WHO Announces Monkeypox Global Emergency: Corrupt Global Leaders Preparing for the Next Pandemic

By America’s Frontline Doctors, July 31, 2022

Monkeypox is a variant of the smallpox virus and is not new. The first recorded case of monkeypox was in 1970, we have been living with this virus in existence for decades. This virus was not a threat to us then, and it is not a threat to us now.

Pelosi’s Potential Taiwan Provocation Raises South China Sea Tensions

By Connor Freeman, August 01, 2022

After a port call in Singapore, the USS Ronald Reagan has returned to the South China Sea where earlier this month it was conducting war drills. South China Morning Post reported that satellite imagery showed the carrier, on Thursday, traveling 185 kilometers (115 miles) from the contested Fiery Cross Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands chain.

Sanctions Had No Effect on Moscow Yet Europe Lost Four Governments: Orban

By Al Mayadeen, August 01, 2022

Russia sanctions have not shaken Moscow’s resolve, despite the fact that Europe has already lost four governments due to economic and political crises, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on Saturday.

9-Year-Old with No Pre-existing Conditions Died Two Weeks After Pfizer Shot, Latest VAERS Data Show

By Megan Redshaw, August 01, 2022

According to survey results released Tuesday, 43% of U.S. parents of children under 5 will “definitely not” give their child a COVID-19 vaccine amid concerns the vaccine poses a greater risk to kids than the virus.

Beware of Faux Anti-imperialists

By Emanuel Pastreich, July 31, 2022

The idle billionaires do not know what to do with all their money. But they certainly don’t miss out on a chance to pour cash on faux anti-imperialists intended to lead those seeking real change down crooked paths to the valley of damnation.

Movie: Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda

By Children’s Health Defense, July 31, 2022

We would like to present to you a film by Andy Wakefield, produced by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., entitled “Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda.”

“Fear Marketing” of Multiple Vaccine Targeted Infections

By Bernadette Pajer, July 31, 2022

Public health agencies in the US engage in what’s known as “social marketing” or “social engineering.” There are university programs and textbooks dedicated to changing behavior using marketing principles.

Trudeau Moves Forward with Fertilizer Reduction Climate Policy

By The Counter Signal, July 31, 2022

PM Justin Trudeau has decided to move forward with his cap on nitrogen emissions by reducing fertilizer use even as provincial Agriculture Ministers beg him to stop. As per a Government of Saskatchewan news release, both Alberta and Saskatchewan’s Ministers of Agriculture have expressed “profound disappointment” in Trudeau’s decision to attempt to reduce nitrogen emissions from fertilizer.

The Balancing Act – How Russia Struggles to Appear on Africa’s Horizon

By Kester Kenn Klomegah, July 30, 2022

As popularly known to African leaders, Russia has thousands of decade-old undelivered pledges and several bilateral agreements signed with individual countries, yet to be implemented, in the continent. In addition, during the previous years there have been unprecedented huge number of “working visits” by state officials both ways, to Africa and to the Russian Federation.

If You Want to Change the World, You Have to Change Mankind! Enlightenment and Education

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, July 30, 2022

People with a lot of money and influence, who are not well-disposed towards the rest of humanity and only have their own profit in mind, are trying in various ways to “unhinge” the world. The world war against Russia is one of them.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: WHO Announces Monkeypox Global Emergency: Corrupt Global Leaders Preparing for the Next Pandemic

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 study, commissioned by the MOH, also indicates new adverse events not reported in Pfizer’s leaflet, and that some adverse events last more than a year. Despite being aware of these findings, the MOH is hiding them from the public and has recently authorized the booster dose for ages 5-11 and is preparing to approve the vaccine for infants

While Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla is hosted in Israel and is promoting his company’s COVID vaccine for infants ahead of the Israeli Ministry of Health’s expected approval for infants in the coming days, it turns out that the ministry is hiding very serious findings on the vaccine’s adverse events in children, especially concerning children aged 5-11. Although the findings of the study, which was commissioned by the ministry itself, were presented to the Epidemiology Division three weeks ago, and despite their seriousness, the MOH authorized last week a third dose (“booster”) for ages 5-11 and announced that it plans to approve the vaccine for infants as early as this week.

In an urgent letter sent on Monday (June 27, 2022) by the Professional Ethics Front to the State Comptroller of Israel, Dr. Matanyahu Engelman, it was revealed that the findings of a study conducted by Prof. Matti Berkowitz, director of the Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology Unit at Assaf Harofeh Hospital (Shamir) were presented to the Department of Epidemiology in early June. The study, which was commissioned by the Ministry of Health, examined the adverse events of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for about six months (From December 9, 2021, until the end of May 2022). The study was based on an analysis of reports recorded in the Nahlieli system (a system that constitutes the Israeli national vaccine database, including the management of the accompanying information, which includes reports of adverse events and safety demonstrations). The letter to the State Comptroller stated that “The findings have been brought to our attention, and they are serious and indicate a risk to children, and in particular to young children aged 5-11”.

Today (June 29, 2022), the association sent another letter to the State Comptroller, detailing the serious findings, accompanied by slides presented to the Epidemiology Division by the research team led by Prof. Berkowitz.

The findings show, among other things, that adverse events are 2-4 times more common among young children aged 5-11; that there are new adverse events that have not been reported in Pfizer’s COVID vaccine leaflet; that contrary to what has been claimed, various adverse events, including neurological effects and menstrual disorders, are not short-term events that pass within a few days, but in many cases, they last for months or even more than a year. Moreover, the study found that a significant proportion of the symptoms did not disappear by the end of the study, so it is not possible to know how long they lasted; and a considerable part of the cases even if the adverse event ceased, it recurred after the next dose.

During the study period, 8,054 reports of vaccine-related adverse events were received in all age groups (5-11; 12-17; 18 and over), of which 6,259 were defined as “valid” (without duplication or empty reports ). In addition, 2,075 adverse events were reported as free text.  Of the reports submitted as free text – five categories together constitute about 70% of all reported adverse events. These categories were analyzed by the research team, and include (in order of frequency): 1. Neurological effects; 2. General effects (not included in any of the categories specifically); 3. Menstrual disorders; 4. Symptoms in the musculoskeletal system; 5. Symptoms in the gastrointestinal tract/kidneys and urinary tract. Cardiovascular symptoms were noted in the sixth category, with slightly fewer reports compared to the fifth category. However, this category was not analyzed by the team, although it was precisely these adverse events, such as myocarditis and pericarditis, that were found to be related to the vaccine and common among teenagers and young adults. Also, according to the team members who presented the study, there are other symptoms such as autoimmune symptoms, which are important to analyze in order to better identify the safety profile of the vaccine, but at this stage have not been analyzed.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.32.07

Adverse events are 2-4 times more common among ages 5-11

The researchers found that in the youngest age group – ages 5-11, adverse events are 2-4 times more common (depending on the specific adverse event described) compared to the older age group, aged 12-17. This finding is very surprising and especially troubling in light of the fact that the percentage of vaccinated among the young group is much lower compared to the larger age group. In fact, according to the MOH’s COVID dashboard, only 25.1% of children aged 5-11 received one dose of the COVID vaccine, 17.7% received two doses, and 0.1% received three doses. In contrast, among 12-15-year-olds 65.6%, 54.6% received two doses, and 14.8% received three doses. Among 16-19-year-olds 89.3% received one dose, 78.2% received two doses, and 45.9% received three doses. That is, while the immunization rate among ages 5-11 is 3-4 times lower for the first and second doses of the vaccine, the rate of reported adverse events in this group is 2-4 times higher!

It should be noted that the findings surprised even the research team itself, and were emphasized by them several times during the presentation.

The finding of a higher rate of adverse events among ages 5-11 compared with ages 12-17 emerges from both the closed fields and open text in Berkovitch’s analysis, and in almost all categories analyzed. In the closed fields it was found that 599 reports are among ages 5-11, while 299 reports are among ages 12-17 – that is, double the number of reports among the younger group.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.32.23

Of the adverse events reported as free text – 7% are among ages 5-11, and 3% among ages 12-17. In other words, the rate of adverse events reported among the younger children is almost 2.5 times higher than that of the older group.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.32.38

For example, in the category of neurological adverse events – 6% are among ages 5-11, and 3% among ages 12-17. That is, the rate of neurological symptoms in younger children is twice as high as in the older group.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.32.46

In the category of adverse events relate to the gastrointestinal / kidney and urinary system – 19% are among ages 5-11, and 5% are among ages 12-17. That is, the rate of reports in the younger group is 4 times higher than in the older group!

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.33.06

New adverse events that were not reported in Pfizer’s leaflet were identified

As can be seen from the slide below, the team identified and characterized neurological symptoms that were not previously known and are not mentioned in the physician’s leaflet of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine, including Hypoesthesia (partial or complete decrease in skin sensitivity), Paraesthesia (abnormal skin sensation such as numbness, tingling, stinging or burning), tinnitus, dizziness and more.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.33.17

Are the adverse events indeed short-lived and transient? Some last more than a year

The findings also include evidence that contrary to what has been claimed so far, various adverse events, including some serious ones, are not short-lived and pass within a few days, but in many cases last for months and even more than a year. It should be noted that the research team made it clear to the Department of Epidemiology that Pfizer needed to be notified regarding the long-term adverse events identified, as the company’s representatives said in a discussion held a few months ago that they had no knowledge of long-term adverse events.
Thus, as can be learned from the slide presented above, as well as from the following slide, the research team found that while studies examining the topic of menstrual disorders have so far claimed that such disorders are short-lived (up to several days), in the present study most reports indicate long-term adverse events. For example, more than 90% of the reports, which relate to menstrual disorders and specify characteristics of the duration of the problem, indicate long-term changes. Over 60% indicate menstrual disorders lasting more than three months: in 26% of the cases, the menstrual disorder lasted 3-6 months; In 15% of the cases it lasted 6-9 months; In 10% of them it lasted a whole year, and in another 10% it lasted over a year. The researchers also noted that in 30% of cases, the menstrual disorder was described as persistent. That is, it did not end at the time the report was delivered. Similarly, with regard to neurological adverse events, in about 68% of the reports which included a characteristic of the duration, the problem lasting more than a month were documented, of which 88% lasted more than three months.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.33.27

Similarly, other reported adverse events have also been identified as long-lasting. For example, with regard to musculoskeletal symptoms, the researchers wrote that while Pfizer’s’ leaflet stated that adverse events such as back pain only lasted for several days and then disappear, in the current analysis – in 79% of the reports which included information about these adverse events, it was noted that the duration lasted more than a week. Of these, about 50% indicated a duration of over six months!

Also with respect to adverse events related to the gastrointestinal, renal, and urinary tract, it was found that over 80% of the reports that included information on the duration of the problem indicated a duration longer than a week. In 30% of them, a duration of more than half a year was specified!

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.33.38

Recurrence/exacerbation of adverse events following a repeated dose

Another finding identified and characterized by the research team is a phenomenon called Rechallenge – recurrence /exacerbation of a previous adverse event after receiving another dose of the vaccine – thus, it was found that in 10% of cases where menstrual disorders were reported, there was a recurrence /exacerbation of the adverse events following another dose of the vaccine.

WhatsApp Image 2022 06 28 at 17.33.56

The two biggest HMOs “are keeping the information close to their chests”

The disturbing findings of this study should be regarded as even more serious in light of the fact that the study was based mainly on reports received from the small funds, and mainly from Meuchedet, as the research team said during the presentation. According to Prof. Berkowitz, the largest HMOs – Clalit HMO and Maccabi HMO, “are keeping the information close to their chests”. It follows that the analysis conducted is extremely lacking and limited, and its findings reflect a severe underestimation of the extent of the true side effects. “It is not clear how, when it comes to such a critical study, the major HMOs do not cooperate, and it is even more unclear why the Ministry of Health does not require them to transfer data to the study,” the association’s members wrote to the state comptroller.

It should be noted that even if the study was conducted on the basis of a full report from all the HMOs, these serious findings would still constitute under-reported, since the Nahlieli system is a voluntary reporting system, and it is known from the research literature that reporting in such systems only represents about 1% -10% of the adverse events found in reality. All the more so when it is known that the two central health funds did not cooperate in transmitting the data.

The concealment of the findings by the Israeli MOH could also have a serious and critical significance in relation to children and infant vaccination at a global level since Israel is considered the “laboratory state”, as claimed by Pfizer’s CEO, Dr. Bourla. The CDC and the FDA rely on the Israeli data and findings to base crucial decisions in the US – decisions which other health authorities globally later follow. Every decision made in Israel regarding children’s vaccination thus has a worldwide impact, and if the decisions are made while concealing and ignoring findings, the results can be disastrous.

Flashing warning lights – Ministry of Health ignores and hides

It turns out that the findings of the study conducted by Prof. Berkowitz and his team are not the first warning signal regarding the safety of Pfizers’ COVID vaccine in children. Active monitoring for adverse events was conducted by the HMOs in Israel for about four months among 172 children aged 5-11, who were vaccinated as an initial group outside the label (under the authorization of the vaccine for kids 12-15 years old), also demonstrated acute safety signals (Ministry of Health circular: “Vaccination of kids aged 5-11 years against the new Coronavirus – an exception for individual cases from 27.7.21”, reference 548562821). Another flashing warning light rises from the gap found among vaccinated kids aged 5-11 years old between the number of those who received the first dose and the number of those who received the second dose. According to data from the Ministry of Health, there is a gap of 92,000 children who did not return to receive the second dose of the vaccine. “This figure, published without any details or explanation, reinforces the warning signal regarding the safety of these vaccines”, the letter to the State Comptroller stated.

As mentioned, the findings of Prof. Berkowitz’s study were presented to members of the Epidemiology Division as early as the beginning of June. However, despite this information, the Epidemiology Division issued on June 14, 2022, a directive to administer a booster dose to children aged 5-11 (Division of the Epidemiology Division: “The new Coronavirus vaccine – a third dose for children aged 5-11 years – Update No. 8 of the 14.6.22 “, reference 548562821).

Moreover, last week the Ministry of Health’s epidemic treatment team discussed the approval of the vaccine for babies and toddlers aged six months to 5 years old in Israel. Contrary to the discussion in which the vaccine was authorized for the 5-11 years old children, the discussion on vaccinating the babies – the most vulnerable group – was not held in public. The only publicly available information about the course of the discussion came out from tweets by some health reporters, according to which Pfizer and Moderna representatives presented during the discussion and overview of the effectiveness of their vaccines in children. As far as is known, no independent experts were invited to the expected sequel discussion this week.

Given the serious findings of Prof. Berkowitz’s study, as well as the fact that the Ministry of Health did not disclose these findings, despite the time that has passed since they were presented to its Department of Epidemiology, and instead decided to approve the vaccine for ages 5-11, and due to the concern that the findings of the study will also be ignored in the upcoming discussion regarding the infant vaccine approval, an urgent Freedom of Information Request (FOIA) has been recently filed by the Professional Ethics Front (Application No. 657228). According to the request, the information should be disclosed even if it is still raw, “Out of fear that there is a blatant violation of parents’ right to informed consent, and because it constitutes gross negligence, and puts children and infants at risk”. However, so far no response has been received from the Ministry of Health.

In light of the urgency of the situation, the Professional Ethics Front has urgently sought the intervention of the State Comptroller’s Office to ensure that the disturbing and serious findings are made public, as well as to immediately stop vaccinating young children and infants and prevent infant vaccination approval until the complete information on the safety of the vaccine in infants and children is fully investigated.

The Ministry of Health did not respond to questions sent to it – neither through the ministry’s spokespersons office nor through its COVID information headquarters.

*

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 is from Real Time Magazine

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Breaking: The Israeli MOH Is Hiding a Study It Conducted, Showing a 2-4 Times Higher Rate of Adverse Events Reports Following Pfizer COVID Vaccine in Kids Aged 5-11 vs Ages 12-17
  • Tags: , , ,

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 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is preparing to lead a Congressional delegation on a tour of Asia, which may include a stop in Taiwan, tensions between Washington and Beijing in the South China Sea are increasing.

After a port call in Singapore, the USS Ronald Reagan has returned to the South China Sea where earlier this month it was conducting war drills. South China Morning Post reported that satellite imagery showed the carrier, on Thursday, traveling 185 kilometers (115 miles) from the contested Fiery Cross Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands chain. Two Chinese ships, a frigate and a destroyer, were identified between 23-27 kilometers away. The USS Ronald Reagan and its strike group is now heading northeast possibly towards the Taiwan Strait.

After drilling in Hainan province, the PLA Navy is carrying out routine exercises near Guangdong, along the Chinese southern coast. According to the Post, “An area in the South China Sea about 89km from Macau will be closed to ships on Saturday for military exercises, according to a notice issued by China’s Maritime Safety Administration. The Gulf of Tonkin off southwestern Guangdong will also be a no-go zone on Tuesday and Wednesday while gunnery exercises are carried out.”

Song Zhongping, a former PLA instructor, suggests the USS Ronald Reagan might escort Pelosi to Taiwan. The Associated Press reported this week, if Pelosi goes to Taiwan, ships, jets, and additional assets will be providing protection for the military plane flying her there. Song adds “At the same time, before the potential visit, the US will increase surveillance of People’s Liberation Army activities around Taiwan – meaning that the US would deploy a large number of reconnaissance aircraft.”

Song predicts the “region will be tense for a while,” and China will correspondingly reciprocate with more surveillance flights eyeing the carrier strike group. He said the PLA will likely warn off U.S. ships and aircraft in the area, and perhaps intercept Pelosi’s plane.

On Friday, despite the hype, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters there is no evidence China is planning to act militarily against Taiwan. “(We’ve) seen no physical, tangible indications of anything untoward with respect to Taiwan,” Kirby said.

Officials in President Joe Biden’s administration are concerned if Pelosi visits the island it will spark a major crisis in the Taiwan Strait. As House Speaker, she is number three in line to replace the president. This follows a series of hawkish former Donald Trump administration officials, Congressional delegations and other high level officials’ visits to Taiwan, which have deliberately goaded Beijing.

Earlier this week, Pelosi invited other lawmakers to join her in Taipei. Reportedly, House Foreign Affairs Chairman Gregory Meeks (D-NY) will join her small delegation.

Biden has said the military warned him Pelosi going to Taiwan is “not a good idea.” During a call on Thursday, Chinese President Xi Jinping told Biden that China will resist “interference by external forces” on the island, adding those “who play with fire will perish by it.” Xi said he hopes “the US will be clear-eyed about this.” On Friday, when reporters asked Pelosi about Xi’s comments she smiled, laughed, and declined to comment.

Pelosi told reporters on Friday “we want Congress to be a part of” the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific policy. Since entering office, Biden has vastly ramped up military provocations with China. Last year, Biden sailed warships through the Taiwan Strait almost every month. He nearly doubled the number of air craft carrier strike groups deployed to the South China Sea, and flew more than 2,000 sorties of reconnaissance aircraft in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and Yellow Sea.

Beyond Biden’s three “gaffes” which has committed Americans to Taiwan’s defense, seemingly doing away with the One-China policy which has kept the peace for decades, US troops are now openly deployed to the island, training local forces for war with the mainland.

*

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.

Connor Freeman is the assistant editor and a writer at the Libertarian Institute, primarily covering foreign policy. He is a co-host on Conflicts of Interest. His writing has been featured in media outlets such as Antiwar.com and Counterpunch, as well as the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. He has also appeared on Liberty Weekly, Around the Empire, and Parallax Views. You can follow him on Twitter @FreemansMind96.

Featured image is from US-China Perception Monitor

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.

***

Russia sanctions have not shaken Moscow’s resolve, despite the fact that Europe has already lost four governments due to economic and political crises, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on Saturday.

“The West’s strategy is like a car with flat tires on all four wheels… The sanctions did not destabilize Moscow. Europe is in trouble, economically and politically, and four governments have become victims: UK, Bulgarian, Italian, and Estonian… People will face a sharp increase in prices. And the better part of the world deliberately did not support us as well — China, India, Brazil, South Africa, the Arab world, Africa — everybody is aloof from this conflict, they are interested in their own affairs,” Orban said while delivering a speech in the Romanian city of Baile Tusnad.

Orban went on to say that the Ukrainian conflict will “put an end to Western hegemony, which could unite the world against someone,” and that a “multipolar global order” will “knock on the door.”

On a trip to Moscow today, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told reporters that the EU should be truthful about the realities of the gas supply from Russia rather than treating it as an ideological matter.

“It has been proven that the purchase of natural gas is not an ideological issue, but a physical issue that can’t be solved by talking,” Szijjarto said.

The EU has been urging member states to decrease dependence on Russian gas as a response to Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine.

Euro hits its lowest, Ruble hits 2-year high 

As shown by trading data, the Euro fell below $1.03 for the first time in July since December 2002. The euro traded at $1.0296 which is down from $1.0421 at a time when the dollar index was 1.04% to 106.23 points.

Fears over the European energy crisis are putting pressure on the euro. Strike-related production suspensions at many fields by Norway’s Equinor increased gas prices. Nord Stream will be suspended for scheduled maintenance from July 11 to July 21. In light of this, European gas futures are rising by 6% to almost $1,800 per thousand cubic meters.

On the other hand, the exchange rate of the dollar and the euro fell against the ruble in May and the currency was trading below 69 rubles for the first time since June 2020, while the euro was trading below 73 rubles.

In terms of stock trading, the Moscow Stock Exchange denominated in rubles (MICEX) index declined by 0.02% to 2444.67 points, while the stock exchange index denominated in dollars (RTS) rose 0.87% to 1091 points.

Moscow trade

Western sanctions didn’t stop Russia from increasing trade with friendly states.

The Russian foreign ministry revealed in April that it expects commodity flows with China to grow and trade with Beijing to reach $200 billion by 2024, according to the Interfax news agency, given that the West-led sanctions on Russia have driven Moscow to shift its economic ties and cooperation toward the East.

The ministry contended that Chinese companies must be cautious of the risks of subjection to secondary sanctions – however, Beijing is ready to expand cooperation with Moscow nonetheless.

Moreover, last month, Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed that Moscow and Tehran’s relations are strategic and deep in nature, pointing to the growth of trade between the Russia and Iran last year and in the first months of 2022.

On his part, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi pointed out that the Russian-Iranian trade relations are developing, stressing that nothing will stand in their way.

Raisi said the agreements that the two countries have reached are under implementation, highlighting that the cooperation between Russia and Iran in the Caspian Sea  region is an important aspect of bilateral cooperation.

*

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.

***

VAERS data released Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show 1,357,940 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID-19 vaccines, including 29,790 deaths and 247,686 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020, and July 22, 2022.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,357,940 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and July 22, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). That’s an increase of 6,990 adverse events over the previous week.

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 29,790 reports of deaths — an increase of 155 over the previous week — and 247,686 serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 1,010 compared with the previous week.

Of the 29,790 reported deaths, 19,236 cases are attributed to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, 7,917 cases to Moderna, 2,584 cases to Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and no cases yet reported for Novavax.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 848,094 adverse events, including 13,805 deaths and 86,604 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and July 22, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 13,805 U.S. deaths reported as of July 22, 7% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 15% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 54% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 601 million COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered as of July 20, including 355 million doses of Pfizer, 227 million doses of Moderna and 19 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

vaers data vaccine injury july 29

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.

Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 22, 2022, for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds show:

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 22, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

  • 12,232 adverse events, including 313 rated as serious and 9 reported deaths.
    The most recent reported death involves a 9-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 2377304) from California who died two weeks after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. The child experienced abdominal pain, sore throat and chest pain during the 2-3 days before she died, according to the VAERS report, which did not indicate any pre-existing conditions.
  • 24 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis.
  • 47 reports of blood clotting disorders.
  • 101 reports of seizures.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 22, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 22, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.

Woman develops rare acute kidney failure after first Pfizer dose 

A woman developed a rare case of acute kidney renal failure — linked to antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) — a few days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine.

According to a case study published July 18 in Nephron, a previously healthy 47-year-old woman presented to a primary care clinic for bilateral flank pain, generalized weakness and bilateral lower extremity swelling that started three days after her first Pfizer shot.

AAV is a group of diseases characterized by the destruction and inflammation of small vessels. The condition occurs when neutrophils attack small and medium vessels of the body, which can affect several organs, such as the kidney, stomach, intestine and lungs.

This case adds to previous reports suggesting COVID-19 vaccines may, in rare instances, promote the development or worsening of autoimmune diseases, such as AAV, from their silent state, according to Patricia Inacio, Ph.D., who summarized the report for ANCA Vasculitis News.

“Rarely, autoimmune processes have been described post-vaccination. AAV is an example of an autoimmune disease that can be induced or flared up from a silent state by COVID-19 vaccines,” the authors concluded. “A high index of suspicion regarding the presence of an autoimmune renal process is needed whenever a recently COVID-19-vaccinated individual presents for acute kidney injury.”

43% of parents ‘definitely’ won’t vaccinate young kids for COVID

According to survey results released Tuesday, 43% of U.S. parents of children under 5 will “definitely not” give their child a COVID-19 vaccine amid concerns the vaccine poses a greater risk to kids than the virus.

The survey, published by the Kaiser Family Foundation, found that 27% of parents said they would “wait and see,” while another 13% said they would have their children vaccinated only if required to do so for school or childcare.

Even parents who were vaccinated against COVID-19 said they would not give permission for their youngest children to get vaccinated.

When asked why they will not vaccinate their eligible child under 5 “right away,” parents cited “concerns about the newness of the vaccine and not enough testing or research, concerns over side effects and worries over the overall safety of the vaccines.”

CDC used flawed data to justify authorizing COVID-19 vaccines for kids

A CDC official used data from a flawed preprint study that exaggerated the risk of death for children from COVID-19 in her presentations to CDC and FDA advisors who were responsible for recommending Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines for infants and young children.

The study, first published May 25 on the medRxiv preprint server, was authored by a group of U.K. researchers. On June 28, the authors published a revised version of the study, after critics questioned some of their original findings.

“It’s really disturbing that data this poor made its way into the meetings to discuss childhood COVID and that it took me less than a few minutes to find a major flaw (and then I found many more as I looked deeper),” said Kelley K, who was the first to point out some of the study’s flaws on her website COVID-Georgia.com.

After learning of Kelley’s analysis, The Defender reviewed the original preprint, confirmed Kelley’s findings and uncovered additional flaws in the original preprint and also in the June 28 revised version.

CHD demands D.C. schools rescind COVID vaccine mandate

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman and chief legal counsel for CHD, in a letter to the superintendent of the District of Columbia school system threatened to sue the school district unless it rescinds its recently announced COVID-19 vaccine mandate for students ages 12 and up.

State Superintendent of Education Christina Grant announced on July 19 that student immunization requirements for the upcoming 2022-2023 school year will include the COVID-19 vaccine for all students who are of an age for which there is a vaccine fully approved by the FDA now that the FDA has fully approved the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for individuals 12 to 15 years old.

D.C. law requires students in all area schools, including private, parochial and independent schools, to be fully compliant with mandated vaccinations, unless they have an approved exemption. The law also requires schools to verify immunization certification for all students.

The requirement was detailed in a law the D.C. Council approved last year and is the first legislation of its kind in the region.

Although courts have upheld many childhood vaccination requirements for licensed and approved vaccines, no court has ever upheld a mandate for schoolchildren for an Emergency Use Authorization vaccine, according to Kennedy.

*

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.

Featured image is from CHD

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 federal judge in Ohio on Wednesday blocked the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate nationwide for Air Force, Space Force and Air National Guard service members who requested religious exemptions.

In his 4-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Matthew McFarland said the government failed to “raise any persuasive arguments for why the Court should not extend the Preliminary Injunction issued on March 31, 2022, to cover the Class Members.”

Wednesday’s ruling replaces McFarland’s 14-day temporary restraining order, issued July 14. The temporary order was issued to allow the military time to make its case for why the preliminary injunction shouldn’t last longer and be expanded to apply to 10,000 or more service members seeking an exemption.

Earlier this month, government lawyers argued that preventing the military from punishing unvaccinated members “would interfere with ongoing legal proceedings and would otherwise be improper, particularly in light of significant new developments.”

Defendants pointed to the recent Emergency Use Authorization of Novavax — which is not yet fully licensed — and claimed unlike the other three shots available in the U.S., Novavax does not use fetal cells in its development, manufacturing or production.

“Those class members whose religious objections were based on mRNA technology or the use of fetal-derived cell lines are no longer substantially burdened by the COVID-19 vaccine requirement because this option is now available,” lawyers said.

“Moreover, religious beliefs of service members who object to vaccination based on mRNA technology are not substantially burdened by Novavax or the Johnson & Johnson vaccines, which do not use mRNA technology.”

Included in the government’s filing as an exhibit was a declaration from Lt. Gen. Kevin Schneider, director of staff for the Air Force headquarters.

Schneider claimed unvaccinated members “are at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 and substantially more likely to develop severe symptoms resulting in hospitalization or death” and that exempting a large number of airmen “would pose a significant and unprecedented risk to military readiness and our ability to defend the nation.”

“As of March 14, 2022, a total of 91,984 Department of the Air Force Service members had contracted COVID-19 during the pandemic, resulting in 229 hospitalizations, of which 14 died,” Schneider said. “Of those who died, 12 (86%) were completely unvaccinated.”

Schneider did not provide the number of servicemen injured or hospitalized as a result of having to receive a COVID-19 vaccine under the military’s vaccine mandate.

McFarland wasn’t convinced. He instead modified the class to include all active-duty, active reserve, reserve, national guard, inductees and appointees of the U.S. Air Force and Space Force, including but not limited to Air Force Academy Cadets, Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps Cadets, members of the Air Force Reserve Command and any airman who has sworn or affirmed the U.S. Uniformed Services Oath of Office or Enlistment and is currently under command and could be deployed.

Under the new order, the Air Force can’t take disciplinary action against, or attempt to kick out members who requested a religious exemption on or after Sept. 1, 2021, those confirmed as having a sincerely held religious belief by chaplains and those who either had their request denied or whose request has not yet been acted on.

“Obviously, we are thrilled for our clients who we were facing career-ending consequences for the exercise of their sincerely held beliefs,” Chris Wiest, an attorney for plaintiffs, said Wednesday.

“This case will now proceed into the discovery phase in which we look forward to placing government decision-makers under oath and questioning them about their discriminatory decision-making.”

Of the Air Force’s 497,000 members, 97% have received a primary COVID-19 vaccination series.

Of the 1,400 exemptions granted, only 104 are religious exemptions — and those were granted only to service members at the end of their term of service.

Currently, 2,847 requests are pending and 6,803 were rejected.

The small number of religious accommodations granted is “farcical,” McFarland said earlier this year. The Air Force “‘has effectively stacked the deck’ against service members seeking religious exemptions.”

The U.S. Secretary of Defense on Aug. 24, 2021, directed military branch secretaries to immediately begin full vaccination of all members of the armed forces, service members on active duty and those in the reserves, and National Guard, unless exempted.

The Secretary of Defense claimed that “to defend the nation, we need a healthy and ready force” and “after careful consultation with medical experts and military leadership, and with the support of the President … vaccination against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is necessary to protect the Force and defend the American people.”

Military’s recruiting crisis deepens under vaccine mandate

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are putting pressure on the Pentagon to fix the military’s recruitment crisis in what has been deemed the worst recruiting environment since the end of the Vietnam War, Politico reported this week.

Recent briefing slides obtained by Politico show senior Pentagon leaders are alarmed by poor enlistment numbers and the military “currently faces the most challenging recruiting market since the advent of the All-Volunteer Force, with multiple Services and Components at risk for missing mission in FY 2022.”

“Arduous market conditions are expected to persist into the future as the market is not likely to self-correct,” according to the slides.

While the military said it acknowledges the problem, the desire of young Americans to join the military has “fallen off the statistical cliff,” according to Politico.

The Army only reached 66% of its goal for the fiscal year ending in September, while the Navy is at 89%, according to data compiled from October 2021 to May 2022.

Although the rates for the Marine Corps, Air Force and Space Force are at 100%, that leaves the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) with a total rate of just 85%.

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), who chairs the Military Personnel Subcommittee, wants to hold a joint hearing with her panel and the Readiness Subcommittee on recruiting issues.

“I would say we have to do a deep dive into why the numbers are shrinking,” Speier told Politico. “I think we have to have a hearing to kind of explore that.”

The DOD says the drop in entry-level troops can be traced to concerns about the physical and psychological risks of service and other career interests, the possibility of interference with a college education, dislike of the military lifestyle and the military’s high standard for recruits.

The Army last week announced it is launching multiple initiatives to address the problem including providing $35,000 bonuses for new recruits ready to ship out to basic training within 45 days and lowering the service’s physical and academic standards.

Some DOD officials and experts blame COVID-19 vaccine mandate

Former and current DOD officials and experts criticized the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate as a contributing factor — and claimed the “department leadership knows it.”

According to Military News, the Army recently cut more than 60,000 National Guard and Reserve soldiers who refused to be vaccinated from military pay and benefits and is preventing them from participating in military duties.

Mackenzie Eaglen, an expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, argued the military’s vaccine mandate has “indisputably negative” impacts on recruiting.

“The math and logic simply doesn’t add up to let troops go involuntarily over the vaccine while announcing at the same time historically high bonuses for new recruits (which the U.S. Army did this winter),” Eaglen said.

“It is far more time-consuming and expensive to fire those with experience versus bringing in new, untrained personnel.”

“If you are sitting in the state of Georgia or Texas and you see they are putting 40,000 members out, you are going to scratch your head a bit and say, ‘why would I join up?’” a former senior DOD official told Politico. “And if you don’t want to get vaccinated, you are certainly not going to join.”

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.), the top Republican on the House Armed Services’ Readiness Subcommittee, former Green Beret and current member of the National Guard, joined with 49 other republican lawmakers on Tuesday to send a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin requesting the Pentagon reconsider its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in response to the recruiting crisis.

“At a time when the department is struggling to recruit qualified young men and women fit for duty to fill the ranks, and while China is embarking on a massive military buildup which threatens American interests around the world, we should not be hindering our own readiness and capabilities by punishing and forcing out experienced and dedicated Guardsmen and Reservists,” the letter stated.

*

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.

Featured image is from CHD

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.

***

Today, Liberty Counsel settled the nation’s first classwide lawsuit for health care workers over a COVID shot mandate, for more than $10.3 million. The class action settlement against NorthShore University HealthSystem is on behalf of more than 500 current and former health care workers who were unlawfully discriminated against and denied religious exemptions from the COVID shot mandate. The agreed upon settlement was filed today in the federal Northern District Court of Illinois. 

As a result of the settlement, NorthShore will pay $10,337,500 to compensate these health care employees who were victims of religious discrimination, and who were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells.

This is a historic, first-of-its-kind class action settlement against a private employer who unlawfully denied hundreds of religious exemption requests to COVID-19 shots.

The settlement must be approved by the federal District Court. Employees of NorthShore who were denied religious exemptions will receive notice of the settlement, and will have an opportunity to comment, object, request to opt out, or submit a claim form for payment out of the settlement fund, all in accordance with deadlines that will be set by the court.

As part of the settlement agreement, NorthShore will also change its unlawful “no religious accommodations” policy to make it consistent with the law, and to provide religious accommodations in every position across its numerous facilities. No position in any NorthShore facility will be considered off limits to unvaccinated employees with approved religious exemptions.

In addition, employees who were terminated because of their religious refusal of the COVID shots will be eligible for rehire if they apply within 90 days of final settlement approval by the court, and they will retain their previous seniority level.

The amount of individual payments from the settlement fund will depend on how many valid and timely claim forms are submitted during the claims process. If the settlement is approved by the court and all or nearly all of the affected employees file valid and timely claims, it is estimated that employees who were terminated or resigned because of their religious refusal of a COVID shot will receive approximately $25,000 each, and employees who were forced to accept a COVID shot against their religious beliefs to keep their jobs will receive approximately $3,000 each.

The 13 health care workers who are lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit will receive an additional approximate payment of $20,000 each for their important role in bringing this lawsuit and representing the class of NorthShore health care workers.

Liberty Counsel will receive 20 percent of the settlement sum, which equals $2,061,500, as payment for the significant attorney’s fees and costs it has required to undertake to sue NorthShore and hold it accountable for its actions. This amount is far less than the typical 33 percent usually requested by attorneys in class action litigation.

