The losers
First and foremost, the entire Ukrainian population has been severely affected by this invasion: thousands of dead and wounded civilians, tens of thousands of dead and wounded soldiers, as well as millions of fleeing citizens. Much of the country’s infrastructure has been destroyed, the harvest has been more than halved, and the country is heading for complete bankruptcy.
“journalists have been targeted, tortured, kidnapped, attacked and killed, or refused safe passage”.
Workers are suffering: zero hour contracts are being legalized and 70 percent of the labour force is exempt from workplace protections.
The Russian population suffers severely too. Tens of thousands of Russian soldiers have lost their lives and a multitude have been wounded. The Russian people are suffering from Western sanctions and increased repression at home.
This war has already cost tens of thousands of lives in Ukraine, but this conflict can also destroy millions of lives far from the battlefield. Indeed, the war is particularly damaging to the global food system already seriously weakened by covid-19, climate change, and high energy prices.
Fortunately, an agreement has been reached to restart grain exports from Ukrainian ports. But that does not prevent food prices from rising[v] sharply in the meantime and therefore becoming unaffordable for an increasing number of people. According to the World Food Programme (WFP), a total of 50 million people in 45 countries are on the brink of famine and, according to the UN, this conflict could cause serious malnourishment to an additional 13 million people this year.
Another major loser is Europe and its population. According to Willy Claes, former Secretary General of NATO, this is essentially a war between the U.S. and Russia, where Europe is side-lined.[vi] Although the war is being waged on the European continent, it is not the European Union but US-controlled NATO that is setting the tone. The Europeans stand by and watch.
But it’s even worse, with the sanctions against Russia, Europe is simply shooting itself in the foot. Significant gas shortages are looming before winter. Not only will that cause a lot of misery, it also increases the likelihood of an economic recession.
It’s not just scarcity that is the problem. Gas prices have increased almost tenfold over last year. Along with skyrocketing inflation, this is also impoverishing large segments of the population. And meanwhile, Russia is seeing its treasury fill up and its rouble strengthen due to phenomenal gas prices.
Among a large proportion of non-Western countries, Europe has lost a lot of prestige because of this war. Those countries cannot understand how the Union is almost completely surrendering its sovereignty and dancing to the tones and war-mongering of the U.S. and Britain.
Another major loser is world stability. After the fall of the Soviet Union, we were temporarily stuck with a unipolar world, completely dominated by the US. With the rise of China and other emerging countries, we seemed to be moving toward a multipolar world.
That was a positive evolution, but spurred on by this war and the warmongering around it, it seems that we are now heading for a division of the world into two camps: a bloc dominated by the West against the rest of the world[vii]. It is highly questionable whether this will succeed, since only a quarter of the countries worldwide have been found willing to support sanctions against Russia.[viii] But it is a negative evolution to say the least.
Another victim of this armed conflict is the planet. In an armed conflict, the ecological damage is always enormous. With this war it is no different. Due to the heavy shelling, there will be significant effects on the urban and rural environment. As a result, Ukraine and the region around it may be burdened with a toxic legacy for generations to come, as shown by a preliminary study by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and partner organizations.
But this war also jeopardizes urgent action against global warming. One could have taken advantage of this conflict to accelerate the great energy transition. Nothing will come of this, quite on the contrary. New gas-fired power stations are being built and coal-fired power stations are even being restarted.[ix] Instead of achieving a reduction in CO2 emissions, we are unfortunately setting another record in carbon emissions.
The first casualty in any war is the truth. Never was this more visible than in this conflict. The mainstream media put forward NATO’s vision with near unanimity. Dissenting voices uttered by the peace movement or some academics were barely heard. As usual, the exceptions confirm the rule.
The way the mainstream media have bent over backwards to toe the line demanded by NATO and the US in recent months have at times been painful. Before the war, Ukraine was portrayed as “the most corrupt country” in Europe. Today, the country is the epitome of liberal ideals. Before the conflict, there was a problem with neo-Nazis. Afterwards, those groups were portrayed as heroes. And so on.
In peacetime, the mainstream media sometimes blunder. In wartime, they completely mess things up. It just goes to show why alternative media are so important.
Broad front needed
The longer the war drags on, the greater the losses for the Ukrainians, the Russians, the starving people in the South and the working people at home.
The more damaging also for the planet, world peace and reliable journalism.
A broad front is urgently needed between the peace movement, the third world, labour and environmental movements to stop this war madness.
*
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.
Translated by Dirk Nimmegeers
Marc Vandepitte is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Notes
[i] This is mainly the case in Asia with the so-called Quad (partnership between Australia, India, Japan and the US), AUKUS (security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the US) and the so-called ‘Five Eyes’ (cooperation based on intelligence between New Zealand, Australia, Canada, United Kingdom and USA.)
[ii] For example, there is talk of a new US military base in Zambia. Outside the European borders, NATO partners are: Colombia, Australia, Iraq, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Mongolia and Pakistan.
[iii] In Syria, NATO provided logistical support to extremist Muslim fighters with the aim of ousting President Assad from power. Today NATO is supporting Turkey which is occupying part of that country.
[iv] Brzezinski Z., The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York 1997, p. 40.
[v] Compared to a year ago, the price of grain has increased by 27.6 percent. The average food price rose by 23.1 percent. Source FAO (UN).
[vi] Willy Claes in De Afspraak, on Belgian TV, 24 May: “If I may put it a little boldly, it is about a confrontation now between Russia and America. With all due respect and sympathy for the Ukrainians, and by the way, Europe is not playing along”.
[vii] The G7 is trying to develop a competitor to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the New Silk Roads. As Putin travels through Africa, Macron is also rushing to the continent to secure or expand the Western sphere of influence. In Latin America, Biden is trying to counter the influence of China with his Build Back Better World initiative (B3W). And so on.
[viii] According to the Economist’s Intelligence Unit, two-thirds of the world’s population lives in neutral or pro-Russian countries regarding the war in Ukraine.
[ix] Germany, Austria and the Netherlands are restarting coal-fired power stations that have been shut down or are easing production restrictions.
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.
***
People love the digital revolution.It allows them to work from home and avoid stressful commutes and office politics.The young love their cell phones that connect them to the world. For writers the Internet offers, for now, a far larger audience than a syndicated columnist could obtain.But while we enjoy and delight in its advantages, the tyranny inherent in the digital revolution is slowly closing its grip on our lives.
Use a gender pronoun or doubt an official narrative and you are blocked from social media.The same corporations that are required by federal law to send us annual statements on how they protect our privacy also track our use of the Internet in order to build marketing profiles of us.The FBI, CIA, and NSA track our use of the Internet to identify possible terrorists, school shooters, drug operations, and foreign agents.Face identification cameras now exist on the streets of some cities.DNA data bases are being built.It goes on and on.
In China the digital revolution has made possible a social credit system.People are monitored about what they say, what they read online, how they behave, where they go.The profile that results determines the person’s rights or privileges.A person who hangs out with the wrong crowd, criticizes the government, misbehaves, drives too fast, drinks too much, has a poor school or work attendance record might be denied a driving license, a passport, university admission, or could have access to bank account limited or blocked.
Digital money is the ultimate power of tyranny
In a system in which there is only government digital money, there is no way to pay a drug dealer or wages off the books, etc. There is no cash form of digital money that can be put in our pocket and used for anonymous payment.Advocates of digital money make much of its ability to close down crime and tax avoidance.Digital money allows a block put on an alcoholic’s bank balance to prevent its use for the purchase of alcohol, and an overweight person’s food purchases could be controlled by how his digital money can be used.These restraints put on individual choice are hyped as health measures.
But after all of this is said, the stark fact remains that the same power conveyed to authorities by digital money can be used to totally control the person.Suppose you object to the evaporation of freedom, or expose a corruption, or challenge an official narrative.The government can block your access to your account or block its use to pay for your housing or food, and bring you to your knees.
Once there is only government digital money, no one will be able to support websites such as this one or to organize a new political movement to challenge the ruling monopoly.Protest movements become impossible.Truckers and farmers would not be able to buy fuel for their vehicles. Once there is only central bank digital money, government can control all investment. Freedom is impossible in a digital world.You comply or you die.
You might say, yes all this is possible, but our commitment to freedom will prevent it.There are two things wrong with this reply.One is that our leaders are not committed to freedom (see this).The other is that it is already happening.
In a recent issue of The International Economy, Andreas Dombret and Oliver Wunsch make “The Case for Central Bank Digital Currencies.”It is time to “go bold,” they say, and to get on with the job.
First understand that these two are operatives of the ruling elite.
Dombret was a board member both of the Deutsche Bundesbank (Germany’s central bank) and the European Central Bank.Wunsch was the International Monetary Fund’s mission chief to Greece and Cyprus and the IMF’s representative to the Bank for International Settlements and the Financial Stability Board.
As you might not remember, or ever known, a few years back Greece and Cyprus were put through engineered financial crises.
In Cyprus people were denied access to their bank accounts.In Greece the story is that the government was bribed to take out loans that could not be serviced or repaid.The European Central bank backed by the IMF demanded that Greece come up with the money by shifting money from education and health spending to loan service, by freeing up more government funds by laying off civil servants, and by selling off public assets such as Greece’s ports and municipal utilities to private foreign investors, and to turn its protected islands over to real estate developers. The Greek economy collapsed. Unemployment forced many Greeks to leave the country.The London Times reported that so many women were forced into prostitution that the price fell to the cost of a cheese sandwich.
Greece lost her sovereignty and was placed under non-elected rule.Now operatives associated with the pillage of Greece and the ruination of her women have been assigned the task of separating each one of us from the control of our own money.The problem of cash is that it provides individuals with sovereignty.People can have cash in their possession outside the banking system. They can make anonymous payments. If tyrannical government seizes their bank account, they can survive off book in the cash economy.But when there is no cash, they lose economic sovereignty.
Dombret and Wunsch do not approach the problem in this way as that would give their game away.They stress the inconvenience of cash:
“For consumers, stocking the right amount of cash at the bank counter or the ATM and playing physically at the baker or the butcher shop is not convenient.”
Of course, most people no longer pay with cash.They write checks and use credit cards that pay them back part of the fees charged the merchant or give them airline miles as Delta’s American Express card does.But the fact remains that they can still build a cash reserve to protect their independence.Once cash is gone, so is independence.
Digital currency already exists in Bitcoin and its rivals.But these cryptocurrencies are private and do not provide the control opportunities.Dombret and Wunsch write that “one must be skeptical of private sector initiatives” in digital money, because private interests “might conflict with the public good.” In other words, Dombret and Wunsch associate “the public good” with monopoly all powerful government that is the goal of the World Economic Forum.
Central Bank Digital Currency does not yet exist.Nevertheless, Dombret and Wunsch have created it as a concept in being by giving it a name: CBDC.Once named, it can now appear. They push its appearanceby stressing that “the availability of a monetary instrument that does not fully rely on private sector infrastructure is an important public good.”In other words, their position is that of the World Economic Forum, that a system controlled by a government of the elite is the model for the New World Order.
We peons should just accept the convenience of digital money and give up our control over our own affairs.
My conclusion is that any people stupid enough to trust government with central bank digital currency deserves to be the slaves that they will be.
William Engdahl tells us that the move by the Federal Reserve and other central banks from Quantitative Easing to Quantitative Tightening will unleash a tsunami of wealth destruction and that the fear the wealth wipeout will cause will be used to usher us into a world in which there is only central bank digital money. Without any doubt this means the end of freedom and liberty. Tyranny will suppress all independence of thought, expression, and action.
“This time, as insiders like ex-Bank of England head Mark Carney noted three years ago, the crisis will be used to force the world to accept a new Central Bank Digital Currency, a world where all money will be centrally issued and controlled. This is also what Davos WEF people mean by their Great Reset. It will not be good. A Global Planned Financial Tsunami Has Just Begun.” — F. William Engdahl
*
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.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
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.
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: Seoul, South Korea, as seen from Namsan Mountain. strogoscope / Flickr
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.
***
Early last week, President Joe Biden announced that the United States had killed al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul, Afghanistan. The news initially sparked widespread media attention, but in the end it came and went with relatively little fanfare, especially for the death of a long-time American enemy with a $25 million bounty on his head.
Perhaps the most telling aspect of the announcement (and the discourse that followed) was what was left unsaid. Despite the fact that Biden ran for president in part on restoring the “rules-based international order,” he made no effort to justify the attack under international law, and most news coverage has failed to even touch on the issue.
On the surface, the strike left relatively little to complain about. It was remarkably precise, killing only Zawahiri, and, for many analysts, it proved that America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan would not hinder its ability to conduct precise counter terror missions.
But experts say the killing lacks legal justification and shows that Biden has bought into one of the most pernicious ideas driving the past two decades of U.S. policy: Washington can and should use force wherever it sees fit, even if that means twisting international law beyond recognition. This is in many ways the underlying logic for America’s globe-spanning military presence, according to experts who spoke with Responsible Statecraft. Worse, it erodes international law, allowing other states to justify all sorts of questionable actions outside their borders.
As Russia’s illegal war on Ukraine enters its sixth month, international law has seldom been more important, according to Craig Martin, a professor at Washburn University.
“We say it’s an act of aggression. We allege that they’re committing war crimes. We’re up in arms,” Martin said. “But you can’t argue that Russia is somehow in violation of this international law — and that they should be held accountable for it — if you yourself are not willing to comply with that international law.”
Neither the White House nor the Pentagon responded to questions from Responsible Statecraft about their legal justification for the strike. In fact, U.S. officials have not yet offered a public justification for the attack. On the domestic front, the administration could point to the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force against al-Qaida, which provides a strong case under U.S. law.