In October 2021, Liberty Counsel sent a demand letter to NorthShore on behalf of numerous health care workers who had sincere religious objections to NorthShore’s “Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policy.” If NorthShore had agreed then to follow the law and grant religious exemptions, the matter would have been quickly resolved and it would have cost it nothing. But, when NorthShore refused to follow the law, and instead denied all religious exemption and accommodation requests for employees working in its facilities, Liberty Counsel filed a class action lawsuit, along with a motion for a temporary restraining order and injunction.

Liberty Counsel Vice President of Legal Affairs and Chief Litigation Counsel Horatio G. Mihet said,

“We are very pleased with the historic, $10 million settlement achieved in our class action lawsuit against NorthShore University HealthSystem. The drastic policy change and substantial monetary relief required by the settlement will bring a strong measure of justice to NorthShore’s employees who were callously forced to choose between their conscience and their jobs. This settlement should also serve as a strong warning to employers across the nation that they cannot refuse to accommodate those with sincere religious objections to forced vaccination mandates.”

Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel said:

“This classwide settlement providing compensation and the opportunity to return to work is the first of its kind in the nation involving COVID shot mandates. This settlement should be a wake-up call to every employer that did not accommodate or exempt employees who opposed the COVID shots for religious reasons. Let this case be a warning to employers that violated Title VII. It is especially significant and gratifying that this first classwide COVID settlement protects health care workers. Health care workers are heroes who daily give their lives to protect and treat their patients. They are needed now more than ever.”

*

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 is from Children’s Health Defense

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.

***

Led by leftist Mayor Eric Adams, New York City has fired over 1,750 city employees, including police officers, firefighters, transportation workers, and Department of Education staffers, because they refused to get the experimental, abortion-tainted COVID-19 vaccines.

The mayor’s office told the New York Post on July 23 that 1,752 municipal employees in total have been forced out of their jobs due to their vax status, an increase of more than 200 since the city’s last update in March.

The Post noted that in February, Adams had terminated the employment of 1,430 city workers who refused to get the shots, including 914 Department of Education staff members, 36 personnel with the New York Police Department, and 25 New York Fire Department employees.

In March, another 101 workers were pushed out of their jobs, the outlet reported.

The mayor’s office had failed to release further official numbers since March, until its Saturday confirmation to the Post that the number of fired employees had risen to over 1,750. A breakdown of the most recent firings by department was not published, the outlet noted.

The Post further pointed out that in addition to the 1,752 employees who have been fired for their stand against the COVID mandate, over 6,000 city workers are still awaiting a response after applying for medical or religious exemptions.

Adams had become the Empire State’s mayor in November 2021, taking over from former Mayor Bill de Blasio who had enforced crippling COVID restrictions on New Yorkers, including crackdowns on church services.

De Blasio’s successor has similarly enforced rigid COVID rules since his inauguration, drawing criticism for his city’s ongoing school mask mandate that required toddlers to mask up throughout long school 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 is licensed under CC BY 2.0

Sri Lanka’s Insurgency

July 31st, 2022 by Citizen Perera

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 Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, in a disgraceful spectacle of cowardice in the face of an insurgent attack, bolted from the Colombo Fortress deserting his Forces and abandoning his responsibility to the Country.

In 2019, Nandasena Rajapakse was elected President of Sri Lanka with the votes of a near 7 million people who delegated their Executive Sovereign Power, for a period of 5 years, to a man who they believed, would strive to do what he had promised to do in his election Manifesto and campaign.

On taking office, Nandasena, by virtue of Article 4b of the Constitution, assumed the role of Commander-in- Chief of the Sri Lanka Army, the Navy and the Air Force and with it the responsibility for the security of the Country and her people.

An American woman, Ayoma Rajapakse, stood beside Sri Lanka’s leading Public Servant at the oath-taking ceremony.

Two years thereon, the country was ablaze and in dire peril with a full-blown American – backed insurgency raging inside the Galle-Face square, challenging and defying the government’s edict; anarchism prevailed and the subversives, were successful in unseating undemocratically, on the 09th of May ‘22, the democratically selected Prime Minister, Mahinda Rajapakse.

The unbridled insurrection raged-on. The insurrectionists – resorting to violence, looting, terror and arson – were confronted by a courageous and professional Police and Military whose authority was frequently undermined by the vacillation of their Commander-in-Chief.

While the situation worsened by the day – houses torched, insurrectionists breaking en masse into government departments –there remained a conspicuous silence at the highest echelon of power.

When the need of the hour was for the Commander-in-Chief to give a clear concept of the ‘then-current’ political situation to the Military leadership for the latter to formulate their plans to tackle the insurgency, Nandasena seemingly muddied the water by asserting that the anarchical village at Galle Face must continue.

It was almost as though – like the energy and power crises and the fertiliser hara-kiri – the country was being deliberately set-up for anarchy and the eventual transfer of Executive power to the man, brought-in surprisingly into the power-equation, from out of the blues, by Nandasena, following the false flag drama and coup of 09 May 22.

When, what was needed was astute leadership and courage to steer the country safely through troubled waters, the Commander-in Chief and his wife suddenly went missing.

As it transpired, in the face of a fresh offensive launched by the insurgents at Galle Face, the Commander-in-Chief of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces had taken to his heels, abandoning his troops, his people and the country.

What a disgrace to a valorous Army!

Nandasena, displaying extreme cowardice in the face of an insurgent offensive, had literally run-away from the battlefield, deserting his troops, his army and the country.

Nandasena gave not a rap about his responsibilities to the country, not a whit about his troops tackling the insurrection nor a damn for the desperate plight he had plunged the people into.

When epic demands that the captain of a sinking ship goes down with honour with his ship, Nandasena and his wife, like rats, were the first to jump ship.  

As a retired officer of the Army and the serving C in-C of the Armed Forces Captain ‘Coward’ is a disgrace to the Military and his conduct demands that he be court-martialed, publicly cashiered, awarded appropriate punishment, stripped-of his rank and his medals and all pensions withdrawn.

Deserting the military is a serious and ‘jailable’ offense.

But abandoning one’s troops, running away from the scene of battle, delivering up any fortification and abandoning one’s post when under enemy attack are unatonable acts of cowardice punishable with death.  This is covered by the Army Act No. 14 of 1949.

To the rank and file, the Commander-in-Chief has set an ignoble example and his punishment therefore must serve as a deterrent and example to the present and future generations to come.

What was pointed out by Professor Suri Ratnapala, an authority in constitutional law, is indeed relevant; during the time Nandasena was in self-imposed isolation, he ceased to function as President, he was not performing executive or diplomatic functions overseas, he was not on vacation (if he were he had not informed any responsible authority of that fact), he had not gone overseas for medical attention (if he had, he had not so informed anyone),  he had left the country in secrecy for the Republic of Maldives, he did not disclose his future movements or programme and he had left the nation in the dark about his future intentions.

Professor Ratnapala asserts, ‘Mr. Rajapakse had self-vacated his office and abandoned his constitutional responsibilities; he had left the country and this is a case of dereliction of constitutional duties’.

This is not the first instance of Nandasena literally taking to his heels.

In the mid-seventies at the Army camp in Sudukanda at Minneriya, Lieutenant Nandasena ran for dear life when soldiers mutinied and assaulted him; on his orders a sick soldier was dragged along the ground to be brought before him; Nandasena had then proceeded to kick the hapless soldier lying on the ground. That soldier died.

Nandasena had gone AWOL for over a month, hiding in fear. There was a Court of Inquiry on the incident.

Subsequently, not too long after the aforementioned incident, soldiers based at Echelon Square in Fort, stormed the Sinha Regiment Officers’ Mess, conduct unheard of in the history of the military; the soldiers   targeted Nandasena for assault. Nandasena ran.

The next time, Captain ‘Coward’ deserted the Army was when the terrorist war recommenced in 1991 with the Army facing a shortfall of officers; those officers eligible to retire were not permitted to do so, based on the principle ‘that an Officer holds his Commission at the will and pleasure of the President’ .

On completing the minimum number of years  required to qualify for an Army pension, viz twenty years, Nandasena did not report for duty when his application for retirement was rejected.  He was declared a deserter. There was a warrant out for his arrest.

He escaped a Court Martial, a jail sentence, a withdrawal of Commission and the forfeiture of his pension by sobbingly prostrating and pleading in front of Ranjan Wijeratne, the then Secretary of Defence.

Nandasena joined his wife in the US, only seven years later; during that time, he worked in a private Company, while the terrorist war raged-on and officers and men in the Army were sacrificing their lives.

Nandasena needs to be apprehended immediately and brought back to the country to be tried by a Court Martial for high TREASON.

Ayoma Rajapakse in the meantime needs to be investigated and tried for leaving the country illegally, without Customs and Immigration declarations and checks.

*

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.

Beware of Faux Anti-imperialists

July 31st, 2022 by Emanuel Pastreich

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 idle billionaires do not know what to do with all their money. But they certainly don’t miss out on a chance to pour cash on faux anti-imperialists intended to lead those seeking real change down crooked paths to the valley of damnation.

That cheap trick was once the territory of the Democratic Party. Sadly, that donkey, or shall we say Trojan horse, has been so overload and weighed down with the droppings of the parasite class that now new fraudulent revolutionaries have to be trotted out.

Let me give you two examples.

The first is the anti-globalist Adam Brooks (on that horrific forum Twitter) who wrote,

“Five deaths of Monkeypox worldwide, all from African countries, 98% of cases amongst men that have sexual relations with other men. Please explain how this is a global emergency? Why did you overrule your advisory panel Dr. Tedros?”

Although this post is seemingly critical of the establishment (for the naïve, or for those suffering from denial syndrome) the comment cements in place a fascistic system dedicated to the destruction of human civilization.

There is no reason to believe that Monkeypox even exists, or that anybody suffers from it at all. The fairy tales of this disease are not subject to any scientific analysis, and although it is entirely possible that biological weapons were, or will be used, and then the results blamed on “monkeypox” the World Health Organization’s Director General, reporting to the super-rich, is untrustworthy. Nothing he says should be taken seriously.

The stupid little story that is being propped up so as to distract from structural shifts in our society concerns the unethical actions of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the World Health Organization. Supposedly, he overruled WHO’s advisory board and declared that Monkeypox is a global emergency.

Nothing could be more irrelevant than this event, if it even happened at all.

The purpose of launching these wind-up anti-establishment figures is not to set things right, or to make the WHO into a dependable organization.

There are steps that could be taken to transform that criminal organization, but he never mentions them.

No, he is part of a larger psychological operation aimed not at specific targets, but rather at destroying the trust of people in all institutions. The impression given to the public is that the institutions on which they must rely have gone insane, are possessed by devils, by evil spirits.

There is no offer of a plan, or the presentation of a careful analysis of who owns what, and how decisions are actually made. No, the director general is just a bad apple, perhaps an indication of some greater decline which is unknowable and unstoppable.

Another example is the pronouncements of Richard Wolff (professor at University of Massachusetts Amherst) on Democracy Now (July 27) about the recent raising of interest rates by the Federal Reserve. He talks about the redistribution of wealth in the United States, and identifies a real issue there, but he then embraces the fraudulent argument that the COVID-19 pandemic was somehow real and that the rise in interest rates is a “body blow” to workers.

The truth is that the COVID-19 scam was the body blow to workers, not because of some virus, but because multinational banks stole some 13 billion dollars, or more, and shut down the economy. The current rise in interest rates is a sideshow, at best.

Wolff does not even touch on the process by which private capital makes national monetary policy at the Federal Reserve, or how the concentration of wealth is planned out, and implemented, on a global scale by the super-rich.

In effect, he is offering up a bucketful of red herrings.

Let us see what he says about economics,

“But perhaps what’s not understood is who raises the prices. That little economics detail is so often lost. Employers, the class of employers in our society, that’s who sets the prices. Employees are excluded from that activity. Employers in the United States are 1% of the population, if that. Those of us who have to take the prices they choose to raise, we are the 99%. And there’s no democracy in allowing 1% of the people to set prices that 99% of the people are forced to pay, for food, clothing, shelter and all the rest.”

This is legerdemain that would make Houdini envious. Employers maybe one percent of the population of the United States, but they are the small fry. It is the 0.01%, or less, of global investment bankers and billionaires who make fiscal policy and who now dominate the media, education, trade and transportation, food and medicine, on a scale unknown in human history. They are the threat, not “employers.”

Of course those “employers” at corporations learn their tricks of the trade from the parasite class, but to go after them is like going after a lizard in a jungle of tigers.

The ultimate purpose of these false critics is to stir up free floating anxiety and suggest an ill-defined, frightening chaos in all institutions that is confusing and disorienting for the public. The goal is to create a world in which nothing and nobody can be trusted.

There is no roadmap available from these oracles because it is not their job to help us.

Once the chaos reaches the boiling point, something most likely already decided by banks of supercomputers, then a messiah figure will be trotted out, much as Adolf Hitler was after Germany had been torn to pieces by hyperinflation.

This messiah will solve the problems no one else could solve (because others were not allowed to solve problems).

But following this false messiah will mean accepting complete control by hidden forces, and renouncing all participatory politics. Many, perhaps most, will chose to follow because the destruction of institutions has left them with no bearings, with no internal compass. After that choice, however, there will be no more choices.

*

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: WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus announced approval for China’s Sinopharm COVID-19 vaccine, Geneva, May 7, 2021 (Source: Indian Punchline)

Movie: Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda

July 31st, 2022 by Children’s Health Defense

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 would like to present to you a film by Andy Wakefield, produced by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., entitled “Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda.” 

Here are some excerpts from the movie transcript:

Humans across the globe are becoming increasingly less fertile. The worldwide fertility rate dropped by nearly 60%.

The lowest number of recorded births in 30 years.

[Reporter] Fertility rates have hit a record low.

A baby bust.

Why are the rates lower? What’s happening here?

[Commenter] Your body’s designed to do something, when you are told that you can’t. If I ever had to say to my daughter that she won’t be able to have children, it would be devastating.

[Commenter] Since women stopped being able to have babies, what’s left to hope for?

When I heard about this story from east Africa about fertility, my thought to myself, “That’s me.”

As a gynecologist, in the last few years, we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of women who are losing pregnancies, the number of women who are presenting with threat of abortion, with bleeding in early pregnancy. We are also seeing a lot of young couples with infertility.

Infertility is one of the most major problems now in gynecology in Africa.

I have seen the tears. They have lost their identity. You die inside.

The ultimate mystery, why are women infertile?

My journey with the miscarriages was very difficult. The first one, I carried that pregnancy for about three weeks. I got pregnant again, and I must have carried that pregnancy for about four weeks. I got pregnant a third time, and this time, I carried that pregnancy for 10 weeks. I knew there was a problem.

When a woman is pregnant, her baby produces HCG through the placenta

[Narrator] Human chorionic gonadotropin, HCG, what is that?

It’s a first signal that tells the woman she’s pregnant. It tells the ovaries to produce a second hormone called progesterone that then maintains the pregnancy.

I was tested, and my anti-HCG levels were way up.

[Narrator] What does this mean when a woman has antibodies, an immune reaction to HCG produced in her own body?

Click here to continue reading. Click the image below to watch full movie or click here.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Movie: Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda
  • Tags:

US Pushers of War with China Find Canadian Allies

July 31st, 2022 by Yves Engler

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.

***

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s planned trip to Taiwan combined with the head of the US military Mark Milley recently calling the Chinese military “noticeably more aggressive” has greatly ratcheted up tensions with the world’s most populous nation.

Major Canadian media and think tanks are pressing for this country to join the conflict. They have recently offered suggestions on how to “win the new Cold War” with China (Globe and Mail), called for promoting Taiwanese independence (McDonald Laurier Institute) and accused the country of “committing mass atrocity crimes and grave human rights violations against the Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims” (Toronto Star).Through endless stories in recent years about Chinese spying and technology theft, as well as influence over Canadian cultural and schooling initiatives, the dominant media has established the ideological terrain for conflict. Echoing ‘Russiagate’ nonsense, last month former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole even claimed his party lost “about eight or nine seats” in the last election due to Chinese interference.

On spurious security grounds, the Trudeau government recently conceded to US and media pressure to ban the world’s largest 5G network provider, Huawei, from building its cutting-edge broadband in Canada. During a meeting with her US counterpart last month Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland raised the idea of “friend-shoring”. If pursued seriously, this could lead to delinking economically from China and Russia.

Concurrently, Canada and the US have been working together to combat Chinese dominance over rare earth minerals used to produce electric cars and other newer technologies. Earlier in the year, opposition politicians and the media demanded Ottawa block a Chinese firm from purchasing lithium deposits a Canadian company controlled in northwestern Argentina. How dare the Chinese take our Argentinian resources!

With US military bases and warships encircling the Asian nation, Canadian vessels and aircraft are increasingly present near China’s territorial waters and airspace. Four Canadian naval vessels are participating in the Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC), a massive month-long US-led training that largely takes place off of Hawaii. The wargames partly target China.

Alongside their US counterparts, Canadian vessels have run provocative manoeuvres in the South China Sea. While they claim to be upholding the “international rules-based order” in these missions, the USA refuses to recognize the Law of the Sea.

In early June it was reported that Chinese jets had repeatedly buzzed Canada’s CP-140 Aurora surveillance plane operating near its territory. A Global News story — likely instigated by Canada’s military — claimed Chinese pilots flew so close to “sometimes see them raising their middle fingers.” (Flipping the bird is not a common Chinese cultural practice.) Probably hoping to prod a (somewhat) reluctant Trudeau government to condemn the Chinese, the military got what they wanted. Asked about Chinese aggressiveness towards Canadian forces 8,000 km from their territory, Prime Minister Trudeau told reporters, “the fact that China would have chosen to do this is extremely troubling, so we will be bringing it up directly with Chinese officials and (government) counterparts and ensuring that this doesn’t continue to be part of an escalatory pattern.”

At the NATO summit in Spain last month the alliance released a new strategic concept that for the first-time listed China. It labeled Beijing a challenge to the alliance’s “interests, security and values”. NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared,

China is substantially building up its military forces, including nuclear weapons, bullying its neighbours, threatening Taiwan … monitoring and controlling its own citizens through advanced technology, and spreading Russian lies and disinformation… China is not our adversary, but we must be clear-eyed about the serious challenges it represents.”

At a time when international cooperation is essential to mitigate the climate crisis and global health threats, a sizable segment of Canada’s ruling elite is stoking conflict with China.

Could Canada actually follow the US into war with 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.

Featured image is from Yves Engler

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.

***

Author’s Note : This was originally posted in March of 2021. Today, July 23, 2022, fear-marketing of multiple vaccine-targeted-infections has begun by the World Health Organization, U.S. federal and state agencies, and the media. Campaigns are underway for covid variants, monkey pox, polio, diphtheria, flu, and many others with corresponding existing or in-the-pipeline vaccines. It is important to be able to spot the “social marketing” campaigns so that slogans can be distinguished from facts. Informed consent cannot occur in a society where an individual is afraid that if they choose not to get a vaccine, they will face retaliation, job-loss, being ostracized and mocked. Informed consent cannot occur when full and complete information about the infection targeted, natural immunity, and treatment protocols are never explained.

Public health agencies in the US engage in what’s known as “social marketing” or “social engineering.” There are university programs and textbooks dedicated to changing behavior using marketing principles.

Campaigns have been done to encourage people to quit smoking, to breastfeed their babies, and to get more exercise. Positive reinforcement messaging is generally appreciated and unchallenged, and those who don’t change their behavior are not ridiculed. You don’t see political cartoons condemning women who bottle feed their babies. It’s considered mean to laugh at someone battling obesity.

Social engineering is also used to increase vaccine uptake. But unlike other public health interventions, there has always been opposition. This opposition has come from those who don’t subscribe to the germ theory of health, from parents of vaccine-injured children, from doctors who witnessed the health of too many of their patients decline following a round of vaccines, from scientists studying the biological impact of vaccination and of vaccine ingredients, such as aluminum.

Also unlike other public health interventions, ridicule of those who disagree with the messaging abounds and is even condoned by the mainstream. There is even a derogatory term meant to mock and shame and intimidate: antivaxxer.

Today in the United States we are experiencing a heightened awareness of the need for respect and kindness for all individuals, regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation, age, income, health affliction, and more.

But excluded from this respect and kindness movement are:

  • anyone critical of vaccines and masks
  • anyone who chooses natural immunity over vaccination
  • anyone who promotes individual health responsibility
  • anyone who promotes treatments for vaccine-targeted infections

For proponents of natural immunity and critical of the official response to COVID-19, ugliness and cruelty and public attacks, such as the above cartoon by cartoonist Bob Englehart, are increasing. Even individuals who support vaccination in general, but are wary of the COVID-19 vaccines in particular, are being labelled antivaxxers. There are many messages in Englehart’s cartoon worthy of discussion, but for the purposes of this post, I will point out the main message that the vaccine industry and their public health partners are thrilled to see and they hope you will come to believe: people who support natural immunity are dangerous.

If Pharma-State (meaning corporate-captured public health agencies) can get society to believe that anyone who supports natural immunity is a dangerous nut job, then the general public becomes an army of vaccine enforcers, and every single person on the planet, even those who are already immune to the targeted infection, become obedient customers. Do people who support natural immunity believe they have the right to intentionally infect anyone? Of course not. Do vaccine-free people pose a greater risk of transmission of vaccine-targeted infections in public settings than vaccinated people? Also no.

I must pause here to say that the vast majority of individuals working for public health and even the vaccine industry are good, kind, and well-meaning. They believe in the need for vaccination, they believe the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. They believe they are doing good–for the “greater good.” The vaccine industry has done a superb job of infiltrating all sources of information, from science journals to medical school curriculums, effectively obscuring and hiding anything negative about their products. In a corporate-captured agency, the employees are not all bribed to do Pharma’s bidding. Some are, and of course the entire system is set up to be funded by Pharma payments to the agencies, but most are folks simply doing their job and believing they are doing good. To learn the full facts about vaccines, the science, politics, and industry, you have to step outside of the mainstream. To do that, you have to be fairly brave because the minute you put your toe over the line, you are called an antivaxxer and your career and even friendships are put at risk. There are an increasing number of people working in public health that have begun to understand this capture and are feeling extremely conflicted, wanting to speak up and change the system, but afraid of what will happen to them if they dare try.

I have been to many medical freedom rallies over the past few years. They have all been peaceful events, full of passion to improve vaccine safety, to end the corporate-capture of public health agencies, to defend medical freedom and informed consent. They are events of powerful speeches, bringing chills, tears, and hope. Below is a graphic reflecting the reality of meeting between medical freedom activists and those who are pro-vaccine and pro-mask.

Yes, I have had people shout at me that they hope I and my family die of polio. Nice, huh? Where is all this anger against those who support natural immunity coming from? Social Engineering from a captured Public Health system.

It has been going on a long time. Consider this publication in the Federal Register in 1984 (vol 49, no 107):

“. . . any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.”

Bolstering faith in vaccination programs and denying harm has become a massive enterprise, institutionalized in academia. During the 2019 legislative session in Washington state, when two bills were introduced to remove personal exemptions to vaccination, the below banner from a previous exhibit was installed in the Capitol Building to influence legislators to increase “Make Me” laws.

Source

When it comes to the “Help Me” aspect of social marketing, Public Health and other governmental agencies play two roles. One is active, the other passive. One saturates society with messaging designed to sway public opinion. The other is utter and complete silence when their messaging drives hate messaging coming from many directions.

Consider this article in Yahoo Life! in July 2020, where the author concludes it’s OK to scream obscenities at a stranger who isn’t wearing a face mask. The mask-less individual depicted could have been a war veteran with PTSD or an assault victim, now unable to wear anything over his face without having a panic attack. He could have severe asthma, a chronic lung disease, a heart condition, anxiety disorder — any number of medical conditions that make wearing a mask harmful to his health. Or, yes, he could be someone who has read the science on mask wearing by healthy people in public places and engaging in civil disobedience. The crowd depicted has no idea. They see a person without a mask, and the author of this article is inciting readers to violence against him. Will we soon see these sort of articles, encouraging violence against anyone not able to prove they are vaccinated?

I sent this article to the WA State Secretary of Health and others at the Department of Health, telling them my concerns for the violence being witnessed in the state, asking them to please take action, to tell the public to remain calm and non-confrontational. They did not reply. They did not take action. People with health issues that qualify for a medical exemption are donning them anyway rather than risk the hateful glares and ugly remarks or refusal of service.

Not only do key players in public health work closely with the drug industry (for example AIM), but the marketing companies that public health agencies hire–with taxpayer money–are often politically aligned. To promote Gardasil and other vaccines, Washington State Department of Health has in the past hired GMMB, a marketing firm on a global mission to “cause the effect.” GMMB boasts that Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton “all hired GMMB to help them win the White House.” GMMB works exclusively with Democratic Party candidates. If you are a Democrat, how would you feel if GMMB exclusively worked with Republican candidates? GMMB is aligned with the goals of the World Economic Forum and their Great Reset, with the Gates Foundation goals to vaccinate everyone on the planet.

President Biden announced the federal government is spending nearly 2 billion dollars, all told, on a “vaccine confidence” campaign to promote uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.

“This television, radio, and digital advertising blitz, set to kick off within weeks, will focus on Americans outright skeptical of vaccines’ safety or effectiveness as well as those who are potentially more willing to seek a Covid-19 immunization but don’t yet know where, when, or how. Specifically, the campaign will target three groups in which access, apathy, or outright skepticism may pose a barrier to vaccinations: young people, people of color, and conservatives, according to a Biden aide.”

*

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 Informed Choice Washington

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.

***

For months, the United States and its vassals have been doing everything they possibly can to provoke China with their meddling in the Asian giant’s internal affairs, particularly the issue of Taiwan. Despite Beijing’s repeated warnings not to do so, the US still keeps pushing.

The planned Taiwan visit by US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seems to be the new point of contention between China and the US, so much so that the leader of China Xi Jinping warned Washington DC “against playing with fire“. Xi Jinping, usually very reserved, careful and diplomatic in his statements, has been very direct in recent months, signalling Beijing’s deep frustration with America’s incessant escalatory actions aimed against China, be it the Taiwan issue, Hong Kong or Xinjiang and the mythical “Uyghur genocide“ claims, among other things.

“Those who play with fire will perish by it,“ China’s foreign ministry quoted Xi Jinping as telling US President Joe Biden in their fifth call as leaders. “It is hoped that the U.S. will be clear-eyed about this,“ Reuters reported. During a call which lasted for well over two hours, China’s leader also stated Beijing expects Washington DC to abide by the “One China policy“, which the US itself recognizes, and stressed that he firmly opposes Taipei’s independence claims and foreign interference.

For his part, the US president stated that Washington DC’s foreign policy regarding Taiwan “remains unchanged“ and that the US “strongly opposes unilateral efforts to change the status quo or undermine peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait,“ according to a White House press release. The government in Taipei thanked the US for Joe Biden’s support and stated it would “continue to deepen its security partnership with the United States,“ according to a statement by its foreign ministry on Friday.

The State Department claims that the “long-scheduled call was part of the administration’s efforts to deepen lines of communication with China and responsibly manage our differences.“ However, the statement can hardly be considered genuine, as the US and its satellite states keep testing China’s patience with openly hostile actions aimed at weakening Beijing’s position in Taiwan, as well as elsewhere in the vast and ever-increasingly important Asia-Pacific region.

China’s response so far has been very reserved, as the Asian giant is trying to avoid escalation. However, China is consistent in building up its forces to make sure no outside power could be able to jeopardize its security. Although Beijing’s actions have mostly been in response to belligerent US moves, such as arming the government in Taipei, China is very likely to become more proactive in order to deter such policies in the future.

An unnamed senior US official stated that US President Joe Biden and China’s leader Xi Jinping discussed the possibility of holding a first face-to-face meeting as leaders and directed their teams to look into this possibility.

“[Biden] stressed the importance of maintaining lines of communication on Taiwan and the two also discussed areas where there was the potential to expand cooperation, including climate change, health security and counter-narcotics,“ the official said.

The official also told reporters that “China’s leader had used similar language about Taiwan before“ and said the “two sides acknowledged differing views that have existed for 40 years.“

“The conversation between the two about Taiwan, it was direct and it was honest,“ he said, while declining to offer more specific details about Joe Biden’s message to Xi Jinping.

In addition to China’s reaction to meddling in its internal affairs, the US is also frustrated by Beijing’s firm refusal to condemn Russia’s counteroffensive against NATO aggression. Seeing many parallels between US policies toward Russia and itself, in addition to many other countries, China is determined to continue its partnership with Moscow. It seems Washington DC wants to punish China’s “non-compliance“ in regards to Russia by trying to escalate tensions in Taiwan. The US is very likely trying to signal that it can cause serious problems for China, just like it did for Russia in Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet region. However, the Chinese leadership is aware of the dangers of showing any sort of weakness or lack of determination to push back.

At present, China is still mostly focused on resolving the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other hand, the US is experiencing a 40-year peak inflation which has effectively pushed its economy into recession. However, instead of tackling its numerous internal issues, including racism, gun violence, baby food shortages, immigration, etc. the US keeps trying to divert attention from these problems and focuses on starting wars and conflicts around the world. This foreign policy approach has been a disaster, to say the least. As a result, the US is now locked in a (New/Second) Cold War with both Russia and China, concurrently.

*

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.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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 July 23, 2022, The World Health Organization declared monkeypox a global emergency of international health concern.[1] Back in May 2022, we brought you AFLDS’ position on the monkeypox story. As suspected, the corrupt global leaders, working side-by-side with The World Health Organization (WHO) aren’t missing a beat in their quest for a perpetual worldwide pandemic. Regarding the decision to declare the “global emergency,” mainstream media reported: 

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made the decision despite a lack of consensus among experts on the U.N. health agency’s emergency committee, saying he acted as “a tiebreaker.” It was the first time a U.N. health agency chief has unilaterally made such a decision without an expert recommendation.[1]

This is proof of what we have stated before. Global leaders have been preparing for the next pandemic and the one after that. If everything goes according to plan, Covid Theater will now morph into Monkeypox Theater. Marburgvirus Theater is currently being developed in the background. You’ll most likely also be hearing about Ebola, a disease that presents similarly to Marburg. We expect to report more specifically on Marburgvirus appearance and preparations soon. In the meantime, remember, We The People are awake, and we see them working in the dark shadows.

An important piece of the puzzle is H.R. 4350 – National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022. If you download H.R. 4350 and word search “public health” you will be alarmed. H.R. 4350 is 3268 pages. Buried in those pages is a nefarious plan to use public health as a means of using the military to form a dictatorship over every agency in the executive branch of the government with no congressional oversight. [2]

Another piece of the complicated puzzle is the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Public Health Emergency Declaration[3].  Corrupt leaders of this country are hungry to be able to operate under the powers of the Public Health Emergency Declaration continuously. If you read the declaration, you may be quite shocked at the sheer number of protections that are waived (without our consent) under the guise of a public health emergency.

What Is Monkeypox?

Monkeypox is a variant of the smallpox virus and is not new. The first recorded case of monkeypox was in 1970, we have been living with this virus in existence for decades. This virus was not a threat to us then, and it is not a threat to us now.

As of right now, the virus is only spread through direct contact with an infected person’s respiratory secretions or other bodily fluids. This is not an airborne virus and it is rarely ever fatal. The CDC currently claims that asymptomatic people cannot spread the virus.[4] As of right now, it appears most people who have reported getting monkeypox have gotten it from someone they had sexual contact with. The best thing you can do to protect yourself and your family is to avoid sexual contact with strangers or people who could be affected and turn off the propaganda on your television.

As we have seen with the Covid pandemic, the information listed on the CDC website is subject to constant change to fit the narrative. We, as always, will monitor the situation on all fronts moving forward. We are here to assure the American people that monkeypox is nothing to worry about. You don’t need a vaccine to protect you. We must stand strong against this and any other disease the WHO attempts to label as a threat. We know the true threat and it is not a disease or pandemic.

Unite and Stand Strong.

In the past two and a half years, we have seen the tyranny that will ensue if we submit to this declared emergency and the next one after that. We should be very concerned, but not about any viruses. These declarations of emergency always precede the next wave of tyranny. This is your reminder, regardless of which virus they push, regardless of the propaganda they spread, WE MUST NOT fear, WE MUST NOTlock down, and WE MUST NOT be bullied into inoculation.

Our medical freedom colleagues at Truth for Health Foundation (www.truthforhealth.org) have already prepared and just updated helpful Fact Sheets and Treatment Guides on both monkeypox[5] and marburgvirus/ebola (hemorrhagic fever viruses)[6].  Organizations like AFLDS and Truth for Health Foundation are in the same war against evil tyrants and we appreciate the opportunity to share these materials with our constituents.

In closing, we will bring you comments of the dearly departed Dr. Vladmir Zelenko on July 21, 2022, shortly before he passed away:

There are emerging biological terror threats. The key is not to panic but to have a rational strategy on how to deal with it.

1. Don’t trust anything WHO, AMA, CDC, FDA, NIH say. I suggest doing the exact opposite. They have consistently proven themselves to be the enemies of the people.

2. Understand that all Covid-19 strains, Flu, RSV, Marburg, and Ebola are single-stranded RNA viruses that use similar pathways for replication. They use RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RDRP) to make copies of their genome.

3. Zinc inhibits RDRP. HCQ, IVM, Quercetin, and EGCG are Zinc Ionophores that help Zinc enter cells.

Above all, resist fear.

*

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.

Notes

[1] www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2022/07/23/who-monkeypox-outbreak-global-emergency/10134299002/

[2] Text – H.R.4350 – 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress 

[3] https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/Pages/phedeclaration.aspx

[4] https://www.cdc.gov/poxvirus/monkeypox/transmission.html

[5] https://www.truthforhealth.org/2022/07/monkeypox-virus-facts-vs-fear/ 

[6] nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com

Featured image is from The Expose

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on WHO Announces Monkeypox Global Emergency: Corrupt Global Leaders Preparing for the Next Pandemic
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

PM Justin Trudeau has decided to move forward with his cap on nitrogen emissions by reducing fertilizer use even as provincial Agriculture Ministers beg him to stop.

As per a Government of Saskatchewan news release, both Alberta and Saskatchewan’s Ministers of Agriculture have expressed “profound disappointment” in Trudeau’s decision to attempt to reduce nitrogen emissions from fertilizer.

“We’re really concerned with this arbitrary goal,” Saskatchewan Minister of Agriculture David Marit said. “The Trudeau government has apparently moved on from their attack on the oil and gas industry and set their sights on Saskatchewan farmers.”

According to Alberta Agriculture Minister Nate Horner,

“This has been the most expensive crop anyone has put in, following a very difficult year on the prairies. The world is looking for Canada to increase production and be a solution to global food shortages. The Federal government needs to display that they understand this. They owe it to our producers.”

As previously reported by The Counter Signal, in December 2020, the Trudeau government unveiled their new climate plan, with a focus on reducing nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizer by 30% below 2020 levels by 2030. That plan is now coming into effect — though the government refuses to acknowledge that nitrous oxide emissions can be reduced without drastically reducing fertilizer use and thus crop production.

“Fertilizers play a major role in the agriculture sector’s success and have contributed to record harvests in the last decade. They have helped drive increases in Canadian crop yields, grain sales, and exports,” a news release from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada reads.

“However, nitrous oxide emissions, particularly those associated with synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use have also grown significantly. That is why the Government of Canada has set the national fertilizer emissions reduction target, which is part of the commitment to reduce total GHG emissions in Canada by 40-45% by 2030….”

This is a tacit admission that any attempt to lower admissions by reducing nitrogen fertilizer will consequently lower crop yields over the next decade, hurting the Agriculture sector and, more importantly, hurting farmers.

And indeed, according to a report from Fertilizer Canada:

Total Emission Reduction puts a cap on the total emissions allowable from fertilizer at 30% below 2020 levels. As the yield of Canadian crops is directly linked to proper fertilizer application this creates a ceiling on Canadian agricultural productivity well below 2020 levels….

It is estimated that a 30% absolute emission reduction for a farmer with 1000 acres of canola and 1000 acres of wheat, stands to have their profit reduced by approximately $38,000 – $40,500/ annually.

In 2020, Western Canadian farmers planted approximately 20.8 million acres of canola. Using these values, cumulatively farm revenues from canola could be reduced by $396M – $441M on an annual basis. Wheat famers could experience a reduction of $400M.

Moreover, Fertilizer Canada doesn’t believe that forcibly decreasing fertilizer use will even lower greenhouse gases but could lead to carbon leakage elsewhere.