The logic is less clear-cut when it comes to international law. Legal scholars who spoke to Responsible Statecraft say that Biden’s team would likely argue that it was an act of self defense and that America had the right to violate Afghanistan’s sovereignty because the Taliban is “unwilling or unable” to help stop the threat posed by Zawahiri. (Secretary of State Antony Blinkenmay have alluded to this idea in his speech after the strike in which he pointed to the “Taliban’s unwillingness or inability to abide by their commitments.”) Charles Dunlap, a Duke law professor who previously served as an attorney for the Air Force, argued in a blog post that this is enough to justify the strike under international law.
“Such facts seem sufficient, even in the absence of evidence about a specific forthcoming attack, to find that al-Zawahiri represented a threat that met the criteria for the application of anticipatory self-defense,” Dunlap wrote. “[T]he presence of al-Zawahiri living openly in Kabul showed that the Taliban was ‘unwilling or unable’ to address the threat he posed to the ‘security of other countries.’”
In Lawfare, national security law expert Robert Chesney noted that this concept has long held sway among U.S. officials, adding that “[t]here’s little doubt that the ‘unwilling’ condition applies here.”
But much of the international legal community is skeptical of this theory, with only a few countries accepting it as plausible. As legal expert Adil Haque told Responsible Statecraft, it also relies on the questionable assumption that America and al-Qaida are still at war.
“Anytime armed hostilities between the state and a non-state actor fall below a certain minimum threshold of intensity, the armed conflict temporarily pauses and the law of armed conflict no longer applies,” argues Haque, who teaches law at Rutgers University. “There’s a very plausible argument that that’s where the United States and al-Qaida have been for some time, while Al Qaeda really has not been carrying out attacks against U.S. targets on a kind of regular basis.”
And Haque is not alone in this assessment. As Martin noted, the United Nations Security Council recently reported that, while terror groups still create major issues in conflict-ridden countries, al-Qaida “is not viewed as posing an immediate international threat from its safe haven in Afghanistan.”
Questions left unanswered
Zawahiri’s death falls under the category of “targeted killing,” a somewhat euphemistic term that the military insists is different from assassination. Prior to 9/11, Israel was the only country that frequently engaged in the practice, which American leaders opposed. But the Global War on Terror changed the calculus in Washington, and the U.S. military adopted the tactic starting in 2002.
The practice is controversial for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that attacks are rarely as “targeted” as last week’s was. In one previous attempt to take out Zawahiri, the U.S. military killed at least 18 Pakistani civilians. (A second strike that may have targeted the al-Qaida leader killed as many as 80 civilians, many of whom were children.) And this level of “collateral damage” is more common than people like to think. Take the case of Qasim Al-Raymi: The United States took out the former leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula in 2020 after killing 66 people, including 31 children, in two prior attempts.
For international legal scholars, this type of attack is complicated. Though it can be legal under certain circumstances, most experts say the state carrying out the strike has to prove that it is at war with the group and that the person targeted poses an imminent threat to its security. In other words, it’s not enough to be a member of al-Qaida in order to be killed; the target has to be engaged in planning or carrying out actual attacks. And when it comes to the 71-year-old Zawahiri, this was far from clear.
Furthermore, the CIA — not the military — carried out the strike on Zawahiri, according to U.S. officials. While Washington has long blurred the line between the CIA and the Pentagon, legal experts contend that intelligence officials cannot legally engage in war under any circumstances given that they’re not uniformed combatants.
“They don’t get to kill people in war, at least not with immunity,” said Martin, noting that domestic Afghan law would likely apply in this case.
Perhaps of greater concern is the question of sovereignty, the bedrock of international law. Notably, the United States is no longer at war in Afghanistan with the permission of the Afghan government, and it has made no indication that the Taliban gave an authorization for the strike. In such a case, Washington generally relies on the previously mentioned “unwilling or unable” theory. But Martin contends that this would require U.S. officials to actually seek permission from the Taliban, which seems not to have happened in this case. (The White House did not respond when asked if the U.S. spoke to Afghan officials prior to the strike.)
Policymakers might argue that this is unnecessary given that, by harboring terrorists, the Taliban has violated its 2020 accord with the United States. But that assertion is hard to scrutinize given that the pact has still not been made public.
And all of this relies on another dubious assumption: Namely, that the “battlefield” for war with al-Qaida includes anywhere a member of the group can be found — including an apartment in a crowded city where the United States is not at war.
“If the United States had fired a drone through a street in Paris to kill Zawahiri, there would be a much different conversation, right?” Martin asked. “You would intuitively say ‘no, surely the battlefield is not in France.’ But that is one of the implications of this idea that there’s this global armed conflict with which the battlefield is defined by wherever al-Qaida members happen to go.”
As with domestic law, the international system loses legitimacy and effectiveness when powerful players bend the rule of law to their whim. Other countries have already used America’s arguments to justify questionable attacks, including Turkey, which has targeted Kurdish leaders in Iraq and Syria. (“Turkey is essentially using the same legal rationale,” said Haque. “It’s very difficult to distinguish the two cases.”) And this will only get worse if Washington continues to flout international law at will, according to Samuel Moyn, a professor at Yale University and a non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute.
“In general, the United States has treated the law of self defense as always permissive for whatever it wants to do,” argued Moyn. “And so why wouldn’t other states follow suit?”
Fortunately, it’s not too late for Washington to change its tune. With the threat from al-Qaida at an ebb, officials could start approaching counter terror as a question of law enforcement rather than war and encourage other states to do the same. But, in order to move on from two decades of hollowing out international law, the U.S. foreign policy community will need to get back to a question that has never been properly addressed since 9/11.
“Is it really true that this kind of illegal act is the only way of dealing with the threat?” asked Moyn. “If you say no, then your incentive is to figure out what a better regime looks like.”
*
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.
Featured image: The U.S. used a Hellfire R9X missile, like the one shown above, to kill al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri on the balcony of a safehouse in Kabul on July 31, 2022. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Nick Scott/Released via ABACAPRESS.COM
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.
***
The lives of the latest fifteen Palestinian children to be murdered by Israel in Gaza, lives ripped from their small, terrified bodies with devastating violence, do not seem of much concern to the powerful in the West, or indeed anywhere.
The BBC repeated without question Israel’s claim that its latest launch of high explosive at the Gaza concentration camp was to prevent a terrorist attack on Israeli civilians – of which prospective attack no evidence has been produced. No western media has asked for any. Nor has it been explained why the attack would be stopped by Israel obliterating the alleged leader in Gaza of Islamic Jihad, and many innocents who chanced to be in his vicinity.
The scenarios in which the assassination of a leader prevent an attack which is in train are Hollywood.
The brave Daniel Hale sits in solitary confinement (euphemistically called a “Communications Management Unit) for blowing the whistle on the US drone assassination programme in Afghanistan. Hale, a drone operative, revealed that 90% of people killed by the drone assassination programme in Afghanistan were not the designated target, but that by default everybody killed by a drone strike was labeled an enemy combatant unless positive proof to the contrary were provided (which of course no effort was made to collect).
The extra-judicial execution of “Bad guys” with no legal process is not only carried out by Israel. The USA and the UK do it all the time, across the conflicts created by their own neo-imperial adventures and lust for hydrocarbons.
Nobody can tell you how many children have been killed by drone strikes or “targeted” missiles and bombings in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Somalia, Yemen or Libya.
The total across those countries is undoubtedly tens of thousands of dead children. We, however, are apparently the good guys. All those children have been killed in our self-defence, just like Israel killed those children in Gaza. I do hope that helps you sleep more soundly.
*
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.
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.
***
General Wayne Eyre, Canada’s chief of the defence staff, refused to confirm or deny whether the country has troops deployed on the ground in Ukraine.
After Global Newsreported that “sources” say special operations members of the Canadian Armed Forces have been deployed on the ground to help train Ukrainians in their fight against Russia, Eyre told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that the military is “never going to talk about discreet or sensitive special operations or confirm or deny them.”
Calling the Global News report and other similar reports “disappointing,” Eyre stated, “If it was true, it would put our troops at risk,” and then questioned why “anyone” would “deliberately want to put Canadian troops at risk?”
Pressed about whether Canadians have the right to know if their own military has deployed soldiers on the ground or if Canadians would be made aware of such a development before its occurrence, Eyre stated,
“Every situation is going to be different” and one has to “balance transparency with operational security and try to find that sweet spot in the middle.”
The development that Canada may have troops on the ground comes shortly after Defence Minister Anita Anand announced the CAF is soon going to be sending members to the United Kingdom as part of a larger plan to train Ukrainians.
Asked by Global News whether the report that Canadians were actively engaged in an operation on Ukrainian soil was true, Anand also declined to comment, saying it would be “imprudent” for her to “provide that information.”
Despite the massive coverage given by the mainstream media with respect to the Russia-Ukraine crisis, many remain skeptical of whether news outlets are being transparent about the cause of the war and why Western governments are so eager to aid Ukraine.
This became particularly true after it was revealed that U.S. President Joe Biden and his son Hunter have deep ties to Ukraine, that America was funding biolabs in Ukraine, and that both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have ties to globalist organizations.
*
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.
Featured image: Canadian Army General Wayne Eyre (Source: Shutterstock)
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.
***
Israel and the Palestinian armed group Islamic Jihad declared a truce late Sunday after three days of heavy Israeli bombardment on the besieged Gaza Strip.
According to the latest official information from the Palestinian health ministry, 44 Palestinians, including 16 children, were killed and at least 350 civilians wounded.
Since 2008, Israel has waged four wars on the Palestinian territory, killing nearly 4,000 people – one-quarter of them children.
According to data compiled by Defense for Children International, at least 2,200 children have been killed by the Israeli military and Israeli settlers across the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 2000 – the beginning of the second intifada.
Here are the names and faces of the 16 children aged 18 and under killed by Israeli air strikes over the past three days:
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.
Featured image: Smoke rises after Israeli airstrikes on Gaza City, the Gaza Strip, Palestine, Wednesday, May 12, 2021. (Nick_ Raille_07 / Shutterstock.com).
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.
***
Major General Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of the Kyiv regime’s military intelligence directorate, admitted in an interview with the British daily Telegraph, that the U.S. government is involved in targeting decisions regarding U.S. supplied Lockheed Martin’s High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS).
Moscow has seized on this admission to charge the U.S. with direct involvement in the Ukraine War.
Asked by the Telegraph how the HIMARS have so precisely targeted Russian fuel and ammunition depots (at least this is what the Kyiv regime has alleged—ed.), as well as battlefield headquarters in eastern Ukraine, General Skibitsky replied, “in this case in particular, we use real-time information.”
U.S. officials are not providing direct targeting information, Skibitsky claimed, because it would potentially undermine their case for not being direct participants in the war.
However, he suggested that there was a level of consultation between intelligence officials of both countries prior to launching missiles that would allow Washington to stop any potential attacks if they were unhappy with the intended target.
Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Lt. Gen. Igor Konashenkov made a video statement saying that Skibitsky’s admission “undeniably proves that Washington, contrary to White House and Pentagon claims, is directly involved in the conflict in Ukraine.”
“It is [the] Biden administration that is directly responsible for all Kyiv-approved rocket attacks on residential areas and civilian infrastructure in populated areas of Donbas and other regions, which have resulted in mass deaths of civilians,” Konashenkov said. “No one else in Ukraine or in the world should have any doubts that HIMARS strikes on Novaya Kakhovka on July 12, on Stakhanov on July 17, on Krasniy Luch on July 24, dozens of strikes on Donetsk, and, of course, the July 29 strike on the detention facility in Elenovka, which killed 50 and injured 73 Ukrainian POWs, were planned by [the] Zelensky regime and approved by Washington.”
“Political, criminal and moral responsibility for the Elenovka massacre and other war crimes in Ukraine, along with Zelensky, lies directly with [the] Biden administration,” he concluded.
U.S. officials denied that HIMARS rockets—having a 70-kilometer range—were used specifically to destroy the detention facility at Elenovka in Donetsk, though television crews that visited the site found rocket motor parts fit to HIMARS missiles.
On July 28, the Russians released the video of an Azov soldier, Dmytro Kozatsky, who accused Zelensky’s adviser, Oleksiy Arestovych, of ordering the creation of shock videos showing Azov Battalion members torturing and murdering Russians POWs in order to deter other Russians from fighting against Ukraine.[1]
According to Moon of Alabama, a political blogger, Kozatsky’s statement was enough to put Arestovych in jail for a very long time. Arestovych allegedly responded by sending the HIMARS missiles to kill the prisoners in Elenovka who were talking to the Russians and making accusations against him.
Amnesty Documents Ukrainian War Crimes
If indeed Ukraine, and the U.S., was responsible for the Elenovka prison bombing, it would fit a pattern of war crimes documented in a new report by Amnesty International.
The report concluded that Ukraine repeatedly violated the laws of war in the Kharkiv, Donbas and Mykolaiv regions; the Kyiv regime has “put civilians in harms way by establishing bases and operating weapons systems in populated residential areas, including in schools and hospitals.”
According to Amnesty’s researchers, viable alternatives were available to the Ukrainian forces that would not endanger civilians by inviting retaliatory strikes on them, such as military bases or densely wooded areas nearby. Even worse, when the Ukrainian army occupied civilian buildings, they did not ask residents to evacuate or assist in that evacuation.
$8.7 Billion in Military Assistance
On August 1, the Biden administration authrized another $550 million in arms and equipment from the Pentagon to Ukraine, bringing the overall total of military assistance to a whopping $8.7 billion.
The latest aid package includes more ammunition for the HIMARS and 155mm artillery systems, which on August 4 were used by the Ukrainian army in the bombing of a funeral ceremony for a Russian Colonel near Donetsk city center (a 12-year-old child was among those killed).
In late June, The New York Timesreported on a secret U.S. operation involving U.S. commandos and spies who coordinate weapons deliveries and provide intelligence and training to Ukrainian special forces, largely at U.S. bases in Germany and Poland.