Nonetheless, Trudeau’s government is moving forward, with farmer’s groups speaking to Farmers Forum now wondering if he’s intentionally trying to cause a food shortage — which Trudeau previously told Canadians to prepare for.

*

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 is from TCS

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

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

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

***

First published on July 8, 2022

Food production and the fossil fuel industries are not the only ones on the globalists’ chopping block. Last weekend I was invited to a zoom call with the German firebrand MEP Christine Anderson who gave us a brief report about the recent vote in the EU parliament to extend the Covid pass requirement for another year. 

The parliament voted in favor of the extension in plenary session in spite of the fact that the measure is wholly useless and unjustified – to say nothing of the fact that 99% of Europeans are opposed to it. Mrs. Anderson’s explicit assessment on the matter was that EU’s democracy is a sham and a fraud. The plenary never debated the measure – they simply took the vote. Why the majority of MEPs voted in favor is entirely a mystery, and a sinister one at that. 

But perhaps the most interesting and unexpected part of the 3 hour long call was about the airline industry. Three of the participants on the call had deep inside knowledge of the airline industry (one of them a pilot) who said in no uncertain terms that the industry is now being systematically and deliberately demolished. Apparently, the ultimate purpose is to kill airline travel altogether. The three participants asked that their names not be used, but they seemed exceptionally well informed and entirely credible. At any rate, the news flow has pretty well corroborated their claims.

It is quite apparent that something IS going on with air travel – a sudden wave of dysfunction, like we are experiencing in energy industry, oil production, supply chains and health care. Perhaps I missed a few. And while the media has reported chaos at many airports around the world (pretty much everywhere, it seems), the explanations seem innocent enough: the airports are understaffed and can’t cope with sudden surge of travellers. Here’s a small sampling of the recent reports:

All of a sudden, we have thousands of flights cancelled or delayed, luggage handling process stalling, hours’ wasted in check-in and security checks, and all this happening pretty much everywhere? Coincidence theorists will swallow the official explanations with a shrug of acceptance, but I do find all this extremely strange.

The traffic management systems that have evolved for nearly a century and that had  functioned close to flawlessly for decades, now suddenly seem to be coming apart at the seams. If what the gentlemen on our zoom call were saying was true, airport chaos could become a chronic thing. Indeed, another person on the call, who said she’d read through many of the WEF documents and all of UN’s Agenda 2020/30/50/etc. said that this is all actually written down as an explicit objective. She said that the ultimate intent is to do away with travelling and to establish a feudal arrangement where people remain fixed in place and all travel is banned.

Of course, we don’t need to make too much out of such documents – they simply reflect someone’s stated vision of the kind of social arrangement they believe desirable for whatever reason. On the other hand, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and by this time, the least we should do is pay attention. The coincidence theorists in our midst, the ever loyal consumers of the mainstream narrative are always happy to disperse when told to do so because “there’s nothing to see here…” However, this cohort has had an extremely poor prediction track record, especially over the last two+ years. For most of the rest of us, it is indeed time to pay very close attention and seed the system with due friction if it is veering toward undesirable ends. This is our future that’s at stake and the world our children and their children will inherit. It is time to be brave.

While the high priests of Davos may not be able to carry out their plans to completion, they have proven powerful enough to cause a great deal of damage.

About that small short…

I almost forgot the practical aspect to this story… If the globalists are set at collapsing the air travel industry, perhaps they are furnishing us with an opportunity: shorting travel and leisure related stocks could prove a good short. I’d start with small airlines and non-defense related companies. Or simply ride the EUREX STOXX Europe 600 Travel & Leisure index:

EUREX STOXX Europe 600 Travel & Leisure index: in a downtrend with a lot lower to go!

Markets move in trends and the STOXX Europe 600 Travel & Leisure index could be going a lot lower.

*

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.

Alex Krainer is the creator of I-System Trend Following offering effective, reliable and cost-efficient portfolio solutions with a proven track record of success. We also publish the TrendCompass report providing daily real-time CTA intelligence on hundreds of financial and commodities markets including Crude Oil, Gold, Wheat, Bitcoin, Japanese Yen and many others. One month free trial is always on the house. To request a trial, just drop us a note to [email protected]

Featured image is from ISTF

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 have been given a hopeless choice, and it is no accident.

The world is being pulled together by hidden forces, by the transfer of money from one bank to another, by the transfer of information, photographs and texts exchanged between media monopolies, banks, and the public relations and consulting firms that service billionaires, making their cynical ploys appear to be humanitarianism.

The world is merging as wealth and power concentrate in the hands of the few. The information fed to working people is increasingly banal and trivial. If we want to respond to international issues, we are forced to work with these new powers, to bow before these false gods, the self-appointed lords of global affairs.

We are being trampled by ruthless globalism that controls all money, produces all the things we need to live and even tries to control our minds via postings on social networks that reduce us to instinctive animals responding to suggestive images.

But the anti-globalist alternative presented to us consists of racist, isolationist groups, groups that use violence and deeply disturbing rhetoric. These groups are increasingly powerful, but they are not interested in the truth. They make equally misleading appeals to the emotions of the frustrated worker.

These groups do not want reform of global institutions, but rather their complete dismemberment. Such actions can only empower multinational corporations further. They do not offer any solutions to climate change or to the domination of society by technology ― in most cases they ignore these threats entirely.

Or we can turn to the global institutions with visionary goals like the United Nations, or the World Health Organization, for guidance.

I am moved when I read the inspiring words of the UNESCO Constitution (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization):

“That since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.”

But although these internationalist institutions like UNESCO retain a few smithereens? of their noble past, they have been so infested with money from corporations, direct, or indirect, that their priorities are dictated by billionaires promoting their own money-making agendas under the false flag of charity.

Given this impossible choice, most of us who have the time, the education and the incentive to try to respond to globalization do not know where to turn. Many have simply given up. The investment banks could not be happier with this result.

There is a critical difference between the drive for globalization dominating business and financial activities and the inspiring vision of internationalism, the coming together of the citizens of the Earth for informed and ethical governance, that led to the founding of the United Nations and other international organizations intended to solve mankind’s common problems.

Globalization brings together people, often extremely bright, to pursue profit through trade and technological development. The assumption in globalization is that the decisions of banks and multinational corporations will help ordinary people and that growth and consumption will bring happiness to everyone. But businesses can only measure success in profits and although they may use some of those profits to help out poor people, their motivation is exploitative.

We need to return to the tradition of brave and fearless internationalism and forge an alternative to globalism that is not isolationist nor grounded in ethnic identity.

Think about the current destruction of the Amazon jungles by the regime of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. The current actions, now ignored by the media, threaten to end civilization and to condemn our youth to a barren planet. It seems that we cannot do anything. Our international institutions are powerless.

The Amazon is being cut down and, in its place, the massive corporation Amazon extends its tendrils to seize control of the global economy. The jungle that purifies our air is slashed and burned and a digital jungle that chokes our freedom flourishes.

We need a system that can identify global issues and coordinate a response at the local level.

  • The United Nations can make statements.
  • Famed intellectuals can write editorials.
  • NGOs can hold protests and let citizens sign petitions.

But there is no coordinated effort to block the criminal drive to destroy our future.

A call for “regime change” on a global scale is an entirely appropriate goal for citizens to pursue. I am not talking about the corporate-led regime-change scams that abound.

Do not forget the thousands of youth from around the world who went to Spain in the 1930s to fight against Franco’s fascist regime. There was no shame in the word “regime change” in that context, nor should there have been.

Nor was there any shame in the use of force to combat the fascistic governments that were set on slaughtering the majority of humanity in a ruthless quest for “living space.” There really was no choice.

We cannot ignore the pressing need to transform the governance of our Earth and that will require more than just signing petitions. It will require us to reinvent global governance, not as a tool for investment bankers and wealthy philanthropists, but as a means to address the threat of ecological collapse, militarism and the massive concentration of wealth.

We need a vision for a future that moves beyond suicidal consumption-driven economics and a paranoid militarized society, a vision that will inspire us to risk everything as we fight against hidden forces tearing our world apart.

The United Nations did not suddenly spring into being.

A small group of intellectuals and activists risked their lives in all corners of the Earth to fight against totalitarianism, and to advocate for internationalism and for world peace.

Eventually, they got support from the governments of Russia, China, the United States and Britain, and other exiled governments. There were profound compromises required for that support. But the dream of not only defeating Fascists, but also establishing true international cooperation, did not die.

The roots of the United Nations can be traced back to the Hague Peace Conventions of 1899, 1907 and 1914 (the final one disrupted by the outbreak of World War I). Those peace conventions codified the international law, proposed and implemented global regimes for disarmament and promulgated humanitarian laws for the conduct of diplomacy, trade and war that included punishment for war crimes.

The Hague Peace Conventions led to the formation of the League of Nations after World War I. For the first time, the Earth had transparent global governance to counter global governance driven by multinational corporations. The League of Nations produced such achievements as the Kellogg―Briand Pact of 1928, setting up a framework to end war. The achievements of the League of Nations, and other international movements, laid the foundations for the United Nations.

Sadly, the United States, flushed with confidence after its victory in the Second World War, could not resist inheriting the legacy of exploitative global governance: the spoils of the British Empire.

American financial elites with deep ties to London ultimately suppressed Americans still committed to the struggle against fascism and the United States turned the Soviet Union into a threat, rather than a partner for world peace. The Cold War was spawned and the mandate of the United Nations was not realized.

Yet, even after the United Nations’ budget was stripped to the bone during the George W. Bush administration, even as American policy drifted further from international law under the Obama and Trump administrations, the United Nations remains a vital place where citizens can appeal for justice and for guidance.

However, the United Nations and affiliated global institutions have abandoned much of their founding ideals. They are run by retired bureaucrats in cushy jobs, and the funding comes (directly and indirectly) from multinational corporations and billionaires in a blatant conflict of interest.

Climate change and the drive for war, the exponential evolution of technology and its negative impact on human agency are massive civilizational challenges that call out for true global governance. Yet the ability of citizens of the Earth to work together for common goals remains intentionally limited.

The well-fed experts at the United Nations offices who chase after funding from foundations set up by the wealthy are completely unprepared for the real dangers of economic, ecological and systemic collapse. The queer opinions on climate, economics, health and geopolitics of billionaires like Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg and Warren Buffett are valued over those of ethical experts, or ordinary citizens.

Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, September 2010

Nor is the problem of globalism simply one of billionaires. Networks connect tens of thousands of supercomputers around the world that purr softly as they calculate how to maximize profit every day, every minute and every second. Those supercomputers make the ultimate decisions for BlackRock and Bank of America, assessing the monetary value of the entire Earth and extracting profit in perfect accord with the algorithms assigned without ethical qualms. Those supercomputers are becoming our default global government.

And if social networks, videos and games remap the neural networks in our brains, encouraging dopamine-driven short-term thinking, the computers will take over.

Don’t reform the United Nations; transform the United Nations

The United States never regained the commitment to the United Nations it had under President Franklin Roosevelt. My administration will place the United Nations at the center of diplomacy, economics and security, but it will be a different United Nations than the shell that we see today. It will be an entity committed to the common good that does not scramble for the scraps tossed to it by the rich and powerful.

The attacks from the right on global governance (especially the United Nations) are often based on fact, but the intentions are not noble. The hidden powers wish to privatize what little remains of a global system that has played a vital, if hobbled, role in establishing international law, regulations and promoting a scientific response to international threats.

Our dangerous and unstable world demands from us a global response that goes further. “Global” does not refer to shared Facebook postings, but rather to a coordinated international effort by committed citizens who are at least as well organized as the bankers and the super-rich that we are up against.

The world is excessively integrated in terms of finance, manufacturing, distribution and consumption for profit, but we remain complete strangers when it comes to collaboration between ethical intellectuals and citizens groups around the world.

The Earth Congress

The current situation is so serious that presenting a laundry list of piecemeal reforms will not do. What we need is a massive structural transformation, not a progressive adjustment, that will change the function of the United Nations.

We must make the United Nations a bicameral representative government, vaguely akin to the Congress, so that it no longer represents only nation states (which have been torn apart by global finance), but also represents all citizens in a democratic manner.

Such a move will give the United Nations back the mandate it had in 1942.

The current United Nations Assembly will serve as the upper house, the equivalent of the Senate. This upper house, retaining the title “United Nations,” will offer each nation a single representative.

The current Security Council, however, will be replaced with a speaker elected by all members of the United Nations, who will work together with permanent and ad hoc committees to address economic, security, welfare and environmental issues.

The authority of global governance, however, will be transferred to a new body that will serve as the equivalent of a lower house, or a “House of Representatives.” The analogy is limited in that this assembly will play the central role.

This legislature, referred to here as the “Earth Congress,” will represent the needs and the concerns of the citizens of Earth at the local level and function as a global institution for the formulation and implementation of policies for the entire world.

The Earth Congress will carry out the global governance function that is now monopolized by investment banks and multinational corporations that force their policies on nation states in secret.

The Earth Congress will be directly engaged with citizens around the world, responding to the concerns of local populations and also informing them about global issues in a scientific manner.

It will establish a global dialog for the formulation of policy for the entire world. The Earth Congress will be far more democratic in nature than most current nation states even as it spans the entire globe.

The first rule for global governance is that there is no role for private capital, no role for foundations and non-profits funded by the wealthy, in the discussion of the future of our Earth. We need scientific analysis based on rigorous and critical debate, we need deep ethical commitment by the members of the Earth Congress and we need the imagination and the creativity to find solutions in unexpected places.

The Earth Congress, funded by local contributions, will serve as a global organization that is capable of assessing the impact of corporate exploitation of resources and of definitively stopping such actions. It will be an organization capable of overriding the criminal actions taking place in Brazil today, or the drive for endless war by factions in the US Department of Defense.

The Department of Defense is a perfect example of why we need true global governance. The department, with interests spread around the globe, controlled by generals and bureaucrats reporting to investment banks, is no longer part of the United States government and completely unaccountable. It carries out its own form of brutal, irresponsible global governance while hiding behind the title “government.”

The Earth Congress will take full advantage of new technologies in a positive sense to facilitate the promotion of true cooperation around the world, whether dialogue between citizens, joint research between scientists, or cooperation on global issues between governments. But it will not have a central building where representatives gather, it will have its meeting places distributed around the world, coordinating the formulation and implementation of policy at the local level in a fair manner to meet the needs of humanity.

The Earth Congress will offer all citizens the chance to learn about the critical problems that we face and at the same time opportunities to participate in governance at the local level that will be reflected simultaneously in policy discussions at the global level.

The Earth Congress will take the lead in formulating strategies that allow citizens to work together with their peers around the world. Trade will no longer be limited to the import and export of goods monopolized by large corporations in a manner that greatly increases carbon emissions. Rather, a shared economy will be established in which communities around the world can find partners with like interests and coordinate their own micro-trade and micro-manufacturing cooperatives. Strict regulation will come from the bottom but will be applied internationally.

The Earth Congress, as the primary legislative body of the world, will determine representation according to the population of the entire planet.

Perhaps one representative can be assigned for every 50 million people (140 representatives for 7 billion people).

Some representation should be determined geographically (to represent regions like Africa or South America) but at the same time, there should be members of the Earth Congress who represent groups who are a significant part of the world’s population, but who are too few in number to have direct representation in local government, such as the extreme poor, or the handicapped.

The Earth Congress must insist on long-term (minimum of 30 years) solutions to the most critical issues facing the Earth and will encourage thoughtful and frank discussions that are not driven by a need for symbolic images, but by a demand for real solutions.

The Earth Congress will also provide long-term financing globally that will make solar and wind power, and organic farming readily affordable for citizens as part of a transformation of the Bretton Woods system.

For the Earth Congress, security will be defined as protecting the Earth and its inhabitants. The inhabitants are not only humans but also indigenous animal and plant life. It will be a basic assumption in global governance that no one owns the oceans, the air, or the land and that all modern concepts like “real estate” are not applicable to these shared resources. The Earth Congress will strictly regulate fishing, the pollution of the air and the water, the destruction of soil and of natural habitats. It will fund projects to restore the natural environment, often by removing the structures erected as part of the cult of “development.”

The Earth Congress will protect, on behalf of the population of the entire planet, the oceans, the Arctic and the Antarctic, and the atmosphere. Satellites and other devices that orbit the Earth will be strictly controlled to protect humanity and end the militarization of space. I will set out transparent and effective regulations to assure that the internet is powered entirely by renewable energy, is accessible to all and promotes an open intellectual discourse based on the scientific method rather than addictive games and pornography.

The interaction of experts in the Earth sciences, the environment, agriculture and technology with groups that are deeply engaged with ordinary citizens, and with representatives of local government, will create a positive cycle of inquiry, objective analysis, constructive proposals and transparent implementation that will usher in a new age of meaningful governance.

Reforming global governance and improving the US-China relationship

The future of global governance is critical to addressing the completely unnecessary conflicts between the United States and the People’s Republic of China being promoted for fun and profit. These two countries should be working together at the highest levels to respond to the challenges of the current day and to create true global governance for the people.

Instead, we are bombarded in the United States with calls for war with China, with campaigns to demonize China.

The two countries have been linked through systems of production and consumption, not through ties between people. We need decoupling in the sense that the people of both countries have their lives controlled increasingly by ruthless multinational banks. Exploitive patterns of economic interaction tying the two nations should be reformed.

But we need a deeper integration between the United States and China in terms of a concrete dialogue between the peoples of both nations about our shared future that will be implemented through honest and transparent governance for the sake of the Earth and future generations.

*

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 is from edgarwinkler / Pixabay

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Future of “Global Governance” and The “Earth Congress”. Transform the United Nations
  • Tags: ,

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 popularly known to African leaders, Russia has thousands of decade-old undelivered pledges and several bilateral agreements signed with individual countries, yet to be implemented, in the continent. In addition, during the previous years there have been unprecedented huge number of “working visits” by state officials both ways, to Africa and to the Russian Federation.

In an authoritative policy report presented last November titled ‘Situation Analytical Report’ and was prepared by 25 Russian policy experts, noted that Russia’s Africa policy is roughly divided into four periods, previously after Soviet’s collapse in 1991. After the first summit held in October 2019, the Russia’s relations with Africa has entered its fifth stage.

According to that report “the intensification of political contacts is only with a focus on making them demonstrative.” Russia’s foreign policy strategy regarding Africa needs to spell out and incorporate the development needs of African countries. The number of high-level meetings has increased, but the share of substantive issues on the agenda remains small. There are little definitive results from such meetings. Next, there has been lack of coordination among various state and para-state institutions working with Africa.

Despite the above objective criticisms or better still the research findings, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov‘s trip to four African countries on 24-28 July, 2022, still has considerable geopolitical significance and some implications. The four African countries on his travel agenda: Egypt, Ethiopia, Uganda and the Republic of the Congo.

In pre-departure interview with local Russian media, Lavrov shared reflections on the prospects for Russia-African relations within the context of the current geopolitical and economic changes, fearing an isolation with tough sanctions after Russia’s Feb. 24 “special military operation” in Ukraine. He unreservedly used, at least, the the media platform to clarify Russia’s view of the war and attract allies outside the West, and rejected the West’s accusations that Russia is responsible for the current global economic crisis and instability.

Reports said African countries are among those most affected by ripples of the war. There are, however, other natural causes such as long seasonal droughts that complicated the situation in Africa. Lavrov reiterated an assurance that Russian grain “commitments” would be fulfilled, and offered nothing more to cushion the effects of the cost-of-living crisis. In a contrast, at least, the United States offered US$1.3 billion package to help tackle hunger in the Africa’s Horn.

It is a historical fact that Russia’s ties with Africa declined with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The official transcripts made available after Lavrov’s meetings in Egypt offered little, much have already been said about developments in North African and Arab world, especially those including Libya, Syria and Yemen, as well as the Palestinian-Israeli conflicts.

With the geographical location of Egypt, Lavrov’s visit has tacit implications. It followed US President Joe Biden‘s first visit to the Middle East, during which he visited Israel, the Palestinian territories and Saudi Arabia. Biden also took part in a summit of  the six member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council, in addition to Egypt, Jordan and Iraq.

Lavrov’s efforts toward building non-Western ties this crucial times is highly commendable especially with the Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit and representatives from the organization’s 22 member states. Egypt has significant strategic and economic ties with Russia. There are two major projects namely the building of nuclear plants, the contract signed back in 2015 and the construction of an industrial zone has been on the planning table these several years.

In the aftermath of the Soviet Union, Russia continues efforts in search of possible collaboration and opportunities for cooperation in the past years. For the first time in the Republic of Congo, Lavrov delivered a special message from President Vladimir Putin to the Congolese President Denis Sassou Nguesso, at his residence in Oyo, a town 400 kilometers north of the capital, Brazzaville. Kremlin records show that Sassou-Nguesso, who has been in power since 1979, last visited Moscow in May 2019 and before that in November 2012.

The Congolese leader during his visit apparently asked for Russia’s greater engagement, and assistance in bringing total peace and stability in Central Africa comprising the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Cameroon and Chad. This presents a considerable interest especially its “military-technical cooperation” to further crash French domination similar to the Republic of Mali in West Africa. Interviews made by this author confirmed that Russia would send more military experts from Wagner Group to DRC through Central African Republic. An insider at the Congo’s Foreign Affairs Ministry confirmed the special message relates an official invitation for Congolese President Sassou-Nguesso to visit Moscow.

Understanding the political developments and much talked about transition (better to describe it as hereditary succession) of regime from President Yoweri Museveni to his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, unquestionably brings Lavrov to Uganda. For Museveni, drawing closer to Russia sends a critical message about the motives on relations between Uganda and Russia.

With Foreign Minister of Uganda Jeje Odongo in the city of Entebbe, Lavrov in the same traditional rhetoric mentioned “the implementation of joint projects in oil refining, energy, transport infrastructure and agricultural production.” It was decided to focus on practical efforts to move the above areas of focus forward in the course of an Intergovernmental Russian-Ugandan Commission on Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation meeting in October.

Interesting to recall that President Vladimir Putin’s meeting on December 11, 2012, President Museveni  said “Moscow is a kind of Mecca for free movements in Africa. Muslims visit Mecca as a religious ritual, while Moscow is a kind of centre that helps various liberation movements.” Later in October 2019, Museveni expressed appreciation for the Africa–Russia meeting.

“It is good to say at this meeting a few areas which we could look at. Number one is defence and security. We have supported building an army by buying good Russian equipment, aircrafts, tanks, and so on. We want to buy more. We have been paying cash in the past, cash, cash, cash. What I propose is that you supply and we pay. That would be some sort of supply that would make us build faster, because now we pay cash, like for this Sukhoi jet, we paid cash,” Museveni during the conversation told Putin.

Lavrov displays his passion for historical references. In many of his speeches during the four-nation tour, Lavrov has repeatedly stressed that it’s imperative for African leaders to support its “special military operation” in Ukraine, repeated all the Soviet assistance to Africa and the perspectives for the future of Russia-African relations. But most essentially, Lavrov has to understand that little has been achieved, both the long period before and after the first Russia-Africa summit held October 2019.

In Ethiopia where the African Union headquarters is located, and representatives of African countries are based, Russia is vying to normalize an international order and frame-shape its geostrategic posture in this capital city. Whether 25 of Africa’s 54 states abstained or did not vote to condemn Russia at the UN General Assembly resolution in March, Africans are overwhelmingly pragmatic. Most of them displayed neutrality, created basis for accepting whatever investment and development finance from the United States, European Union, Asian region, Russia and China, from every other region of the world.

For external players including Russia eyeing Africa, Museveni’s thought provoking explanation on “neutrality” during the media conference re-emphasizes the best classic diplomacy of pragmatism. “We don’t believe in being enemies of somebody’s enemy,” Museveni told Lavrov. Uganda is set to assume the chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement, a global body created during the Cold War by countries that wanted to escape being drifted into the geopolitical and ideological rivalry between Western powers and Communists.

Lavrov, however, informed about broadening African issues in the “new version of Russia’s Foreign Policy Concept against the background of the waning of the Western direction” and his will objectively increase the share of the African direction in the work of the Foreign Ministry. Relating to the next summit, scheduled for mid-2023, “a serious package of documents that will contain almost all significant agreements” are being prepared, he said.

Lavrov with his Ethiopian counterpart Demeke Mekonnnen and the African Union leadership in Addis Ababa have agreed on additional documents paving the way to a more efficient dialogue in the area of defense sales and contracts. Still on Ethiopia, Russia’s state-run nuclear corporation Rosatom and Ethiopia’s Ministry of Innovation and Technology signed a roadmap on cooperation in projects to build a nuclear power plant and a nuclear research center in the republic. In addition, other bilateral issues, including joint energy and infrastructure projects, and education were discussed.

“We have good traditions in the sphere of military and technical cooperation. Today, we confirmed our readiness to implement new plans in this sphere, including taking into account the interests of our Ethiopian friends in ensuring their defensive ability,” the Russian top diplomat said. “Russia is ready to continue providing assistance to Ethiopia in training its domestic specialists in various spheres,” he added and finally explaining that Moscow was ready to develop both bilateral humanitarian and cultural contacts and cooperation in the sphere of education with Addis Ababa.

According to Lavrov, Russia has long-standing good relations with Africa since the days of the Soviet Union which pioneered movements that culminated in decolonization. It provided assistance to the national liberation movements and then to the restoration of independent states and the rise of their economies in Africa. Undeniable fact is that many external players have also had long-term relations and continue bolstering political, economic and social ties in the continent.

In his Op-Ed article, Lavrov argues: “We have been rebuilding our positions for many years now. The Africans are reciprocating. They are interested in having us. It is good to see that our African friends have a similar understanding with Russia.” The point is that Moscow is desirous to widen and deepen its presence in the continent. On the other hand, the Maghreb and African countries are, in terms of reciprocity, keen to strengthen relations with Moscow, but will avoid taking sides in the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

Lavrov has successfully ended his meetings and talks in Africa. Now, the basic significant issue in its current relations is still the fact that Russia has thousands of decade-old undelivered pledges and several bilateral agreements signed with individual countries in the continent, while in the previous years there have been unprecedented huge number of “working visits” to Africa. The development of a comprehensive partnership with African countries remains among top priorities of Russia’s foreign policy, Moscow is open to its further build-up, Lavrov said in an Op-Ed article for the African media, and originally published on the ministry’s website.

In the context of rebuilding post-Soviet relations and now attempting at creating a new model of the global order which it hopes to lead after exiting from international organizations. In order to head an emerging global order, Russia needs to be more open, make more inroads into the civil society, rather than close (isolate) itself from “non-Western friends” this fast-changing crucial period – in Asia, Africa and Latin America. For instance, Africa is ready as it holds huge opportunities in various sectors for reliable, genuine and committed investors. It offers a very profitable investment destination.

Despite criticisms, China has built an exemplary dinstinctive economic power in Africa. Besides China, Africa is largely benefitting from the European Union and Western aid flows, economic and trade ties. That compared, Russia plays very little role in Africa’s infrastructure, agriculture and industry, and making little efforts in leveraging unto the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Our monitoring shows that the Russian business community hardly pays attention to the significance of African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) which provides a unique and valuable platform for businesses to access an integrated African market of over 1.3 billion people.

Substantively, Russia brings little to the continent especially in the economic sectors that badly need investment. Of course, Russia basks at restoring and regaining part of its Soviet-era influence, but has problems with planning and tackling its set tasks, lack of confidence in fulfilling its policy targets. The most important aspect is how to make strategic efforts more practical, more consistent and more effective with African countries. Without these fundamental factors, it would therefore be an illusionary step partnering with Africa.

Some policy experts have classified three directions for external partners dealing with Africa: (i) active engagement, (ii) sit on the sideline and observe, and (iii) be a passive player. From all indications, African leaders have political sympathy, and most often, could express either support or neutral position for Russia. But at the same time, African leaders are very pragmatic, indiscriminately dealing with external players with adequate funds to invest in different economic sectors. Africa is in a globalized world. It is, generally, beneficial for Africa as it could take whatever are offered from either East or West, North or South.

In stark contrast to key global players for instance the United States, China and the European Union and many others, Russia has limitations. For Russia to regain part of its Soviet-era influence, it has to address its own policy approach, this time shifting towards new paradigms – implementing some of the decade-old pledges and promises, and those bilateral agreements; secondly to promote development-oriented policies and how to make these strategic efforts more practical, more consistent, more effective and most admirably result-oriented with African countries.

*

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.

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a regular contributor to Global Research. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

Featured image: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov meets with Egyptian counterpart

How We Can Take Control Again of Politics

July 30th, 2022 by Emanuel Pastreich

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 political, social and economic landscape we face in the United States is transforming at a terrifying speed. Small groups have monopolized resources, assets and knowledge and they have left the vast majority of us to suffer in ignorance the catastrophic consequences of criminal mismanagement.

The super-rich stole between five and ten trillion dollars from you over the last four months, in addition to what they had looted before then. And just when we are starting to pull ourselves together to confront the criminal regime of Wall Street, we were confronted with the brutal murder of Mr. George Floyd, slowly tortured to death and those images were spread across the entire country.

Such brutal killings by police happen every day. Increasingly, honest police are forced to quit the force. But this incident was practically created for television and broadcast so as to foment massive domestic conflict that will benefit the wealthy who are terrified that working people might come together in response to their looting of the nation, and of the Earth.

The murder of Mr. George Floyd is the confluence of two horrific subterranean rivers that flow beneath the surface of the United States. One is the river of hatred and contempt for those who are classified as alien, as inferior, on the basis of their skin color, or the habits that they have learned from their parents. This river of hatred has been exploited for hundreds of years to distract from economic exploitation. The Fusionist Party of the 1890s brought together black and white to fight for social justice. They were brutally suppressed, and segregation was the result, a scheme in which pathetic privileges were given to poor whites and a mindless racism was encouraged as part of a divide and conquer strategy.

The other terrible subterranean river is that of destruction for profit, the controlled demolition of the United States’ economy. There is a faction among the rich and powerful who see opportunity for profit in the unspeakable act of tearing the United States apart. They want us to fight each other, and to be so divided that we are incapable of coming together to demand a righteous, equitable and transparent society. Those dark forces have spent enormous sums of money to create rifts and to the pit one poor man against another.

It is impossible to have a conversation on issues like climate change and vaccinations, about the role of government and of the military, about the power of banks and multinational corporations. Different parts of the population have been fed narratives that are so divergent as to make it difficult to agree on what is true and what is false. And too many of the establishment have signed a blasphemous contract with the devil to be silent about the massive lies in plane sight in order to be allowed to become famous and to live a comfortable life.

The intentional confusion created by the media and by authorities around COVID 19 has exacerbated this trend. The murder of George Floyd is the final stage of this plan. Citizens of the United States are confronted with a baited gambit, an impossible choice. Choice A: question the COVID 19 narrative, the plan for vaccinations and be forced into alignment with isolationist and racist militias; Choice B: denounce brutal racism in the government and the systematic efforts of the Trump administration to encourage racist acts and find yourself aligned with Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren and a panoply of “think left, live right” closet globalists.

Who forced this choice on us? That is my question for you.

I condemn this brutal murder and demand justice. But I appeal to your native wisdom, your innate ability to rise to the occasion, just as Robert Kennedy did when he spoke on the night of Martin Luther King’s assassination. Please, please, please! Do not be drawn into this trap set for you by the rich and the powerful.

We must start by facing honestly the advanced moral decay in the fabric of our nation.

Many poor people have been deprived of educations and have been misled by powerful forces to blame the other (whether it is the black, the Asian, or the rural white worker) rather than thinking strategically about how we can all come together to fight against these dark forces.

Most people I know have given up on trying to build bridges. The threat of violence from the White House is a clear sign that the age of bridge-building is dead.

And as violence is encouraged in the streets, the current political “COVID 19” crisis encourages people to stay at home, to interact only with those of similar minds. Social media, like Facebook and Twitter, is promoted by the people who are supposedly our moral leaders as an appropriate way to organize. But that social media, and the news that we read, is intentionally designed to make our thinking shallow, to render us foolish. Until we start making our own news, start organizing our own social media, we will be played for fools.

If we cannot create a positive trend in America that gives hope for progress to the people, if all that the people can see is collapse and conflict, then the powerful can go forward with their plans to keep us from meeting each other, from being able to send mail to each other, from traveling, from communicating effectively via email or via social media. Google will never tell you that you are effectively living in a prison.

The forces have thrown against us by corporations, by investment banks, and the various anti-immigrant and anti-minority groups that they prop up behind the curtain, are warping the bearing walls of our nation. These forces want to make attacks on minorities acceptable again-as was the case in the 1920s.

They want you to ignore the looting of the government by banks and to obsess with the looting in the streets that is replayed over and over again in that disgusting media we are forced to rely on.

We need a plan for what we are going to do and we need to follow that plan.

We do not need politicians who tell us that things are bad, but are afraid to explain to us why they are so bad. We do not have time for vague hope that things will get better by magic.

We most certainly should not think that replacing the brutal, brash and narcissistic Donald Trump with some other corrupt politician will solve our problems.

What we need is a new politics of habit, of thinking and of action that is neither “conservative,” nor “progressive,” but is rather transformative. We need a politics that addresses root causes, not their grotesque consequences.

We must grieve for George Floyd, for his family and his friends and his people. At the same time, we must see through the rouse, understand how this incident was rigged up as a chance to use race as a means to tear the country apart and to promote conflicts that will be an excuse for martial law.

Donald Trump sent out a message by Twitter (which is a cynical for-profit corporation that squeezes billions out of us) saying “When looting starts, shooting starts.” Supposedly Twitter blocked this message because it was offensive. I doubt this story. Rather these media companies are working overtime to manipulate us, trying to make us think that they are objective, they are our friends, through false images and deceptive rituals.

The violence of police cannot be separated from the horrific foreign wars we are engaged in now. Police are often soldiers who have returned from those wars. The violence they practice is incubated in violent video games, in movies and in a militarized value system. The violence has swept through our entire society.

The writer James Baldwin wrote of those who have been trained to see the world in terms of race,

“They are, in effect, still trapped in a history which they don’t understand; and until they understand it, they cannot be released from it. They have had to believe for many years, and for innumerable reasons, that black men are inferior to white men. Many of them, indeed, know better, but, as you will discover, people find it very difficult to act on what they know. To act is to be committed, and to be committed is to be in danger. In this case, the danger, in the minds of most white Americans, is the loss of identity…The black man has functioned in the white man’s world as a fixed star, as an immovable pillar: and as he moves out of his place, heaven and earth are shaken to their foundations…

“And if the word integration means anything, this is what it means: that we, with love, shall force our brothers to see themselves as they are, to cease fleeing reality and begin to change it. For this is your home, my friend, do not be driven from it; great men have done great things here, and will again, and we can make America what America can become.”

Baldwin was talking, frankly, of what it takes to make America great, not great again, but great for the first time.

What do we do now?

The ancient art of Aikido offers a strategy for the resolution of the social and political crisis, bordering on hybrid war, that we face. But it demands that we first engage in thoughtful, philosophical consideration of the larger dynamics in our nation that has brought us here. Although the Aikido approach may not appeal those who wish to indulge their emotions, it is the most effective response to what could easily become a catastrophe for the entire world. Conflict in the United States cannot be separated from conflicts around the world. The violence used in our streets was learned from our numerous foreign wars. What happened there, hidden from the sight of citizens, has changed who we are.

And now, if things fracture, the question of who controls nuclear weapons could be a crisis tomorrow.

Akido shows us how we can avoid an emotional response to the images we are fed by the corrupt media in an attempt to get us mad, and we can rather focus on building our own communities, and our own brave organizations, so that they can stand up to the powers behind what we see on TV.

Aikido teaches us that we should not respond to the blow thrown at us with an equally powerful blow against our opponent. Rather we should redirect the energy of the blow thrown at us in a harmless direction, or even in a positive direction.

A hostile attack must be disarmed by subtly redirecting the very energy that is thrown against us.

The larger significance of these words is that there is a balance in the universe that we must tap into and the only way that we can truly solve problems is precisely through such a redirection of energy.

Political history shows the truth clearly. Efforts to oppose terrible wrongs have often led to the overuse of force and created new problems, sometimes worse than original ones. The sad process is similar in each age. And such an overreaction is precisely what the dark forces in the United States are hoping for, planning for.

And, yet we cannot expect the people to suffer terrible injustice in silence. As the American patriot Thomas Paine wrote, “Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice.”

What would an Aikido master say if he were giving us advice about how to rebuild this country after this horrific spiritual damage, and how to respond to the terrible blows thrown at us by hidden forces?

Where would he suggest we should start to heal this commercialized, commodified, fragmented, frightened, defiled and demoralized country?

The terrible racial conflicts that are being encouraged by the corrupt media, and by banks like BlackRock and Goldman Sachs, are intended to make people on both sides go too far, to create lasting conflicts that distract attention away from looting of our country, not by poorly paid workers, but by banks, and by those who profit from such disasters.

We can see immediately the negative impact of this blow. But, if we use our imaginations, and if we are disciplined, we can redirect the energy. People have been awakened out of their slumber.

That is good.

People have been made aware of deep injustice that they previously pretended did not exist.

That is good.

They have come together in the streets, sometimes working together, sometimes in confrontation.

This could be good.

The intention of those who have promoted images of destruction and chaos intended for different groups was to encourage horrific conflict.

That is bad.

But if we are able to pursue the truth, not sensationalized reports, and if we are able to make use of this awakening to get people involved into real conversations with each other, and even with the people whom they are supposed to hate, then the forces unleashed to tear us apart can be redirected to bring us together.

We can also start a deep conversation between citizens, gathering at home, in our neighborhoods, to talk about what the real history of America is. We can ask ourselves questions that demand answers:

When did things go wrong in America?

Did everything go wrong after Donald Trump was elected? Or did Trump play some positive role in that he spoke the truth about the endless wars and corruption in the country?

Or did the problems start with the deep corruption of the late Clinton administration and then the George W. Bush administration?

Or should we trace the sickness back to the assassination of John F. Kennedy?

Or should the evils in our country be traced back to the colonization by Europeans in the 17th century, and the extractive economy the slave economy they imported?

Or is there something fundamentally depraved about humanity that goes all the way back to Adam and Eve?

These are critical questions to ask about America and the answers are not simple.

The current wave of disruption projected across our country must be redirected to energize people and to get them engaged in constructive discussion. That discussion could lead to transformation at the deepest level, rather than the propagation of painful conflicts egged on by, set up by, the media and their corporate backers.

The politicians we see on television are expert at dividing us. That is all politicians know how to do. But we could have a politics dedicated to unity, to transformation of thinking, to honest perception. Not all Americans have an equal role in transforming the negative powers that have been unleashed in our country.

Some of us will have received educations and specialized knowledge that allow us to understand the world in ways that others cannot. We, as intellectuals, have an obligation to help those around us to perceive the world more clearly, to make sure that they are not abused by the powerful.

At the same time, we intellectuals have much to learn from those who have worked at hard jobs, standing all day in restaurants, living in inadequate housing, suffering terrible abuse. We can start to create a positive cycle by working together with those who know firsthand the hardships of our society, but who do not have our specialized knowledge needed to change things.

Such an alliance between workers and intellectuals will redirect the forces of exploitation in a positive direction. But such a redirection requires of us, those who have benefited the most (like myself), a willingness for sacrifice.

Consider the quote attributed to Winston Churchill, “never waste a good crisis.” The expression is normally used in the negative sense, meaning that a crisis is a chance to force through changes that would be resisted by the public normally.

The passage of the Patriot Act in the United States after “9.11” is a perfect example — a radical restriction of liberty that could never have been achieved without a manufactured mood of crisis.

The crisis today is being magnified and distorted as a means to fundamentally alter American society. The intention is to block all opposition to the concentration of wealth, to the destruction of the environment, and to decrease the autonomy and the liberty of citizens.

If we observe carefully, however, we will notice that there are unexpected positive changes generated by those negative practices. If we can seize the positives, we can push for a constructive transformation. We have no choice as the forces have already been unleashed.

For example, suddenly, without any form of participatory process, or even consultation with experts, global travel has been profoundly restricted, and trade. Airlines are in bankruptcy; airports have been shut down and ports are quiet.

But although politics in this case hobbles towards tyranny, the use of petroleum for transportation and the runaway consumption society that has taken over are killing our ecosystem. It was precisely the right time to shut down the globalization machine and this disruption could be an extremely positive move if we have the vision to recreate our society.

Air transit has to end. Frivolous travel has to stop.

The lock-down orders that have kept us at home, that have destroyed small businesses and empowered corporations, that have allowed the super-rich to make billions and have driven most of us into poverty, are a negative force.

But again, staying at home and working together with our family can be healthy if the direction is healthy. If we must stay in our neighborhoods, it could be an opportunity to build communities that are strong enough to stand up against the power of the rich. We can use the opportunity to get to know our neighbors and learn how to work together with them.

Teaching courses online could reduce the need for automobiles, and even allow for innovative connections between students and teachers around the world that could promote an international perspective. But today online education is being pushed primarily by those in search of profits. We will have to seize control of on-line education and change its direction.

I make these suggestions here just as that, suggestions. We will need to work together to redirect, to block, the dangerous forces that have been unleashed in the United States.

But I would like to suggest that as we mourn the deaths, as we lament the destruction and the damage to our society, that we also keep our eyes open to innovative and creative ways in which these negative forces can be redirected so as to achieve a fundamental transformation of our society. Such a transformation was, to be honest, way, way, overdue.

The aikido of politics and policy that I suggest here is complex and subtle. Most politicians would not dare to approach you with such a policy proposal. They assume that messages must be dumbed down for an American audience that cannot concentrate, that is made foolish by social media and commercial content.

But I take you seriously fellow Americans, I will never talk down to you. I assume that you, standing behind the counter at Wal-Mart, you, taking orders at Amazon, you, wiping down tables for McDonald’s late at night, that you entirely understand these complex issues, that you can, and you will rise to the occasion. You will shake off the poisonous consumer culture and move forward in this struggle.

As we move forward, let us recall the vision put forth by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his State of the Union address of January 6, 1941, as a challenge to the specter of fascism.

Roosevelt called for the protection of “Four Freedoms” for all citizens: “Freedom of speech,” “Freedom of worship,” “Freedom from want” and “Freedom from fear.”

Roosevelt was not ambiguous about the significance of the four freedoms.

He declared:

In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.

The first is freedom of speech and expression ― everywhere in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way ― everywhere in the world.

The third is freedom from want ― which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings that will secure for every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants ― everywhere in the world.

The fourth is freedom from fear ― which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor ― anywhere in the world.”

Achieving such a vision will require tremendous energy and focus, it will require us to come out into the streets and work with our neighbors to create a just and fair society. We have been given such an opportunity, by accident, perhaps. Now is the time to seize it and push forward in a righteous direction.

*

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 is from The Bullet

Wer die Welt ändern will, muss den Menschen ändern!

July 30th, 2022 by Dr. Rudolf Hänsel

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.

***

Menschen mit viel Geld und Einfluss, die der übrigen Menschheit nicht wohlgesonnen sind und nur ihren eigenen Profit im Sinn haben, versuchen auf verschiedene Weise, die Welt „aus den Angeln zu heben“. Der Weltkrieg gegen Russland gehört dazu. Der frühere Präsident von Greenpeace, Dr. Patrick Moore, sagte vor kurzem, dass die Eliten einen „Selbstmordpakt“ hätten, um die Weltbevölkerung zu reduzieren: „Wir stehen jetzt vor einer Situation, in der eine große Anzahl sehr mächtiger Organisationen und Eliten auf internationaler und nationaler Ebene eine Politik fordern, die im Grunde ein Selbstmordpakt ist. Im Grunde eine Art Todeswunsch.“ (1) Besorgte Zeitgenossen wollen diesen destruktiven Prozess gerne schnell und nachhaltig stoppen. Doch die Frage ist: Wie?

Da die Geschichte ein Werk des Menschen ist, muss der Mensch geändert werden, um die Welt zu ändern.

Gut gemeinte Appelle verfehlen oft ihr Ziel. Dagegen bietet die moderne wissenschaftliche Psychologie ein geeignetes Instrumentarium. Damit der Mensch für eine humane, friedliche und freiheitliche Gesellschaft gewonnen werden kann und sich in Bewegung setzt, muss er sowohl über die Vorgänge in der Welt aufgeklärt sein, als auch seine eigene Natur, seine seelische Verfassung sowie seine Reaktionsweisen und die der anderen kennen.

Wenn dieser Mensch dann zum Beispiel an das Problem des Krieges herantritt, ist er in der Lage zu unterscheiden: Welche Menschen führen Krieg? Sind es nur die anderen, die Politiker, die Kriegsführer, oder gehören wir selbst auch dazu? Zum Beispiel die Mutter, die ihre Söhne auf das „Feld der Ehre“ geschickt hat und dann „in stolzer Trauer“ eine schwarze Armbinde trug? Oder die Generation, die den Ersten Weltkrieg mitmachte und anschließend in den Zweiten marschierte, in dem Vater und Sohn auf dem „Felde der Ehre“ zurückblieben? Und was ist mit dem Pfarrer und der Kirche, die die Waffen segnet?

Mit der Psychologie hätte er einen Kompass, mit dem er menschliche Handlungsweisen richtig einordnen kann.

Wissenschaftliche Psychologie

Die Psychologie ist eine Wissenschaft über den Menschen, über die menschliche Natur: wie er wird, wie er heranwächst, welche Erlebnisse er macht, wie er sich in seinem Leben zurechtfindet. Seine Erfahrungen werden ihm vor allem von seinen Eltern, aber auch von den Lehrern vermitteln. Es ist dann das Produkt seiner Erlebnisse und Eindrücke in der Kindheit.

Bereits in den ersten Lebensjahren – mit fünf bis sechs Jahren, wenn es in den Kindergarten kommt – hat das Kind einen Kompass. Es weiß dann, wie es sich zu verhalten hat; auch über das andere Kind, über Vater, Mutter und Geschwister hat es eine Meinung. Es hat bereits seinen Charakter, seine Charaktereigenschaften und kennt seine Stellung in der Welt.

In der Medizin durfte der Mensch den Menschen – seine Organe und sein ganzes Inneres – nicht kennen lernen, nicht studieren. Die Kirche war aus bestimmten Gründen dagegen, dass man den Menschen erforscht. Erst als man die Notwendigkeit erkannt hatte, sind Leichen gestohlen worden und die Mediziner sind darangegangen, den Menschen zu erforschen. Die Medizin ist nur weitergekommen, weil sie die Funktion des Körpers erkannt hat.

Heute will die wissenschaftliche Psychologie das geistige und seelische Leben des Menschen erforschen: seine Gedanken, seine Gefühle und seine Erlebnisse. Wenn man die Gefühle und Reaktionsweisen des Menschen einmal versteht und erkennt, wie er heranwächst, wie er die Welt sieht und was in ihm vorgeht, dann wird einem vieles klar. Das ist dann ein anderes Denk- und Gefühlsvermögen. Man wird sich selbst und den anderen, die Gesellschaft und die ganze Welt richtig verstehen.

Aufklärung und Erziehung

Demgemäß sind Aufklärung und Erziehung die wichtigsten Maßnahmen, die zum Beispiel gegen den Krieg und alle anderen inhumanen und freiheitraubenden „Anordnungen“ der korrupten Obrigkeit ergriffen werden können (2).

Die autoritäre Erziehung der Vergangenheit schuf einen Menschentypus, der nur die Kategorien „Herrschen“ und „Dienen“ kannte. Kein Wunder, dass dieser Mensch weder die sozialen Probleme lösen, noch den Krieg aus der Welt schaffen konnte. Religiöse und soziale Ideologien sowie Privilegien im gesellschaftlichen Leben hindern den Menschen daran, die Einheit des Menschengeschlechts zu begreifen (3). So wird Zweitracht unter denen gesät, die darauf angewiesen wären, sich auf dieser Erde ein erträgliches Dasein zu sichern.

Heute weiß man, dass man nur mit psychologischen Erziehungsmethoden – Verzicht auf unangemessenes Autoritätsgebaren und Gewaltanwendung sowie Verständnis des kindlichen Seelenlebens – Menschen heranbilden kann, die gegen die Verstrickungen des Machtwahns gefeit sein werden und keine „Untertanen-Mentalität“ mehr besitzen (4).

Noch kann man nicht sagen, wann sich das Menschheitsgewissen, dessen Mahnruf durch die Jahrhunderte geht, endgültig Gehör verschaffen wird. Da aber an der Frage, ob sich die Menschen in weit höherem Maße als bisher zur allmenschlichen Solidarität bekennen werden, der Bestand des Menschengeschlechts hängt, sollten wir alle nichts unversucht lassen, die entsprechenden psychologischen Maßnahmen zu ergreifen.

*

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 (Schwerpunkte: Klinische-, Pädagogische-, Medien- sowie Individual-Psychologie). Als Pensionär arbeitete er in Lindau am Bodensee 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.

Noten 

1. https://www.globalresearch.ca/former-greenpeace-president-dr-patrick-moore-says-elites-have-suicide-pact-reduce-world-population/5787942/

2. https://www.globalresearch.ca/will-enlightenment-psychological-education-methods-push-back-domination-man-over-man-inspire-love-freedom/5787450/

3. a. O.

4. a. O.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

  • Posted in Deutsch
  • Comments Off on Wer die Welt ändern will, muss den Menschen ändern!

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 with a lot of money and influence, who are not well-disposed towards the rest of humanity and only have their own profit in mind, are trying in various ways to “unhinge” the world. The world war against Russia is one of them. The former president of Greenpeace, Dr Patrick Moore, recently said that the elites had a “suicide pact” to reduce the world’s population: “We are now faced with a situation where a large number of very powerful organisations and elites at international and national levels are calling for policies that are basically a suicide pact. Basically a kind of death wish.” (1) Concerned contemporaries would like to stop this destructive process quickly and permanently. But the question is: how?

Since history is a work of mankind, mankind must be changed in order to change the world.

Well-intentioned appeals often miss their target. Modern scientific psychology, on the other hand, offers a suitable set of tools. In order for man to be won over to a humane, peaceful and free society and to set himself in motion, he must be enlightened about what is going on in the world as well as knowing his own nature, his mental make-up as well as his ways of reacting and those of others.

When this person then approaches the problem of war, for example, he is able to distinguish: Which people are waging war? Is it only the others, the politicians, the war leaders, or are we ourselves also part of it? For example, the mother who sent her sons to the “field of honour” and then wore a black armband “in proud mourning”?

Or the generation that went through the First World War and then marched into the Second, leaving father and son on the “field of honour”? And what about the priest and the church blessing the arms?

With psychology, he would have a compass with which to properly classify human agency.

Scientific psychology

Psychology is a science about man, about human nature: how he becomes, how he grows up, what experiences he has, how he finds his way in life. His experiences are imparted to him primarily by his parents, but also by his teachers. It is then the product of his experiences and impressions in childhood.

Already in the first years of life – at the age of five to six, when it enters kindergarten – the child has a compass. It then knows how to behave; also about the other child, about father, mother and children. It also has an opinion about the other child, about father, mother and siblings. It already has its character, its traits and knows its position in the world.

In medicine, man was not allowed to get to know man – his organs and his whole inner being – not to study him. The Church was against studying the human being for certain reasons. It was only when the necessity was recognised that corpses were stolen and doctors began to study the human being. Medicine has only progressed because it has recognised the function of the body.

Today, scientific psychology wants to explore the mental and spiritual life of the human being: his thoughts, his feelings and his experiences. Once you understand the human being’s feelings and ways of reacting and recognise how he grows up, how he sees the world and what goes on inside him, then many things become clear. It is then a different capacity for thinking and feeling. One will understand oneself and the other, society and the whole world correctly.

Enlightenment and education

Accordingly, enlightenment and education are the most important measures that can be taken, for example, against war and all other inhumane and freedom-stealing “orders” of the corrupt authorities (2).

The authoritarian education of the past created a type of human being who only knew the categories of “ruling” and “serving”. No wonder that this man could neither solve social problems nor eliminate war. Religious and social ideologies as well as privileges in social life prevent man from understanding the unity of the human race (3). Thus second thoughts are sown among those who would depend on it to secure a tolerable existence on this earth.

Today we know that only with psychological methods of education – renunciation of inappropriate authority and the use of violence as well as an understanding of the child’s soul – can one educate people who will be immune to the entanglements of power madness and no longer possess a “subject mentality” (4).

It is not yet possible to say when the conscience of humanity, whose call of admonition goes through the centuries, will finally make itself heard. But since the existence of the human race hangs on the question of whether mankind will profess all-human solidarity to a far greater degree than hitherto, we should all leave no stone unturned in taking the appropriate psychological measures.

*

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 (specialising in clinical, educational, media and individual psychology): Clinical, educational, media and individual psychology). As a retiree, he worked for many years as a psychotherapist in his own practice in Lindau on Lake Constance. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral education in values and an education for public spirit and peace.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) https://www.globalresearch.ca/former-greenpeace-president-dr-patrick-moore-says-elites-have-suicide-pact-reduce-world-population/5787942/

(2) https://www.globalresearch.ca/will-enlightenment-psychological-education-methods-push-back-domination-man-over-man-inspire-love-freedom/5787450/

(3) op. cit.

(4) op. cit.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on If You Want to Change the World, You Have to Change Mankind! Enlightenment and Education

How We Fell Into the Covid Plandemic

July 30th, 2022 by Alex Krainer

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 2020 SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been a profoundly traumatizing experience for many people around the world. Working in concert, health authorities in most nations unleashed a Pandora’s Box of ruin and destruction upon their citizens: hundreds of millions have lost their livelihoods, businesses, their homes, and their physical and mental health. Some of that damage could take a generation to overcome. For millions, the experience was fatal.

Among more vulnerable populations, more than 200 million were pushed into extreme poverty and 130 million into hunger. Our environment fared no better: trillions of disposable face masks and billions of test kits ended up in oceans, waterways and landfills around the world.

How could all this happen?

How could policy response to a supposed health crisis turn out so extremely destructive?

And how did so many of us buy into it all and comply with the program? By today we have some answers to these questions.

The pandemic was orchestrated to launch a covert agenda against the peoples of the world. The health emergency was used to justify the radical rollback of civil liberties and to introduce an authoritarian new world government and a global police state.

And no, they did not overreact out of an abundance of caution but with calculated malice.

Public health experts knew, or should have known that lockdowns would be counterproductive and destructive: this is the core public health curriculum.

In 2006, the Bush administration commissioned one of the world’s foremost authorities on infectious disease, dr. Donald Henderson to advise on infectious disease outbreaks, including lockdowns, quarantines and business closure. Dr. Henderson concluded his report as follows:

“Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics, or other adverse events, respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted…”

It was every public health official’s solemn duty to know this curriculum.

As to why so many among us did not suspect foul play, the answer is that it is not in our nature to even consider such evil. As J. Edgar Hoover said, “The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous, he cannot believe it exists.”

Our evolutionary history formed us to be predominantly gentle and trusting creatures; we spent 99% of that time living in small groups with our next of kin. Mutual support was the foundation of social life, and trust could be matter of survival. As a result, most of us are practically hardwired to trust figures of authority and to cooperate with them to assure the group’s safety against external threats.

Show me the incentives, and I’ll show you the outcome

But our trust and cooperation was exploited in a ruthless and cynical way by those who planned to use Covid 19 health “emergency” in order to force us and our children into their control matrix. The conspirators drew on historical experience, extensive planning and multiple simulations to plan their gambit. This particularly involved structuring the requisite command and control hierarchies and incentive systems which ensured that at all levels, including the policy makers, financiers, public health bureaucracies, law enforcement and the media all worked in lock-step towards the planned objectives.

Charlie Munger, believed by many to be one of the wisest men in finance said, “show me the incentives and I’ll show you the outcome.” Consider the case of the bubonic plague outbreak in Geneva in 1530, described in the 1867 book, “Chroniques de Genève.” (p. 396-402):

[Google translation] “When the bubonic plague struck Geneva in 1530, everything was ready. They opened an entire hospital for the plague victims. With doctors, paramedics and nurses. The traders contributed, the magistrate gave subsidies every month. The sick always gave money, and if so one of them died alone, all the goods went to the hospital.

But then a disaster struck: the plague was dying out, while the subsidies depended on the number of sick people. In 1530 there was no question of right and wrong for the Geneva hospital staff. If the plague produces money, then the plague is good. And then the doctors got organized. At first, they just poisoned patients to increase the mortality statistics, but they soon realized that the statistics they were not to be concerned only with mortality, but mortality from plague. So they began to cut the bubbles from the bodies of the dead, dry them, grind them in a mortar and give them to other patients as medicine. Then they started dusting off clothes, handkerchiefs and garters.

But somehow the plague continued to subside. Apparently, the dried buboes weren’t working well. Doctors went to town and scattered bubonic powder on the doorknobs at night, selecting those homes where they could then profit from them. As an eyewitness wrote of these events [stated], “this has been hidden for some time, but the devil is more concerned with increasing the number of sins than with hiding them.” … one of the doctors became so brash and lazy that he decided not to wander around the city at night, but simply to throw dust on the crowd during the day.” …

The epilogue of the story was that the perpetrators got caught and all met a cruel, gruesome punishment. But the story of pathogens and politics didn’t end there.

Of pathogens and politics

In 2013, the PLOS journal published an important research paper titled, “Pathogens and Politics: Further Evidence That Parasite Prevalence Predicts Authoritarianism.” Its authors examined 90 cultural populations along two variables of their primary concern:

(1) authoritarian governance and

(2) historical prevalence of infectious disease.

They found that the correlation between infectious diseases and authoritarian governments was as high as 73%! In social sciences, this is an astonishingly high correlation; it is even higher than the correlation between IQ and test scores. As Harry Truman said, “The only thing new in the world is the history you don’t know.”

The history we didn’t know is the long-established tendency of autocratic rulers invoking invisible enemies to stoke fear, declare emergencies and coerce compliance in the name of greater good.

But fear or no fear, we must never abdicate our responsibility to our children and future generations – the responsibility to be vigilant and defend our hard-won liberties from would-be usurpers. We must defend liberty, if necessary with our lives, for if we fail then that one thing that makes life worth living could be lost for our children and their children. These are times to be brave and vigilant, to ask hard questions and demand truthful answers, to research and share our knowledge with all of humanity.

Today we are equipped with information resources and means of communications that were unfathomable to prior generations. We must make the best possible use of them and ensure that we gift future generations a much, much better future. With everything we have at our disposal, there can be no excuse ; armed with truth and courage, we will succeed.

*

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 is from LifeSiteNews

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 Great Reset is enjoying the summer heat, the diversion of people on vacation in the Global North, to quietly and invisibly use some of its deadliest weapons on the people at large: Fear and engineered weather patterns.

The fear campaign is revving up, to be at full speed and full impact in the fall – Monkeypox, a new Omicron corona.

On July 23, 2022, the WHO has already declared monkeypox as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). And this with worldwide less than 20,000 reported cases.

They were reported, but are they real? They were apparently tested with the same invalid PCR test as is still used for determining Covid infections – a test totally unsuited, even by CDC (later retracted) for viral detection of this kind, resulting in up to 97% false positives.

But how many people know this?

And even if they do know about the fraudulent test – they still believe in the Monkeypox danger.

They still believe that their government is honest, defending their, the people’s best interest. The next vaxx campaign is already being prepared. You may never know the difference between the concoction they plan to inject into your arm. Is the monkeypox vaxx different from the toxic fluid they inject for covid?

Frankly, nobody knows, because the composition of the vaxx is never published. It took about half a year until the Quinta Columna” of Spain, a team medical doctors and virologists, was able to analyze a vial, in which they found graphene oxide, a highly toxic and electromagnetic substance.

Precisely the substance which was later identified with cases of Myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle that may lead to heart failure.

Who knows what will be the substance put into the monkeypox vaxxes?

Monkeypox was announced by WHO DG Dr. Tedros as affecting mostly (90%) “male who have sex with other male”, you may call it in other terms “homosexuals”.

Yet, Tedros declared Monkeypox as a Public Health Emergency — the drumbeat of fear-fear-fear. A perfect weapon of mass destruction (WMD).

At the same time, they are also preparing you for the fourth covid booster. At the beginning its especially for the elderly as they are the most vulnerable. Of course, they care for the elderly, the “cream of crop” of the “useless eaters” (Klaus Schwab advisor, Israeli historian, Yuval Noah Harari).

In Chicago they are standing in line for the monkeypox vaxx, all in face masks. There is an apparent shortage. So, people want to grab a vaxx as long as they are available.

And just in this morning, announced by WHO’s Mr. Tedros, there is a new, so far unknown version of hepatitis making the round. Be careful – more news will be released as it become available.

The media keeps bulldozing over the fact that the poisonous covid-vaxx, and probably all subsequent “everything” vaxxes, is a killer vaxx, has already killed millions, if not tens or hundreds of millions, way more than allegedly died from the covid-19 disease.

It is all terribly fraudulent, manipulated and convoluted, confusing, so that people, rather won’t question, even if they feel, sense that something is not quite right. They believe in their government, whom they believed all their life that it has your best interest in mind. They would not dare to think differently. How could they? – They have democratically “elected” their governments, and people’s tax money pays their lush salaries – so, no question “they [the governments] have my best interest in mind”.

This cognitive dissonance is difficult to beat.

If you told the “believers”, that unless they stop believing and take their destiny into their own hands, there will be many more plandemics, and many more different vaxxes and boosters. They plan to literally inject you full with poison, so your immune system will collapse and you may die. If you tell them, the “believers” will most likely call you a “conspiracy theorist”. That is another weapon, one that kills the truth.

Which leads to one of the Reset’s key objectives: Massive reduction of world population.

It’s already ongoing, namely through the first heavily coerced phase of vaxxing at least some 50% to 60% – maybe more – of the Global North, in the last 18 months, since December 2020. This is when the vaxx campaigns started in all 194 WHO member countries, simultaneously, or what the 2010 Rockefeller Report very pointedly calls “the Lockstep Phase”.

In a 2010 TED Talk, Bill Gates propagated, if we are doing a real good job vaccinating, the world population could be reduced by 10% to 15%.

The internet reference to several versions of this video have been “fact-checked” out – i.e., censored.

See quotation in the following video starting at 04:21. See also screenshot of transcript of quotation below

TED Talk at 04:21:

Transcript of quotation from the video

The Fourth Vaccine Booster

According to Mike Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pizer, many of those who have been vaxxed and even more so, of those who have already received two or three so-called “boosters”, and are waiting for getting their fourth one, may die within two to three years, from causes and diseases linked to the injections, but the cause of death may be difficult to associate with the vaxxes.

Already today we see a flareup of cardiac diseases, like myocarditis. The heart inflammation can reduce the heart’s ability to pump blood, leading to heart failure and sudden death. Many athletes have collapsed on the sports arena, and many have eventually succumbed to heart failure. Since the vaxx drive began, the heart failure rate of sports people has gone up by several thousand percent.

Other vaxx-related diseases may cause blood clots, leading to thrombosis, affect kidneys, the liver, the reproductive system of both women and men. The vaxxes may cause miscarriages. They are also several thousand percent higher than before the vaxx injection – and they may cause outright infertility.

Different kinds of cancers, including blood cancers, such as leukemia, lymphoma and myeloma, as well as lung and stomach cancers have also been observed as being rapidly rising. One of the key caner-causing elements is the graphene oxide which is contained in many vaxx injections.

Let’s also keep in mind that we are confronted with different types of vaxxes. Not all vials contain the same toxic substances. They can cause different diseases. Their effectiveness is being tested by the dark elite-cult in this first phase of what is also called UN Agenda 2030, alias the Great Reset.

When you read all of this, you may become scared. Fear is detrimental for your immune system, for your health. So no Fear, please!

Remember Fear is one of their key weapons. But awareness, rather than fear, is also a defense-weapon.

Well-nourished people usually have a fairly good immune system, that will defend the body first from covid, and if covid occurs, will heal it like it heals from the common flu. Ivermectin is a medication that has proven very effective. It may be banned in your neighborhood, because they don’t want you to heal. They want you to be vaxxed.

There are plenty of inexpensive but effective over-the-counter remedies, like Vitamins C, D, Zinc, ginger and more.

While there is no concrete evidence that it has been applied, Environmental Modification Technologies (ENMOD) namely Engineered Weather may be another weapon of mass destruction.

Food Shortages

The heatwaves currently affecting the Global North, combined with unheard-of flashfloods and inundations, will certainly impact agricultural production. And as a side line, people’s economies. Many may lose everything; the farmers their lifelong subsistence.

Mass destruction of agricultural harvests, enhanced by forced reduction of agricultural activities, like what is currently ongoing in the Netherlands, is detrimental for food security.

Hundreds of thousands of farmers are protesting in the street and throughout Holland, since weeks against these insane government policies. They follow the WEF / Bill Gates dictate of worldwide food reduction to provoke food shortages; hardly reported by the mainstream.

The protests have so far been to no avail. Australia is apparently taking similar measures, with the result of alike protest events. The “leaders” of both countries are close to Klaus Schwab and the WEF, following the Reset mandates to the letter.

Other food reductions or harvest demolitions, include the withholding of grain shipments, like those blocked in Russia and Ukraine, due to the west-provoked and induced Ukraine war; outright destruction by fire and floods of grain and other food stocks, as well as massive apparently “heat-related”, but yet unexplained deaths of livestock – “several thousand cows” – died suddenly in southwestern Kansas, in June 2022. See this.

The NYT reports on 28 July, 2022, from southeastern Kentucky: “One of the worst, most devastating flooding events,” in state history, the governor said. Three people died and about 23,000 residents were without power. Cellphone service was down in some areas. See this.

Agricultural production losses by the floods are not even mentioned in the NYT Breaking News.

Interfering with agricultural production may lead to severe food shortages and in turn to famine – and death. Famine and malnutrition are already severely affecting the Global South.

Oxfam reports on 17 May 2022, “one person is likely dying of hunger every 48 seconds in drought-ravaged Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia, according to estimates by Oxfam and Save the Children”. These, they say, are the “world’s repeated failure to stave off preventable disasters”. See this.

Yes, preventable. But do those who pretend to rule the world, those behind the WEF, the Reset and the UN Agenda 2030, really want to “stave off preventable disasters?”. It looks rather like they induce such disasters to meet the Reset’s agenda.

Farmland Ownership

According to a January 2021 article by ‘The Land Report’, Gates owned 242,000 acres (close to 100,000 ha, or about 1,000 square kilometers) of farmland through two investment management firms – Cottonwood Ag Management and Cascade Investment. At that time, what Mother Jones calls an “Empire of Dirt” was worth some US$ 5 billion. See this.

Since then, Gates’ farmland acreage ownership tops 300,000 acres, making him the largest private landowner in the US.

Gates is not the only billionaire purchasing farmland. Big Tech and Big Finance are also part of the party.

Pension Funds and other insurance companies, as well as banking conglomerates have purchased multi-billions worth of farmland, around the world. Majority ownership of the insurance and banking sectors are the renown villains, the inter-connected financial giants, BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street.

Knowing that Big Finance supports the WEF’s Great Reset, it would be foolish to expect that the goal and purpose of this private ownership of farmland, worldwide, is to assure a balanced and fully nutritional world population. Just the opposite. For them, Mother Earth’s population is way too large.

If We, the People, are aware and understand the planned evil machinations going on under the narrative of “climate change” – another neoliberal money-making proposition of the ruling elite – then, We, the People, can intervene, stopping the lies – by allying with each other and building a new society, a system of People: Working by the People, for the People.

Easier said than done? Maybe. But the first step is to recognize our “enemy” – to become independent from our governments, to separate from our ancient believes that governments are our “protectors”; to realize that they are NOT; that they mean harm not good for Us, the People. Because they have been coopted or corrupted, coerced or threatened, by the self-proclaimed world powers too what they are being told, or else. The ongoing and expanding fake plandemics and fraudulent vaxx campaigns should be a lesson.

Did you know, that WHO had already in 2014 declared, that the 2020-2030 will be the Decade of Vaccination. You may not find this reference anymore on internet, for obvious reasons.

When we detach from the current government structures and the accompanying lie-propaganda narrative, and form local associations working in solidarity, embracing a new societal concept, “local production, for local markets, with local money and a local banking system that works for the people” – we may create a new momentum, overcoming and beating their current weapons of mass destruction – fear and engineered weather-induced famine.

*

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.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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.

***

U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping held their fifth call today since Biden’s inauguration. According to the White House readout of the conversation, on the thorny issue of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s reported trip to Taiwan, Biden told Xi simply “that the United States policy has not changed.” Xi, in contrast, was direct and blunt: “Those who play with fire will perish by it. It is hoped that the US will be clear-eyed about this,” with Beijing’s readout adding China should be “prepared for the worst scenario, especially military preparation,” as the best way to deter the U.S.

What happens in August will have much of the world’s attention: will Rep. Nancy Pelosi defer to the Pentagon’s admonition that this is “not a good idea” and cancel the trip—or ignore Xi’s threats and visit Taiwan, potentially sparking a military clash in the Taiwan Strait? The stakes couldn’t be higher.

As the United States and China careen towards a potential showdown over Pelosi’s proposed visit, much of establishment Washington wants to resolve the issue with its knee-jerk favorite tool: flexing military muscles. Over-reliance on coercion as the lead tool in international relations has served U.S. interests poorly over the past two decades.

Especially at a time of economic turmoil in much of the Western world – along with the persistent threat of the war between Ukraine and Russia spilling over the borders into NATO territory – the United States cannot afford to see its already-tense relationship with China devolve into a potential military clash. Yet hawks in both Washington and Beijing seem intent on pushing the envelope of such risk. Speaker Pelosi’s potential visit to Taipei is the latest flashpoint, but far from the only one by U.S. and allied leaders in recent months.

Over the past number of months, a raft of former high-ranking U.S. officials has visited Taiwan. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, along with former Deputy National Security Advisor and Undersecretary of Defense Meghan O’Sullivan and Michelle Flournoy, went at Biden’s behest in February. In March, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made the trip, and earlier this month, former Secretary of Defense Mike Esper did the same. On Thursday, a rare high-level visit from Japanese lawmakers and two former ministers of defense met with the Taiwanese president discussing regional security.

China, which has long claimed it views such high-level visits as contributing to “separatist” elements on Taiwan in seeking independence, has reacted with unusually strong vitriol against reports that Pelosi may visit Taipei. Wang Wenbin, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said if Pelosi goes through with the visit, “China will take strong countermeasures. We mean what we say.” Col. Tan Kefei, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, ominously warned that “the Chinese military will never sit idle (if Pelosi visits Taiwan) and will take strong measures to thwart any external interference.”

Perhaps strongest of all, however, Hu Xijin, long-time editor of the semi-official mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, the Global Times, tweeted “the mainland’s response to Pelosi’s visit will be unprecedented and will involve shocking military response.” Without question, the United States should not form its foreign policy based on whether another country does or doesn’t like our actions.

But Washington very much must base its actions on policies that have the best chance to produce positive outcomes for our country, strengthening U.S. national security and economic opportunity. Needlessly poking China on an emotional issue that could result in military action against our nation, however, is unwise and must be avoided. Unfortunately, the way this situation has unfolded has put both Pelosi and the United States in a tough situation – one that must be navigated with skill and wisdom.

Because Beijing’s demarches have been so firm and public, Pelosi cannot easily back out of the trip. Already she has significant support from two notable Republicans, Pompeo and Sen. Tom Cotton, both of whom have strongly and publicly advised her to make the trip. Pelosi will almost certainly face public censure from the right if she is seen as “backing down” to Chinese bullying. Yet, if she does proceed with the visit, the U.S. and Taiwan face the risk that China might make good on its threats and take some sort of military action. Wars have been started over much less.

Recent satellite imagery has shown increasing Chinese air force activity at the Longtian Airbase – a seven minute flight to Taiwan – featuring a tarmac that was “packed with Flanker-series fighter jets, Russian-made Su-27s and the Chinese variants of J-11 or J-16 series.”

Meanwhile, the United States has reportedly begun military movement of its own, dispatching an aircraft carrier group to the South China Sea. Defense officials told the Associated Press that if Pelosi makes the trip to Taiwan, the Pentagon would also dispatch “fighter jets, ships, surveillance assets and other military systems would likely be used to provide overlapping rings of protection for her flight to Taiwan.” Owing to such volatile conditions in and around the Taiwan Straits, the wisest thing the Administration and Pelosi could do is to scotch the trip.

Face-saving ways can be found – such as “postponing the trip until a later time” – but this specific trip should be canceled for one overriding reason: the risk to American security represented by Pelosi’s visit is in no way commensurate with any potential benefit to the U.S. In fact, there is virtually no upside for America with this visit. As pointed out above, there has been no shortage of official and semi-official contacts between Washington and Taipei recently that no additional benefit could accrue to the U.S. by adding the Speaker of the House to the list.