The Times further reported that “some CIA personnel have continued to operate in the country secretly, mostly in the capital, Kyiv, directing much of the vast amounts of intelligence the United States is sharing with Ukrainian forces, according to current and former officials. At the same time, a few dozen commandos from other NATO countries, including Britain, France, Canada and Lithuania, also have been working inside Ukraine.”
On a street in Bakhmut, a town in the hotly contested Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, The Times reporter observed a group of Ukrainian special forces that had American flag patches on their gear and were equipped with Belgian and American assault rifles.
These revelations all give further weight to Russian assertions about extensive U.S. involvement in a war that is quickly turning into another Vietnam-type quagmire.
Imperial Messenger Raises Alarm Bells
No less an establishment voice than New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman—who earned the nickname “the imperial messenger” for his long ideological support for U.S. imperialism—has raised alarm bells about U.S. policy in Ukraine.
In an August 1 column criticizing Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, Friedman wrote that
“the Ukraine war is not over. And privately, U.S. officials are a lot more concerned about Ukraine’s leadership than they are letting on. There is deep mistrust between the White House and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine—considerably more than has been reported.
“And there is funny business going on in Kyiv. On July 17, Zelensky fired his country’s prosecutor general and the leader of its domestic intelligence agency—the most significant shake-up in his government since the Russian invasion in February. It would be the equivalent of Biden firing Merrick Garland and Bill Burns on the same day. But I have still not seen any reporting that convincingly explains what that was all about.
“It is as if we don’t want to look too closely under the hood in Kyiv for fear of what corruption or antics we might see, when we have invested so much there.”
These comments are especially significant because of their source.
They indicate that the mythic narrative about Zelensky and illusions sustaining public support for the war are no longer believed at elite levels and have been shown to be fraudulent.
*
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.
Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He can be reached at: [email protected].
Note
1. A similar tactic was used in the 1940s by Ukrainian Nazi collaborators of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN).
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.
***
Legend has it, that when things go wrong and everybody is hoping for better times, they first have to get worse, before a new era of peace and harmony may emerge.
We may now be at these crossroads. The Beast is Rising. But its Fall is in sight.
We have to understand, the Beast is Big. It’s Huge. It’s so extraordinarily big, humanity has never faced something like it in recorded history.
So, we better be properly prepared.
Imagine, a small handkerchief or a pocket-square (a tiny decorative lapel accessory) is sitting on a huge quintuple king-size bedsheet, aiming at controlling the bedsheet. That’s the globalist Cult Elite, aiming at converting the world population into a One World Order (OWO). It will not happen.
It’s an image so absurd that could have only emerged form a megalomaniac – which is what the WEF and its Master, Klaus Schwab, and his behind the scene money masters are.
No matter, how powerful they think they are, tyrannizing the world at large into their slaves, We, the People, will make sure it will not happen. Fissures in the OWO ranks are already clearly visible.
The new motto is bye-bye OWO-Globalism and welcome to the new multipolar world.
Actually, a world that is gradually becoming an east-west polarization, with a west that is ever faster decaying in more ways than one – monetary-wise, in term of political ethics, as well as faltering support from western and hitherto western-leaning governments and, at least, by two thirds of western people, who vehemently oppose their governments.
Mind you, we are not quite there yet – at the point of western collapse.
However, the crack in the wall, where the light shines through [paraphrasing a famous Leonard Cohen song] gives enormous hope for the light to prevail.
The Big Picture – what is it?
The Big Picture has three major branches, three major objectives of the Beast to fulfill. Imagine the Beast as a multiple-tentacled Monster-Octopus. Listed not necessarily in order of priority, but rather as a simultaneous bulldozing approach, they include:
i) Massive depopulation, genocide, worldwide; an eugenist agenda on which the Gates and Rockefellers et al, have worked already for decades, and already their predecessor generations were obsessed with eugenics. Less people, less “useless eaters” – and consumers of scarce, unrenewable resources. So bluntly presents it Yuval Noah Hariri, Israeli “intellectual” and close adviser to Klaus Schwab, the WEF’s eternal CEO;
ii) Shifting assets from the lower and middle echelons to the top – the elite, billionaires, individuals, as well as corporate finance, such as BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street; others may include Fidelity, City Bank, Bank of America and many more.
The first three alone are interlinked as shareholders and can act as one, controlling an estimated 25 trillion dollars, worldwide, giving them a leverage power of way above US$ 100 trillion (compared to the world’s GDP of about US$ 90 trillion), thereby having virtual control over every country on the globe, and
iii) Digitization of everything, connecting everything with everything, eventually with the mega-powerful ultra-shortwaves 5G and soon to come 6G. Through these electromagnetic waves, they may access our brains. It’s Klaus Schwab’s pipedream. It includes digital worldwide unform vaxx-passes, managed through the infamous QR-code, or similar, with practically illimited info-storage capacity.
Currently it has a potential of storing more than 30,000 pieces of information about each one of us. Those who manage the QR-code, know you better than you know yourself. It is an updated version of Bill Gates’ Agenda ID2020.
Digitization may, as a first step, include an under-the-skin chip on every surviving citizen – currently being volunteer-practiced in some Nordic countries, like Sweden and Denmark, storing and monitoring every piece of info about you, incl. health records, bank accounts, with whom you talk, where you travel, where and what you shop — and-and-and – you got the picture.
Later, it will likely just be an electronic fingerprint in the form or capacity of a QR-code or its successor, that is engrained in our bodies through an electromagnetic field which is being injected into our bloodstream – graphene oxide, for example – under the pretext of covid vaxxes, or eventually any vaxxes invented and forced upon the population.
The next one may be the “new” flu-vaxx – already announced as a novelty, practically untested, but ready for the fall season. Be aware and beware!
Digital money, already largely dominating the Global North, will become the norm by the end of Agenda 2030, or sooner – if WE, the People, do not stop it. – And yes, we can. Digital money would make us to digital slaves; digital money could be blocked at will by the Cult Cabal, or outright stolen, depending on our behavior.
No worries, according to Klaus Schwab, we eventually will own nothing but will be happy – that’s the paraphrased ending of the Great Reset. Our mind will no longer think independently, but 5G and the graphene oxide injected by the covid and other vaxxes still to come, will make from humans so-called “transhumans” (expression used by Klaus Schwab in an interview in 2016 with the Swiss French TV), basically useless and dispensable slaves, since robots and Artificial Intelligence (AI) will have taken over human roles.
These goals are all addressed in one way or another in the WEF’s Great Reset. It may be worth your while to have a glance at it. Most libraries contacted, answered with a smile, they don’t carry the book; they’d rather not associate with this monster plan.
The globalist agenda is gradually disintegrating. See this on the anti-globalist trend of the WEF in Davos, May 2022.
Yet, the globalists keep fighting on. A hopeless game. But they may be able to extend their globalist drive for a while, with perpetual lies, untold riches of immorally and largely illegally acquired financial wealth, possibly bringing about millions of victims – and, God forbit – leading into WWIII, potentially meaning a hard-core nuclear war.
The Beast is still on the rise. That does not mean it is winning.
Many of us may not notice. It is discrete, but deadly. In all its discretion, it keeps announcing what it is planning, what is in store for humanity. The Cult, the Luciferian Cult, to which the Beast likely belongs, in order to succeed, has to announce its action well in advance. Lest they, the Cult, may not prosper.
The Cult’s Warnings
The Cult has repeatedly warned us throughout the last at least 50 years. It has always told us well-in-advance wat they and their minions were planning. And this with increasing intensity in the last two to three decades. Just a few examples. Most of us have conveniently ignored their warnings.
The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio – official name United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 3-14 June 1992. It was based on the Club of Rome’s (in)famous 1971 publication “Limits to Growth, A Simulation Model of World Population, Environment and Economics”. The model predicted a looming environmental disaster in the coming 50 to 100 years, i.e., beginning just about now.
The Club of Rome, alias the Earth Summit, gave the impetus for what is today known as the Global Warming cum Climate Change Agenda – with its commercial side-kick, the New Green Deal.
You must know, the Club of Rome was not a European invention, as the name may have you believe. It was a Rockefeller initiative.
9/11 was the deadly, violent event to announce a new era – an era of increasing to total control, depriving personal liberties, restrictions with often denigrating and embarrassing airport security checks. A few weeks after the well-organized horrendous 9/11-devastation, the Patriot Act was passed through Congress. It had been prepared way before 9/11. It deprives US citizens of nearly 90% of their human and citizen rights.
Similar emergency type laws were passed with ease in Europe and other so-called “western countries”, referring to countries following the US political and monetary doctrine. Most of the Global North, or the West (also including, Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand), currently lives under some kind of an “emergency legislation”, largely circumventing their Parliaments for matters that deal with the Great Reset Agenda.
Most of their populations have no clue that their Parliaments have been partially disabled.
The 2010 Rockefeller Report depicts the contents of the UN Agenda 2030 in four Chapters. The first one describes the Lockstep scenario. Pretty much what the world, the 193 UN member countries, went through after the worldwide declared lockdown for the covid-19 plandemic. In lockstep, every government followed the same human rights destroying stern rules, instilled and coerced by fear, dictated by WHO. See this full 2010 Rockefeller Report – chapters “The Scenario Framework” and the “Scenario Narratives” are of particular interest.
Bill Gates’ – TedTalk February 2010in San Diego – he advocated:
“If we are doing a real good job (vaccinating], we may reduce world population by 10% to 15%.”
This was just a trial balloon to gauge people’s reaction.
It was also an announcement of things to come. As we know by now the ultimate target of world population is something of the order of half a billion people – as indicated on the Georgia Guidestones which have recently been vandalized. – No worries, the cabal will not reach that mass-genocide target. But it has already done immense harm, and if not stopped, will continue killing people, many in the most atrocious ways.
WHO declares in 2014 the decade of vaccination – referring to the decade of 2020 to 2030, i.e., the UN Agenda 2030. Did anybody pay attention? – How did WHO know? Maybe Bill Gates was whispering the orders in the “WHO halls” where “donations” are collected. Conveniently, any reference to this WHO warning has disappeared form internet.
June 2016 – the Swiss Gotthard tunnel inauguration – a bizarre Luciferian Celebration, depicting lockstep – Luciferian sex-dances and strange killings and deaths – remotely related to tunnel construction. Full of symbolism.
Google’s explanation – “While tunnels certainly represent journeys, they more often symbolize the passage from one phase of life to another. In its most primal meaning, the tunnel symbolizes the birth canal. Just as a baby evolves and journeys outward, so do characters of a story.”
See also this 6-min. Gotthard Tunnel inauguration video clip.
It is certainly a passage through darkness. No surprise. Not evil or Lucifer ever projected a world of light for us, the common people. All to the contrary, the more obscure they keep us, the more fear they instill, the more control they gain. And that is what seems they want to play out. – To no avail. They won’t succeed.
Event 201 of 18 October 2019 in NYC – The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York City.
The Event’s website describes the exercise as an “aera where public / private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.” The real object of the exercise was just the opposite, via a corona virus.
By coincidence, a few weeks later, at the beginning of 2020, a corona-virus broke out, called SARS-Cov-2, alias Covid-19. WHO declared it a pandemic on 11 March 2020, when reported deaths, worldwide, were fewer than 5000. Knowing what we know today, one may ask: How reliable are these death reports – then and today?
Compare this with 52,000 flu-related deaths in the US during the 2017 / 2018 flu-season. The common flu was never declared a pandemic. See this.
We are now being warned about the impending food shortages, energy shortages that will bring about a cold winter, famine; plus, a sizable recession preceded by horrendous double-digit inflation – that in turn will trigger bankruptcies, unemployment, poverty, misery – and more deaths.
The Beast’s ascent is not undisturbed. There are forces pulling in other directions, attempting pulling it down, sideways and outright apart. The massive crack in the wall, that lets the Light shine through, is getting bigger and bigger. Once the light reaches a sufficient amount of people, a critical mass – the Beast’s reign may be getting close to an end.
We are not there yet. Unfortunately. But we must think positive. Inspiring each other spiritually. Creating a mental and spiritual togetherness. We, the Awakened People, can bring this diabolical era to an end.
Following the lead mentioned above, the Beast may be depicted as a multiple-tentacled Monster-Octopus. Each tentacle has its deadly mission. Many tentacles have sub-tentacles. In case a tentacle is defeated the others will fight on, and the defeated one will grow back with even greater vigor. That’s the concept.
We have to be aware and conscious of these multiple-scenarios and the Big Picture they constitute, so as not to allow our attention to being deviated by one single scenario – for example, the plandemic and vaxx narrative. Though, admittedly important, it ought to be connected to all other “tentacle-scenarios”, lest we miss the overall objectives of The Great Reset Agenda, alias UN Agenda 2030.
We want to stop this human-made criminal Outbreak of misery and death as a whole, in its entirety. If we do it by compartment, our chances to overcome the Beast are largely diminished. The Cult Cabal counts on us being distracted by one or two tentacles, while the others keep laboring ahead – almost undisturbed – reaching gradually their goals.
It is utterly important that we are aware that all the tentacles are connected. There are no coincidences; and there is no single frontline in this war. The entire humanity, no matter where we are on this globe, is the frontline. That also means, there is no escape.
Unless, and this is crucial, we wake up. This is our escape. We, the People, see the light, and ascend to another level where the darkness of the Beast cannot reach us anymore. We need a critical mass for our People’s Power to be strong enough, to pull us, humanity, through and collectively onto a different, higher and enlightened plane.
To do that, for those who are awake, who see the Beast, who see the tentacles and their machinations as killing machines, it is utmost important that we always see the overall objective of the Great Reset, the UN Agenda 2030, and the 4th Industrial Revolution, hence, the Big Picture.
When we fight one tentacle, say, the covid narrative, an important one, we must always remember that there are others, and that covid is only one cog in the wheel, in the gear of the Reset destruction.