But her visit could result in a belligerent China taking rash action that could change the security status quo in the Taiwan Straits, putting both American and Taiwanese interests in danger. The risk simply isn’t worth it.

*

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.

Now a 1945 Contributing Editor, Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of “The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America.” Follow him @DanielLDavis

Featured image is from OneWorld

US-NATO Intent upon Boycotting Russia-India Relations

July 29th, 2022 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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 US seems once again interested in boycotting good relations between Russia and India. Congressmen in Washington are proposing that New Delhi be included in the NATO-Plus group, guaranteeing a series of privileges in military cooperation. Obviously, the military ties between both countries are not recent, but this type of maneuver precisely at the current moment indicates the concern on the part of the US with the rapprochement between India and Russia.

Ro Khanna, Representative of California’s 17th Congressional District, proposed to the US Congress that an amendment be made to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to include India as a Major non-NATO ally (MNNA). Khanna hopes that in this way bilateral cooperation would be sufficiently strengthened and the trade in military items would be facilitated, reducing bureaucracy and consolidating an alliance between both powers.

“I have worked on trying to add India as the sixth country to that [in addition to Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Israel, and South Korea], and that would facilitate and make it easier to have this growing Defense Partnership and make sure that we’re moving India towards more of a Defense Security alignment with the United States and Russia (…) The reason it’s in the interests of the United States is we need a strong partnership with India. Defence partnership, a strategic partnership, especially because we are two democratic nations and with the rise of China and with the rise of Putin this alliance is critical for the United States”, he said.

Although his proposal is being resumed and re-discussed at the moment, it must be mentioned that the bill had already been submitted for evaluation two years ago. The fact that the bill was not a topic of great discussion at the time and that it has returned to the public sphere precisely now indicates that the rapprochement between Russia and India and New Delhi’s insubordination to Western sanctions are worrying Washington.

It is also interesting to note that as an Indian American himself, Khanna has been prominent in US politics for his struggle to improve the ties between his country and his family’s nation. It was also Khanna who submitted a proposal to the House of Representatives for India to be “allowed” to bypass some of the recently imposed sanctions against Russia, under the Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). India’s purchase of S-400 missile defense systems from Russia was on the verge of significantly deteriorating bilateral US-India diplomacy, but some US congressmen and government’s officials have been working in order to maintain stability – and in this sense Khanna’s proposal was approved on 14 July.

In fact, both the act to protect India from the sanctions applied to trade with Russia and the possible appointment of New Delhi to NATO Plus are measures whose central objective is the same: to try, through diplomatic means, to reverse the scenario of rapprochement between India and Russia. With this, it is hoped to form an intercontinental alliance in which the US and India will be strategic partners against their “common enemies”. Washington is realizing that it cannot “dissuade” India but must offer diplomatic goodwill gestures to try to gain advantages in this scenario.

The main problem with this American strategy is that it is wrong in its own narrative. There is no such thing as a “Russian-Chinese moment that threatens the US-India alliance,” as Khanna puts it. What exists is a moment of transition to a multipolar geopolitical order, absolutely decentralized and marked by multiple strategic partnerships focused solely on pragmatism. Not only have Russia and China come closer, but India has actively participated in this process, both with its participation in trade with Russia and in BRICS’ projects and by significantly reducing its tensions with China. Therefore, any strategy whose rhetorical center is the notion that it is possible to form an “US-India alliance” against a “Russian-Chinese alliance” will fail.

Another point to be criticized is that the US continues to ignore the Indian diplomatic tradition, whose pragmatic principles do not allow any policy of automatic alignment. New Delhi will continue to negotiate what interests it with any country that offers favorable conditions. The Indian State sees itself as a regional power, heir to a civilization of thousands of years and ready to play an international leading role. This Indian (geo)political mentality will not change regardless of the prevailing global scenario. So, even if eventually India become a MNNA, this will not change the sovereigntist stance of the Indian government.

In this sense, if the US really wants to get closer to India, it must not just “liberate” it from sanctions or place it in a group of “NATO’s external allies” (which does not even include a collective security pact). On the contrary, the US must respect Indian sovereignty and the right of New Delhi to maintain multiple simultaneous partnerships and a non-aligned position on the global arena.

*

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.

Featured image is from thewire.in

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 US aircraft carrier and its strike group have returned to the South China Sea after a port call in Singapore, deploying in the disputed region as tensions with China rise over a possible visit to Taiwan by congressional leader Nancy Pelosi.

Officials with the US Navy’s Seventh Fleet confirmed the deployment of the USS Ronald Reagan to the vital trade route but did not comment on questions about tensions over the trip by Pelosi, speaker of the US House of Representatives.

“USS Ronald Reagan and her strike group are underway, operating in the South China Sea following a successful port visit to Singapore,” Commander Hayley Sims said in a statement to Reuters.

Sims added that the Reagan “is continuing normal, scheduled operations as part of her routine patrol in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific”.

When asked for comment, China’s foreign ministry said the US was once again “flexing its muscles” in the South China Sea with the Reagan’s sailing.

“It is clear from this for everyone to see who is the biggest threat to the South China Sea and the Asian region’s peace and stability,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told a regular briefing on Thursday.

News of the deployment of the Japan-based carrier comes as Beijing and Washington trade diplomatic blows over Pelosi’s visit, reportedly due to take place next month after being postponed earlier in the year. Pelosi has not confirmed the possible trip.

US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin said on Wednesday he had spoken with Pelosi and given her a security assessment but any comments about a trip she might make to Taiwan would have to come from her office.

The tensions come as US President Joe Biden and China’s Xi Jinping begin their fifth call as leaders on Thursday, which the White House said started at 8:33am (1233 GMT).

US officials said the call would have a broad agenda, including discussion of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which China has yet to condemn.

China has issued stern warnings to US officials about Pelosi’s possible visit to Taiwan, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman said on Monday.

Beijing considers Taiwan to be part of its territory and has never renounced using force to bring the island under its control.

The Reagan strike group had been operating in the South China Sea earlier in the month before heading for a five-day rest stop in Singapore at the weekend.

Singapore-based security scholar Ian Storey said he would expect Chinese vessels to shadow the strike group, based on recent actions as well as the latest tensions.

“Most of the time those interactions are safe and professional, but there’s always a risk they could get too close and spark a confrontation,” said Storey, of the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

US officials on Tuesday accused China of increased “provocations” against rival claimants in the South China Sea and said its “aggressive and irresponsible behavior” meant it was only a matter of time before there was a major incident or accident.

*

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 is from New Eastern Outlook

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.

***

Judicial Watch announced today it received 112 pages from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that show top officials being pressured by “companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense.”

The records were produced to Judicial Watch in response to a February 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) that was filed after HHS failed to respond to a September 3, 2021, FOIA request for records of communication from the former director and deputy director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, respectively (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00292)). 

Drs. Gruber and Krause reportedly resigned during the White House’s push to approve the COVID-19 vaccine “booster shots.” 

On September 13, 2021, Gruber and Krause were among a group of resigning doctors who agreed that, “Available evidence doesn’t yet indicate a need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots among the general population …” 

The records include an August 25, 2021, email by Marion Gruber to her boss, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Peter Marks:

Over the last couple of days, Janssen has bombarded us with emails regarding their booster dose studies.

*

I am also very concerned that companies (such as Pfizer and Janssen) are trying to put pressure on OVRR [Office of Vaccines Research and Review] by way of PR [public relations]. We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense (e.g., Sep 20)…. It appears that at least Pfizer’s data will not be aligned with this approach and the ‘n’ [test numbers] they have is grossly insufficient. Obviously, we have to review the data but we have taken a peak and have serious concerns.

Lastly, and this is my personal opinion, data we have seen so far from various companies (Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna) appear to suggest that boosters are not needed.

In an email exchange on August 27, 2012, Gruber replies to an email from Maureen Hess, a communications specialist in Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: “Well, the message appears to be ‘total buy-in in the need for boosters,’ this is not how I am writing the BD [likely board decision], I am trying to take a more neutral approach. This piece sounds as if we already decided to approve this supplement.”

Hess responds, “Okay, I’ll make some additional edits (but JW [likely Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock] was included on this statement – https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0818-covid-19-booster-shots.html – so our edits may be rejected above us.” After sending more emails about edits Hess made, Gruber replies, “From my perspective this is as good as it can get. Obviously, this statements [sic] puts us into a real bind but the damage is already done.”

In an Aug. 20, 2021, email exchange Dr. Doran Fink, the Deputy Director of the FDA’s Division of Vaccines and Related Products Applications raises questions regarding new data, that Moderna was submitting to FDA about its COVID vaccine. Fink told Drs. Gruber, Krause and other colleagues:

I had to bite my tongue when Peter [likely Dr. Peter Marks, Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research] mentioned this morning we wouldn’t be doing rushed reviews anymore so as not to ask about the booster doses that the administration promised to everyone by Sept 20!

*

And then there is the question of the data that will support these booster doses – maybe I’m wrong, but my understanding is that Pfizer is proposing that their sBLA include the Phase 1 booster data from a grand total of 23 subjects. I’m not sure what Moderna will have, but the data Fauci presented in the press conference from NIAID studies, which was ~25 subjects per treatment arm.

Gruber states in an August 17, 2021, email “They [Dr. Doran’s team] fully understand that the Acting Commissioner would like to approve this product [Pfizer Covid booster vaccine] very soon and are trying their best to complete their review and assessment, while at the same time, maintaining our high standards and scientific and clinical integrity.”

Philip Krause,  in an August 10, 2021 email, complains: “It sounds like Peter [likely Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks] thinks he has taken over all vaccine operations, not just the Pfizer BLA [Biologics License Application] …”

On August 23, 2021, Dr. Arnold Monto, Professor in the Department of Epidemiology of the University of Michigan School of Public Health, emails Drs. Gruber and Krause using the subject “VRBPAC and boosters:”

The Surgeon General last night made a statement that the FDA and CDC advisory committees would be reviewing Hope that he misspoke about the VRBPAC (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee) Doesn’t seem to be enough time to get it organized Just got asked about flu vaccination and Covid boosters being given at the same time. Gave my personal information, don’t

Gruber then replies to Monto: “We will be discussing the ‘booster question’ and related submissions including whether VRBPAC should be held. We do not know yet and you are right that timing will be an issue once again.”

On September 22, 2021, the FDA approved use of a booster dose of the Pfizer drug. According to the organization’s news release, the FDA, “amended the emergency use authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to allow for use of a single booster dose, to be administered at least six months after completion of the primary series” for people at “high risk” of “severe COVID-19.” 

“These FDA documents confirm a politicized approval process for the controversial Covid-19 vaccine booster shots,” says Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is a scandal that it took months and a federal lawsuit to these troubling facts about this unprecedented and seemingly never-ending vaccine operation.”

Through FOIA requests and lawsuits, Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:

  • Recently, NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
  • HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
  • NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
  • HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
  • HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
  • HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
  • University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records show the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
  • HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines show a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
  • Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) reveal safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
  • HHS records include emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
  • HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
  • Fauci emails include his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.

*

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 is from Children’s Health Defense

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.

***

New Delhi described plans by Islamabad and Beijing to involve third countries in the multi-billion-dollar China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), that passes through Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, as “illegal” and “unacceptable”. With CPEC pivotal for the development of western China and Beijing’s ambition to establish its own globalised transportation network, the Belt and Road Initiative, essentially hinging on being able to traverse Kashmiri territory currently occupied by the Pakistani military, introducing third countries to CPEC, such as Turkey, has the potential to engulf the region in war.

Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesman, Arindam Bagchi, said on July 26 that such activities under CPEC are “inherently illegal, illegitimate and unacceptable”, and will be treated accordingly by India. “India firmly and consistently opposes projects in the so-called CPEC, which are in Indian territory that has been illegally occupied by Pakistan.”

India’s warning came after reports emerged that Pakistan and China decided to welcome interested third countries to participate in CPEC during a Joint Working Group meeting on International Cooperation and Coordination on July 22.

“We have seen reports on encouraging proposed participation of third countries in so-called CPEC projects. Any such actions by any party directly infringe on India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Bagchi stated.

CPEC was launched in 2013 to improve Pakistan’s road, rail and energy transportation infrastructure so that the deep-sea port of Gwadar can connect with China’s western Xinjiang province. The port of Gwadar has effectively become a Chinese port in Pakistani territory, and cuts down the transportation of goods coming and going from western China by thousands of kilometres.

The Indian warning comes as Chinese fighter jets continue to fly close to Indian military positions on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh. According to Indian government sources, as quoted by local media: “Chinese fighter jets, including J-11, are flying close to the LAC. Cases of violation of the 10 km Confidence Building Major line have been reported in this area in recent days.” Chinese analysts claim that Beijing were provoked into these flight manoeuvres because of India upgrading its military infrastructure in Ladakh.

Source: InfoBrics

None-the-less, what it does highlight is that the Kashmir region, including Ladakh, is already in a tense situation as the three nuclear powered states of India, China and Pakistan continue to compete. With China and Pakistan not only cooperating in the economic sphere, but also the military, introducing a third country like Turkey to CPEC, which already strongly supports Islamabad’s position on Kashmir, is a scenario that India will find intolerable.

Addressing a ceremony on May 20 to mark the launch of PNS Badr in the port city of Karachi, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said turning CPEC into a trilateral project with Pakistan, Turkey and China would be beneficial for the region.

“The ongoing China Pakistan Economic Corridor was set to translate regional connectivity and a trilateral arrangement with the inclusion of Turkey could prove beneficial for the people in the region,” he said at the time.

In the same speech, Sharif stressed that the multi-dimensional cooperation between Pakistan and Turkey in defence, foreign policy and public welfare was reaching new heights. He said the launch of the ship was a “moment of pride for the entire Pakistani nation and the naval forces of the two countries.” The Pakistani prime minister then thanked Turkey for always supporting his country’s positions against India.

“Turkey and Pakistan, as ‘one nation living in two countries’, and even before the creation of Pakistan, the Muslims of the sub-continent supported the cause of their Turkish brethren,” said Sharif.

With India already competing with the Chinese-Pakistani alliance over controlling Kashmir, the introduction of third parties to CPEC, especially Turkey, is a matter of national security. Turkey proves in deed through its illegal invasion and occupation of northern Cyprus, funding of terrorists in Syria, and direct intervention in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, that it is willing to take hard action to defend its interests and allies.

Although conflict with a nuclear-powered state like India is a different prospect to fighting Armenia, Turkey has deep experience through the wars in Syria and Libya in funding, arming and training jihadist forces. It is this experience in weaponising Islamists, in which Pakistan is a hotbed for, that concerns New Delhi.

It is not known to what extent India will react if third parties are introduced to the CPEC project, but it can be expected there will be an escalation in military readiness if Turkey were to be involved and use Pakistan as a spearhead against India. As Pakistan reverses its nation-building mythology from Arabism to Turkism, Turkey has embraced this identity shift and sees the South Asian country as part of the wider Turkic world. This has naturally put Kashmir in the eyes of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and therefore at odds with India.

If Islamabad and Beijing were to go ahead with plans to introduce third parties to CPEC, especially with a state like Turkey, it will have the potential to see three nuclear countries at war as India too has demonstrated in action that it is willing to defend its national security.

*

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.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Expanding the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Third Parties Could Lead to War in South Asia
  • Tags: , ,

A Tribute to My Wife Seung Eun : Emanuel Pastreich

July 29th, 2022 by Emanuel Pastreich

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).

***

Seung Eun passed away on July 28, 2022. Her legacy will live. Our thoughts are with Global Research author Emanuel Pastreich and the family of Seung Eun.

***

Born the fifth of six children to a mother who was fastidious about maintaining an orderly home, and sorry that she had not been able to attend high school, Seung-Eun had both a tremendous drive to learn and a humility about her remarkable insights into the nature of things.

Her father loved reading books, smoking cigarettes, and was generous, but silent, at the many lunches and dinners he arranged.

Seung-Eun was a deeply creative and loving woman, but her creativity was devoted to the spaces she inhabited and the subtle ways she expressed her love for those around her.

Family was the canvas on which she wrote her generous spirit broadly. Even in the midst of the worst setbacks, she found time for family, and managed to create a home. Marvelously and mysteriously, she found deep meaning in the smallest things and led us to understand better ourselves without ever speaking a word.

Seung-Eun 승은 was the name given to her by a Buddhist monk on a trip when she was 28 years old. She bravely decided one day that it would be her name and she never changed her mind. That alone is unusual in Korean society. Her original name was Lee Young-mi 이영미).

Although Seung-Eun grew up in a relatively well-to-do family, her father’s financial troubles meant that she suddenly lost everything at the start of college, and most of her wealthy friends abandoned her.

Some parts of that experience was something that we shared, and I think perhaps it was one of the reasons why she never left me, even under the most dire circumstances.

Seung-Eun made up her mind to study classical Korean music in college. Her parents were deeply worried as they thought the study of Western music would increase her chances of finding a good mate from a wealthy family.

And then she decided to marry me, and did so in spite of all the worries of her family.

She had a deep understanding of Korean music, of Korean traditional painting, and of Korean Buddhism. She was an excellent cook of Korean food and she knew exactly what each of her children enjoyed most. For her, art was life and life was art–but not in a conspicuous, ostentatious, sense.

She had a radiant smile, and a tremendous enthusiasm, that brought light, and energy, to the breakfast table, to the carefully laid out plates and cups in the cabinet, and to the cans and pasta stacked up in the pantry. She energized everything.

I met her in February, 1996, when I was studying in Korea for a year. She spoke no English and did not have any particular interest in the United States. I appreciated this quality immediately as I was tired of Koreans who took an unnatural interest in my sad and tired country.

But there was more. I was struck by the deep sense of respect that she showed for all people. The first time we had lunch together I noticed that she treated the humble woman running the little restaurant with a glowing warmth.

A slightly round face, brilliant eyes, perfect teeth, and a subtle beautiful voice defined Seung-Eun.

She had never visited the United States before she came to meet my parents in 1997. But although she could not speak a word, she had many of the characteristics I remember from my grandmother. She embraced my family as her family. It seemed as if the whole thing had been determined in advance at some ethereal level.

She was soon making all sorts of plans for our future. For my future, and for the children’s future. Some plans worked; some did not.

We ended up at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign in1998 and in that rural town, she made a wonderful home, filled with the art and the pottery she had collected over the years. That space, and others that she created later on, still haunt me.

She played elaborate games with the children, Benjamin (born 2001) and Rachel (born 2004). Engaging them in fantastic worlds was her specialty. And the snacks she offered up were created especially for then–and no one else.

She did not have large numbers of friends, but those to whom she was close, she was very close to. She made a special effort to establish friendships with the parents of our children’s friends. She did so, methodically, over decades.

After we moved to Washington D.C. in 2004, in the midst of yet more chaos, she created a regular family schedule and made the children feel that they were the center of the world–which they were, of course. It was a simple apartment in Falls Church, but everything was carefully arranged. The kids always knew she would be there for them and that she cared about them more than anything.

She was a great teacher. She had tremendous patience with the two of them and she tried always to figure out exactly what they needed. Teaching was not simply about things and numbers. I sensed that there was always a deep ethical component to teaching the children for her. And I also learned so much myself, without even noticing it. I would later realize just what a genius she had, how much smarter than just about anyone else she was. But I never, never perceived her genius at the moment. I only understood it much later.

She was not a teacher in the sense of a Ph.D at a university. She was a teacher who was effective precisely because her teaching was invisible.

When we moved to Korea in 2007, to the smaller city of Daejeon, suddenly lifted out of Washington D.C. and placed in a location that did not have many amenities, it was a bit of a shock for all of us. Moreover, the university, and the governor’s office, were not always friendly environments. But Seung-Eun was able to create a stable family environment anyway, one full of hidden sacred spaces, even when we had to move every year, or every nine months.

She became deeply involved in Buddhism while we lived in Daejeon. At her command, we all loaded up in the car and drove out to various temples deep in the mountains, especially to Bongamsa 봉암사 Temple near Mungyeong. Bongamsa Temple is a deeply spiritual place near a quick flowing river that threatens to carry you away in its current. We spent our days there wandering the paths around the temple, wading in the pools on top of the great boulders further up in the mountains, and speaking with the monks on the wood verandas of the temple. I still remember her dragging us to the services at dawn when the drums rumbled in the stillness. .

After we moved to Seoul in 2011, Seung-Eun started to study Buddhist art history at Korea University and for a few years was buried in books. She even took off on a trip along the Silk Road all by herself from which she brought back hundreds of photographs of odd and intriguing temples and carvings.

She was almost finished writing her master’s thesis on temple portraits in Korea and Japan when she was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2014. The surgery and chemotherapy, stopped the cancer, for a while, but they sapped her energy and slowed her down immensely. She continued to love her children, to be concerned for those around her, but she could not work as long, read as much, or make the elaborate plans that she once did.

We tried moving back to Washington DC in 2019. She again made an amazing space to live in within the brick house we rented. But her health was worse and I could no longer find the employment necessary to support us.

That meant that we went back in Korea.

The last year, after 2021, Seung-eun’s mother grew weaker and weaker and Seung Eun spent much time taking care of her. Eventually she lived with her mother full time. I think that taking care of her mother helped Seung-Eun to regain some energy. It was love, after all, that gave her power.

She made plans to go back to the United States so she could be with the children, and she worked at a restaurant in order to make some money that she could send to them.

She did not tell anyone that the cancer had reoccurred. We had no idea just how serious the situation was. I think that not telling us was her way of protecting us.

There can be no doubt about the concern, and the love, that Seung-Eun had, day and night, for the children, and for me.

I feel that the family unit, the four of us became so incredibly close because of the loving attention that she gave to us without hesitation. We did not know that she was the cement that held us together, a kind of invisible cement.

Our wedding, November 8, 1997 @ Lark Creek Inn, Larkspur, California

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Tribute to My Wife Seung Eun : Emanuel Pastreich

The Phoniest, Most PR-Intensive War of All Time

July 29th, 2022 by Caitlin Johnstone

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 president and first lady of Ukraine have posed for a romantic photoshoot with Vogue magazine, wherein President Volodymyr Zelensky waxes poetical about his love for his darling wife.

Now, I know what you’re thinking: how is Zelensky making time for a Vogue photoshoot amidst his busy schedule of PR appearances for other major western institutions?

I mean this is after all the same Volodymyr Zelensky who has been so busy making video appearances for the Grammy Awards, the Cannes Film Festival, the World Economic Forum and probably the Bilderberg group as well, and having meetings with celebrities like Ben Stiller, Sean Penn, and Bono and the Edge from U2. It’s as busy a PR tour as he could possibly have without having a discussion about the strategic importance of long-range artillery with Elmo on Sesame Street.

Oh yeah, and also isn’t there like a war or something happening in Ukraine? You’d think he’d probably be somewhat busy with that too.

Call me crazy, but I’m beginning to suspect that there might be a concerted effort to manipulate the way we think about the war in Ukraine. In fact, I’d even go so far as to say it’s the most aggressively perception-managed war we’ve ever experienced.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February we have not only been smashed with mass media propaganda unlike anything we’ve ever seen while Russian media are purged from the airwaves, we’re also seeing the new media element of unprecedented amounts of online censorship, algorithm-boosted propaganda, and social media trolling.

So we’ve literally never seen this much overall effort put into manipulating the way the public thinks about a war. Which makes sense, given that it’s a profoundly dangerous proxy war which stands to benefit ordinary people in no way, shape or form.

I mean, can you imagine if people were allowed to just think their own thoughts about their government’s economic warfare against Russia which is hurting them financially and pushing millions toward starvation with the full awareness and approval of the US government? Or if Americans were allowed to wonder if the billions they are pouring into this proxy conflict could be better spent at home? Or if people started objecting to a needless conflict for geostrategic domination threatening their lives and the lives of everyone they know with the risk of nuclear annihilation?

Can’t have that.

There is a night-and-day difference between wanting to tell people the truth about something and wanting to manipulate their perception of something. There are times when true facts can be used to influence people’s perception one way or the other, but if your agenda is to manipulate perception rather than tell the truth you will necessarily be forced to rely on lies, half-truths, distortion, and lies by omission wherever the truth doesn’t serve that agenda.

If they were telling us the truth about this war, they wouldn’t be censoring Russian media. They wouldn’t be censoring online voices who disagree with the official narratives about Ukraine. They wouldn’t be continually blasting us in the face with mass media perception management, and they sure as hell wouldn’t be putting Ukraine’s celebrity-in-chief on the cover of Vogue magazine.

We are being manipulated, and we are being deceived. And we are being manipulated and deceived because our perceiving clearly on our own would go against the interests of the empire. They are lying to us because the interests of the people and the interests of the empire are, as usual, squarely at odds.

*

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 is from Vogue via Caitlin Johnstone

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.

***

Guests are:

Dr. Katarina Lindley, a family physician and owner of a direct primary care clinic. She is President-Elect of the Texas Chapter of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), and World Council for Health Welcomes Steering Committee member.

Dr. Robert Verkerk, founder, Executive & Scientific Director of Alliance for Natural Health (ANH). ANH works towards protecting, developing and implementing innovative and sustainable approaches to natural and sustainable healthcare.

This session is about a new analysis on survey data by the Control Group project, which reveals how over 300,000 people from more than 175 countries have fared without taking a COVID-19 vaccine.

The analysis reveals that the control group did not place a disproportionate burden on health systems and severe COVID-19 disease has been rare. Nine days after the survey report was uploaded, ResearchGate removed it.

*

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 is from The Conservative Woman

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Survey on How 300,000 people from 175 countries have fared “without taking a COVID-19 vaccine”

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 Democrats and Republicans are relentless warmongers.  They kill, they maim, they ravage, and they deceive with impunity.  They destroy entire countries to feed the dogs of war.  Their latest victim is Ukraine.

The Biden regime is using the conflict in Ukraine to wage a proxy war on Russia with the unanimous support of Congressional Democrats, including so-called progressives.  The Republicans are doing their part in a bipartisan effort to menace Russia by expanding NATO as an extension of the Pentagon’s war machine.  As a direct result of the conflict, defense contractors are making money hand over fist, proving, once again, that the military-industrial complex needs perpetual war to thrive. 

The immediate goal of the war is to weaken the Russian military and destroy Russia’s economy, thereby eliminating a major obstacle to global hegemony.  The long-range goal is regime change in Moscow.  The ultimate objective is the Balkanization of Russia and the exploitation of its vast resources by American corporations.

The means used to fight proxy war involve the delivery of astronomical amounts of financial and military aid to the puppet government in Kiev, a junta brought to power by a U.S. engineered coup in 2014.  The total is $54 billion and counting.  The money is being given to one of the most corrupt governments on earth, whose leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, has banned all opposition parties.  Zelensky, despite being Jewish, leads an ultra-nationalist government that harbors fascist ministers and a fascist militia.  Zelensky, the former actor turned president, is no more than a lap dog for Ukrainian oligarchs.

The means used to wreck the Russian economy involve unprecedented sanctions that will cause enough economic hardship, it is hoped, to bring down the Putin government.  Russia’s foreign exchange reserves totaling $300 billion have been frozen.  Russian banks have been removed from the international financial management system known as Swift.  The United States has banned imports of Russian oil and gas.  It has prohibited the import of Russian seafood, diamonds, and vodka.  It has sanctioned Russian oligarchs.

The chief effect of military aid is the prolongation of death and misery in a conflict that will inevitably result in a Russian victory.  U.S. militarists know this and seek to prolong combat to bleed Russia by arming Ukrainian forces as they once did by funding, arming, and directing an Islamic insurgency in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union.  But this time around, it is the United States, not the Russian Federation, that will be bankrupted.

Rather than crippling the Russian economy, sanctions have strengthened the ruble, a currency that must now be used to purchase Russian energy.  The sanctions have led to a dramatic increase in the price of Russian oil and gas.  Russian exports account for 20% of the world’s supply of oil.  These conditions have led to an unprecedented increase in income for Russia as Putin redirects the sale of energy and food resources toward China, India, and East and West Asia, away from Europe and the United States.

Image on the right is from The Cradle

On a recent visit to Tehran, Putin announced a massive $40 billion oil deal and strategic partnership with Iran.  Contrast Putin’s successful summit, where he also met with Turkey’s Erdogan, to Biden’s visit with the murderous Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salam in Saudi Arabia, whom the president once characterized as a “pariah.”  In a disgraceful meeting, Biden begged the boy prince to increase oil production, only to come away empty-handed.  Bin Salam’s Kingdom, it seems, is getting very close to Putin’s Russia in what is termed “OPEC Plus.”

The unintended impact of sanctions has sparked a dramatic inflation in the pricing of all commodities, particularly gas and food, in the United States and Western Europe.  This comes as the U.S. debt has topped $30 trillion, largely due to massive tax cuts for the rich, limitless corporate welfare, and perpetual war.

The boomerang effect of sanctions on the United States is profound due to the shortsightedness of neoconservative war planners in Washington, who unwittingly undercut the dollar as the world’s reserve currency by creating conditions that encouraged nations targeted by sanctions to conduct financial transactions in their own currencies; effectively shattered globalization by fostering the emergence of regional trading-blocks led by China and Russia; and perpetrated another geo-political, military, and humanitarian disaster in Ukraine.   In their quest for global dominance, the neocons are bringing about the global decline of the American empire, and they are too blinded by their own arrogance to see it.

Although defense of America’s empire is supported by both wings of the Property Party, the Democrats are more duplicitous as they claim to defend democracy and human rights in a quest for social justice, in contrast to Republicans, who rationalize foreign intervention with naked power politics.

Bill Clinton’s pursuit of “peacekeeping” and “humanitarian interventionism” and Barack Obama’s employment of “responsibility to protect” justifications for the use of military force can be contrasted with George W. Bush’s utilization of the Wolfowitz doctrine of unilateral and preemptive war to clarify each side’s pretext for military intervention.  The latter approach tends to generate more public opposition than the former.

Trump’s advocacy of an “America First” doctrine that emphasizes global military primacy can be compared to the Biden doctrine that pits the American struggle for “democracy” against “autocracy” to rationalize militarism and war.  Biden’s approach illustrates the latest version of the “lesser evil” argument advanced by Democrats, which is a fiction.

All foreign policy “doctrines” represent the continuity of American military dominance and are designed to maintain the U.S. empire, but some are more deceptive than others.  Here is where the Democrats excel: in deception.

The Biden administration includes a Black/South Asian Vice President, a Black Secretary of Defense, and a Black UN representative, all of whom vociferously support proxy war with Russia.  How progressive.  This is a hideous example of equal opportunity imperialism at its best, resulting from a politics that allows the Democrats to co-opt racial, ethnic, gender, sexual, and cultural identities to provide the illusion of social change while promoting capitalist exploitation, empire, and war.

It should be remembered that Barack Obama, the United States’ first Black president, used NATO bombing and Islamic jihadists to prosecute an illegal war on Libya in 2011.  Obama’s war, supported wholeheartedly by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, led to the overthrow of the Libyan government; the brutal torture and execution of its leader, Muammar Gaddafi; the fragmentation of the country; and the introduction of Black slavery to the North African nation.

With regard to NATO, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 made the military alliance obsolete.  But rather than dissolve the alliance, the West, under U.S. leadership, expanded the organization from 12 original members in 1949 to 30 members today.

The key to understanding Russia’s position on Ukraine was the promise made by Secretary of State James Baker on behalf of President George H. W. Bush to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev not to expand NATO “one inch eastward” if the Kremlin would allow the unification of Germany.  The promise was given on February 9, 1990.  The promise was broken by succeeding U.S. presidents.  The continued expansion of NATO, with proposals to include Ukraine and Georgia, is seen by Russia as an existential threat to its security.

There is an ominous history fostered by Democrats that validates Russian concerns.

For the greater part of the 20th century, the United States led hot and cold wars against the Soviet Union.  In the immediate aftermath of the Bolshevik revolution, allied countries, including Great Britain, France, and the freedom-loving United States, invaded Russia in an attempt to strangle the revolution in its cradle.  They failed.  Their troops were defeated by the Red Army in 1918.  President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, ordered the infamous invasion.  Domestically, Wilson unleashed Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer to arrest, jail, execute, and, in the case of immigrants, deport anarchists, socialists, communists, and labor organizers during the first “Red Scare” in the years 1919 and 1920.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt enlisted the Soviet Union as an ally in the fight against the Axis powers during World War II.  It was the Red Army’s defeat of the Wehrmacht at Stalingrad in 1943 that turned the tide of battle against Nazi Germany and signaled its eventual defeat.  The Soviet Union lost 25 million lives as a result of Hitler’s “Operation Barbarossa,” an invasion that inflicted indelible scars on its people.  Vladimir Putin, whose parents were terrorized and whose younger brother died during the war, has vowed that Russia would never again fight a land war on its territory, a statement that should serve as an ominous warning to the West.

President Harry Truman, a Democrat, ushered in the Cold War and the national-security state in 1947.  Truman announced his doctrine in a speech to Congress on March 12, 1947, when he pledged his support for Greece and Turkey in their fight for “freedom” against Soviet communism.  In reality, Truman armed and financed repressive governments to crush rebellions under the guise of fighting communism.  By so doing, he set the template for numerous CIA and military interventions in support of right-wing governments by his successors.  Domestically, Truman’s administration launched an infamous campaign of political repression that came to be known as Truman/McCarthyism, a period that saw the persecution of socialists, communists, and their supporters during America’s second “Red Scare.”

Image below: President Harry Truman

Prior to announcing his anti-communist doctrine, Truman, in an attempt to intimidate Josef Stalin, dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945, committing a monstrous crime against humanity to demonstrate American military superiority.  Truman’s despicable act was the first shot fired during the thermonuclear age.  The development and use of the first atomic bomb by the United States touched off a decades long arms race that continues to this day with the recent deployment of hypersonic weapons capable of delivering nuclear payloads in minutes.

President Kennedy brought the world closer to nuclear war than it has ever been by imposing a naval quarantine on Cuba after the discovery of Russian nuclear weapons on the Caribbean island.  The crisis lasted 13 tension filled days in October of 1962.  Kennedy, however, had the good sense to secretly negotiate the removal of those weapons with Soviet Premier Khrushchev after being confronted with demands that he bomb the island by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an act that would certainly have resulted in nuclear war.

It was Pentagon policy, as formulated by maniacal war planners in the military’s infamous think tank, the RAND Corporation, to fight and win a nuclear war by destroying every city in the Soviet Union and China at the cost of 475 million lives in the two communist countries.  Such was the level of homicidal hatred generated by anti-communist ideology that prevailed within the military-industrial complex during the Cold War.

Kennedy subsequently gave a powerful speech asserting the need to begin the journey toward nuclear disarmament and effect détente with the Soviet Union during a commencement ceremony at American University on June 10, 1963, articulating a posture on peaceful co-existence with the communist state that, along with his desire to abolish the CIA after the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, undoubtedly led to his assassination by operatives of the national-security state.  Before his death, Kennedy matched word and deed by negotiating a Limited Test Ban Treaty that prohibited the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water, with the Soviet Union.

President Lyndon Johnson prosecuted a war in Vietnam that cost the lives of over 1 million Vietnamese and 58,000 American soldiers in the name of fighting communism.  The Soviet Union and Mao’s China supported North Vietnam in its struggle against U.S. imperialism.  The United States military met defeat in the jungles of Vietnam, as it would do in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan in future asymmetrical wars.

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter, a born-again Christian and Democrat, took the advice of his National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and directed the CIA to arm, finance, and deploy Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan to induce the Soviet Union to send troops into the country in defense of a secular government, which it did in December of that year.

Carter delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress on January 23, 1980, by articulating a foreign policy doctrine that promised the use of military force against any country that attempted to gain control of the Persian Gulf region, an area he defined as crucial to the “vital interests” of the United States.  The doctrine was announced in response to the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan that Brzezinski had secretly provoked.  What Brzezinski termed the “bear trap” worked, allowing the United States to give the Soviet Union its own “Vietnam” from 1980 to 1988.

It should be noted that the Carter administration was staffed by prominent members of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission, an inter-imperialist policy discussion forum once chaired by Brzezinski.  It should also be recalled that a step-child of U.S. covert intervention in Afghanistan is Al-Qaeda, an Islamic jihadist organization that has been used repeatedly by the CIA to destabilize unfriendly governments in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and beyond.  The U.S. proxy war in Afghanistan contributed to the weakening of the Soviet Union and its eventual demise.

With the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1991, Western vampires, led by Wall Street investors and Harvard economists, imposed neoliberal “shock therapy” on Russia by privatizing its economy, bringing unimaginable misery and suffering to the Russian people.

Bill Clinton gave unqualified support to Boris Yeltsin, who oversaw privatization and the sell-off of state-owned industries and resources.  Shock therapy led to the collapse of Russia’s economy during the years 1992 to 2001.  Production fell by 50%.  Investments decreased by 80%.  During that time period, approximately 3 million premature deaths occurred in Russia.  Additionally, 75% of the population was plunged into poverty, totaling 74 million people.

When the Russian parliament repudiated the Clinton/Yeltsin shock therapy and tried to impeach the Russian president in 1993, Yeltsin ordered troops to bomb the legislative body with tanks.  He proceeded to dissolve the legislature in direct violation of the Russian constitution.  Yeltsin’s overthrow of constitutional democracy was supported to the hilt by Bill Clinton’s public endorsements and through the National Endowment for Democracy, a CIA front organization.

Clinton also manipulated a Russian election to elect Yeltsin in 1996, despite the hated Russian president having an approval rating of only 2%.  This history should be kept in mind when recalling that Hillary Clinton falsely accused Russia of hacking the U.S. presidential election in 2016 to elect Donald Trump.  The Clintons are adept at blaming others for crimes they have committed.

In addition to presiding over the looting of Russia with the approval of a puppet regime, Bill Clinton expanded NATO in March of 1999 to include Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, explicitly breaking George H.W. Bush’s pledge not to expand the alliance eastward toward Russia.  In light of the present crisis in Ukraine, Clinton has tried to re-write history in order to justify his unjustifiable actions.

Not to rest on his imperialistic laurels, Clinton ordered the bombing of Yugoslavia with the support of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on March 24, 1999.  The NATO bombing was commanded by General Wesley Clark, ostensibly as a “humanitarian” mission to stop ethnic cleansing by Serbia.  In fact, the 78-day bombing was a culmination of U.S. imperialism’s attempt to promote ethnic conflict to break up the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and privatize its economy.  Clinton proceeded with the bombing despite the opposition of Russia and China, a crucial event that shaped the perception of the United States as a dangerous hegemon.

In August of the eventful year of 1999, Vladimir Putin was hand-picked by Boris Yeltsin to become Russia’s Prime Minister.  Putin became President of the Russian Federation in 2000 and stopped the looting of Russia.  From that time forward, he became an enemy of the United States and its predatory corporations and banks.

Barack Obama did yeoman’s work to expand the New Cold War and promulgate Russophobia.

Obama welcomed expanded NATO membership to include Albania and Croatia in 2009, extending the alliance into Eastern Europe.

Egged on by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama, as previously noted, used NATO to attack Libya in 2011.  The establishment of a “no-fly” zone over Libyan skies allowed the alliance to bomb government targets while Islamic jihadists fought the Libyan military on the ground.   One prize that was seized by the West after the overthrow of Gaddafi, was Libyan oil, which had been nationalized to fund a version of Islamic socialism that raised the standard of living higher than any other country on the continent, except South Africa.  Another reason for the attack was Gaddafi’s commitment to African unity and his support for revolutionary forces.  The empire tolerates no opposition.

The U.S./NATO attack on Libya convinced Putin to draw a line in the sand on regime change in Syria, a country of strategic importance for Russia.  Putin’s intervention stopped the U.S. dirty war in its tracks, earning him the empire’s contempt.

In 2014, Obama and his neoconservative flunkeys, led by Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Victoria Nuland, fomented a coup d’état in Ukraine. The Ukrainian neo-Nazis were instrumental in driving the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych from office.  By supporting the coup, Obama effectively endorsed the resurgence of fascism in Ukraine, and planted the seeds for Russia’s military intervention in 2022.

One of the first acts of the newly installed puppet regime in Kiev was to outlaw the use of Russian as the second official language, an act that precipitated a civil war with Russian speaking-people living in the Donbass who, not surprisingly, sought independence.  Between 2014 and 2022, 14,000 Russian speaking Ukrainians were killed by Kiev’s war in the break-away Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.  It was the massing of Ukrainian troops in February of 2022 for a final assault on the East that prompted Putin to order a military intervention in Ukraine on the 22nd of that month.  The United States has used the intervention to turn a Ukrainian civil war that it provoked into a long-anticipated proxy war against Russia.

In addition, Obama further antagonized Russia by imposing sanctions on officials after the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to reunite with Russia in a referendum held on March 16, 2014, as a result of the U.S. coup.  The Crimea was annexed by Catherine the Great in 1783 and officially ceded to Russia by Ottoman Turkey in 1791, in a treaty that ended a series of Russo-Turkish wars.  As a gesture of solidarity, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, himself an ethnic Ukrainian, gave the Crimea to Soviet Ukraine in 1954.

In 2016, Obama deployed an Aegis land-based anti-ballistic missile system in Romania, which poses a direct threat to Russia.   A second launching site planned by Obama is set to become operational in Poland in 2022.  The land-based systems are complimented by four U.S. navy ships equipped with Aegis missiles that routinely patrol the Mediterranean, Black, and Baltic Seas.  The Aegis system is equipped with interceptor missiles and vertical launchers.  Russia sees the Aegis system as a threat because defensive interceptor missiles can be replaced with offensive nuclear missiles.  Even the deployment of a defensive system is a threat because it encourages a nuclear first strike against Russia, which is the primary reason the now defunct ABM Treaty was negotiated in 1972.  Obama lied when he said the Aegis system would protect Europe from Iranian missiles.  As Putin has correctly observed, the Aegis systems are aimed at Russia.  Although the defensive capability of Aegis has been neutralized with a new generation of hypersonic weapons, the offensive threat remains at the forefront of Russian security concerns.

And then there is Russiagate.  In 2016, Obama extended sanctions on Russia by leveling the baseless accusation that the Kremlin hacked the U.S. presidential election of that year.  In an egregious violation of diplomatic protocol, Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats and seized Russian diplomatic property in the United States in retaliation for non-existent “electoral interference,” further escalating the New Cold War.  Aside from some insignificant social media messaging posted on Facebook by Russian trolls, no forensic evidence of Russian government interference in the presidential election exists.

Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, led by Charles Schumer in the Senate and Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives, and supported by FBI director James Comey, CIA director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, used the Obama fiction of “Russian interference” in the 2016 election to delegitimize the presidency of Donald Trump and sabotage Trump’s attempt to normalize relations with Putin’s Russia.  Trump was accused of “colluding” with Russia to win the election.

Clinton and the Democrats, embarrassed by their loss to Trump, had to find an excuse for their electoral defeat, and find it they did by blaming Russia.  Their commitment to globalization, free trade, deindustrialization, neoliberalism, mass-incarceration, and militarization of the police escaped notice among political pundits and elite media, but not, it seems, many American workers who were thrown on the scrap-heap of a vast American wasteland and responded by giving the political establishment the middle finger by voting for Trump.

The problem for Democrats and their allies in the deep state is that no hard evidence of Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee or Trump collusion could be found, not even by the Mueller investigation, despite their claims of wide-spread “Russian interference.”

Not to be deterred by facts, House Democrats voted to impeach Donald Trump on December 18, 2019. The pretext: Ukraine.  The Democrats accused Trump of attempting to withhold $400 million in military aid unless Ukrainian President Zelensky, launched an investigation into Vice-President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s activities in Ukraine.  As fate would have it, VP Biden openly bragged in front of the Council on Foreign Relations, about how he threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid unless Zelensky’s predecessor, Petro Poroshenko, fired a prosecutor who was investigating Hunter Biden’s activities with a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma.  Hunter Biden was reportedly paid $850,000 to sit on the company’s board of directors and serve as one of its lobbyists.  In Trump’s case, Zelensky did not order an investigation, and the military aid was subsequently delivered.  In Biden’s case, Poroshenko fired the prosecutor and the economic aid was released.  In the cesspool of American politics, the Democrats are the dirty pot that excels in calling the equally filthy kettle black.

Rather than challenge Trump on policy issues, the Democrats manufactured the Russiagate scandal to dethrone the egocentric Donald, who responded in kind by falsely claiming the Democrats engaged in electoral fraud to steal the 2020 election.  As both political parties serve the American plutocracy, not the American people, fraudulence prevails as politics degenerates into ugly partisan power struggles, devoid of ethics, not to mention constitutional or international legality, in what Putin correctly termed an “empire of lies.”  The result is a dramatic loss of political legitimacy for the American state.

Enter Joe Biden as President.  Biden ignored Russian attempts to make peace in Ukraine.  Zelensky’s failure to honor the Minsk agreement, a protocol his country signed in 2015 to end the civil war and provide autonomy for Eastern republics, led to Russia’s recognition of the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk.  Zelensky was no doubt following orders from the empire.

Biden also ignored the Russian demand that Ukraine not be allowed to join NATO.  Instead, Biden dismissed Russia’s security concerns and enthusiastically prosecuted a U.S./NATO proxy war in Ukraine once Putin decided to send his military to demilitarize and de-nazify Ukraine, a state that sits directly on Russia’s border.

At a recent NATO summit held on March 24, 2022, Biden promised to increase the U.S. military presence in Europe.  Then, on March 26th, Biden gave a speech in Poland, calling for Putin’s removal from power in a breathtaking act of imperial arrogance.  In May, Biden asked the U.S. Senate to certify support for NATO membership for Finland and Sweden, two formerly neutral countries.  Biden is on record as wanting Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO, directly crossing a Russian red line.  In June, NATO announced plans to expand its rapid deployment forces from 40,000 troops to 300,000 troops.  In July, the EU’s Foreign Policy Chief, Josep Borrell, announced a plan to purchase $500 billion in weapons.

Rather than defuse tensions and negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine, the United States and NATO escalate provocations against Russia that are unremitting and dangerously irresponsible.

Biden’s unlimited support for the proxy war in Ukraine is not being undertaken with the best interests of the American people in mind.  He and his lackeys, led by Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, are waging a war for empire.  And it carries the real possibility of escalation to nuclear war.

Given this history, the Russians may have concluded that they are dealing with deranged lunatics, and it appears they are, as the American political class becomes further and further detached from reality.

The Republicans have done their part to advance U.S. hegemony in Russia, a pipe dream that, if continued, may end in nuclear annihilation.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower continued the Truman policy of containment of the USSR.  Eisenhower, no rabid militarist, wanted to negotiate a nuclear test ban treaty and an arms control agreement with the Soviets, particularly in light of the development of the hydrogen bomb by each country.  On May 1, 1960, a U2 spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union, and its pilot, Francis Gary Powers, was captured.  The incident was condemned by Soviet Premier Khrushchev, who stormed out of a Paris summit with the United States, ending the possibility of arms control during the Eisenhower administration.  The summit’s failure did not prevent Eisenhower from warning the nation of the growing power of the military-industrial complex as he left office.

President Richard Nixon expanded Johnson’s war in Vietnam to Laos and Cambodia, becoming a certifiable war criminal for waging a genocidal war in Indochina.  Despite, or it may be argued, because of, his history as a rabid anti-communist, the clever Nixon embarked on a historic visit to China aimed at deepening the Sino-Soviet split that fractured relations between the two communist nations in 1972.  Nixon’s visit was made possible through secret negotiations undertaken by his National Security Advisor and fellow war criminal, Henry Kissinger.

Washington’s bellicose policies formulated during the Obama, Trump, and Biden regimes have driven Moscow and Beijing closer together than at any time prior to the vaunted split, prompting Presidents Putin and Xi to declare the Russian-Chinese relationship will not be broken by any third nation in a signal to the United States.

It should be noted that Nixon concluded a major nuclear arms treaty with the Soviet Union when he and Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev signed the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I) in May 1972.  Nixon and Brezhnev also signed an Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) that year.  A new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty was signed by Barack Obama and Russian President Medvedev in 2010 and is set to expire in 2026.  Medvedev recently stated that the U.S. will have to beg Russia for another agreement in light of America’s proxy war in Ukraine.

Ronald Reagan embarked on a global anti-communist offensive for the purpose of rolling back communist, socialist, and anti-imperialist governments and progressive social movements around the world.  Reagan’s CIA, under the direction of William Casey, funded global counter-revolution and repression in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Grenada, South Africa, Mozambique, the Philippines, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Poland, and beyond.

Reagan’s military and nuclear arms buildup was unprecedented during peacetime in U.S. history, and was funded in part by massive cuts in social spending that, coupled with union busting and deindustrialization, ushered in decades of class war against American workers and poor people.  His deployment of short and medium-range Pershing and Cruise nuclear missiles in Europe aimed to counter Soviet SS-20 missiles and his funding of the Strategic Defense Initiative, known as “Star Wars,” pushed the world to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union, a country Reagan, with visions of Armageddon and the Christian Rapture dancing in his head, referred to as the “Evil Empire.”

Reagan did pull back from the brink, and in 1986, he met with Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik, Iceland, to lay the groundwork for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty of 1987 and the Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction (START I) Treaty of 1991.  He did so despite his belief in the “End Times” and his history as an anti-communist ideologue. The Reagan militaristic buildup is credited with helping to bankrupt the Soviet Union and quicken its downfall.

In a demonstration of global supremacy in January of 1991, President George H.W. Bush prosecuted Gulf War I against Iraq to secure control of the region’s oil resources.  The Soviet Union, an erstwhile ally of Iraq, refused to support Saddam Hussein, clearing the way for Bush’s war.  In a speech to Congress on September 11, 1990, Bush declared the need to create a “New World Order” that is “freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace,” to justify the war.  George Orwell’s indictment of Stalinist dictatorship, written in his prophetic novel, 1984, can be applied to the American empire, whose leaders regularly, and without the slightest bit of shame, invent enemies and invert reality.

In triumphalist fashion, neoconservatives used the dissolution of the Soviet Union on December 31, 1991 to declare the beginning of a “New American Century” of global domination.  Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev recently proclaimed “the unipolar world has ended” and “the U.S. is no longer master of planet earth.”  So much for the American century of world domination that saw the United States fail to prevent the emergence of global rivals in Russia and China; fail to win asymmetrical wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; fail to depose the Ba’athist government in Syria; fail to overthrow leftist governments in Nicaragua and Venezuela; and fail to disarm North Korea.  Not that the neocons did not try.

President George W. Bush and the neocons, led by Dick Cheney, used the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to defend the “New World Order” of American primacy by declaring a fraudulent “War on Terror” that served as a pretext for global interventionism.  By so doing, the neoconservative Wolfowitz doctrine was adopted as the Bush doctrine.

The infamous Wolfowitz doctrine continues to animate U.S. policy toward Russia as Biden’s minions ignore the reality of a multipolar world and seem oblivious to U.S. debacles in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, as they press ahead in Ukraine.

Bush withdrew from the aforementioned Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001, paving the way for the subsequent deployment of Aegis systems in Romania and Poland.

Proving that politics does indeed make strange bedfellows when money can be made in the free market, Bush’s State Department, the CIA front organizations known as the U.S. Agency for Economic Development and the National Endowment for Democracy, the NGO Liberty Institute, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute, unleashed a “color revolution” in Georgia in 2003.  Known as the “Rose Revolution,” it swept Eduard Shevardnadze, who once served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Soviet Union before becoming Georgia’s president in 1995, from power.  He was replaced by Mikhail Saakashvili, an American puppet educated at George Washington University and Columbia University Law School.  The coup’s goal was to ensure free market reforms that enabled American corporations to access the region’s energy resources.

Seeking to extend control over other former republics of the Soviet Union, the same gang engineered a “color revolution” in Ukraine in 2004.  Not surprisingly, the “Orange Revolution” brought to power a government that expedited the privatization of the country’s industries and resources, facilitating the rise of oligarchical rule behind the façade of democracy.  Also, unsurprisingly, the revolution eventually collapsed.  In the process, Ukrainian politics, came to resemble a Las Vegas slot machine as corruption became rife.

In March of 2004, Bush continued Clinton’s enlargement of NATO by supporting membership in the alliance for Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.  The dim-witted ex-president recently admitted he broke Baker’s promise not to expand NATO, as he cheered the U.S./NATO war with Russia.  It should also be noted that Bush pushed for Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO as far back as April 1, 2008.

Last but certainly not least, Bush, the neocons, and their allies in Israel provoked a Russian military intervention in Georgia in August of 2008.  In a breathtaking demonstration of hypocrisyWestern imperialists immediately condemned Russian aggression, ignoring the many invasions committed by the U.S. empire and the Zionist state.

As for Trump, the orange opportunist enthusiastically embraced Russophobia once his initial attempts at establishing détente with Russia were so vehemently attacked by the U.S. political establishment, the intelligence community, and the elite corporate media.  The empire has no friends, only vassal states and enemies.  The vassals submit to the neoliberal Washington consensus, the enemy states do not, preferring economic nationalism and sovereignty to subservience to the American hegemon.

To make matters worse, Trump withdrew from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Weapons Treaty of 1987 in 2018.  The treaty, as previously stated, prohibited the use of short-and medium-range nuclear weapons, which were widely deployed in Europe and the Soviet Union during the Reagan era.

Democrats and Republicans are two heads of the same imperialist monster.  The imperial monster is menacing the Russian bear.

In February of 2007, President Putin gave a speech at the Munich security conference during which he indicated, with some degree of prescience, that NATO expansion does not provide security for Europe.  He pointed out that, conversely, it constitutes a serious provocation because it places NATO frontline forces and anti-missile systems on Russia’s border.  He also stated, in reference to the United States, that a unipolar world is unacceptable as it is a world with one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making, one master, and one sovereign that has nothing to do with democracy.  He pleaded for multilateral diplomacy, economic development, and integration, particularly with Europe, along with mutual security and prosperity.  He was ignored.

Instead of collaboration on matters of economic development and mutual security, the United States and its NATO cat’s paw continued to perpetrate political intrigue, subversion, a coup d’état, a civil war, belligerent expansion, hyper-militarization, and economic warfare that backed the Kremlin into a corner.  The result is a full-blown U.S./NATO proxy war with Russia unfolding in Ukraine.

Washington is fully responsible for provoking this war.  The Ukrainian and Russian people are paying the cost in lives lost as the masters of war profit from their misery, secure for the moment within the iron triangle Eisenhower warned about in 1961.

The American people are also paying the price of war.  Their economic and social rights are under attack.  Their cities are deteriorating.  Their schools, shopping centers, and workplaces have become a shooting gallery, with mass gun violence nearly an everyday occurrence.  Housing and medical care have become unaffordable.

Americans are deeply divided by Democrats and Republicans, who strive, unscrupulously, for power.  As political discourse becomes increasingly polarized, the politics of identity is pitted against the politics of supremacy by politicos who unite to practice the politics of empire once they are elected.

At the core of power politics lies the pernicious ideology of “American Exceptionalism,” which claims that America is an extraordinary nation, uniquely virtuous in human history.  American virtue is a myth; American exceptionalism is not.

The United States of America is exceptional.  It is an exceptionally violent, war-like nation.  Its leaders demonstrate exceptional arrogance and duplicity.  It possesses an exceptionally vast military empire.  And it is exceptionally destructive.  So much so that it threatens life on earth.

An existential question remains: can the myth, through popular struggle, become a reality, or will reality destroy, once and for all, the myth?

*

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.

Donald Monaco is a writer and political analyst who lives in Brooklyn, New York.  He received his Master’s Degree in Education from the State University of New York at Buffalo in 1979 and was radicalized by the Vietnam War.  He writes from an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist perspective.  His most recent book is titled, The Politics of Empire, and is available at amazon.com.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Two Party Imperialism and War with Russia. A Historical Perspective

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.

***

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is demanding answers from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), after he says the agency “has repeatedly disregarded its responsibilities under FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) and the American people’s right to agency records,” according to a Wednesday letter from Paul to NIH Acting Director Lawrence A. Tabak.

“For almost two years, public interest groups and media organizations have been forced to engage in protracted litigation to obtain documents related to NIH’s involvement in COVID-19,” adding “The records NIH has produced have been heavily redacted.”

This suggests NIH is censoring the information it releases to the public about the origins of the pandemic.

Paul cites an article by journalist and former Chuck Grassley investigator Paul D. Thacker, which notes an egregious admission by the NIH in Court that the agency “is withholding portions of emails between employees because they “could be used out of context and serve to amplify the already prevalent misinformation regarding the origins of the coronavirus pandemic.””

In an 18-page declaration to the court, NIH FOIA Officer Gorka Garcia-Malene detailed how the NIH redacts documents in compliance with the law. In the case of Exempt 6 privacy concerns, Garcia-Malene declared:

Exemption 6 mandates the withholding of information that if disclosed “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). Exemption 6 was applied here due to the heightened public scrutiny with anything remotely related to COVID-19.

Mr. Garcia-Malene also claimed that information had be redacted “because of the amount of misinformation surrounding the pandemic and its origins.” Seriously, the NIH is now arguing in court that because there is so much misinformation about how the pandemic began, they can’t release facts that might clear up misinformation about how the pandemic began.

The NIH was responding to a case brought by US nonprofit Right to Know, after the NIH deleted coronavirus sequences that Chinese researchers added to the NIH’s Sequence Read Archive. As Thacker notes, “These datasets involved key studies that virologists were using at the time to promote the now discredited theory that the COVID-19 virus may have passed from pangolins to humans.

In the case at hand, the NIH attempted (and succeeded) at sealing the name of a Chinese researcher which had already been made public.

More via Disinformation Chronicle:

Last week, the NIH filed a motion in a Virginia court to seal portions of documents that reference the Chinese researcher and an NIH official in a lawsuit filed against the agency for redacting and covering up records that might explain how the pandemic began.

“[T]he individuals have a substantial privacy interest in avoiding harassment or media scrutiny that would likely follow disclosure,” wrote a lawyer for the NIH to the judge. “Sealing is therefore necessary to protect this information from any further public dissemination.”

But what is actually being protected? The American public’s right to access public information that may reveal what kicked off the pandemic, or the purported privacy rights of a scientist who lives thousands of miles away in China? This legal ploy further highlights the NIH’s aggressive, haphazard approach to redacting documents and hiding information that might explain how the pandemic started.

Last summer Buzzfeed released an investigation of the NIH’s Anthony Fauci and reported that the documents the agency released were “just a portion of what was requested, and they are filled with redactions, making them an incomplete record of the time period and Fauci’s correspondence.” Meanwhile, the Intercept reported in February that the NIH continues to withhold critical documents that could shed light on how the epidemic began, noting that the agency sent them 292 pages of fully redacted records.

Among these pages, the NIH fully redacted the 2020 COVID-19 research plan put together by Anthony Fauci.

A week after The Intercept story, The Chief Records Officer for the U.S. Government sent the NIH a letter asking them to investigate allegations that agency personnel are shredding documents related to grant-making decisions and funding for research in China.

Kangpeng Xiao’s name became public in December 2020, when the nonprofit U.S. Right to Know published a report on revisions to coronavirus sequences that Chinese researchers had added to the NIH’s Sequence Read Archive. These datasets involved key studies that virologists were using at the time to promote the now discredited theory that the COVID-19 virus may have passed from pangolins to humans.

“These revisions are odd because they occurred after publication, and without any rationale, explanation or validation,” wrote Sainath Suryanarayanan, in the December 2020 report for U.S. Right to Know. The nonprofit based their report on NIH documents they received from a FOIA request.

According to these documents, several Chinese scientists asked the NIH to alter coronavirus sequences stored on the NIH database, with many of these requests coming from Kangpeng Xiao with the South China Agricultural University. In one case, Xiao asked NIH official Rick Lapoint in March 2020 to delete some coronavirus sequences.

A few months later, Xiao published a prominent paper on May 7, 2020, in the journal Nature that argued a coronavirus discovered in pangolins was closely related to COVID-19. But as U.S. Right to Know discovered, Xiao’s request to delete coronavirus sequences from the NIH’s Sequence Read Archive (SRA) was just one of many changes.

Xiao et al. made numerous changes to their SRA data, including the deletion of two datasets on March 10, the addition of a new dataset on June 19, a November 8 replacement of data first released on October 30, and a further data change on November 13 — two days after Nature added an Editor’s “note of concern” about the study.

Eventually, Nature’s “note of concern” attached to Xiao’s 2020 study changed to a very lengthy correction in late 2021 that explained that data “were mislabelled and attributed incorrectly.” That correction also thanked Alina Chan of Harvard and the Broad Institute “for bringing the errors to our attention.” Chan later tweeted that Nature refused to publish her analysis of the viruses and merely folded her study into their correction.

NIH coronavirus database becomes national news

This U.S. Right to Know report was largely ignored, but last summer, coronavirus sequences at the NIH SRA became national news when Jesse Bloom, a virologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, published a preprint on NIH sequences that Chinese researchers had deleted. As Bloom explained in an email to NIH leadership at the time, “[T]his can be a good opportunity for the NIH to take the lead by using its remarkable data archives to make progress in resolving some of the important questions about the virus’s origins.”

The NIH would not disclose to reporters the names of Chinese researchers who requested sequence deletions, but the New York Times later identified one of the scientists as Ben Hu at Wuhan University.

Empower Oversight referenced Kangpeng Xiao’s identity in federal court recently on July 11, when the nonprofit charged that the NIH was improperly redacting documents when responding to their FOIA requests. In one case, the NIH had provided Empower Oversight with an October 12, 2021, email from Jesse Bloom to the NIH discussing a scientist’s request to delete NIH SRA sequences. Citing Exemption 6, which covers privacy concerns, the NIH redacted both the names of the requestor and the NIH official that Bloom cited in his email

Read the rest from Thacker here

Paul has demanded the NIH answer the following questions:

*

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 is from Zero Hedge

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Rand Paul Demands Answers After NIH Admits Redacting COVID-19 Origins Emails ‘To Prevent Misinformation’
  • Tags: , ,

Australia: Facial Recognition Technology Down Under

July 29th, 2022 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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 language is far from reassuring.  Despite being caught red handed using facial recognition technology unbeknownst to customers, a number of Australia’s large retail companies have given a meek assurance that they will “pause” their use.  The naughty will only show contrition in the most qualified of ways.

It all began with an investigation by CHOICE which found that the department store chain Kmart, and household warehouse chain Bunnings, were using FRT to ostensibly protect customers and staff while reducing theft in select stores.  The group also found a third retailer, The Good Guys, had not lived up to its distinctly smug name, using technology that stores the unique biometric information of its customers.

According to the investigation, 25 major Australian companies were asked whether they used FRT and how their privacy policies stacked up.  Based upon the findings, the three big culprits were identified.

FRT navigates some rather treacherous terrain.  There is the broader question of privacy and issues of consent.  CHOICE consumer data advocate Kate Bower put her finger on the issue by noting that the privacy policies of such companies were usually buried in vast online undergrowth and “often not easy to find.”  Given the operating nature of such stores – being in person and retail – it was also unlikely that anyone was “reading a privacy policy” before entering.

At some of their outlets, Kmart and Bunnings did sport signs at entrances informing customers that such technology was being used.  There are also prevailing problems with bias and racial discrimination.  The evident concern here was that the signs themselves were barely noticeable to patrons, placed in strategically innocuous spots.  For any toiling student seeking to understand the law of contract and the incorporation of contractual terms, such signs are virtually worthless in drawing attention to any individual entering the store.

In a survey of over 1,000 Australians between March and April this year, CHOICE found a general lack of awareness about the nature of the technology being used.  Three out of four (76%) claimed with less than blissful ignorance they did not know retailers were using facial recognition.  Those who did smell a rat identified the wrong parties – namely supermarket chains Coles and Woolworths.

The percentage of those surveyed claiming that retail stores should disclose to customers about the use of FRT before entering the store was 83% while 78% expressed concern about the security of any faceprint data secured by the companies.

Bunnings has, unsurprisingly, accused CHOICE of misrepresenting their case.  In the carefully chosen words of chief operating officer Simon McDowell, such “technology is used solely to keep team and customers safe and prevent unlawful activity in our stores, which is consistent with the Privacy Act.”

Through the annals of history, when laws are breached and principles are violated, the principle of necessity gets saddled up and ridden into debates.  In this case, its staff who might be endangered by reprobates (“repeat abuse and threatening behaviour,” McDowell calls it), or customers who need protection when going about their shopping.  And even when used, there are “strict controls around the use of the technology which can only be accessed by [a] specially trained team.”

Bunnings managing director, Mike Schneider, reiterates the security element of the enterprise.  FRT aided in identifying banned customers and undesirables.  “We don’t use it for marketing or customer behaviour tracking, and we certainly don’t use it to identify regular customers who enter our stores as CHOICE has suggested.”

On July 12, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) announced that it was opening investigations into the way personal information is handled by Kmart and Bunnings, with specific reference to the use of FRT.  The body’s director of strategic communications, Andrew Stokes, explains that biometric information, as collected by FRT, “is sensitive personal information under the Privacy Act.”

Any organisation that falls within the operation of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) is not entitled to collect sensitive information in the absence of consent from the individual.  Any information gathered must also be reasonably necessary for the organisation’s functions or activities.

Consent and the law have not always been on the best of terms.  Often strangers, they sometimes converge, or miss each other altogether.  In terms of Australian privacy law, hardly impressive and often disappointing in its lack of bite, the OAIC will note the following elements to determine whether genuine consent was given to the use of FRT: whether the individual was adequately informed before granting consent; whether it was done voluntarily; whether it was current and specific; and whether the individual had the capacity to comprehend and communicate that consent.

The reaction from the three retail outlets has, for the most part, been tactical, and more likely a case of waiting for the OAIC’s verdict.  According to Bower, “customers will welcome the news that Bunnings and Kmart are joining The Good Guys in pausing the use of facial recognition technology in their stores, but we know that what customers really want is for them to stop using it altogether.”  To do so would be very much against the ill-spirited nature of Australian corporate culture, as privateering as any that can be found on this warming planet.  They may have been bruised and slightly embarrassed, but they are unlikely to be compliant.

*

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 is from 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.

***

In prescribing cures for inflation, economists rely on the diagnosis of Nobel laureate Milton Friedman: inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon—too much money chasing too few goods. But that equation has three variables: too much money (“demand”) chasing (the “velocity” of spending) too few goods (“supply”). And “orthodox” economists, from Lawrence Summers to the Federal Reserve, seem to be focusing only on the “demand” variable. 

The Fed’s prescription is to suppress demand (borrowing and spending) by raising interest rates. Summers, a  former U.S. Treasury Secretary who presided over the massive post-2008 bank bailouts, is proposing to reduce demand by raising taxes or raising unemployment rates, reducing disposable income and thus people’s ability to spend. But those rather brutal solutions miss the real problem, just as Summers missed the crisis leading up to the 2008-09 crash. As explained in a November 2021 editorial titled “Too Few Goods – The Simple Explanation for October’s Elevated Inflation Rates,” we don’t actually have too much consumer money chasing available goods:

M2 money supply surged [in 2020] as the Fed pumped out liquidity to replace businesses’ lost sales and households’ lost paychecks. But bank reserves account for nearly half of the cumulative increase since 2020 began, and the vast majority seem to be excess reserves sitting on deposit at Federal Reserve banks and not backing loans. Excluding bank reserves, M2 money supply is now growing more slowly than it did for most of 2015 – 2019, when inflation was mostly below the Fed’s 2% y/y target, much to policymakers’ chagrin. Weak lending also suggests money isn’t doing much “chasing,” a notion underscored by the historically low velocity of money. US personal consumption expenditures—the broadest measure of household spending—have already slowed from a reopening resurgence to rates more akin to the pre-pandemic norm and surveys show many households used stimulus money to repay debt or build savings they may not spend at all. It doesn’t look like there is a mountain of household liquidity waiting to do more chasing from here. [Emphasis added.]

In March 2022, the Federal Reserve tackled inflation with its traditional tools – raising interest rates and tightening the money supply by selling bonds, pulling dollars out of the economy. But not only have prices not gone down since then, they are going up. As observed in a July 15 article on Seeking Alpha titled “Fed-Induced Recession Looms As Rate Fears Roil All Markets”:

On Wednesday, the Consumer Price Index came in at a 9.1% annual rate. The higher-than-expected reading puts the CPI at a new 41-year high.

The biggest contributors to rising consumer prices are the basic necessities of food, fuel, and shelter. As households struggle to make ends meet, they are trimming discretionary spending, burning through savings, and running up credit card balances.

Businesses are also getting squeezed. On Thursday, the Producer Price Index showed wholesale costs rising at a massive 11.3% year-over-year.

When their own costs go up, producers must raise the prices of their products to cover those costs, regardless of demand. Less money competing for their products won’t bring producer costs down. It will just drive the companies out of business, as happened in the Great Depression. The Seeking Alpha article concludes:

… As both businesses and consumers are forced to tighten their belts, a slowdown looms.

And if the Federal Reserve makes another major policy misstep, then a severe recession and financial crisis may also be coming.

Recession is already evident. The stock market has lost a cumulative $7 trillion in value this year, while the crypto market has lost $2 trillion since last November. Emerging markets are in even worse straits. According to a July 14 article by Larry McDonald on ZeroHedge, “Emerging and frontier market countries currently owe the IMF over $100 billion. US central banking policy plus a strong USD is vaporizing this capital as we speak.… A quarter-trillion dollars of distressed debt is threatening to drag the developing world into a historic cascade of defaults.”

Every time the Fed raises rates, borrowing becomes more expensive. That means higher interest costs not only for governments but for borrowers with mortgages, home equity lines of credit, credit cards, student debt and car loans. For both large and small businesses, loans also get pricier.

To be clear, this is not the same sort of inflation that Paul Volcker was taming in 1980 when he raised the Fed funds rate to 20%. McDonald observes, “In 2021, global debt reached a record $303T, according to the Institute of International Finance .… Volcker was jacking rates into a planet with about $200T LESS debt.” [Emphasis added]

Volcker was also not dealing with the supply shortages we have today, generated by lockdowns that put more than 100,000 U.S. companies out of business; sanctions and war that cut off global supplies of fuel, food and resources; and farming crises such as that in the Netherlands, generated by overly stringent regulations.

Higher interest rates don’t alleviate cost/push inflation caused by supply crises; they make it worse. Rather than making money harder to get, the government needs to focus on the supply side of the equation, stimulating local production to bring supply levels up. Rather than Volcker’s solution, what we need is that pioneered by Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who pulled us out of similar crises with public banking institutions designed to stimulate infrastructure and development.

For foreign models, we can look to the infrastructure-funding central banks of Australia, New Zealand and Canada in the first half of the 20th century; and to China, which salvaged the global economy following the 2008 banking crisis with massive infrastructure and development funded through its state-owned development banks.

China Did It

In the last 40 years, China has exploded from one of the world’s poorest countries to a global economic powerhouse. Among other notable achievements, from 2008 to 2022 it built 23,500 miles of high-speed rail, at a time when U.S. infrastructure projects were stalled for lack of funding. How did China pull this off? Rather than relying on taxpayer funds or foreign debt, it borrowed from its own banks.

China has three massive state-owned infrastructure and development banks – the China Development Bank, the Export-Import Bank of China, and the Agricultural Development Bank of China. Called “policy banks,” they get their liquidity either (a) directly from the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) in the form of “Pledged Supplementary Lending,” or (b) by issuing bonds, which have higher credit ratings than commercial bank bonds and are in demand because they can be used as collateral to borrow from the central bank. China’s policy banks are limited to funding certain specific government policies; and these policies are all productive and public-purpose-driven, unlike the short-term private profit-maximization driving Wall Street banks.

Besides its big state-owned banks, China has an extensive network of local banks, which know their local markets. The PBOC website lists seven tools it can use for adjusting monetary policy, including not just a short-term lending facility like the U.S. Fed’s discount window, but a facility to inject liquidity into banks for medium-term loans, as well as the “pledged supplementary lending” to fund long-term loans from the three policy lenders for specific sectors, including agriculture, small businesses, and shanty town re-development.

Yet all this stimulus has not driven up Chinese prices. In fact consumer prices initially fell in 2008 and have hovered around 2% ever since. [See chart below.]

Prices are creeping up now, as is happening everywhere; but they have reached only 2.5%—far below the 9.7% seen in the U.S. in July.

Our Forebears Did It Too

State-owned infrastructure banks are not unique to China. In the United States, a similar model was initiated by Alexander Hamilton, the first U.S. Treasury Secretary. The “American System” of government-issued money and credit was key both to winning the American Revolutionary War and to transforming the nation from a collection of agrarian colonies to an industrial powerhouse. But after the War, the federal government was $70 million in debt, including $44 million from the colonies-turned-states.