The covid tentacle has many sub-tentacles: Big Pharma is one; the vaxx-mandate is another one; the useless and socially degrading forced mask-wearing, social distancing, and home-office work, are all ways of humiliating, separating and isolating individuals. And so forth. They all play nicely into each other, enhancing each other, psychologically, by FEAR, and physically, by various forms of other than covid diseases, i.e., all types of cancers, leukemias, liver-kidney and heart failures – and much more; all potentially deadly. Indeed, they have already caused exponentially more deaths than the covid-plandemics is said to have caused.
It would, therefore, be unwise to put all our scientific knowledge into the vaxx debate, or the covid infection – is it real, or isn’t it? It doesn’t matter. But by doing just this, we are playing into the devil’s hands.
While it is a must to identify the covid fraud – describing the scam scientifically by medical doctors, virologists and other scientists, but it is by far not enough. The public at large must understand the cheat, so they may be able to shed off the immune system destroying fear.
Overall objectives of the Reset are in plain view. Therefore, we must expose and connect the Cult’s covid fraud and the fear it causes, to all other tentacles of the Octopus-Beast. We must fight the entire GREAT RESET Narrative as a whole and in solidarity.
Other Tentacles of the Octopus-Beast
Fear, already mentioned before, is yet another deadly tentacle. It is well known in psychology, that fear – the constant tension of fear – lowers our auto-immune defense. It renders us increasingly vulnerable to all kinds of diseases, including a myriad of different cancers and diseases of our vital organs. They all may lead to death, at which point it will be next to impossible to trace the cause of disease and death back to the poisonous “covid-vaxx”.
Fear is one of the Beast’s strongest weapons. Not only does it destroy our natural immunity, fear makes us blind and obedient. Blind to our own human rights. For fear, we give them up, hoping the Beast will safe us. Instead, we are becoming slaves – slaves to our governments, who are, in turn, the servants of the WEF – and the Beast.
Climate Change – the ever-most ferociously propaganda-pushed agenda that the planet will heat up, that we humans are the culprits, as we use excessive amounts of fossil fuel, creating so-called greenhouse gases, driving world temperatures through the roof. As mentioned above, this is the continuation of the Rockefeller-initiated Club of Rome agenda to enslave the (western) world through guilt.
We, of the western / Global North’s Judo-Christian beliefs or cultures, are beset by guilt, as part of our guilt-driven up-bringing. It’s part of our religious cum cultural inheritance. So, we are extremely vulnerable when told that we, humans, are guilty of death and destruction causing climate change.
The Beast plays on this vulnerability. And very successfully at that.
To enhance the Green Agenda, the Climate Change narrative, Southern European countries – Spain, Greece, Portugal, France, Italy as well as the transatlantic United States are plagued by extreme heat waves, ever-so-often interrupted by deadly flash-floods. In the process, man-made forest fires destroy the forests, the very lungs providing life on earth with oxygen. The purpose is to enhance the Climate Change agenda.
See this 1-min video, how a “rescue helicopter” sprays fire on forests in Southern Spain, filmed by a fire-fighter. The text is in Spanish, but the video is self-explanatory; no text needed; see this.
The truth is hidden or even censured from us. The universe, including our dear and generous Mother Earth, is never stagnant. She is constantly on the move. Not only physically but also temperature-wise.
Our egocentricity makes us believe that we with our short lives – on average less than 100 years – makes us the center of the universe, that everything that happens, occurs in our lifetimes, i.e., extreme climate changes / modifications.
For the past about two months the Global North went through record heat waves and record periods without rain. As reported by France, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, other countries in Europe, as well as parts of the US, these are heat and dry spells never experienced since weather measurements began, in some countries as early as the 17th Century. In others in the early 20th Century. The relentless heat in Europe, as well as the US, is destroying food crops, contributing to a worldwide food shortage, leading to famine, desperation and eventually death.
As a sub-tentacle of the Beast, more fear, crop loss, famine – death.
Although nowhere mentioned, nor proven, this record phenomenon, (yet to fully analyzed and ascertained) appears like “engineered weather”. It would typically fit into the type of DARPA research and DARPA released technology. DARPA is a Pentagon sponsored thinktank. Modified weather patterns are powerful weapons. They work silently, causing food shortages, famine and death – and contributing in more ways than one to the agenda of the Great Reset. See this.
Farmland Reduction – A concerted effort of farmland reduction is also part of the Great Reset agenda. Bill Gates is buying up farmland throughout the US and even in other parts of the world. He is said to already own junks of farmland in Ukraine. See this [in German].
By now Gates owns some 300,000 ha of the most productive farmland mostly in the US but also elsewhere in the world.
Farmland owned by Gates will not produce bovine meat, under the pretext of methane gases that contributes to Global Warning. Under Gates’ concept of food reduction, his farmland may not produce food at all – accelerating the Hunger Games.
By the same token, the Dutch Government under the leadership of Mark Rutte, a scholar of Klaus Schwab’s Academy for Young Global Leaders, is adamant in reducing Dutch farmland by 30%. The Netherlands is the world’s second largest exporter of agricultural goods, after the United States. See this.
Dutch farmers have been in the streets for the last almost two months to protest their land being forcefully repossessed by the government to reduce the meet output. So far to no avail.
The airline industry is severely hit by flight reductions, due to largely artificial shortages of personnel – and unattractive covid restrictions (a vaxx-must for staff of many airlines). This is said having led to significant flight reductions precisely during the Global North’s summer holidays.
The financial situation of many western airlines is precarious and may become even more so – as kerosene / petrol / energy prices keep rising.
The masters of the Great Reset do not want traveling people. They are not as easy to control as are stationary ones.
This tentacle serves at least two purposes: i) it keeps people stationary, more isolated from each other and from global movements; and ii) people who cannot move may be more fearful and better controllable.
Energy – Gas, Petrol, Electricity, Shortages
The consequences are multi-faceted. Like climate change, energy shortages affect everything. Our economies’ growth drive is based on energy. Shortages of energy are leading to recessions, diminishing economic output, reducing the workforce, creating poverty – misery, disease — and yes, death.
But we are NOT in an energy shortage. An energy shortage is artificially created – under the pretext of the Ukraine-Russia war – which, in turn, has been created to serve the Great Reset agenda: Massive death, economic collapse, bankruptcies, poverty – prompting a shift of assets from the bottom and the center to the tiny elite on top – and, accelerating the ascent of an all-digitization – from money to the human brain.
But there is no energy shortage. It’s all been artificially created by the masters of the WEF, and the Great Reset. See video below.
There are of course, many more “tentacles”, sub-tentacles and motives for what we are experiencing in the global North’s hot and rainless summer months. But you got the drift. If you consistently ask: “Cui bono?”- or “Who benefits?” – The answer will lead you always to the same vile octopus with its multiple deadly tentacles, called the Great Reset.
This desired world model described by the WEF’s Klaus Schwab et al, is a world towards an ultra-neoliberal system, with largely reduced humans and the surviving ones will have become “transhumans” (Schwab’s term), manipulable by 5G and soon 6G, to be happy owning nothing.
To sum it all up, lets remind ourselves of the dangers related to the all-commanding digital control:
As a final note, a short video (7 min. August 6, 2022) of Dr. Vernon Coleman, about the dangerous new flu-vaxx – if you care for your children, this, as part of a pdf-file inserted in the video:
Don’t believe what governments say. Warn everyone.
Please remember, you are not alone. More and more people are waking up. And once they are awake, they don’t go back to sleep. We are already a far bigger force, than the conspirators would have you believe. If we are going to win this war, then we have to fight with passion, with the truth and we have to fight with determination. No mask, no test, no jab. Don’t trust the government; no mass media, and remember – we have God on our side.”
*
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.
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 is 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” 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.
***
The five largest recipients of US weapons have traditionally included Saudi Arabia, Australia, South Korea, Japan and Qatar.
Ukraine, which was ranked as the 50th largest importer of US arms, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), is now set to make a giant leap upwards.
During 2017-2021, Saudi Arabia accounted for 23% of US arms exports, Australia 9.4%, South Korea 6.8%, Japan 6.7% and Qatar 5.4%.
But these were all paying customers compared to Ukraine which has received billions of dollars in US weapons gratis—in its five-month-old battle against one of the world’s major nuclear powers.
The distribution of weapons, including large donations from Western Europe, are being coordinated by the International Donor Coordination Center, which has moved over 78,000 tons of arms and ammunitions worth more than $10 billion, both from US and Western allies, according to the New York Times.
In a fact Sheet released July 22, the State Department said the United States has committed a staggering $8.2 billion in arms and security assistance to Ukraine since the beginning of the Biden Administration in early 2021, with an accelerated flow of weapons following the Russian invasion on February 24.
A partial breakdown of US arms to Ukraine includes:
Over 1,400 Stinger anti-aircraft systems; more than 6,500 Javelin anti-armor systems.
Over 20,000 other anti-armor systems.
Over 700 Switchblade Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems.
126 155mm Howitzers and up to 411,000 155mm artillery rounds.
72,000 105mm artillery rounds.
126 Tactical Vehicles to tow 155mm Howitzers.
22 Tactical Vehicles to recover equipment.
16 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and ammunition.
Four Command Post vehicles.
Two National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS).
20 Mi-17 helicopters.
Counter-battery systems.
Hundreds of Armored High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles.
200 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers.
Over 10,000 grenade launchers and small arms.
Over 59,000,000 rounds of small arms ammunition.
75,000 sets of body armor and helmets.
Approximately 700 Phoenix Ghost Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems.
Laser-guided rocket systems—and more.
Norman Solomon, Executive Director, Institute for Public Accuracy and Director, RootsAction.org told IDN the massive arms shipments from the United States to Ukraine are in sync with the refusal of the US government to engage in serious diplomatic efforts as the horrific Russian war on Ukraine continues.
“The military-industrial complex of the USA is thriving on the war crimes of the Kremlin, as if in a macabre and tacit partnership. It’s not difficult to discern some forms of glee—in effect, “let’s you and them fight”—from the governing U.S. establishment as it voices enthusiastic support for Ukrainian people who are suffering and dying. Yet the war can only end through negotiations and diplomacy,” he said.
There is scarcely any evidence that the top policymakers in Washington have real interest in seeking to nurture diplomatic initiatives that could halt the carnage, argued Solomon.
“Instead, we get endless rhetorical flourishes in harmony with the sounds of massive weapons shipments being rushed to Ukraine. For the arms contractors making a killing, it’s win-win; this is a war they cannot lose.”
It is mere realism to observe how fantastically lucrative the ongoing war is proving to be for US-based weapons dealers—and a longer war means still more huge profits, said Solomon, author of “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death“.
He said the recent news reports that the White House is “exploring” whether to ship fighter jets to Ukraine is a further indication that the US administration is in the midst of extremely dangerous mission creep.
Back on March 11, President Biden declared that sending jets with US pilots and crews to Ukraine would amount to “World War III.”
Yet, he is now reportedly considering a big step in that direction. Instead of more massive shipments of weaponry, what’s desperately needed is a commitment to leave no stone unturned on behalf of finding diplomatic solutions that can end this war, said Solomon.
Meanwhile, the State Department says the United States is committed to strengthening allies and partners worldwide to meet their sovereign self-defense needs and to improve their capabilities to operate with US forces to address shared security challenges.
Funding for training, maintenance, and sustainment.
The United States also continues to work with its allies and partners to provide Ukraine with additional capabilities to defend itself.
According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Russian Federation’s military and paramilitary services are equipped mostly with domestically-produced weapons systems, although since 2010, Russia has imported limited amounts of military hardware from several countries, including Czechia, France, Israel, Italy, Turkey, and Ukraine.
The Russian defense industry is also capable of designing, developing, and producing a full range of advanced air, land, missile, and naval systems. As of 2021, Russia is the world’s second largest exporter of military hardware.
The Russian armed forces include approximately 850,000 total active-duty troops (300,000 Ground Troops; 40,000 Airborne Troops; 150,000 Navy; 160,000 Aerospace Forces; 70,000 Strategic Rocket Forces; approximately 20,000 special operations forces; approximately 100,000 other uniformed personnel (command and control, cyber, support, logistics, security, etc.); estimated 200-250,000 Federal National Guard Troops.
*
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.
Thalif Deen is a former Director, Foreign Military Markets at Defense Marketing Services; Senior Defense Analyst at Forecast International; and military editor Middle East/Africa at Jane’s Information Group, US.
Featured image: Senior Airman Jansen Esteves, a 436th Aerial Port Squadron special handler, verifies shipment information for supplies bound for Ukraine at Dover Air Force Base, Del. Photo Credit: DoD
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.
***
While the World Health Organization pushes ahead with plans to enact a new or revised international pandemic preparedness treaty, the World Bank and other organizations are advancing new vaccine passport regimes.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is moving ahead with plans to enact a new or revised international pandemic preparedness treaty, despite encountering setbacks earlier this summer after dozens of countries, primarily outside the Western world, objected to the plan.
A majority of WHO member states on July 21, during a meeting of WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB), agreed to pursue a legally binding pandemic instrument that will contain “both legally binding as well as non-legally binding elements.”
STAT News described the agreement, which would create a new global framework for responding to pandemics, as “the most transformative global health call to action since [the] WHO itself was formed as the first specialized United Nations agency in 1948.”
Meanwhile, the World Economic Forum, African Union and World Bank — which created a $1 billion fund for “disease surveillance” and “support against the current as well as future pandemics” — are developing their own pandemic response mechanisms, including new cross-country vaccine passport frameworks.
WHO’s ‘pandemic treaty’: what’s been proposed and what would it mean?
Ongoing talks to formulate a new or revised “pandemic treaty” are building on the existing international framework for global pandemic response, the WHO’s International Health Regulations (IHR), considered a binding instrument of international law.