Hamilton solved the debt problem with debt-for-equity swaps. Debt instruments were  accepted in partial payment for stock in the First U.S. Bank. This capital was then leveraged into credit, issued as the first U.S. currency. Loans were based on the fractional reserve model. Hamilton wrote, “It is a well established fact, that Banks in good credit can circulate a far greater sum than the actual quantum of their capital in Gold & Silver.”

That was also the model of the Bank of England, the financial engine of the colonial oppressors; but there were fundamental differences between the two models. The Bank of the United States (BUS) was designed for public development. The Bank of England (BOE) was intended for private gain. (See Hamilton Versus Wall Street: The Core Principles of the American System of Economics by Nancy Spannaus, and Alexander Hamilton: A Biography by Forrest McDonald.)

The BOE was chartered to fund a national war and was capitalized exclusively by public debt. The government would pay private lenders, who controlled what policies could be funded. Hamilton’s BUS, by contrast, was to be a commercial bank, funding itself by generating credit for infrastructure and development.

Under Hamilton’s system of “Public Credit,” the primary function of the BUS would be to issue credit to the government and private interests for internal improvements and other economic development. Hamilton said a bank’s function was to generate active capital for agriculture and manufactures, increasing the quantity and quality of labor and industry. The BUS would establish a sovereign currency, a banking system, and a source of credit to build the nation, creating productive wealth, not just financial profit.

The BUS was chartered for only 20 years, after which it lapsed. When economic hardships and monetary pressures followed, the Second Bank of the United States was founded in 1816 under President John Quincy Adams, basically on the Hamiltonian model. It funded one of the most intense periods of economic progress in history, investing directly in canals, railroads, roads, and coal and iron enterprises; lending money to states and cities engaged in such projects; and managing credit so that it continually flowed into needed productive activities.

After the Second BUS was shut down, Abraham Lincoln’s government issued Greenbacks (U.S. Notes) directly, funding both the Civil War and extensive infrastructure and development. The National Banking System was also established, under which national banks would be partially capitalized with federal securities.

An International Movement Is Born

The American System and its leaders not only allowed the American colonists to break free of British control but inspired an international movement. Other British colonies revolted, including Australia, New Zealand and Canada; and other countries rebelled against the British imperial free-trade doctrines and developed their own infrastructure and manufacturing, including Germany, Ireland, Russia, Japan, India, Mexico, and South America.

The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), founded in 1911, followed the Hamiltonian model. It was masterminded by an American named King O’Malley, who called Hamilton “the greatest financial man who ever walked the earth.” The CBA funded major national development and Australia’s participation in World War I, simply with national credit issued by the bank.

In Canada from 1939-74, the government borrowed from its own Bank of Canada, effectively interest-free. Major government projects were funded without increasing the national debt, including aircraft production during and after World War II, education benefits for returning soldiers, family allowances, old age pensions, the Trans-Canada Highway, the St. Lawrence Seaway project, and universal health care for all Canadians.

Meanwhile in the U.S., we got the Federal Reserve – and the worst banking crisis and economic depression ever in 1929-33. Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt then rebuilt the U.S. economy financed through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, again funded on the Hamiltonian model. Initially capitalized with $500 million, from 1932 to 1957 it lent or invested over $40 billion for infrastructure and development of all kinds; funded the New Deal and World War II; and turned a net profit to the government of $690 million.

Solving Today’s Price Inflation

That could be done again, assuming the political will. Some pundits predict that the Fed will back off its aggressive interest rate hikes when the carnage from that approach becomes painfully evident, but it seems to be a phase we have to go through to convince policymakers that the Fed’s current tools are not able to curb the price inflation we have today. We need to stimulate local development with a national infrastructure and development bank like China’s; and for that, Congress needs to pass an infrastructure bank bill.

Four such bills are currently before Congress. Only one, however, is capable of generating the nearly $6 trillion that the American Society of Civil Engineers says is needed over the next decade for U.S. infrastructure investment. This is HR 3339: The National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2021, which would effectively be self-funded on the American System model – a critical feature given that the federal debt is at record levels. The bank would be capitalized with federal debt acquired in debt-for-equity swaps – federal securities for non-voting bank shares paying a 2% dividend. This capital would then be leveraged at 10 to 1 into low-interest loans, essentially at cost. The bank would be anti-inflationary, by bringing supply up to meet demand; would not require new taxes but would rather increase the tax base, by increasing GDP; and would require only a small Congressional outlay for startup costs, which would quickly be repaid. For more information on HR 3339, see the National Infrastructure Bank Coalition website.

*

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 first posted on ScheerPost.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of DebtThe Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Pixabay

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.

***

Thomas Malthus predicted that famine was the inevitable byproduct of agriculturally successful populations: A well-fed population would breed faster than the agricultural sector could grow. For him, that was an unavoidable tragedy. Modern leftist governments, though, have a new approach to this: They are forcing Malthusian famines by mandating fertilizer reductions and seizing farmers’ lands. It’s all part of the Great Reset that the New World Order of Klaus Schwab et al have planned for us: You’ll have nothing, including no food, while they live in their castles on the hill, insulated from the Hobbesian terrors they’ve created.

First, we heard about the complete collapse of the Sri Lankan government. That occurred because the government, anxious for the approval of the World Economic Fund and other green activists, decided to mandate organic farming practices. The world had entirely organic farming in the pre-modern era and there was a name for it: subsistence farming. That meant that farmers subsisted on the margin of famine, with a single bad growing season or blighted crop sufficient to destroy a society.

Next, we learned that farmers in the Netherlands were striking because the government announced that they must reduce their nitrogen output by 30%-70%, something that will destroy farms—and that the government is seizing farmland to ensure this reduction goes forward.

Up until now, Holland has been one of the preeminent food-producing countries in the world but the farmers’ own government seeks to end that. To add insult to injury, Geert Wilders published a letter showing that the government intends to use the expropriated land to house “asylum seekers.”

Two more countries are joining the list of countries with governments that are deliberately embracing famine. Despite the disruption in the world food supply because of the two years of COVID lockdowns, Justin Trudeau’s government is planning to implement a plan from 2020 that will see the country reduce its nitrous oxide emissions by 30% over the next ten years—and, preferably, to reduce them by 40-45%. The ministers in both Alberta and Saskatchewan have complained, noting that this will substantially reduce food production.

However, when it comes to food production, Canada has a plan: Bugs. The government has invested in a plan to produce 9000 metric tons annually of crickets for animal and human consumption. If it’s any consolation, the solons of the New World Order will also be eating bugs. After all, lobster really is kind of like the grasshopper of the sea, right?

What we’re witnessing is a form of madness, as various world governments enter into a race to return the world to a time of cold, dark, and famine. It’s no wonder, then, that Ireland just hopped on board the “let’s create a famine” bandwagon. Ireland too is demanding that its farmers cut their emissions by 28%:

According to a report by The Times, Ireland’s Minister for Agriculture, Charlie McConalogue, has already agreed to force a cut of either 27 or 28 per cent on the country’s farming sector, a move that will cause significant disruptions to local businesses.

However, the publication also claims that there is still significant pressure on McConalogue to implement a curb of 30 per cent, a measure the head of one of the country’s largest farming organisations has said would result in a massive cut in cattle numbers in the country.

By the way, if you think it can’t happen here, in America, you’re wrong. One of the byproducts of Biden’s war in Ukraine is that American farmers are no longer receiving the fertilizer that Russia and Belarus have provided for the world. What fertilizer there is has become much more expensive. Limited, expensive fertilizer means limited, expensive food supplies. In a time of modern farming that should see unlimited amounts of food, famine will soon be haunting America too.

This is all to “save the planet,” of course. The current world population is around 8 billion. And while the Georgia Guidestones may be nothing but dust now, it’s reasonable to believe that it states a target world population that sits very well with the World Economic Fund and its acolytes around the world: Fewer than 500 million people. The rest of us are extraneous and would be better as natural fertilizer than as living, breathing CO2 polluters.

*

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: Fields by freepik.

Zelensky Poses for Magazine as His Country Collapses

July 29th, 2022 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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.

***

Increasingly, public opinion shows dissatisfaction with Volodymyr Zelensky‘s attitudes. This time, the reason for the popular indignation is the fact that the Ukrainian president participated with his wife in a photo shoot for Vogue magazine. The production of the images in the midst of a scenario of real devastation in Ukraine has not been well received by the readers, who claim that the Ukrainian leader romanticizes the conflict to take advantages.

Vogue Magazine recently released a collection of photos of Volodymyr Zlensky and Olena Zelenska in a failed attempt to make war propaganda for the Ukrainian regime. In the image, Zelensky appears holding hands and next to the First Lady. Olena poses next to some soldiers, near sand barricades at the official residence of the Ukrainian government, next to a destroyed plane.

The story was made in early July in Kiev by journalist Rachel Donadio, with the photos being taken by American photographer Annie Leibovitz. The official issue will be released in October, but the images have already been published. The magazine’s objective was to show the “emotional side” of the couple and the Ukrainian leader’s “bravery” in these difficult times. The result, however, was in a totally adverse direction.

The complex production of the photo essay generated discontent among the magazine’s readers, who apparently did not like to see the leader of a country at war reserving his time to dedicate himself to work as a photographic model. Throughout this last week of July, Zelensky has been severely criticized, certainly losing many of his Western supporters. In practice, the fact that he posed for the magazine with his wife in the midst of the war has been seen as an expression of disdain for the Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield and for the civilian population, which suffers every day as the conflict continues.

In fact, it seems difficult to imagine how the president of a country in a situation of conflict as serious as Ukraine can find time in his “busy” schedule to pose for a foreign magazine. Obviously, these meetings with journalists serve as an important instrument of war propaganda and have a strong diplomatic effect, helping to garner support and funds abroad. But that does not justify making a mega-production, with special sets, elegant clothes and sophisticated makeup while on the battlefield Ukrainian citizens are bleeding to obey the government’s orders.

Particularly in the US, the topic has grown among Republicans, who are taking advantage of popular outrage to further criticize Biden’s policy of financing the conflict. Several messages circulate on the internet containing words of discontent with the fact that billions of American dollars are being sent to support a president who, instead of helping his people, poses smiling hand in hand with his wife for a major magazine. As a result, the US government’s popularity is expected to decline further in the coming months.

Also, there is another point being discussed, which is the magazine’s opportunism in taking advantage of the Ukrainian tragedy to make a profit. The act of “glamorizing” war is, although controversial, relatively common among popular magazines, but now Vogue seems to have crossed the most elementary ethical limits. The conflict in Ukraine is serious and fully active. Thousands of lives have already been lost and millions of people have lost their homes. In addition, there is also the risk of internationalization of the confrontation, considering the constant foreign influences in Kiev. But the American magazine simply ignored all this and produced an issue that literally romanticizes the conflict, despite the suffering of the local people.

The project appears to have failed in every way. The magazine will certainly profit from the issue, but the criticism will be immense. The US government will become even more unpopular than it already is. And Zelensky will lose even more allies in the Western world. Indeed, if there was any objective to foster public diplomacy and international cooperation through unofficial means, the failure was absolute. All Vogue has done was to worsen the image of the Kiev Junta in the West and further raise awareness of American public opinion about the kind of government they are helping to finance with their taxes.

Zelensky should apologize to the Ukrainian people for the disdain he has shown. And the best way to apologize is to use his power as president to fulfill the role of peacemaker and end the conflict once and for all – which, as we know, will only be possible with the surrender and the accepting of the peace conditions imposed by Moscow.

*

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.

Featured image: Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his wife Olena Zelenska on Vogue cover. Photograph: Instagram via WION

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 announcement by Russian Defence Ministry on Tuesday on Vostok-22 strategic command post exercises during August 30-September 5 gives a big message to the West in political and military terms. 

The announcement said,

“In addition to the troops (forces) of the Eastern Military District, units of the Airborne Troops, Long Range Aviation and Military Transport Aviation, as well as military contingents from other states, will be involved in these manoeuvres.” 

If there is going to be participation by China, it will be highly significant in the present context of global politics, especially in the Far East. 

Vostok 2018, held exactly four years ago, was the first time such a massive military exercise was held after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. (At the height of the Cold War in 1981 under Leonid Brezhnev, the Soviet Union held its last Vostok exercise). In the event, Vostok 2018 turned into a Russia-China gun show. 

The Russian Federation put more than 300,000 troops in the field—alongside tens of thousands of tanks, helicopters, and weapons of every sort—for a huge war game in Russia’s far-eastern reaches, and invited the Chinese People’s Liberation Army to play along, which it did.

And a whole new groove in international affairs began appearing, signifying that the interests of Russia and China have once again begun to align — this time around, in response to US military power under a pugnacious president, Donald Trump.  

On the sidelines of the exercise, Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping had a breakfast of blinis together in Vladivostok. It was a powerful signal that Russia no longer saw China as an adversary but as a potential military ally. It was widely noted internationally as heralding a major shift in the co-relation of forces in world politics. 

To be sure, any Chinese participation in Vostok 2022 will be similarly subjected to close analysis by Washington and its allies at a time of heightened tension in US-China relations, with Beijing warning last week to take “resolute and strong measures” should the Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi proceed with reported plans to visit Taiwan. 

China has vowed to annex Taiwan by force if necessary, and has advertised that threat by flying warplanes near Taiwanese airspace and holding military exercises based on invasion scenarios. At a meeting in Singapore early July  with Chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chief of the Joint Staff Department of China’s Central Military Commission Gen. Li Zuocheng  had warned that Chinese military would “resolutely safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity. If anyone creates a wanton provocation, they will be met with the firm counterattack from the Chinese people.” 

However, at the end of the day, Chinese participation in Vostok 2022 will be seen as an expression of solidarity with Russia in the best spirit of the February 4 joint statement by the two leaderships, which states that  “Friendship between the two States has no limits, there are no ‘forbidden’ areas of cooperation.” 

No matter the usual mantra that the Vostok 2022 is not directed against any third party, its optics will be as a counter to the US pressure on Russia and China. Both Russia and China face new security challenges in the Far East in the recent period — especially, the revival of “militarism” in Japan, NATO’s growing Asia-Pacific posturing, and the belligerence in the US’ provocations over Taiwan. 

Tass news agency has reported that Russian Defence Ministry has proposed certain amendments to Russia’s Federal Law “On territorial waters, territorial sea and the contiguous zone of the Russian Federation”, putting restrictions on the passage of foreign military ships through the Northern Sea Route connecting Europe and East Asia. 

The proposed amendment will require foreign military and state ships to sail through the Northern Sea Route without entering ports or naval bases, and,  furthermore, seek permission from the Russian authorities at least 90 days in advance. The amendment will be effectively restricting the use of the shortest sea route to Asia for the western navies operating in the Asia-Pacific region. 

Significantly, this Russian move comes in the wake of the NATO’s plans to forge stronger security links between the North Atlantic area and Asia-Pacific countries (Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand) in a coordinated strategy to counter China’s rise.  

Equally, the staging of Vostok 2022 comes at a juncture when Russia’s military operations in Ukraine are entering a crucial phase. In a major speech in Moscow on July 7 at a meeting with leaders of the parliament, Putin warned that everyone should understand that Russia “by and large hasn’t started anything seriously yet” in Ukraine.

To be sure, Vostok 2022 flies in the face of western propaganda that Russian military capabilities are steadily weakening due to the conflict in Ukraine. The MOD announcement on Vostok 2022 made it a point to touch on it indirectly.

The MOD statement said,

“A number of foreign media are spreading inaccurate information about alleged mobilisation activities. Please note that only a part of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is involved in the special military operation, the number of which is sufficient to fulfil all the tasks set by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

“Moreover, none of the planned operational and combat training and military-technical and international cooperation activities of the Russian Ministry of Defence have been cancelled and will be provided with the necessary personnel, weapons, military equipment and materials.” 

This is only logical, since, following the massive haemorrhage suffered by the Ukrainian military in the past 5-month period, the military balance is now working favourably for the Russian forces. Equally, the Russian military strategy to grind the Ukrainian forces with heavy artillery and missile strikes and the slow pace of the conflict also meant that the operations are sustainable over a prolonged period.

At any rate, given the hostile posturing of the NATO forces all along Russia’s western borders, it is inconceivable that Moscow would have risked by heavily committing its forces to the Ukraine operations. Interestingly, Germany’s army chief Lieutenant General Alfons Mais told Handelsblatt newspaper recently in an interview that Russia has “almost inexhaustible”  resources.  

In the general’s estimation,

“With its artillery superiority, the Russian army is apparently working its way forward kilometre by kilometre. This is a war of attrition that will raise the question of how long Ukraine can hold out… The Russian army is getting stronger, and Russia has resources that are almost inexhaustible.” 

The focus of Vostok 2022 will be “on the use of groupings of troops (forces) to ensure military security.” It will be staged in 12 different locations spread across the Eastern Military District, one of Russia’s five military districts, with  a vast geographical spread of 7 million sq. kilometres, headquartered in Khabarovsk on the Amur river in the Russian Far East near the Russia-China border, and comprises the regions up to Sakhalin Oblast, which includes Kuril Islands.

*

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 is from Ukrainska Pravda

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia’s “Vostok 2022” War Games: Massive Military Exercise on “Invasion Scenarios”
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

In reading Nuremberg, The Belmont Report, and now the Helsinki Declaration, I can say that up to 2020, US had far lower ethical standards for human subjects research than WMA. Now? None.

Both WHO and the US HHS suffer from a form of ethical blindness when it comes to vaccine research. Foregoing long-term vaccine safety studies in favor of retrospective analysis of real-world data, these agencies fail to recognize that post-marketing (and post-EUA) studies are de facto uncontrolled, non-randomized prospective clinical trials conducted without proper consenting procedures.

If you’ve read the Nuremberg Code, the Belmont Report, and the Declaration of Helsinki, you’d know that protections are supposed to be in place not for some people undergoing some clinical studies, but instead are considered to be required to be in place for all people undergoing any clinical studies.

Right now, in our Medical Ethics, Informed Consent, and Human Rights course @ IPAK-EDU, having completed our readings and discussions of The Nuremberg Code and the Belmont Report, we’re reading and discussing The Declaration of Helsinki.

Nuremberg focused primarily on the rights of patients’ protection from harm by doctors performing “human experiments”. Helsinki changed the langued to “clinical research”, but the intention was the same. The Belmont Report was an early draft of a guidance-type document in the US meant to inform professionals of the general expectations of normative standards; it is now only considered a “historic” document.

Nuremberg, Helsinki and Belmont carry no legally enforceable language in the US. Instead, Nuremberg and Helsinki were meant to provide international standards by which individual countries could gauge their governance and regulation of clinical, human subjects research. It takes a while, but comparing the Helsinki Code to the US policies in play prior to 2020 (before COVID) shows that US researchers (meaning US-based pharmaceutical companies) wanted to weaken the concept of beneficence – the principle that all involved in a trial should benefit from being part of a clinical trial.

Where the US had departed (prior to 2020) from the rest of the countries that backed Helsinki (WMA) and participated in its updates included, according to Kimmelman et al. (2009) included:

  • Disclosure of conflict of interest;
  • Public disclosure of study design;
  • Benefit for populations in which research is conducted (beneficence);
  • Reporting of accurate results and publication of negative findings;
  • Access to treatment after research has been conducted, and
  • Restriction of use of placebo in a control group where effective alternative treatment is available.

The departure formally came when issues related to HIV clinical trials run in less wealthy countries seemed to depart from Helsinki standards. Rather than work to reconcile differences with Helsinki, US companies, and the US government came up with a different international standard called “Good clinical practice” – standards in place in the EU (codified as Directive 2001/20/EC), and the US (enforced as policy by NIH), all backed by Pharma.

The most well-known sticking point seems to have been the insistence by countries within which US-based pharmaceutical companies were testing their drugs that, at the end of any clinical trial, patients be given access to the best available standard of care for the condition being studied.

But that’s just the topic that people feel comfortable talking about.

Each week, my co-instructor, Bernadette Pajer and I discuss and debate the significance and relevance of each of the historic documents – noting of course the temporal relevance. The departure of the US and the EU from the countries that continue to abide by Helsinki serves to empower those running clinical trials at the expense of those individuals taking on the risk of new drugs and vaccines – both in the risk of poor efficacy and in the risk of potential safety issues.

It’s time to revisit why and how it came about that the pharmaceutical companies are able to write the rules by which they conduct clinical research.

If you’ve read my past substack articles, you’ll note that I (and others) have called out the FDA for lowering the regulatory bar so low for COVID-19 vaccine “approvals” or “EUA”s that no standard can actually be found.

And of course, you could not help but notice that Fauci was the person pronouncing standards of ethics and dictating his version of reality.

Well, it turns out that Fauci was at the forefront of the war on ethical research, arguing against the requirement of the use of placebos in HIV drug trials in Africa:

“At a recent meeting on AIDS care in Africa, held in Kampala, Uganda, several doctors expressed their concerns about the changes to the declaration. Dr Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health, Maryland, warned the conference of “ethical police” who might not understand the complexities of the situation in Africa.” Source

Fauci’s insistence on no placebo arm in HIV drug trials in Africa is an example of bluster and posturing on morality to hide the negative consequences (harm) of the drug AZT. We’ve seen this bluster and posturing all along with COVID-19 vaccines, and Fauci’s denial of the efficacy of early treatment. He rolls over so many of the principles of medical research ethics – and ethics of care – those that were meant to be sacrosanct to protect the interests and well-being of individuals, as outlined in Nuremberg, Helsinki, and the Belmont Report.

From Helsinki:

”Risks, Burdens and Benefits

16.       In medical practice and in medical research, most interventions involve risks and burdens.

Medical research involving human subjects may only be conducted if the importance of the objective outweighs the risks and burdens to the research subjects.

17.       All medical research involving human subjects must be preceded by careful assessment of predictable risks and burdens to the individuals and groups involved in the research in comparison with foreseeable benefits to them and to other individuals or groups affected by the condition under investigation.

Measures to minimise the risks must be implemented. The risks must be continuously monitored, assessed and documented by the researcher.

18.       Physicians may not be involved in a research study involving human subjects unless they are confident that the risks have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed.

When the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or when there is conclusive proof of definitive outcomes, physicians must assess whether to continue, modify or immediately stop the study.”

Fast-forward to 2021, from Wikipedia:

“Early long-term higher-dose therapy with AZT was initially associated with side effects that sometimes limited therapy, including anemia, neutropenia, hepatotoxicity, cardiomyopathy, and myopathy. All of these conditions were generally found to be reversible upon reduction of AZT dosages. They have been attributed to several possible causes, including transient depletion of mitochondrial DNA, sensitivity of the γ-DNA polymerase in some cell mitochondria,[27] the depletion of thymidine triphosphate, oxidative stress, reduction of intracellular L-carnitine or apoptosis of the muscle cells.[28] Anemia due to AZT was successfully treated using erythropoetin to stimulate red blood cell production.[29][30] Drugs that inhibit hepatic glucuronidation, such as indomethacin, nordazepam, acetylsalicylic acid(aspirin) and trimethoprim decreased the elimination rate and increased the therapeutic strength of the medication.[31] Today, side-effects are much less common with the use of lower doses of AZT.[32] According to IARC, there is sufficient evidence in experimental animals for the carcinogenicity of zidovudine; it is possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).[33]

The mere existence of some treatment does not prove it to be safer – or more effective – than a placebo, yet Fauci acted as though his favorite drug was fait accompli. Obviously, his lack of concern over the well-being of people in countries like Africa and India was also racist. No wonder why those in Pharma who want to do research on the cheap & dirty look at Fauci in awe… he’s the singular best worst example of an ethical researcher seen in a long, long time.

Medical hubris has been the modus operandi of Fauci well before COVID-19.

I found a reference from 1986 in which Christine Grady and Anthony Fauci argued that having an ethical physician in charge of decision-making was more important than informed consent, reversing 70 years of ethical standards first set forth for the Post-WWII era world by the Nuremberg Code. Christine Grady, Chief of the Department of Bioethics, is Fauci’s wife. (See this)

Their position is that the world can trust people in white coats conducting human experimentation to be “virtuous” while, at the same time, they write their own rules and set their own standards for “virtue”.

We are now, in 2022, in a very bad way as a direct result of Fauci and Grady degrading the standards of ethics for clinical research in the US and for dragging much of the rest of the West with them.

Many people are asking: Who do these people think they are?

It’s way past time to stop Fauci & Grady’s pattern of using disadvantaged populations, treating those with no voice like lab rats. It’s not enough to hold them accountable. It’s time we revisit and undo the damage done by Fauci & Grady and map a path for US medical research policies to be brought into alignment with the Helsinki Declaration. It has its own demerits; it’s not perfect, but it should serve as a model for reform for biomedical research conducted using US dollars.

Full enrollment for our medical ethics course has closed. But I’m re-opening enrollment today for one week for Video Access Only option so you can watch the past three weeks discussions as Bernadette and I review these historic documents in each class. You’ll also receive an email when each new class video is ready. We are discussing Helsinki today at 11:00 AM ET; the video will come out later today.

Next week, we’re reading and discussing the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and Bioethics and then we’re going to start review US policies in detail.

Click on this image to sign up to receive via email links to our discussions:

Even if this course is not for you, considering joining us in September @ IPAK-EDU for courses that will set your mind ablaze with knowledge, insight & perspective. Explore our courses here.

You can find more about Fauci & those who helped him destroy medical research ethics in the US in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s blockbuster book, The Real Anthony Fauci and learn more about how US policies have involved experimentation in CHD’s documentary, “Medical Racism: The New Apartheid.”

*

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.

Sources

Grady C, Fauci AS. The Role of the Virtuous Investigator in Protecting Human Research Subjects. Perspect Biol Med. 2016;59(1):122-31. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2016.0021. PMID: 27499489.

Kimmelman, Jonathan; Weijer, Charles; Meslin, Eric M (2009). “Helsinki discords: FDA, ethics, and international drug trials”. The Lancet. 373 (9657): 13–14. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61936-4. PMID 19121708.

Nuremberg Code

Helsinki Declaration

The Belmont Report

Featured image is from Popular Rationalism

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on How Fauci and Grady Degraded the Standards of Ethical Requirements for Clinical Research in the US Compared to the Rest of the World
  • Tags: , , ,

Pelosi to Taiwan an Affront to China’s Sovereignty

July 29th, 2022 by Stephen Lendman

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 Tuesday, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Zhao Lijian stressed the following:

“There is only one China in the world, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory.”

“The government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the sole legal government representing the whole of China.”

“The one-China principle is a fundamental principle affirmed in UNGA Resolution 2758.”

“It is the premise on which the PRC established diplomatic relations with 181 countries.”

“It is an established international consensus and a widely recognized basic norm in international relations.”

Yet “certain” regimes defiantly challenge the legality of the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Proclamation.

They vowed to respect China’s “red line” on Taiwan, then breached their commitment.

They’re “trampling on…the international order and undermining international rule of law.”

“This is an (unacceptable) affront (Beijing) will not tolerate.”

“The one-China principle is what underpins peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait” and the Asia/Pacific more broadly.

Zhao also stressed the following, saying:

“(T)here is no so-called ‘president’ in Taiwan.’ ”

“(T)he path of ‘Taiwan independence’ will lead to a dead end.”

“If Taiwan (or its paymaster USA) wants to confront the mainland militarily, it will only find it futile and doomed to fail.”

Separately, China’s Defense Ministry warned that if hostile to peace and stability Pelosi visits Taiwan, Beijing will respond strongly to her flagrant one-China principle breach.

China’s official People’s Daily quoted Beijing’s Defense Ministry’s spokesman, Tan Kefei, saying:

If Pelosi visits Taiwan, “it would seriously violate the one-China principle and stipulations in the three China-US joint communiques, seriously harm(ing) China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and seriously damag(ing) the political foundation of China-US relations.

According to China’s Global Times commentator, Hu Xijin, PLA aircraft may accompany Pelosi’s military aircraft into Taiwan’s airspace.

And relations with hegemon USA may undergo major changes.

And this from Fudan University’s Center for American Studies deputy director, Xin Qiang, saying:

“Pelosi doesn’t care that she might make a big mess of US-China relations, because the executive branch and the military will be the ones forced to take the consequences and deal with the aftermath.”

Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences senior fellow, Yuan Zheng, called for sanctioning Pelosi and her family members, banning them from entering the mainland, Hong Kong and Macao if she visits Taiwan as planned.

And this from Institute for International Affairs President Zheng Yongnian:

The Biden regime and Congress are “semi-paralyzed and divided.”

Pelosi didn’t coordinate her planned visit with the White House.

And the fake Biden’s domestic approval rating keeps declining.

With the US already in recession, Dems want the subject changed to bashing its invented enemies.

If Pelosi visits Taiwan, it’ll risk possible Sino/US confrontation, Zheng believes.

“Cooperation, competition and confrontation coexist in the US’ China policy.”

In response to a Pelosi Taiwan visit, “China…should take real actions.”

Along with accompanying her aircraft into Taiwan airspace, “military exercises (should be) conduct(ed) at the same time.”

“(M)aximum pressure” should be exerted against the US because “Taiwan is at the heart of China’s core interests.”

“(R)eunification is inevitable.”

If the empire of lies intends to turn Taiwan into an Asia/Pacific Ukraine against China, it’ll be “a dead-end policy.”

At the same time, don’t “underestimate US irrationality.”

China must prepare for the worst, knowing how hegemon USA operates.

US regimes failed in trying various ways to undermine, sabotage and isolate China.

Playing the Taiwan card at this time explains Pelosi’s planned visit.

Hegemon USA “will continue…trial and error” China policies.

What hasn’t worked so far won’t likely work ahead with new tactics.

A South China Morning Post editorial on Pelosi said the following:

If she follows through on her planned visit, she’ll risk a “ ‘resolute and forceful’ response from Beijing that may have dire regional consequences,” adding:

Her arrival in Taipei will heighten military tensions in the Taiwan Strait.

The unacceptable provocation will trigger a strong Beijing response.

China, Russia and other independent nations are gaining in prominence on the world stage.

Decadent, depraved US Western states are declining because of their self-destructive policies and refusal to change their wicked ways.

A Final Comment

Ahead of Pelosi’s planned visit, Taiwan conducted air, sea and ground military exercises.

Rehearsing how to counter a potential Chinese invasion, Pentagon and CIA elements are likely involved covertly.

And if dominant Biden regime hardliners think Beijing is bluffing about a tough response to Pelosi’s unacceptable trip, proving otherwise should be its option of choice to show that US arrogance won’t be tolerated in a part of the world where it doesn’t belong.

*

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.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

This article was originally published on the author’s website, The Stephen Lendman Blog.

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

Featured image is from Anti-bellum

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 natural medicine is often viewed with suspicion as something “novel” and “unproven,” it’s actually allopathic medicine that is the new kid on the block. Before John D. Rockefeller seized control over the medical industry 112 years ago, naturopathic-based herbal medicine, sun exposure and homeopathy were standard

Today, the Rockefeller Foundation is part of The Great Reset cast, which seeks to gain total control over every person in the world — financially, medically, physically and psychologically

Several crises are now converging, and all of them are life threatening to some degree, starting with the bioweapon they call the COVID “vaccine.” We also face supply chain issues, and shortages of food and energy. Maintaining good health will become a primary concern moving forward, as we’ll face many added stressors

Simple and free strategies that will improve and protect your health include getting regular sun exposure — the benefits of which include vitamin D production, vitamin A activation and, most importantly, subcellular melatonin production — and optimizing your circadian rhythm

Eliminating seed oils from your diet and implementing time-restricted eating are two simple ways to improve your metabolic health, reverse insulin resistance and reduce excess body fat

Click here to watch the video.

In the video above, I’m interviewed by Maria Zeee of “The Shift.” As some of you know, I went through conventional medical training and started out as an allopathic osteopath, prescribing both drugs and vaccines.

Basically, medical school works as an indoctrination program where you learn how to diagnose disease based on certain sets of symptoms. Any given diagnosis is then treated with a prespecified suite of drugs.

After about five years into private practice, I realized I was on the wrong path — that these therapies did nothing to address the root cause of any disease — and I started educating myself about nutrition and foundational health practices, which have been my focus ever since.

After I realized that, I sent letters to all my patients and let them know that if they weren’t committed to getting off drugs they needed to find a new physician. I lost about 70% of my patients when I sent that letter, but those who remained and agreed to be treated with natural strategies such as nutrition and exercise fared well, and my reputation grew as a result.

Natural Medicine Is Not Unproven

I am in the process of writing my new book and the first chapter will be all about how Rockefeller captured the U.S. medical system over a century ago through a very clever campaign to clean up many problems it had in the 19th century.

He did this through the Flexner report and subsequent strategic investments which essentially gave him control over the entire medical system which would serve as tool for him to sell petrochemical-based pharmaceuticals to further increase his wealth. Most are not aware that even today Rockefeller owns 50% of the drug companies.

While today natural medicine is viewed with suspicion as something “novel” and “unproven,” it’s actually allopathic or “conventional” medicine that is the new kid on the block. Before John D. Rockefeller seized control over the medical industry 112 years ago, naturopathic-based herbal medicine, sun exposure and homeopathy were the standard of care.

Such treatments only became “quackery” after Rockefeller’s successful infiltration. Understanding how Rockefeller corrupted medicine can be helpful in understanding current-day events a bit better as well.

How Medicine Was Corrupted

John’s father was William Avery Rockefeller, an authentic “snake oil salesman” who conned people into buying his useless “Rock Oil” tonic for cancer — a mixture of laxative and petroleum. Avery once admitted he would cheat his children every chance he got, in order to “make ‘em sharp.”1

John D. learned the lessons of duplicity and fraud well, and by the time he was 40, he controlled 90% of the global oil refineries. Within another few years (early 1880s), he also controlled 90% of the marketing of oil, and one-third of all oil wells.

Together with General Motors, Rockefeller secretly bought up and dismantled the public transportation system in the U.S., to promote the need for a family car. They also replaced electric streetcars with gas-guzzling busses to expand their petroleum business.

In 1902, Rockefeller funded the establishment of the General Education Board, through which he intended to control public education. Other oil-backed schemes to mold and reshape the American education system followed, including a scheme to alter the teaching of American history to promote a view of collectivism, as well as a program culminating in the transformation of the practice of medicine.

As mentioned, naturopathic-based herbal medicine was the norm at that time, and Rockefeller set out to shift the medical industry toward using oil-derived pharmaceuticals instead. To that end, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research was established in 1901, headed up by Dr. Simon Flexner who, at the time, was a professor of experimental pathology at the University of Pennsylvania.

Flexner’s brother, Abraham, was contracted to write a report on the state of the American medical education system, and his study, The Flexner Report,2 published in 1910, paved the way for Rockefeller to completely overhaul the American medical system.

The result of this report is that virtually every natural medical therapy was criminalized and all practitioners were put out of business and replaced with “scientific” doctors. This was the very beginning of “trust the science”. Natural remedies and ancient effective cures were dismissed as quackery. The only medicines deemed reputable were patentable synthetic drugs, invented in the oil cartel’s own research centers.

Rockefeller’s Plan to Monopolize Medicine, Banking and Food

Around that same time, the oil cartel also found a way to take over and control the U.S. financial system, through the creation of the Federal Reserve, established in 1913. The Rockefellers have been powerbrokers in the banking industry ever since.

They also sought to consolidate control over the global food supply, using philanthropy as their cover for the takeover. The Rockefeller Foundation funded the Green Revolution that led to the introduction of petroleum-based agricultural chemicals, which quickly transformed agriculture, both in the U.S. and abroad.

President Johnson’s “Food for Peace” program actually mandated the use of petroleum-dependent technologies and chemicals by aid recipients, and countries that could not afford it were granted loans from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The Rockefeller Foundation also funded the “gene revolution” that brought us patentable genetically modified seeds. Today, The Rockefeller Foundation is part of The Great Reset cast, which seeks to gain total control over every person in the world — financially, medically, physically and psychologically.

Unfortunately, a majority of people are still unaware of The Great Reset and what it actually entails. According to Mattias Desmet, Ph.D., who popularized the concept of “mass formation hypnosis” as an explanation for the insanity we saw during the first two years of the pandemic, an estimated 30% of the population are completely hypnotized and unable to see or accept the truth.

About 10% never fell for the hypnotic propaganda, while the remainder are basically “fence sitters” who go along to get along. To prevent The Great Reset, it’s crucial to educate these fence sitters so they realize the danger in going along with the official narrative.