On Dec. 1, 2021, in response to calls from various governments for a “strengthened global pandemic strategy” and signaling the urgency with which these entities are acting, the WHO formally launched the process of creating a new treaty or amending the IHR, during Special Session — only the second in the organization’s history
During the meeting, held May 10-11, WHO’s 194 member countries unanimously agreed to launch the process, which previously had been discussed only informally.
The member countries agreed to:
“Kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The IHR, a relatively recent development, were first enacted in 2005, in the aftermath of SARS-CoV-1.
The IHR legal framework is one of only two binding treaties the WHO has achieved since its inception, the other being the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
The IHR framework already allows the WHO director-general to declare a public health emergency in any country, without the consent of that country’s government, though the framework requires the two sides to first attempt to reach an agreement.
The proposals for a new or revised pandemic treaty, put forth at the special ministerial session of the WHO in May, would “somewhat” strengthen the WHO’s pandemic-related powers, including establishing a “Compliance Committee” that would issue advisory recommendations for states.
However, according to the Daily Sceptic, while the IHR is already legally binding, the amendments proposed in May would not strengthen existing legal obligations or requirements:
“The existing treaty regulations, like all (or most) international law, do not actually compel states to do anything other than talk to the WHO and listen to it, and neither do they specify sanctions for non-compliance; almost all their output is advice.
“The proposed amendments don’t alter that. They don’t allow the WHO unilaterally to impose legally binding measures on or within countries.”
The Daily Sceptic noted one of the risks stemming from the negotiations for a new or updated treaty include the potential codification of “the new lockdown orthodoxy for future pandemics,” which would “replace the sound, science-based, pre-COVID recommendations” previously in place.
According to Dr. Joseph Mercola, such a treaty would grant the WHO “absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more.”
Mercola also questioned a “one-size-fits-all approach to pandemic response,” pointing out that “pandemic threats are not identical in all parts of the world. In his view, he said, “the WHO is not qualified to make global health decisions.”
Similar concerns contributed at least in part to opposition against the proposals presented at the special ministerial session, during which a bloc of mostly non-Western countries, including China, India, Russia and 47 African nations, prevented an agreement from being finalized.
Will opposition fade away?
Although no final agreement was achieved at the May meeting, consensus was reached to organize a new special ministerial session of the WHO later this year, possibly after the WHO’s World Health Assembly, scheduled for Nov. 29 through Dec. 1, Reuters reported.
Mxolisi Nkosi, South Africa’s ambassador to the UN, told the WHO’s annual ministerial assembly the new special session would “consider the benefits for such a convention, agreement or other international instrument.”
Nkosi added:
“Probably the most important lesson COVID-19 has taught us is the need for stronger and more agile collective defences against health threats as well as for building resilience to address future potential pandemics.
“A new pandemic treaty is central to this.”
At the time, the U.K.’s ambassador to the UN, Simon Manley, addressing the lack of an immediate agreement and the consensus to hold a new meeting, tweeted “negotiations may take time, but this is a historic step towards global health security.”
2️⃣ Second resolution – led by 🇬🇧 🇨🇱 🇪🇺 with 60+ co-sponsors – calls for discussions on a #PandemicTreaty to start later this year.
Negotiations may take time, but this is a historic step towards global health security.
The INB, at its meeting held in Geneva July 18-21, also agreed with this view, reaching a consensus that its members will work on finalizing a new legally binding international pandemic agreement by May 2024.
As part of this process, the INB will meet again in December and will deliver a progress report to the 76th World Health Assembly of the WHO in 2023.
According to the WHO, “Any new agreement, if any when agreed by Member States, is drafted and negotiated by governments themselves, [which] will take any action in line with their sovereignty.”
The WHO further claims that “governments themselves will determine actions under the accord while considering their own national laws and regulations.”
The Biden administration expressed broad support for a new or updated pandemic treaty, with the U.S. heading previous negotiations on this issue, along with the European Commission, via its president Ursula von der Leyen, who, as previously reported by The Defender, is also a strong proponent of vaccine passports and mandatory COVID-19 vaccination.
An analysis by the Alliance for Natural Health International speculated that any final agreement may simply strengthen the existing IHR or, alternatively, may involve an amendment to the WHO’s constitution — or both.
Just two days after the July 21 INB agreement, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director-general, tweeted:
“I’m pleased that alongside the process of negotiating a new [international] accord on pandemic preparedness & response, WHO’s Member States are also considering targeted amendments to the [IHR], incl. ways to improve the process for declaring a [public health emergency of international concern, or PHEIC].”
"I thank the Emergency Committee for its deliberations and advice. I know this has not been an easy or straightforward process, and that there are divergent views among the members."-@DrTedros#monkeypox
— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) July 23, 2022
In the same Twitter thread, he also declared the ongoing monkeypox outbreak “a public health emergency of international concern,” one “that is concentrated among men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners.”
Notably, the WHO director-general overruled an expert panel that was divided over whether to classify the outbreak as a global public health emergency.
With this declaration, three “global health emergencies” are now in place, as determined by the WHO: COVID-19, monkeypox and polio.
Busy summer for vaccine passport proposals
While the WHO and global governments weigh plans for an updated or new pandemic treaty, other organizations are moving forward on vaccine passport technologies and partnerships.
On July 8, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), composed of many of the world’s industrialized nations, announced it would promote the unification of the different vaccine passport systems currently in use around the world.
Thirty-six countries and international organizations participated in a July meeting with the goal of “creating a multilateral framework for establishing a global vaccine passport regime,” according to Nick Corbishley of Naked Capitalism.
The development is a continuation of efforts involving the WHO to harmonize global vaccine passport regimes.
In February, the WHO selected Germany’s T-Systems as an “industry partner to develop the vaccination validation service,” which would enable “vaccination certificates to be checked across national borders.”
T-Systems, an arm of Deutsche Telekom, was previously instrumental in developing the interoperability of vaccine passport systems in Europe.
Also in July, 21 African governments “quietly embraced” a vaccine passport system, which in turn would also be interlinked with other such systems globally.
On July 8, which is also Africa Integration Day, the African Union and the Africa Centers for Disease Control launched a digital vaccine passport valid throughout the African Union, describing it as “the e-health backbone” of Africa’s “new health order.”
This follows the development in 2021, of the Trusted Travel platform, now required by several African countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Togo and Zimbabwe, and air carriers such as EgyptAir, Ethiopian Airlines and Kenya Airways, for both inbound and outbound travel.
Beyond Africa, Indonesia, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the G20, is conducting“pilot projects” that would bring about the interoperability of the various digital vaccine passport systems currently in use globally. The project is expected to be completed by November, in time for the G20 Leaders’ Summit.
Naked Capitalism highlighted the role of South African company Cassava Fintech in the efforts to develop an interoperable vaccine passport for all of Africa.
A subsidiary of African telecommunication company Econet, Cassava initially developed the “Sasail” app, which the company described as Africa’s first “global super app” that combines “social payments” with the ability to send and receive money and pay bills, chat with others and play games.
Cassava and Econet entered into a strategic partnership with Mastercard, “to advance digital inclusion across Africa and collaborate on a range of initiatives, including expansion of the Africa CDC TravelPass.”
Mastercard’s top two stockholders are Vanguard and BlackRock, which hold significant stakes in dozens of companies that supported the development of vaccine passports or implemented vaccine mandates for their employees. The two investment firms also hold large stakes in vaccine manufacturers, including Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson.
Mastercard provides funding for the World Bank’s Identity for Development (ID4D) Program, which “focuses on promoting digital identification systems to improve development outcomes while maintaining trust and privacy.”
The Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at the New York School of Law recently described the ID4D program, which touts its alignment with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) , as one which could pave the way to a “digital road to hell.”
According to the center, this would occur through the prioritization of “economic identity” and the use of an infrastructure that has “been linked to severe and large-scale human rights violations” in several countries.
Mastercard is also active in Africa through its joint initiative with another fintech (financial technology) company, Paycode, to “increase access to financial services and government assistance for remote communities across Africa” via a biometric identity system containing the data of 30 million individuals.
World Bank, WHO promote ‘pandemic preparedness’ and vaccine passports
The World Bank in late June announced the creation of a fund that will “finance investments in strengthening the fight against pandemics” and “support prevention, preparedness and response … with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.”
The fund was developed under the lead of the U.S., Italy and current G20 president Indonesia, “with broad support from the G20,” and will be active later this year.
It will provide more than $1 billion in funding for areas such as “disease surveillance” and “support against the current as well as future pandemics.”
The WHO is also a “stakeholder” in the project and will provide “technical expertise,” according to WHO’s director-general.
The agreement follows a 2019 strategic partnership between the UN and the World Economic Forum, to “accelerate” the implementation of the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its SDGs.
Although the agreement has recently circulated on social media, it was announced in June 2019, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. It encompasses six areas of focus, including “health” and “digital cooperation.”
In terms of health, the agreement purports that it will “support countries [sic] achieve good health and well-being for all, within the context of the 2030 Agenda, focusing on key emerging global health threats that require stronger multistakeholder partnership and action.”
In turn, the “digital cooperation” promoted by the agreement will purportedly “meet the needs of the Fourth Industrial Revolution while seeking to advance global analysis, dialogue and standards for digital governance and digital inclusiveness.”
However, despite rhetoric preaching “inclusiveness,” individuals and entities that have refused to go along with applications such as vaccine passports have faced repercussions in their personal and professional lives.
Such was the example of a Canadian doctor who was fined $6,255 in June over her refusal to use the country’s ArriveCAN health information app — which is being investigated over privacy concerns — to enter the country.
Dr. Ann Gillies said she was fined when re-entering Canada after attending a conference in the U.S.
Andrew Bud, the CEO of biometric ID company iProove, a U.S. Department of Homeland Security contractor, described vaccine certificates as driving “the whole field of digital ID in the future,” adding they are “not just about COVID [but] about something even bigger” and that “once adopted for COVID [they] will be rapidly used for everything else.”
*
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.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.
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.
***
There were “terrible flaws” in Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials — and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) knew it, according to Alexandra Latypova, a former pharmaceutical industry executive who reviewed nearly 700 pages of documents Moderna submitted to the FDA as part of its application process.
Latypova, who has 25 years of experience in pharmaceutical research and development, started a number of successful companies — primarily focused on creating and reviewing clinical trials.
On a recent episode of “RFK Jr. The Defender Podcast,” she told Kennedy what she learned after reviewing the Moderna documents, obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request.
Latypova told Kennedy that out of nearly 700 pages, about 400 pages are irrelevant studies that Moderna repeated multiple times.
Moderna also submitted three versions of a single module, she said. And one module contained only narrative summaries of Moderna’s studies, but no actual study results.
“So we are still missing a large number of results, such as full reports that are supporting those narratives,” Latypova told Kennedy.
The FDA “obviously did not object” to any of this, she said. “That’s evidence of collusion to me with the manufacturer.”
Latypova also discussed Moderna’s clinical trials timeline. She said the Investigational New Drug (IND) application meeting is supposed to occur with the FDA when the company initiates human clinical trials.
Moderna and the FDA had a pre-IND meeting on Feb. 19, 2020, and the IND application was formally opened the next day. The global pandemic was declared on March 11, 2020.
“Somehow these visionaries could predict the future with such certainty that they opened a clinical trial for the vaccine, for which a pandemic was announced a month later,” Latypova said.
There is normally only one IND application for one product. In this case, however, there are two IND applications — one belonging to Moderna, and one belonging to the National Institutes of Health, which partnered with Moderna on its COVID-19 vaccine.
Latypova also told Kennedy that Moderna did not conduct studies to determine if its mRNA vaccine affected male fertility.
“We have no idea what [the vaccine] does to young men who want to have children in the future,” she said.
The documents also confirm that Moderna’s trials studied the vaccine’s delivery mechanism, but not its payload, which in this case is the spike protein.
“They want you to believe that … you can … have a truck filled with food, or you can have a truck filled with explosives,” Latypova said. “They’re saying it doesn’t matter. Focus on the truck. It’s the same truck, doesn’t matter what’s inside.”
In the end, Latypova said,
“They’re desperate to vaccinate every single person on the planet because they don’t want you to know what’s going on.”
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.
Rachel Militello has worked extensively as a legal assistant at law firms and newspaper companies. She is also a self-published author of poetry that is geared toward mental health awareness.
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.
***
Recent imagery obtained by The War Zone from Planet Labs shows four USAF B-2 Spirit stealth bombers lined up at the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Amberley airbase in Queensland. Considering the USAF currently only operates 20 B-2 bombers, the photo provides an unprecedented glimpse from space of one-fifth of the service’s entire B-2 fleet deployed ‘down under.’ That being said, it will likely become a very normal sight as the U.S. and Australia work more closely to deter China.
The photo highlights the growing presence of USAF B-2s in Australia in recent months – signaling the U.S.’ commitment to maintaining stability within the Indo-Pacific amid growing tensions with China. The four B-2s currently stationed at Amberley were sent from the 509th Bomb Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, to support a Pacific Air Forces Bomber Task Force. Two B-2s arrived at Amberley on July 10, while another two B-2s arrived on July 12. While B-2s have visited Australia before, this is the first deployment of B-2s to the country as part of the Bomber Task Force (BTF), according to Janes. USAF and RAAF flyers have focused on “training missions and strategic deterrence missions” since the four USAF B-2s arrived at Amberley as part of the Enhanced Cooperation Initiative under the Force Posture Agreement between the U.S. and Australia.
The first pair of B-2s to arrive at Amberley will remain there “throughout the months of July and August and are planning to be involved in various Australian Defence Force (ADF) exercises such as Exercise ‘Koolendong’ and Exercise ‘Arnhem Thunder,’” an Australian Department of Defense spokesperson said. Exercise Koolendong 2022 wrapped up at the end of July.
A USAF B-2 Spirit stealth bomber parked on the tarmac at Amberley airbase in Queensland, Australia. USAF photo.
Two USAF B-2 Spirit stealth bombers perform a Bomber Task Force mission on July 18, alongside two Royal Australian Air Force F-35A Lightning IIs. USAF photo by Tech. Sgt. Dylan Nuckolls.
Performing training missions with USAF B-2s and allied fighter jets has been an “absolute blast [so far,]” Lt. Col. Andrew Kousgaard, commander of the 393rd Expeditionary Bomb Squadron, said in a statement after USAF flyers began training with their RAAF counterparts. “Since our advance team hit the ground… U.S. airmen have integrated with their Australian counterparts in every specialty: fuels, logistics, maintenance, aviators, you name it.”
USAF and RAAF flyers also intend to experiment with refueling B-2s from RAAF KC-30 tankers, Kousgaard indicated, which would add another means of refueling USAF bombers in the Pacific during coalition operations.
“We have plans to conduct engines-running refueling with Australian equipment, [and] air refuel with Australian KC-30s … the list goes on, and the entire deployed squadron is really excited about it,” Kousgaard said. “It’s important for us to demonstrate that we can accomplish that mission from diverse locations in the largest combatant command in the world, and that’s exactly what we’re doing here.”
“The only way to learn and improve is to actually deploy and practice,” he noted. “We simply cannot operate effectively by ourselves in this environment, and learning to effectively integrate with our partners is absolutely critical to success. We’re training against that ‘tyranny of distance,’ alongside our Australian partners on this deployment, and that experience is truly invaluable.”
Two #US Air Force (USAF) Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bombers landed in Australia and will operate in #Australia until the end of August 2022 pic.twitter.com/bBqrhG3aeZ
Commenting on the deployment of the first pair of B-2s sent to Amberley, Kousgaard said: “This deployment of the B-2 to Australia demonstrates and enhances the readiness and lethality of our long-range penetrating strike force.”
The presence of so many B-2s in Australia clearly sends a very public signal that the U.S. is prepared to use the B-2, and do so from new operating locations, should a future conflict with China unfold.
The deployment also highlights the U.S.’ commitment to supporting its allies in the region – particularly Australia. The U.S., Australia, and the U.K. formed a trilateral security pact in September 2021 covering the Indo-Pacific region (AUKUS,) which aids the transfer of weapons and technologies between the three countries. As part of the pact, the U.S. and U.K. will also help Australia to build nuclear-powered submarines. In a further show of unity, U.S. Navy Adm. John C. Aquilino, commander of U.S. military forces in the Indo-Pacific, recently visited RAAF Base Amberley while in the country for the 24th annual Indo-Pacific Chiefs of Defense (CHODs) conference.
RAAF Air Cmdre. David Paddison underscored the significance of Aquilino’s to the base.
“It is a privilege having Admiral Aquilino visit our largest Air Force base in Australia and meeting our aviators, who have been working with their peers from the 509th Bomb Wing.”
“It’s not a regular occurrence for our refueling, security, and firefighters to gain experience on aircraft such as the B-2. This partnership has been instrumental in enhancing the capabilities and interoperability of both our forces through joint exercises and activities. The Indo-Pacific is our home and we stand committed to an open, inclusive, and resilient Indo-Pacific.”
In a recent public statement, Adm. Aquilino stressed that the Indo-Pacific is “the most consequential theater with the most challenging security issues [for the U.S.] … advancing our interoperability with critical allies like Australia is critical to maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific.”
While several USAF B-2s are expected to stay at Amberley for at least another few weeks, it’s likely that the service’s presence in Australia will only increase with U.S. bombers setting up shop ‘down under’ becoming a common occurrence.
*
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.
Featured image: Four USAF B-2 Spirit stealth bombers lined up at Amberley airbase in Queensland, Australia. Planet Labs.
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.
***
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) is demanding that the Canadian government holds Israel accountable for its unprovoked and aggressive war against Gaza this weekend, which killed at least 44 Palestinians. Canada has not commented on Israel’s actions except to support Israel’s right to security, ignoring Israel’s pattern of deliberately targeting civilians in airstrikes – in what clearly amount to war crimes. CJPME urges Canada to end Israel’s impunity and deter future violence, including by ending military trade with Israel.
“Canadians are appalled and deeply embarrassed by Canada’s refusal to condemn Israel’s attacks against civilians in Gaza,” said Michael Bueckert, Vice President of CJPME. “If Canada fails hold Israel accountable for its pattern of deliberately bombing civilian targets, it will embolden further Israeli aggression and encourage its wanton disregard for international law,” added Bueckert.
Over a period of three days starting on Friday, August 5, Israeli airstrikes deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure across Gaza, including residential towers. At least 44 Palestinians were killed, including 16 children, and more than 350 were injured. Due to lack of fuel, Gaza’s only power plant shut down, leaving people with only 4 hours of electricity per day. In response to Israeli attacks, Islamic Jihad militants fired hundreds of rockets into Israel, but no Israeli causalities have been reported. This was the most serious violence since Israel’s 11-day offensive on Gaza in May 2021, which killed at least 240 Palestinians, 63% of which were civilians, and injured 1,968.
Except for a single and unsigned tweet, issued late on August 6, the Canadian government has remained entirely silent on Israel’s latest war. Canada’s sole statement boasted of supporting “Israel’s right to assure its own security,” but CJPME notes that the statement failed to specify that it was Palestinians who had been killed, that Israel was the aggressor party, or that Israel’s airstrikes had deliberately targeted residential buildings. According to Palestinian NGO Al-Haq, Israel’s disproportionate attacks on civilians may amount to crimes against humanity, and UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has condemned Israel’s military offensive as “a flagrant act of aggression. Illegal. Immoral. Irresponsible.”
CJPME urges Canada to respond to Israeli aggression and violations of international law by implementing the following concrete solutions:
Canada should clearly condemn Israel’s act of aggression, and deter Israel from conducting future violence;
Canada should demand an immediate and permanent end to Israel’s brutal and illegal 15-year blockade of Gaza;
Canada should fully support the investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into possible war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories, and urge the ICC to include Israel’s recent actions in its investigation.
*
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.
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.
***
One aspect of Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan that has been largely overlooked is her meeting with Mark Lui, chairman of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC). Pelosi’s trip coincided with US efforts to convince TSMC – the world’s largest chip manufacturer, on which the US is heavily dependent – to establish a manufacturing base in the US and to stop making advanced chips for Chinese companies.
US support for Taiwan has historically been based on Washington’s opposition to communist rule in Beijing, and Taiwan’s resistance to absorption by China. But in recent years, Taiwan’s autonomy has become a vital geopolitical interest for the US because of the island’s dominance of the semiconductor manufacturing market.
Semiconductors – also known as computer chips or just chips – are integral to all the networked devices that have become embedded into our lives. They also have advanced military applications.
Transformational, super-fast 5G internet is enabling a world of connected devices of every kind (the “Internet of Things”) and a new generation of networked weapons. With this in mind, US officials began to realise during the Trump administration that US semiconductor design companies, such as Intel, were heavily dependent on Asian-based supply chains for the manufacturing of their products.
In particular, Taiwan’s position in the world of semiconductor manufacturing is a bit like Saudi Arabia’s status in OPEC. TSMC has a 53% market share of the global foundry market (factories contracted to make chips designed in other countries). Other Taiwan-based manufacturers claim a further 10% of the market.
As a result, the Biden administration’s 100-Day Supply Chain Review Report says, “The United States is heavily dependent on a single company – TSMC – for producing its leading-edge chips.” The fact that only TSMC and Samsung (South Korea) can make the most advanced semiconductors (five nanometres in size) “puts at risk the ability to supply current and future [US] national security and critical infrastructure needs” .
This means that China’s long-term goal of reunifying with Taiwan is now more threatening to US interests. In the 1972 Shanghai Communique and the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, the US recognised that people in both mainland China and Taiwan believed that there was “One China” and that they both belonged to it. But for the US it is unthinkable that TSMC could one day be in territory controlled by Beijing.
‘Tech war’
For this reason, the US has been trying to attract TSMC to the US to increase domestic chip production capacity. In 2021, with the support of the Biden administration, the company bought a site in Arizona on which to build a US foundry. This is scheduled to be completed in 2024.
The US Congress has just passed the Chips and Science Act, which provides US$52 billion (£43 billion) in subsidies to support semiconductor manufacturing in the US. But companies will only receive Chips Act funding if they agree not to manufacture advanced semiconductors for Chinese companies.
This means that TSMC and others may well have to choose between doing business in China and in the US because the cost of manufacturing in the US is deemed to be too high without government subsidies.
This is all part of a broader “tech war” between the US and China, in which the US is aiming to constrain China’s technological development and prevent it from exercising a global tech leadership role.
In 2020, the Trump administration imposed crushing sanctions on the Chinese tech giant Huawei that were designed to cut the company off from TSMC, on which it was reliant for the production of high-end semiconductors needed for its 5G infrastructure business.
Huawei was the world’s leading supplier of 5G network equipment but the US feared its Chinese origins posed a security risk (though this claim has been questioned). The sanctions are still in place because both Republicans and Democrats want to stop other countries from using Huawei’s 5G equipment.
The British government had initially decided to use Huawei equipment in certain parts of the UK’s 5G network. The Trump administration’s sanctions forced London to reverse that decision.
A key US goal appears to be ending its dependency on supply chains in China or Taiwan for “emerging and foundational technologies”, which includes advanced semiconductors needed for 5G systems, but may include other advanced tech in future.
Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan was about more than just Taiwan’s critical place in the “tech war”. But the dominance of its most important company has given the island a new and critical geopolitical importance that is likely to heighten existing tensions between the US and China over the status of the island. It has also intensified US efforts to “reshore” its semiconductor supply chain.
*
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.
Maria Ryan is Associate Professor in US History, University of Nottingham.
Featured image is licensed under CC 3.0 – Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego
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.
***
The brazenness of Zelensky’s hypocrisy in condemning alleged Russian meddling in his country but then openly calling for meddling inside Russia itself through the banning of its nationals from the West for the purpose of provoking a Color Revolution against President Putin is yet another bridge too far for the average Westerner to accept.
A lot of folks are talking about Zelensky’s proposal that he shared with the Washington Post in a recent interview about banning all Russians from visiting the West. It’s indisputably the epitome of fascism since it seeks to collectively punish an entire people for their authorities’ foreign policy, but there’s also a bit more to it as revealed by the Ukrainian leader himself. He slipped during the interview by admitting that “This is the only way to influence Putin” after having explained how he imagines the Russian people to react to this potential ban. It’s very strongly implied that he expects them to initiate a Color Revolution to overthrow President Putin.
Never mind that this outcome is nothing but political fantasy, the point to pay attention to is his meddling motivations for proposing a complete ban on Russians visiting the West. The US-led Western Mainstream Media (MSM) has incessantly spewed conspiracy theories from 2016 onward alleging that Moscow’s the one meddling in the West, including most recently through the US’ Uhuru Movement, yet that same declining unipolar hegemony’s Eastern European proxy is now openly admitting that he wants to meddle in Russia through his proposed means for the purpose of carrying out regime change there. The hypocrisy is stunning but obviously won’t be called out by the MSM.
Nonetheless, those Westerners who are gradually waking up – and to a certain extent largely because the MSM itself has recently started exposing some of Kiev’s unsavory aspects like Amnesty International, CBS News, The Guardian, and CNN did last week – will be able to read through the lines and discern the double standards at play. After all, Gallup’s latest poll proved that literally only 1% of Americans consider Russia to be their country’s “most important problem”, which proves that all the brainwashing hasn’t had any long-term effect and most likely was counterproductive in hindsight. Therefore, only a radical fringe minority of Americans will probably support Zelensky’s proposal.
The vast majority, meanwhile, are expected to either not even care or to perhaps even be passionately against this discriminatory policy. Although they’re practically powerless to influence their leaders since elected representatives have no accountability to their constituents until the next elections (and even then the so-called “uniparty” usually ensures that people pretty much only have a choice between bad and worse), it’s still important to note the growing divide between the government and the governed. This aligns with the tactical axis of the “Great Bifurcation” related to the fierce friction between the elite and populists, which President Putin predicted in June could soon lead to elite change in the West.
The brazenness of Zelensky’s hypocrisy in condemning Russian meddling in his country but then openly calling for meddling inside Russia itself through the banning of its nationals from the West for the purpose of provoking a Color Revolution against President Putin is yet another bridge too far for the average Westerner to accept. The Ukrainian leader is less popular than ever nowadays due to his patrons’ taxpayers becoming upset at how ungrateful he is for the tens of billions of dollars in support that their governments have provided him after he told Americans that his country should be more important to them than their own and then exposed his elite life through his Vogue photoshoot.
Overall, Zelensky seems incapable of reading the room and realizing that everything that he’s done lately works against his own interests in the sphere of Western public opinion.
He seems to think that he can flaunt his extravagant life of luxury in their taxpayers’ faces after receiving tens of billions of dollars from them, demand that his country be more important to them than their own, and now hypocritically tell their governments to do what he wants in order to meddle in Russia’s affairs, all without being seen as the megalomanic that he truly is. The Western people are getting fed up with him and now longer regard this literal comedian as funny, but as an offensive joke that’s costing them billions.
*
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.
Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
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.
***
China definitely appears to be at the top of American concerns. The CIA is launching a new project aimed at fomenting actions against Beijing. For this, the US government is even shifting money that was aimed at investing in measures against terrorism. In practice, this means that tensions between Washington and Beijing are likely to remain serious for a long time to come.
Recently, the Associated Press reported, citing sources, that the CIA’s “counterterrorism” mission center is having its budget and personnel redirected to a new center, which would be focused on China. The sources report that, although terrorism remains a “priority” for the agency, China is currently considered the greatest threat to the US, which is why more efforts would be needed in order to create measures aimed at neutralizing the Asian country.
The news comes a few days after the US carried out a military intelligence operation that killed Ayman al-Zawahri, an alleged leader of Al Qaeda, in Kabul. As the operation took place, China intensified its military exercises in the Taiwan Strait, forming an air and naval blockade against the island. American experts allegedly suggested that this fact proved that terrorism, while still a problem, is no longer the top American priority, as Beijing is taking advantage of the time spent on “counterterrorism” by the Americans to further advance its ambitions. This “new situation” would justify a change of focus on the part of American intelligence.
Douglas Wise, a former CIA officer who worked at the counter-terrorism center, commented on the case and assessed that the transition will not be so easy, since over the last few decades the US has devoted much of its intelligence apparatus to the terrorism issue. Wise believes that an anti-terrorist “culture” has been developed at the CIA, which will take years to overcome by a new focus. He stressed that a “rational plan” for transition will be needed, otherwise US intelligence will be stagnant and without operational capability, which will undoubtedly favor US enemies.
It is necessary to point out, however, that the news is not as surprising as it seems at first. The US has been promoting an intelligence focus to an “anti-China mission” since last year, when, in October, the CIA announced the creation of an operations center against China. What seems to be happening now is simply the officialization of this new focus of attention, in addition to budget and human resources redirection. China will officially become Americans’ greatest fear and Washington’s national security priority.
Also, the creation of this new anti-China intelligence center, even more specialized and equipped than the previous one, seems to be a direct consequence of Biden’s foreign policy program, which proposed to simply confront all “enemy” countries at the same time, escalating tensions around the world. While Trump has steered opposition to Beijing towards a commercial focus provoking a “trade war” Biden has intensified the confrontation in the military and intelligence field, which has put the world at risk.
What remains to be seen is what data would justify this assessment about the existence of a “Chinese threat”. The intensification of Chinese military activities in recent days came as a response to an American provocation. If the US had not sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Taipei, China would not have started the current drills. There seems to be no point in considering Beijing a threat for responding to a provocation that the US itself made.
Obviously, both countries have a number of disagreements and can undoubtedly be considered rival states, but it does not seem prudent in any way to direct this opposition to an intelligence aspect. This makes the situation more serious and sets precedents for an endless chain of countermeasures. If US intelligence has China as its focus, Chinese intelligence will also be forced to have the US as its main target. And so, the tensions only tend to increase.
It is also necessary to note that terrorism has been considered the main global threat over the last decades. Combating terrorism is a national security priority in almost every state. The possibility of replacing the importance of combating this global enemy with combating one specific country is something truly outrageous and reason enough to escalate tensions even further.
The best measure the US could take with regard to China would be to simply stop provoking the Asian country and allow its process of national reunification to take place in the most peaceful and sovereign way possible. The less American interference in Chinese affairs, the more peacefully tensions will be resolved.
*
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.
Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter.
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.
***
Why has there been almost no coverage of what was taking place at the same time multi-millionaire Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was visiting Taiwan?
Consider what is being said, as well as what is totally omitted, in the U.S. coverage of China’s naval action around Taiwan.
The U.S. naval command RIMPAC (Rim of the Pacific Amphibious Assault Training) was carrying out maneuvers involving 170 aircraft, 38 ships, four submarines, and 25,000 military personnel from all the G7 imperialist countries. Some 19 other Asia Pacific countries were pulled in for symbolic participation. RIMPAC is the world’s largest international maritime exercise.
This aggressive maritime action took place from June 29 to Aug. 4. In other words, it was going on as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was visiting Taiwan.
The shaping of information is all pervasive. Whether it is FOX News, CNN, AP, the New York Times or the Washington Post, the multibillion-dollar media are part of and totally intertwined with U.S. military industries. They collaborate in hiding U.S. war plans and provocations.
The role of the corporate media in totally distorting the news on China must be challenged.
China’s right to self-defense
The media coverage of China’s military drills around Taiwan never describe them as self-defense. The media display absolute unity, blocking any mention of China’s right to safeguard its national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Every statement or action taken by China is relentlessly described as “threatening,” “provocative” or “expansionist.” The same words are used again and again in news articles and politicians’ statements.
There is only one accepted political line. The media repeat that China is irrational, paranoid, belligerent, menacing and overreacting.
U.S. actions, even military maneuvers in which thousands of troops employ jet bombers and aircraft carriers, are described as “routine rotations” or normal schedules – that is, if the mainstream media report on them at all.
The Chinese media are always described as state-controlled propaganda. By comparison, the U.S. corporate media are always defined as free and democratic.
This is so relentless that it impacts even social forces who oppose U.S. militarism and endless U.S. wars.
Routine threats by U.S. Navy
RIMPAC is planned and coordinated by the U.S. Navy’s Third Fleet. According to its commander, their massive training is meant to deter escalation by China’s military.
Only part of the Third Fleet is engaged in RIMPAC. The fleet’s total size comes to a combat-ready force of more than 68,000 people, 100 ships and 400 aircraft.
Moving into place as Pelosi visited Taiwan was the even larger U.S. Navy Seventh Fleet, the largest of its forward-deployed fleets. At any given time, it amounts to 50 to 70 ships and submarines, 150 aircraft, and more than 27,000 sailors and Marines.
The Seventh Fleet is led by the USS Ronald Reagan, accompanied by guided-missile destroyers, nuclear submarines and jet aircraft. This ship has now been joined by aircraft carrier battle groups of the USS Nimitz and USS Theodore Roosevelt.
It is comparable to a scenario in which Chinese destroyers were to sail into the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of New Orleans and Houston.
The U.S. Pacific Fleet consists of approximately 200 ships/submarines, nearly 1,200 aircraft, and more than 130,000 sailors and civilians. The U.S. Navy maintains 11 carrier strike groups in international waters.
Hiding in plain sight
Isn’t this aggressive and threatening? Yet this vast and deadly armada is hidden in plain sight. It is barely mentioned, but even when hundreds of ships and aircraft are involved, they are described as simply participating in “routine” or “business as usual” exercises.
These continuing assaults are not top news, but they are reported in military news media, such as the Navy Times.
When the guided-missile destroyer USS Benfold conducted its third transit through the South China Sea in a week, the Chinese government was prompted to label the move as a provocation. (See this)
The U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet has so far this year sent an average of one guided-missile destroyer per month through the Taiwan Strait as a challenge to China. (See this)
According to the Navy Times, China’s foreign ministry protested:
“The U.S. military’s actions have seriously violated China’s sovereignty and security, seriously undermined peace and stability in the South China Sea, and seriously violated international law and norms governing international relations.”
China’s long-held position is that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to one China and should work together to seek national reunification.”
The Taiwan Strait is part of the South China Sea, and China has claimed the area as its territorial waters. However, the United States has consistently said that it considers the strait to be international waters.
Freedom of Navigation – imperialist piracy
“Freedom of Navigation” is similar to the grand term “Free Trade.” It is not about freedom. Freedom of Navigation has meant unrestricted U.S., British, French and Japanese access to the looting of China.
Few people in the U.S. are aware of the fact that, more than a century ago, the U.S. Navy sent fleets of armored ships to patrol Chinese rivers and coastal waters.
Special fleets of gunboats of the U.S. Navy and Marines patrolled Chinese rivers up to 1,000 miles inland. They were there to enforce U.S. trade interests and suppress uprisings. Armies of occupation from the U.S., Britain, France, Germany and Japan were stationed in Chinese cities.
“Concessions” were forced on China by brutal gunboat diplomacy and enshrined by onerous unequal treaties that made China pay imperialist countries huge indemnities and grant such “concessions” as control of its cities, major ports and largest waterways.
Britain, with U.S. and French participation, fought two Opium Wars in China to enforce its “right” to sell opium. The merchants called this “defending free trade” and “protecting freedom of navigation.”
It was the 1949 victory of the Chinese Communist Party that finally ended these “Freedom of Navigation” invasions into China’s mainland, opening the opportunity to rebuild a strong, united China which is increasingly able to defend its coastal waters and resist U.S. imperialist demands.
The corrupt and defeated former military forces, defending the rights of the old landlord class, withdrew, with U.S. Navy protection, to the island province of Taiwan. This was hardly a democratic process. It was a totally militarized U.S. occupation of the island.
China has held a consistent, well-understood position on its sovereignty and territorial integrity that is recognized internationally in all world bodies. China has repeatedly asserted its right to resolve this unfinished national reunification.
U.S. violates signed agreements
Washington is openly violating three different signed agreements – Joint Communiques it made with China in 1972, 1979 and 1982 – affirming that China is one country and Taiwan is a province of China.
Any focus on these signed agreements of “One China” in the Western media today would expose that the U.S. has broken its promises not to interrupt China’s efforts to reunify the island peacefully.
Once in a while the truth slips in. Roger Waters, co-founder of Pink Floyd, an English rock band formed in London in 1965, is now on a final U.S. tour titled: “This is not a drill.” In an interview with CNN on August 7, Waters refuted the narrative about Taiwan.
When CNN host Michael Smerconish said in the interview that “China is too busy encircling Taiwan,” Waters immediately said, “They’re not encircling Taiwan, Taiwan is part of China, and that’s been absolutely accepted by the whole of the international community since 1948.” Smerconish tried to interrupt Waters, saying that China is “on the top of the list of human rights offenders.” Waters immediately shot back: “The Chinese didn’t go to Iraq and kill 1 million people in 2003.”
Pelosi and insider trading
The U.S. corporate media are united in hostility to China. At the same time, different media can favor either a Democratic or Republican presidency.
For example, Fox News, guilty of a daily barrage of racist stereotypes against China, was at the forefront of exposing Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul Pelosi, for his multimillion-dollar insider stock trading in a semiconductor firm just before Congress voted to give $52 billion to chip manufacturers in the U.S., called the CHIPS Act.
Despite this scandal and her role as Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi met with the chairman of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the world’s largest semiconductor manufacturer and a beneficiary of the U.S. legislation.
TSMC plans to build a $12-billion chip factory in the U.S. The semiconductor industry is a priority for the U.S. “containment” of China. At the same time, the U.S. government is using various sanctions to suppress Chinese high-tech companies and break chip supply chains away from China.
Effort to reverse U.S. corporate decline
Wang Peng, a research fellow at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences, explained:
“The U.S. is using the CHIPS Act to force companies in countries and regions of key status on the global chip supply and industrial chains to play by U.S. rules, as well as encircling and suppressing chip industries in emerging markets,”
The bill’s requirement is for companies to pick only one of two choices: business ties with China, or subsidies from the U.S. government. (See this)
The problem U.S. imperialists face is how to force countries in the region to act against their own economic interests.
Taiwan’s annual exports to China come to $126.2 billion, almost double its exports to the U.S. of $65.9 billion. South Korea’s exports to China, at $132.5 billion, far outweigh the $74.4 billion to the U.S. Japan’s exports to China come to $163.8 billion, compared to only $135.9 billion in exports to the U.S.
In order to force high-tech companies to decouple from the People’s Republic of China, U.S. imperialism needs a political/military crisis with China. Every U.S. plan for sanctions on China starts with a manufactured crisis over Taiwan.
U.S. imperialism’s strategy of restructuring and distorting the global economy to serve its own short-term interests of maximizing immediate profits has led to an aggressive U.S. expansion of NATO and provocations in Ukraine.
The immediate threat to U.S. hegemony was the EU trade with Russia of $260 billion a year — 10 times its trade with the U.S. The EU has also been the largest investor in Russia. Breaking this growing economic integration of the EU with Russia, and at an even greater level with China, serves the long-term strategic interests of U.S. corporate domination that have been in place since World War II.
In 2021 China’s GDP was roughly 10 times larger than Russia’s. China is the world’s top trading economy and the number-one exporter of manufactured goods. It is in an increasingly strong position to resist U.S. demands.
The desperate imperialist strategy to reverse the declining global position of the U.S. will be far more disruptive to the global economy.
This information on U.S. provocations must be dragged into the daylight by all the forces determined to prevent another imperialist war.
The role of the U.S. corporate media is to make imperialist threats seem palatable and entirely reasonable. This is possible only by blocking all past history of U.S. wars while using racism to smear and demonize China’s legitimate, reasonable and lawful responses and countermeasures,
Taiwanese rapper and anti-imperialist commentator Zhong Xiangyu explains:
“The U.S. government has never been a protector of Taiwan. The U.S. Navy was the first country to attack Taiwan with a warship in 1867. The U.S. Navy supported Japan in invading Taiwan in 1874. The U.S. government sold weapons to Japan during the Sino-Japanese War, leading to China’s defeat and forcing China to cede Taiwan to Japan in 1895.
“Today Taiwan separatism is not true independence. It just means serving U.S. interests in a hegemonic, unequal relationship.”
*
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.
This article was originally published on Workers World.
Sara Flounders is Co-Director of the International Action Center. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Costa Rica’s recently elected president abolished the country’s COVID “vaccine” mandate on Wednesday.
“As of today, the vaccines are not mandatory,” President Rodrigo Chaves Roblesannounced during an August 3 press conference. “And therefore any action taken against anyone who does not want to be vaccinated is an action that is against the law.”
Recently elected Costa Rica president, Rodrigo Robles, rescinds the vaccine mandate. Makes it illegal to force anyone. pic.twitter.com/mFoEXh1PxD
Chaves, who was elected in April 2022, shared that although he himself has been jabbed, and he encourages others to consider “vaccination” as well, his position is “fundamentally that people have freedom of choice.
“But, if you don’t want to, as I said during my campaign: Costa Rica’s people are not cattle that you beat with a piece of wood and force to get vaccinated,” Chaves declared during the press conference.
Costa Rica’s president emphasized that his administration’s position is the same as that of the World Health Organization (WHO), the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO), and the majority of the world’s countries, arguing that Costa Rica’s prior vax mandates are therefore “contrary to international standards.”
Chaves backed up his claim by highlighting a WHO statement from April 2021, which stated that “vaccine” mandates “interfere with freedom and individual autonomy” and that “One must balance the well-being of the community with individual liberties.”
He further slammed the mandates as a violation of Costa Rican law since, as he pointed out, the members of Costa Rica’s National Vaccination and Epidemiology Commission (CNVE) were functioning under expired terms when they issued the jab mandates, rendering all of their post-term actions “invalid.”
After Chaves and his administration took office, “we realized that their terms … officially ended in 2020,” he said.
“When told this, they all got quiet. They said that nobody had told them their terms had ended. And nobody questioned this until the Minister here investigated,” continued Chaves, referring to Minister of Health Jocelyn Chacón, also present at the press conference.
The president explained that he asked Chacón to suspend the jab mandates “given the illegal actions taken by the Commission,” while keeping the shots available for those who, in the exercise of their liberty, desire to be vaccinated.”
During the press conference, Chacón denied claims that the current government of Costa Rica is “anti-vaccination,” pointing out that its members were “up to date” with their shots.
“There are countries which do not mandate, and have higher rates of vaccination. Why? Because people do not want to be ordered: they prefer to have things explained,” Chacón said.
In October 2021, Costa Rica announced it would start implementing a COVID shot mandate that would require the jab to enter non-essential businesses, including restaurants, shopping malls, gyms, and hotels. The jab was also required for all public servants, and private businesses were permitted to mandate the shot for their employees as well.
Costa Rica then became the first country in the world, in November 2021, to mandate COVID jabs for children. The decision came only a week after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave its approval to administering Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine to children age 5-11 despite limited safety data and virtually nonexistent need. The Costa Rican government cited the FDA approval in its announcement of the mandate.
Reuters reported that as of May 2022, more than 85% of Costa Ricans had “received at least one shot, while 79% have had two doses, and 41% have received a third vaccine, according to official data.”
Former Costa Rican president Carlos Alvarado announced that month, during his last speech as president, that the country was one of a “select group of countries in the world that has more than 85% of its population vaccinated with at least one dose.”
*
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.
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.
***
Guest is Sara Bennett, singer, entertainer, presenter; “the chameleon among singers.” She has received several awards, among them is Artist of the Year 2019 (German Artist Magazine).
In this session, she talks about how important it is to speak to people in a positive way:
“Everything we are experiencing out there now, this complete absurdity, nothing more than purposeful numbing, hypnosis and distraction from the essential. […] People […] forget about life as such.”
Moreover, she opens up about passivity of the artistic community; colleagues collectively bury their creative freedoms and human rights.
She also shares an encounter with midwives in Luxembourg who said that the number of stillbirths has never been so high, the placentas look abnormal, there have never been so many harelips.
*
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.
Comments Off on Video: Soaring Number of Stillbirths, Abnormal Placentas.”Everything We are Experiencing is Complete Absurdity”. Sara Bennett, Corona Investigative Committee
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.
***
Executive summary
A doctor friend of mine in Canada heard about 15 deaths of Canadian doctors over the last 9 months. He’s been in practice for 30 years. He’s never heard of any such unusual deaths before of doctors. Zero in 30 years. Why is he now, all of a sudden, hearing of so many deaths, and why are these deaths all happening very soon after vaccination?
From July 13 to July 28, 7 doctors died… an average of one doctor every other day for 2 weeks straight. And the causes of death were statistically unusual: two died swimming (which is very rare), one died in her sleep (very rare), etc.
The fact checkers assure us all that all of these doctors died for other reasons; the fact that they all died right after the vaccine was simply bad luck. That’s not the right metric. The fact checkers need to tell us the last time this happened where 7 doctors died in 14 days from unusual causes. They cannot. This is unprecedented.
The Canadian doctors continue to ignore the deaths in plain sight and continue to believe what they are told to believe. I predict the next shots will be even worse.
Sadly, I don’t think the Canadian doctors are ever going to figure this out.
14 deaths of young doctors in the last 9 months, all shortly after the jab
A doctor friend in Canada has been passively noticing the untimely death of doctors in Canada shortly after they were forced to get the third and fourth doses of the vaccine. He sent me these images below which had been sent to him. He’s not proactively researching these. There are likely a lot more deaths he doesn’t know about.
Guess how many similar deaths (young doctors dying unexpectedly of odd causes) he’s noticed in the past 30 years in practice? Yup, zero.
What’s astounding is that this is a vaccine, which according to this CDC study, makes it nearly impossible for you to die after the shot. Yet, these doctors all died shortly after the shot. The doctors are dead, so the CDC study must be wrong.
Oddly, none of the deaths were covered in the Canadian mainstream media, so I thought you should know about them.
Let me be very clear. You cannot have 14 Canadian doctors die shortly after the vaccine if there isn’t something wrong with the shot. Period. Full stop. Each of these is a very rare event. Having them clustered like this is a sure sign the vaccines killed them.
Any honest scientist would start with this hypothesis as the most obvious hypothesis and only reject it if there was compelling evidence to the contrary.
The vaccine kills people in subtle ways that are NOT being investigated by medical examiners. They are deliberately looking the other way.
Two of the most popular methods used by the vaccine to kill people are accelerating a cancer (which may have started from an earlier dose) and by causing a sudden death which, if the person is driving or swimming, appears to be a car accident or drowning.
Nearly all the medical examiners all look the other way when assessing a vaccine-caused death.
For example, I know a technician who works for a medical examiner who is seeing all these odd “blood clots,” but he says the pathologists “won’t listen or investigate”!
Why are people looking the other way? It’s because they want the pandemic to go away and they are told that the vaccine is the only way out of the pandemic so they look the other way when there is bad news.
Fact checkers: Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
According to the fact checkers, none of these doctors died from the shots, they all died of other causes. Duh. The vaccine always kills people by stopping their heart, brain, etc. so it always looks like they died from something else because they did.
But when normally healthy people all of a sudden die like this in rapid succession, you are being totally disingenuous if you rule out the vaccine as the likely instigator of the death.
What the fact checkers fail to point out is that in many cases, the diseases often first started after the first vaccine shot, and then got worse with progressive shots. Somehow, they always miss that point that the vaccine accelerated the death. The fact that all these doctors died in close proximity to the shots is just too coincidental.
Canadian docs will keep believing the “safe and effective” narrative because that’s what they are trained to do: trust the authorities
My doctor friends in Canada simply cannot believe how brainwashed his colleagues are. Zero deaths in 30 years, now all of a sudden 14 deaths in 9 months each happening shortly after their shots. Come on. That’s not bad luck. No way.
The Canadian docs will continue to ignore the stats, believe the “fact checkers,” and line up for the shots. It will get worse in the next round.
14 Canadian doctors who have died after being given the vaccine
From July 13 to July 28, 7 doctors died… an average of one doctor every other day for 2 weeks.
Vincent Mak
Died August 3rd, 2022 at 12:45pm. My friend knew him. Covered here and here.
Ask yourself: have you ever seen a post like this in your life? Do you think this is “normal”?
Read this post about Wayne Root’s wedding. He basically did the post-marketing randomized clinical trial that the CDC never did. Only 200 people were “enrolled” in his “trial” which lasted just 8 months. The results are stunning and cannot be explained by just “bad luck.” There is no other possible explanation: the vaccines are a disaster.
Wayne’s vaccinated friends had a 26% risk of severe injury and a 7% chance of death compared with a 0% level for his unvaxxed friends in the same time period. This is the type of observational study the CDC should be doing… but they aren’t for obvious reasons (it would create vaccine hesitancy).
The evidence just doesn’t seem to matter, even when it is in plain sight. 40.2% of women had their reproductive organs affected by the vaccine and we still are mandating this vaccine?!?!
Are there any anecdotes showing the reverse, i.e., only unvaxxed getting sick/dying? I couldn’t find any!
When I looked for anecdotes that are opposite to this one (where it was the unvaxxed who were being injured or dying), I couldn’t find any.
Apparently, I am not alone. This poll is as lopsided as it gets; it tells you everything you need to know:
It’s up to the fact checkers now to produce hundreds of extreme reverse anecdotes (e.g., Wayne Root’s wedding anecdotes, but where ONLY the unvaccinated were dying and injured).
Summary
This is a partial list of Canadian doctor deaths. I’m sure there will be more in the comments.
The key point is the sheer number of events are simply too high in the doctor category alone. These doctors all dying shortly after the jab suggests a most likely hypothesis be that the jab killed them, e.g., by accelerating their existing medical condition, or creating a new medical condition, or by a mysterious sudden death.
So while it could be that one or maybe two of the deaths were just coincidences, odds are that the rest were not. This sort of pattern has not happened before.
Science is about figuring out which hypothesis is a better match to the data. For the data I’m seeing, it’s always that the vaccines are too unsafe to use.
IMPORTANT
I have yet to see an anecdote that is the mirror image of Wayne Root’s anecdote where it is only the unvaxxed getting injured and dying in a randomly matched group. If you got one, let me know in the comments!
*
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.
On the 9th of August, 1945, an all-Christian B-29 bomber crew, took off from Tinian Island in the South Pacific, with the blessings of its Catholic and Protestant chaplains. In the plane’s hold was the second of the only two nuclear bombs to ever be used against human targets in wartime. The primary target, Kokura, Japan, was clouded over, so the plane, named Bock’s Car, headed for the secondary target, Nagasaki.
The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s visit to Myanmar on August 3 shows that the relationship is assuming a strategic character. The Foreign Ministry in a press release on August 2 highlighted that the relationship is “one of the priorities of foreign policy in the Asia–Pacific region, an important factor in ensuring peace, stability and sustainable development.”
As the tension between the US and China mounts as a fall-out of Nancy Pelosi’s provocative Taiwan visit, the technology war between the two is also taking a new turn. Both houses in the US Congress have approved a $280 billion plan – The Chips and Science Act – to boost US chip manufacturing.
Guest is Dr. Ariyana Love, a Naturopathic Doctor & Investigative Journalist. Her elder son was vaccine injured at age two and diagnosed with High Functioning Autism at age 7. She applied her knowledge of Naturopathic Medicine and designed a dietary protocol that resulted in a near total reversal of her son’s debilitating symptoms.
Shots puts an amusing spin on the little-known history of eugenics. It traces the genocidal, anti-ethnic eugenics movement which resulted in the sterilization and elimination of millions. It exposes how the wealthiest families financed the evolution of eugenics into Nazi Germany, and pushed America into perpetual wars. These families further influenced the government’s elimination of financial liability for vaccine manufacturers while simulating run-ups to the 2020 pandemic. By that year the wealthiest had bought and controlled the media, and censored medical experts that criticized government actions.
This title might surprise you. But at the height of the Second World War, America and the Soviet Union were allies. And Hollywood as of June 1941 was involved in producing a very different type of war film.
In a video that is sure to give anyone hope, an 11-year-old girl calls out Klaus Schwab and the plans of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in one of the most intelligent and well-spoken deliveries that would flaw even some of the greatest speakers in history.
The antiviral medication remdesivir has played a controversial role in the COVID-19 treatment protocols used by hospitals that many families allege resulted in the death of their loved ones.
By New Year’s Day 1951, the United States had increased its atomic bomb stockpile by many times over, enough to wipe out the Soviet Union. In June 1946, to the frustration of US war planners, the military possessed a modest nine atomic bombs.
Africa and the Middle East is set to suffer more than Europe if there is a reduction of grain exports, according to the head of the Belgian federation of cereal traders and agrosupply (FEGRA), Gisele Fichefet. Her comment was said in response to Russian Agriculture Minister Dmitry Patrushev’s August 5 warning that 50 million tonnes of grain might be forced off the market because this year’s crops did not reach the 130 million tonne target.
Comments Off on Selected Articles: August Ninth: The Atomic Bomb dropped on Nagasaki, August 9, 1945: Christians Killing Christians in the Name of Christ
Spain Admits Spraying Deadly Chemtrails as Part of Secret UN Program: One Month After March 2020 COVID-19 Lockdown
11 Year Old Girl Calls Out Klaus Schwab and His Globalist Goons
COVID Vaccination and Turbo-Cancer. “Multiple Tumors in Multiple Organs”. Dr. Ute Kruger
The Cult of Globalism: The Great Reset and Its “Final Solution” for “Useless People”
Global Planned Financial Tsunami Has Just Begun
“The Doomsday Forum”: Senior Military, Nuclear Weapons Officials Convene… America’s “$1 Trillion Nuclear Weapons Plan”. Take Out Russia, Iran and North Korea?
As the COVID Myths Explode, Delusions Are Shattering: Our Exit from Subservience Leads to Nuremberg 2.0
NATO Learns Nothing and Forgets Nothing
The Collapse of America: Distant Early Warning Signs of Uncle Sam’s Demise. Andrei Martyanov
Today, Ukraine Bombed a Donetsk Hotel Full of Journalists – Here’s What It Felt Like to be There
Video: COVID-19 Vaccine Patents and Gene-Deletion. Dr. Ariyana Love Interviewed by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Three Young Doctors Die Unexpectedly at Small Hospital Just Days After 4th COVID Vax Mandate
It Is an Illusion to Believe That One Can Rise Against the State
The Most Perniciously Perfect Piece of Propaganda: The COVID Face Mask
Government Database Reveals 10,000% Increase in Cancer Reports Due to COVID Vaccines
The “Great Zero Carbon” Conspiracy and the WEF’s “Great Reset”
The Heroic Archbishop Viganò: The Corrupt Billionaire Agenda, “SARS-CoV-2 Virus Is Nothing but a Seasonal Flu”
The Phoney Nitrogen Crisis: The Netherlands Is Ground Zero for Global Famine Agenda. Precipitating “30,000 Farmers Out of Business”
New Documentary: Eugenics to Pandemics
Controversial Drug Remdesivir Plays Key Role in COVID-Related Hospital Deaths: Dr. Ardis