Now’s the Time to Get Healthy

As I note in this interview, several crises are now converging, and all of them are life threatening to some degree, starting with the bioweapon they call the COVID “vaccine.” The COVID shot has already killed hundreds of thousands of people, and more likely millions, and will continue to cause premature death and disability over the next several years.

We also face supply chain issues, and shortages of food and energy. Maintaining good health will become a primary concern moving forward, as there will be so many added stressors. On top of that, hospitals are also more dangerous than ever.

The good news is that getting and staying healthy is fairly simple. Your body is designed to heal itself, given the chance. If you’re new to this, be sure to sign up for my online newsletter and start reading. You can also find my articles archived on Substack.

In the interview, I explain why I had to create a fee-based Censored Library on Substack. For clarity, you can read all of my newsletter articles for free for 48 hours. If you want unlimited access, you’d need to join my Censored Library, which is $5 per month.

Health Tip No. 1: Sun Exposure

So, what are some of the strategies that can help keep you healthy that don’t cost a fortune (or anything at all)? One of the most basic ones is to get regular sun exposure, as its benefits include vitamin D production, vitamin A activation and, most importantly, subcellular melatonin production.

Ninety-five percent of the melatonin in your body is actually produced in your mitochondria in response to near-infrared light. Mitochondria are responsible for cellular energy production, and mitochondrial dysfunction is a root cause of most chronic disease.

Melatonin, meanwhile, is a very powerful antioxidant that reduces oxidative stress. By mopping up free radicals, melatonin reduces damage to the mitochondria and helps them work optimally.

Melatonin also helps increase glutathione, which is a major detoxification agent. Importantly, virtually none of the melatonin created in your mitochondria will ever make its way into your blood. Oral melatonin can also help your chronobiology and regulate sleep, when taken at the appropriate time (in the evening, shortly before bed).

Health Tip No. 2: Cut Seed Oils From Your Diet

If you’re worried about getting sunburn from all this sun exposure, this next talking point will offer relief, because the No. 1 cause of sunburn is excessive intake of seed oils and other foods high in linoleic acid (LA). This includes oils like canola, safflower, corn oil and many others.

The LA actually gets incorporated into your cellular membranes, and if you have high levels of LA in your cells, you’re going to be more prone to both sunburn and skin cancer. While LA has a half-life of about two years, and can take up to seven years to get rid of completely, many will notice a difference in the amount of sun they can tolerate fairly rapidly once they cut this fat from their diet.

That said, sunburn may be the least of your problems if you’re consuming high amounts of LA, as it acts as an overall metabolic poison.3 This will be one of the major subjects of my next book. I am actually hoping to give it to you for free in celebration of our 25th anniversary.

Seed oils, courtesy of the LA, are incredibly proinflammatory4 and drive oxidation in your body. This oxidation, in turn, triggers mitochondrial dysfunction that then drives the disease process.5,6,7,8,9,10,11Anything over 10 to 15 grams a day is likely to cause problems in the long run, and the average American is eating 80 grams a day.

Your body also breaks down LA into harmful subcomponents called advanced lipid oxidation end products (ALEs) and oxidized LA metabolites (OXLAMs), which can cause significant damage at the cellular level.

For example, an ALE called 4HNE is a mutagen known to cause DNA damage, and OXLAMs are cytotoxic, genotoxic, mutagenic, carcinogenic, thrombogenic, atherogenic and obesogenic.12 In fact, one of the primary reasons for the obesity epidemic in the U.S. is the overwhelming amount of LA being consumed on a daily basis.

In addition to all of that, most seed oils are made from genetically engineered crops, making them a significant source of toxic glyphosate. Aside from cooking oils, the primary sources of LA are processed foods (any food containing or cooked in seed oil) and conventionally raised chicken and pork (as they’re fed a lot of corn).

Health Tip No. 3: Time-Restricted Eating

A third strategy that won’t cost you a dime, and may actually save you money, is time-restricted eating (TRE), a form of intermittent fasting where you eat all your meals and snacks within a six- to eight-hour window, and your last meal at least three hours before bedtime. This means that for 16 to 18 hours a day, you’re fasting.

This schedule will give you virtually all the same benefits as calorie restriction with respect to longevity benefits, but without any of the downsides, the primary one being compliance.

In the U.S., 90% eat across 12 hours. Some will even wake up in the middle of the night to eat, and this is a surefire recipe for metabolic disaster and chronic ill health. One of the primary benefits of TRE is that it will make you metabolically flexible, so that you can burn both fat and carbs for energy.

If you’re constantly hungry, chances are you’re metabolically inflexible and cannot efficiently burn fat. Your body is basically just screaming for another quick energy fix, because carbs burn fast and when they’re gone, you need more. Once your body can efficiently burn fat, hunger usually disappears.

Without hunger pangs driving your search for food, you’ll also be able to simply not eat if you’re in a situation where you can’t find healthy food. This way, you’re not “forced” to eat junk that will deteriorate your health.

TRE will also help prevent excessive activation of the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR). mTOR is found in every tissue and responds to different nutrients and stimuli, including dietary protein, insulin, carbohydrates and exercise, and is best activated twice a day in a pulsatile fashion. When you activate it continuously as most people do when they graze throughout the day, it can lead to an increase in risk in diseases like cancer.

Tip No. 4: Optimize Your Circadian Rhythm

Circadian rhythm optimization is another frequently overlooked strategy that can have a tremendously beneficial impact on your health. Your body is designed to fall asleep a couple of hours or so after the sun has gone down, and to wake up more or less with the sun.

Most adults need right around eight hours of solid sleep per night for everything to function optimally. In the evening, avoid blue light from your TV and electronic screens. If you need lighting, you could use red LED bulbs, low-wattage filament bulbs or salt lamps. Alternatively, you could wear blue-blocking glasses. There are also various apps that will alter the color temperature of your screen at night.

These are but four simple strategies that cost you nothing and can make a huge difference in your health and well-being. There are dozens more, many of which I’ll cover in a free e-book that’s being published later this year. The truth is, your body is biased toward health and can heal from most anything as long as you give it what it needs and eliminate pernicious toxins that are jamming up your mitochondria and cellular machinery.

Become a Perpetual Student and Continue Your Learning

Last but not least, I mention in the interview that one of the most important traits you can develop if you want to be healthy is the mindset of a perpetual student. Pre-internet, learning was a laborious challenge that required physical trips to libraries and book stores, making photocopies and storing reams of paper.

As the internet took off, researching became incredibly easy. For about 20 years, you had the literature of the world at your fingertips. Today, censorship has stifled much of this intellectual freedom, and accessing information about health in particular is again a challenge.

Google, for example, is shadow banning and hiding valuable sites that contradict the official narrative so, unless you know where to look, you may not find them. Fortunately, I’ve been around for 25 years and have a large following that do know where to find my site. Newcomers, however, are at a distinct disadvantage.

So, at this point, it’s very important to identify trusted sources, and to follow them regularly, as doing a Google search is not going to lead you in the right direction anymore.

Virtually all search results are directed toward Big Pharma-approved and “fact checked” sites that regurgitate the talking points put forth by the globalist cabal that seek to force us into The Great Reset. One of my personal favorites that I follow regularly is Dr. Robert Malone’s GETTR account.

*

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.

Notes

1 Corbett Report October 6, 2017

2 The Flexner Report 1910

3 YouTube, Ending the Debate Over Seed Oils September 9, 2021

4 J Surg Res. 2012 Sep; 177(1): e35–e43

5 STAT April 19, 2017

6 BMJ 2016;353:i1246

7 NIH Grantome, Dietary Treatment of Hyperlipidemia in Women vs Men

8 Atherosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology 2004;24:498–503

9 Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging 2018;22(8):885-891

10 British Heart Journal 1995 Oct;74(4):449-54

11 The Lancet August 29, 2017; 390(10107): 2050-2062

12 YouTube, Omega-6 Apocalypse 2, Chris Knobbe August 25, 2021, 6:05

Featured image is from Michigan Medicine

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on How Medicine Was Corrupted: Difficult Times Ahead — How to Break Free From the System
  • Tags: ,

This Month’s Most Popular Articles

July 29th, 2022 by Global Research News

When the Globalists Crossed the Rubicon: The Assassination of Shinzo Abe

Emanuel Pastreich, July 23 , 2022

Will the Tragic Fate of World Stars Like Celine Dion and Justin Bieber Open the Eyes of Their Fans? Impacts of COVID-19 Vaccine

Dr. Nicole Delépine, July 23 , 2022

Pfizer Crimes Against Our Children: Cardiac Arrest of Two Month Old Baby an Hour After Experimental Vaccine

Ranit Feinberg, July 17 , 2022

Global Planned Financial Tsunami Has Just Begun

F. William Engdahl, July 23 , 2022

Fifth Generation (5G) Directed Energy Radiation Emissions in the Context of Contaminated Nanometal COVID-19 Vaccines with Graphite Ferrous Oxide Antennas

Mark Steele, July 20 , 2022

What Was COVID Really About? Triggering a Multi-Trillion Dollar Global Debt Crisis. “Ramping Up an Imperialist Strategy”?

Colin Todhunter, July 27 , 2022

Video: The Plan. WHO Plans to Have 10 Years of Pandemics (2020-2030). “Proof that the Pandemic Was Planned with a Purpose”

Stop World Control, July 17 , 2022

Dear Friends, Sorry to Announce a Genocide: Dr. Naomi Wolf on the Pfizer “Confidential Report”

Dr. Naomi Wolf, July 17 , 2022

COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies

SUN, July 9 , 2022

The Cult of Globalism: The Great Reset and Its “Final Solution” for “Useless People”

Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 16 , 2022

Big Pharma Wants to Put an End to Vitamins and Supplements

Dr. Joseph Mercola, July 20 , 2022

Worldwide Monkeypox Health Emergency (PHEIC): For Bill Gates, It’s “Moneypox”: Simulation of Fictitious Monkeypox Virus Pandemic in March 2021, Goes Live in May 2022

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 24 , 2022

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 8 , 2022

Toxicology vs Virology: The Rockefeller Institute and the Criminal Polio Fraud

F. William Engdahl, July 14 , 2022

The Elite Coup to Kill or Enslave Us: Why Can’t Governments, Legal Actions and Protests Stop Them?

Robert J. Burrowes, July 25 , 2022

The United Nations Scrubbed this Article Heralding ‘The Benefits of World Hunger’ from Its Website After It Went Viral

Alicia Powe, July 8 , 2022

The Heroic Archbishop Viganò: The Corrupt Billionaire Agenda, “SARS-CoV-2 Virus Is Nothing but a Seasonal Flu”

His Excellency Carlo Maria Viganò, July 23 , 2022

European Union Finally Admits COVID-19 Vaccines Destroy Your Immune System

Arsenio Toledo, July 13 , 2022

38,983 Deaths and 3,530,362 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database as Mass Funeral for Children Who Died After Pfizer Vaccine Held in Switzerland

Brian Shilhavy, June 29 , 2022

Whilst You Were Distracted by Boris Resigning, the UK Gov. Published a Report Confirming Fully Vaccinated Children Are 13,633% More Likely to Die of COVID Than Unvaccinated Children

The Expose, July 14 , 2022

DARPA, Insects, Mad Science, and Us: Nowhere to Hide

By Tessa Lena, July 28, 2022

You may think that you have seen it all but here is a great idea. Take some insects, infect them with a genetically modified virus designed to genetically edit mature plants in real time, and release them. Release them into wild and repeat, “it’s safe and effective.”

Russia to Exit WHO, WTO and Other UN Agencies?

By Peter Koenig, July 28, 2022

According to Russian Duma’s Deputy Speaker Pyotr Tolstoy, the Russian Government is evaluating the possibility to withdraw from a number of UN agencies, most visibly WHO and WTO which they consider do Russia more harm than good. This may be particularly the case with WTO which Russia only joined in 2012 after 8 years of negotiations, because WTO allows countries under the western sanctions program to increase tariffs on Russian goods way above the WTO guidelines.

History: How America Lost Its Anti-Imperial Foreign Policy Tradition, and How It Can be Recovered

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, July 28, 2022

Compared the great initiatives taken on behalf of freedom and anti-colonialism throughout the past 250 years, today’s USA appears to be a strange and foolish creature running roughshod over the dignity of people and nations in a race for mass nuclear extermination.

“The WHO Review and Why It Matters to You?” Abir Balan

By Dr. Robert Malone, July 28, 2022

“The WHO Review and Why it Matters to You?” was written by Abir Ballan and published by PANDA. It is a must read by anyone who is interested in public health, the global COVID-19 WHO policies – that almost all nations followed, and the full extent of the corruption by WHO/global leaders and governments. The review also lists out what should have been done instead.

The War on Syria, The Bab al Hawa Deception. “Humanitarian Aid” in Support of Al Qaeda Terrorists

By Syria Support Movement, July 28, 2022

On July 12,  the UN Security Council extended the authorization for humanitarian aid to cross through Bab al Hawa on the Turkey-Syria border for another six months.  The US and allies had wanted a one-year extension, but Russia vetoed it.  The US, UK and France abstained on the six-month approval, while all others supported it.

The Light and Shadows of the Korean Peninsula

By Emanuel Pastreich, July 28, 2022

How many times have I seen an American expert pointing to a satellite photo of the Korean Peninsula at night and remarking that the striking difference between the darkness that envelops North Korea and the bright lights that illuminate South Korea, as well as Japan, symbolizes the insularity, the oppressiveness and the pathetically backward economic state of the North. The obvious point is that the brightly lit South is a model of progress, of technology, of democracy and of free markets.

Prominent U.S. Official Told CNN that They’re Afraid Western Unity on Ukraine Is Weakening. “Economic Suicide” for the EU

By Andrew Korybko, July 28, 2022

The prevailing narrative has hitherto been that Western unity on Ukraine is an unprecedented display of solidarity with so-called “democratic principles”, yet now none other than a leading American official just discredited that interpretation of events.

Boris Johnson Positioned as Next NATO Chief: Report

By Zero Hedge, July 28, 2022

Could Boris Johnson be tagged as the next Secretary General of NATO? That’s what a somewhat surprising new report in The Telegraph suggests, indicating that “Ukrainian and Tory MPs support idea of PM being a possible candidate, though sceptics suggest he would likely be greeted with a French veto.”

Did Wall Street Play a Role in this Year’s Wheat Price Crisis?

By Ashoka Mukpo, July 28, 2022

In late March, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine entered its second month, U.N. agencies began to issue dire warnings regarding the world’s food supply. The war, they said, was pushing food-insecure countries to the brink of a “devastating” hunger crisis, with the combination of brutal fighting in Ukraine and unprecedented economic sanctions on Russia threatening to disrupt as much as a third of the world’s wheat exports.

Member of European Parliament Labels COVID Vaccine Coercion “Worst Crime Ever Committed on Humanity”

By Steve Watson, July 28, 2022

In a speech in the European Parliament earlier this month, German MP Christine Anderson described the coercion of people into taking COVID vaccines as the “biggest crime ever committed on humanity.”

The Dangers of Military Escalation: Lessons from Vietnam for Ukraine

By Rick Sterling, July 28, 2022

There are similarities today with the US and NATO pouring tens of BILLIONS of dollars in weapons into Ukraine to counter the Russian military intervention. The US and western allies are providing additional support in intelligence and military advice. While there are not yet official US troops (as there were not in Vietnam for the first years), there are special operations and much other military support.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: DARPA, Insects, Mad Science, and Us: Nowhere to Hide

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.

***

Compared the great initiatives taken on behalf of freedom and anti-colonialism throughout the past 250 years, today’s USA appears to be a strange and foolish creature running roughshod over the dignity of people and nations in a race for mass nuclear extermination.

Such is the image projected by Mark Milley’s ranting anti-China attacks or the relentless demonization of Russia sweeping across mainstream media ever day- both nations who have repeatedly called for cooperation and friendship with the USA. If it were simply belligerent words then we could brush off these childish attacks as mere foolish rhetoric, but sadly these words are backed by extraordinarily dangerous action. From escalating military maneuvers on Russia’s border, to belligerent military expansion in China’s backyard, everywhere one looks, we find the same lemming-like commitment to playing a nuclear game of chicken in the hopes of psychologically breaking the Multipolar Alliance.

However, as China’s former Ambassador Cui Tiankai recently stated,

 “China and the USA need to recapture the spirit of cooperation from WWII and join hands to confront our common enemies in the new era.”

I couldn’t agree more.

As the Ambassador invoked the spirit of Lincoln citing the martyred President’s beautiful insight: “the best way to predict the future is to create it”, I think it’s wise to revisit the two opposing global policy options the USA had available to it at the turn of the last century while the Civil War hero William McKinley still presided in the office of the presidency in 1901.

At this crucial moment in world history, it was still undetermined whether America would hold on to its anti-imperial traditions or slip into the trap of a new imperial identity.

Monroe Doctrine or Empire?

As Martin Sieff eloquently laid out in his recent article, President McKinley himself was a peacemaker, anti-imperialist of a higher order than most people realize. McKinley was also a strong supporter of two complementary policies: 1) Internally, he was a defender of Lincoln’s “American system” of protectionism, internal improvements and black suffrage and 2) Externally, he was a defender of the Monroe Doctrine that defined America’s anti-imperial foreign policy since 1823.

The Monroe Doctrine’s architect John Quincy Adams laid out this principle eloquently on July 4, 1821:

“After fifty years the United States has, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations, while asserting and maintaining her own.

That the United States does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.

That by involving itself in the internal affairs of other nations, the United States would destroy its own reason of existence; the fundamental maxims of her policy would become, then, no different than the empire America’s revolution defeated. It would be, then, no longer the ruler of itself, but the dictator of the world.”

America’s march is the march of mind, not of conquest.

Colonial establishments are engines of wrong, and that in the progress of social improvement it will be the duty of the human family to abolish them”.

It was an aging John Quincy Adams whom a young Abraham Lincoln collaborated with in ending the imperial Mexican-American war under Wall Street stooge James Polk in 1846. When Adams died in 1848, Lincoln picked up the torch he left behind as the London-directed “proto deep state” of the 19th century worked to dissolve the republic from within. The foreign policy conception laid out by Adams ensured that America’s only concern was “staying out of foreign imperial entanglements” as Washington had earlier warned and keeping foreign imperial interests out of the Americas. The idea of projecting power onto the weak or subduing other cultures was anathema to this genuinely American principle.

A major battle which has been intentionally obscured from history books took place in the wake of Lincoln’s murder and the re-ascension of the City of London-backed slave power during the decades after the Union victory of 1865.

On the one hand America’s role in the emerging global family of nations was being shaped by followers of Lincoln who wished to usher in an age of win-win cooperation. Such an anti-Darwinian system which Adams called “a community of principle” asserted that each nation had the right to sovereign banking controls over private finance, productive credit emissions tied to internal improvements with a focus on continental (rail/road) development, industrial progress and full spectrum economies. Adherants of this program included Russia’s Sergei Witte and Alexander II, Germany’s Otto von Bismarck, France’s Sadi Carnot, and leading figures within Japan’s Meiji Restoration.

On the other hand, “eastern establishment families” of the USA more loyal to the gods of money, hereditary institutions and the vast international empire of Britain saw America’s destiny tied to an imperial global partnership with the Mother country. These two opposing paradigms within America have defined two opposing views of “progress”, “value”, “self-interest” and “law” which have continued to shape the world over 150 years later.

William Gilpin vs Alfred Mahan: Two Paradigms Clash

A champion of the former traditionally American outlook who rose to the international scene was William Gilpin (1813-1894).

Gilpin hailed from a patriotic family of nation builders whose patriarch Thomas Gilpin was a close ally of Benjamin Franklin and leading member of Franklin’s Philosophical Society. William Gilpin was famous for his advocacy of America’s trans continental railway whose construction he proselytized as early as 1845 (it was finally begun by Lincoln during the Civil War and completed in 1869 as I outlined in How to Save a Dying Republic.

In his thousands of speeches and writings, Gilpin made it known that he understood America’s destiny to be inextricably tied to the ancient civilization of China- not to impose opium as the British and their American lackies were want to do, but to learn from and even emulate!

In 1852, Gilpin stated:

“Salvation must come to America from China, and this consists in the introduction of the “Chinese constitution” viz. the “patriarchal democracy of the Celestial Empire”. The political life of the United States is through European influences, in a state of complete demoralization, and the Chinese Constitution alone contains elements of regeneration. For this reason, a railroad to the Pacific is of such vast importance, since by its means the Chinese trade will be conducted straight across the North American continent. This trade must bring in its train Chinese civilization. All that is usually alleged against China is mere calumny spread purposefully, just like those calumnies which are circulated in Europe about the United States”.

With Lincoln’s 1861 presidential victory, Gilpin became Lincoln’s bodyguard and ensured the president survived his first assassination attempt en route to Washington from Illinois. During the Civil War, Gilpin was made Colorado’s first Governor where he successfully stopped the southern power from opening up a western front during the war of secession (applying Lincoln’s greenback system to finance his army on a state level) and winning the “Battle of Glorieta Pass”, thus saving the union.

After the war Gilpin became a leading advocate of the internationalization of the “American system of political economy” which Lincoln applied vigorously during his short-lived presidency. Citing the success of Lincoln’s system, Gilpin said:

 “No amount of argument will make America adopt old world theories… To rely upon herself, to develop her own resources, to manufacture everything that can possibly be manufactured within her territory- this is and has been the policy of the USA from the time of Alexander Hamilton to that of Henry Clay and thence to our own days”.

Throughout his speeches Gilpin emphasizes the role of a U.S.-Russia alliance:

“It is a simple and plain proposition that Russia and the United States, each having broad, uninhabited areas and limitless undeveloped resources, would by the expenditure of 2 or 3 hundred millions apiece for a highway of the nations threw their now waste places, add a hundredfold to their wealth and power and influence”

And seeing in China’s potential the means to re-enliven the world- including the decadent and corrupt culture of Europe:

“In Asia a civilization resting on a basis of remote antiquity has had, indeed, a long pause, but a certain civilization- although hitherto hermetically sealed up has continued to exist. The ancient Asiatic colossus, in a certain sense, needed only to be awakened to new life and European culture finds a basis there on which it can build future reforms.”

In opposition to the outdated British controls of “choke points” on the seas which kept the world under the clutches of the might of London, Gilpin advocated loudly for a system of internal improvements, rail development, and growth of the innate goodness of all cultures and people through scientific and technological progress. Once a global system of mutual development of rail were established, Gilpin stated “in the shipment of many kinds of raw and manufactured goods, it will largely supersede the ocean traffic of Great Britain, in whose hands is now carrying the trade of the world.”

Gilpin’s vision was most clearly laid out in his 1890 magnum opus “The Cosmopolitan Railway” which featured designs for development corridors across all continents united by a “community of principle”.

Echoing the win-win philosophy of Xi Jinping’s New Silk Road today, Gilpin stated:

“The cosmopolitan railway will make the whole world one community. It will reduce the separate nations to families of our great nation… From extended intercommunication will arise a wider intercourse of human ideas and as the result, logical and philosophical reciprocities, which will become the germs for innumerable new developments; for in the track of intercommunication, enterprise and invention invariably follow and whatever facilitates one stimulates every other agency of progress.”

Mahan Derails America’s Anti-Imperial Identity

Alfred Thayer Mahan (1840-1914) represented an opposing paradigm which true American statesmen like Lincoln, Secretary of State James Blaine, William Seward, President Grant, William Garfield, and McKinley detested. Sadly, with McKinley’s murder (run by an anarchist ring with ties to British Intelligence) and the rise of Teddy Roosevelt in 1901, it was not Gilpin’s but rather Mahan’s worldview which became the dominant foreign policy doctrine for the next 120 years (despite a few brief respites under FDR and JFK).

Mahan is commonly credited for being a co-founder of modern geopolitics and an inspiration for British imperial grand strategist Halford Mackinder.

Having graduated from West Point’s naval academy in 1859, Mahan soon became renowned as a total failure in actual combat having crashed warships repeatedly into moving and stationary objects during the Civil War. Since reality was not his forte, Mahan focused his post-war career on Ivory tower theorizing gushing over maps of the world and fawning over Britain’s power as a force of world history.

His “Influence of Sea Power Upon History 1660-1783 published in the same year that Gilpin published his Cosmopolitan Railway (1890) was a total break from the spirit of win-win cooperation that defined America’s foreign policy. According to the Diplomat, this book soon “became the bible for many navies around the world” with the Kaiser of Germany (now released from the influence of the great rail-loving statesman Otto von Bismarck whom he fired in 1890) demanding all of his offers read. Later Teddy Roosevelt ordered copies for every member of Congress. In Mahan’s book, the geopolitician continuously asserts his belief that it is America’s destiny to succeed the British Empire.

Taking the British imperial definition of “commerce” which uses free trade as a cover for the military dominance of weak nations (open borders and turning off protectionism simply makes a people easier to rob), Mahan attempts to argue that America need not continue to adhere to “outdated” habits like the Monroe doctrine since the new order of world empires demands America stay relevant in a world of sea power and empire. Mahan writes: “The advance of Russia in Asia, in the division of Africa, in the colonial ambitions of France and in the British idea of Imperial Federation, now fast assuming concrete shape in practical combined action in South Africa” demands that the USA act accordingly.

Attempting to refute the “outdated habits” of rail development which consume so many foolish statesmen around the globe, Mahan states: “a railway competes in vain with a river… because more facile and copious, water traffic is for equal distances much cheaper and because cheaper, more useful”. Like those attacking today’s Belt and Road Initiative, the power of railways is that their returns are not measurable by simple monetary terms, but are rather QUALITATIVE. The long-term construction of rail systems not only unite divided people, increase manufacturing and industrial corridors but also induce closer powers of association and interchange between agriculture and urban producers. These processes uplift national productive powers building full spectrum economies and also a culture’s capacity for creative thought.

The attempt made to justify sea traffic merely because “larger amounts of goods can be shipped” is purely quantitative and monetary sophistry devoid of any science of real value.

While Gilpin celebrates the successful awakening of China and other great nations of the world, in the Problem of Asia (1901) Mahan says:

 “It is scarcely desirable that so vast a proportion of mankind as the Chinese constitute should be animated by but one spirit”. Should China “burst her barriers eastward, it would be impossible to exaggerate the momentous issues dependant upon a firm hold of the Hawaiian islands by a great civilized maritime power.”

Mahan’s adherence to social Darwinism is present throughout his works as he defines the political differences of the 3 primary branches of humanity (Teutonic, Slavic and Asiatic) as purely rooted in the intrinsic inferiority or superiority of their race saying: 

“There are well recognized racial divergencies which find concrete expression in differences equally marked of political institution, of social progress and of individual development. These differences are… deep seated in the racial constitution and partly the result of the environment”.

Mahan goes onto restate his belief that unlike the superior Teutonics “the Oriental, whether national or individual does not change” and “the East does not progress”.

Calling China a carcass to be devoured by an American eagle, Mahan writes:

“If life departs, a carcass can be utilized only by dissection or for food; the gathering to it of the eagles is a natural law, of which it is bootless to complain… the onward movement of the world has to be accepted as a fact.”

Championing an Anglo American alliance needed to subdue and “civilize” China as part of the post-Boxer Rebellion, Mahan says

of all the nations we shall meet in the East, Great Britain is the one with which we have by far the most in common in the nature of our interests there and in our standards of law and justice”.

In case there was any doubt in the minds of Mahan’s readers as to the MEANS which America should assert its dominance onto China, Mahan makes clear his belief that progress is caused by 1) force and 2) war:

“That such a process should be underlain by force… on the part of outside influences, force of opposition among the latter themselves [speaking of the colonial European monarchies racing to carve up China in 1901 -ed] may be regrettable, but it is only a repetition of all history… Every step forward in the march that has opened in China to trade has been gained by pressure; the most important have been the result of actual war.”

A Last Anti-Imperial Push

The chaos induced by the anti-foreigner Boxer Rebellion of 1899 which spread quickly across China resulted a heated battle between imperial and anti-imperial forces in both Russia and the USA. Where Transport Minister Sergei Witte who spearheaded the development of the Trans Siberian rail line (1890-1905) tried to avoid military entanglement, McKinley was busy doing the same.

The boxers soon attacked the Manchurian rail connecting Russia to China by land and Witte succumbed to pressure to finally send in troops. The reformers of China who attempted to modernize with American and Russian assistance under Emperor Kuang Hsu and Li Hung Chang fell from power as total anarchy reigned. The outcome of the Boxer chaos involved the imperial powers of France, Germany and England demanding immense financial reparations, ownership of Chinese territory and mass executions of the Boxers.

While McKinley is often blamed for America’s imperial turn, the reality is just the opposite.

The Spanish-American war begun in 1898 was actually launched unilaterally by Anglophilic racist Theodore Roosevelt who used the 4 hour window he had while Undersecretary of the Navy (while the actual Secretary was out of Washington) to send orders to Captain Dewey of the Pacific fleet to engage in a fight with the Spanish over their Philippine territories. McKinley had resisted the war hawks until that point but found himself finally bending to the momentum. In China, McKinley, like Russia’s Sergei Witte worked desperately to reject taking territory resulting in great fears from the British oligarchy that a U.S.-Russia alliance led by McKinley and Witte was imminent.

The assassination of McKinley on September 18, 1901 catapulted Mahan-loving Vice President Teddy Roosevelt into high office, who enmeshed America into a new epoch of Anglo-American imperialism abroad, a growth of eugenics and segregation at home and the creation of an independent police state agency called the FBI.

As Sieff writes:

“Roosevelt devoted his next eight years in the presidency and the rest of his life to integrating the United States and the British Empire into a seamless web of racial imperialist oppression that dominated Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa and Asia and that destroyed the cultural history and heritage of the Native North American nations.”

 

In Russia, the 1902 Anglo-Japan Treaty led to the disastrous Japan-Russia war of 1905 which devastated the Russian navy, ended the political career of Sergei Witte and threw Russia into chaos leading to the fall of the Romanovs (Czar Nicholas II was the last statesman occupying high office that this author is aware of to have actively promoted the Bering Strait Tunnel rail connection in 1906. It wasn’t until FDR’s Vice President Henry Wallace met with Foreign Minister Molotov in 1942 that the idea resurfaced once more).

While the “open door” rape of  China was attempted by the Anglo-Americans, a fortunate rear guard maneuver orchestrated by another follower of Abraham Lincoln named Sun Yat-sen resulted in a surprise overthrow of the Manchu dynasty in 1911 and the institution of the Republic of China with Sun Yat-sen as the acting President.

While Sun Yat-sen sided with Gilpin and Lincoln in opposition to the Mahanists on the issue of rail and industrial development (illustrated in his extraordinary 1920 International Development of China program), the intrigues that sank the world into World War I made any hopes of this early development of China impossible in Sun Yat-sen’s lifetime.

Today’s Belt and Road Initiative, and strategic alliance established between Russia, China and Iran has re-awoken the forgotten vision of William Gilpin for a world of cooperating sovereign nation states. Do western nations still have anything moral enough within their citizens or nationalist leaders capable of reversing their own plunge into chaos long enough to accept a Russia-China-US alliance needed to revive McKinley’s American System or will we slip ever further into a new World War?

*

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 The Canadian Patriot.

Matthew Ehret the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas trilogy. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from TCP unless otherwise stated


The Clash of the Two Americas

Vol. 1 & 2

by Matthew Ehret

In his new two volume series The Clash of the Two Americas, Matthew Ehret introduces a new analysis of American history from the vantage point that the globally-extended supranational shadow government that managed the British Empire was never fully defeated and has acted within the USA itself since 1776 as a continuous multi-generational fifth column managing every significant event and assassination of American presidents for the next 250 years.

Click here to order.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on History: How America Lost Its Anti-Imperial Foreign Policy Tradition, and How It Can be Recovered
  • Tags: ,

“The WHO Review and Why it Matters to You?” Abir Balan

July 28th, 2022 by Dr. Robert Malone

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 WHO Review and Why it Matters to You?” was written by Abir Ballan and published by PANDA. It is a must read by anyone who is interested in public health, the global COVID-19 WHO policies – that almost all nations followed, and the full extent of the corruption by WHO/global leaders and governments. The review also lists out what should have been done instead. The full document can be accessed by the link below:

This review empowers you with key information to help you assess the WHO’s candidacy as an authoritative global public health organization. It provides background information on public health and pandemic management principles as previously agreed upon by this branch of the United Nations. The PANDA analysis will allow you to evaluate the soundness of the WHO-recommended response to Covid-19 and MonkeyPox, and to determine how faithfully the WHO followed its own previously developed recommendations. It goes on to summarize the assumptions underlying their Covid-19 recommendations, followed by a summary of the final recommendations.

Finally, it discusses possible influences on the WHO’s decisions and direction, and suggests actions you may take to safeguard your own personal and national health sovereignty from the power which this international organization has developed and has been exerting on all of us.

My brief synopsis/compilation is below:

The WHO was founded in 1946 and had some basic core principles, that were completely ignored during the COVID outbreak. This image is a compilation of the constitution of the WHO:

The next image (below) is are from the planning documents for influenza and related pandemic diseases in 2019.

These recommendations were based on an analysis of the scientific literature. What actions the WHO chose to recommended during COVID were almost a complete deviation from the previous pandemic development plans which it had developed and endorsed. Of course, the questions which come to the mind of any who confront the almost complete reversal of previously recommended policies are “Why?” and “Who was behind this remarkable reversal?”

Obviously, the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) deployed during the Covid-19 pandemic are not in line with earlier the 2019 WHO pandemic management recommendations.

This review then goes through all the “new” data that shows that lock-downs, masks, universal vaccination, school closures, etc. are all based on either fabricated, poor quality studies or non-existent research. These sections are detailed and nicely summarized.

The issue of lethality of the virus and how WHO has falsely made it appear as if the virus is more deadly than it actually was, even with the original strain – is also discussed in detail.

Using images and tweets from the WHO website – the review makes the case that the WHO has been corrupted, but does so without making a single specific accusation. The images let the WHO’s own words and deeds speak. The impact factor of these images is significant. One such example is below:

The conclusion of the document lists out what might have been done differently.

The document is comprehensive, well referenced and worth reading. Consider doing so and sharing with friends, colleagues and even politicians.

*

Template letter to politicians or government representatives

Dear [insert name],

As a [representative of the people in government/ member of parliament], you are committed to serve the people and ensure that their best interests are at the heart of all public policy.

The WHO-recommended response to Covid-19 was largely followed by most countries. This highlights how far-reaching the WHO’s influence is on local governance and, as a consequence, the impact of its recommendations on people’s lives and livelihoods.

Are you sure the WHO-recommended response to Covid-19 is in line with WHO’s constitution and its own pandemic preparedness plans?

Are you sure the WHO is still guided by science and not by private interests?

What is your responsibility towards your fellow citizens?

You have great power to influence your government and create positive change.

You are invited to explore the suitability of the WHO as a global authority on public health: THE WHO REVIEW AND WHY IT MATTERS TO YOU

Sincerely,
[sign your name here]

*

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

Featured image is from the WHO website

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The WHO Review and Why it Matters to You?” Abir Balan
  • Tags: ,

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 are at the crossroads of one of the most serious crises in world history. We are living history, yet our understanding of the sequence of events since January 2020 has been blurred.

Worldwide, people have been misled both by their governments and the media as to the causes and devastating consequences of the COVID-19 “pandemic”.

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair. 

More than 7 billion people worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis.

The COVID-19 public health “emergency” under WHO auspices was presented to public opinion as a means (“solution”) to containing the “killer virus”.

If the public had been informed and reassured that COVID is  (according to the WHO definition) “similar to seasonal influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat. The lockdown and closure of the national economy would have been rejected outright.”

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Excerpt, E-Book on the Worldwide Corona Crisis. Highlights

***

Video: Michel Chossudovsky Interviewed by Prof. Ivaylo Grouev. EuroTV Media, Bulgaria

Video is from EUROTV Media

Transcript of the interview

Prof. Ivaylo GrouevIt is my great pleasure to have professor Chossudovsky, who agreed to meet at his wonderful home and to discuss something which we describe as global order or rather “global disorder” or as I put it a few months in one of my publications – hysteria before multipolarity. So, I would like to start if you don’t mind with one of your best-selling books Globalization of poverty” which became sort of bible for my course in globalization. Essentially you are responsible for 10,000 to 12,000 students to read your book and write you a book review.  I remember vividly one chapter from your book “Policing States Through Loan Conditionalities”. In this context I would like to ask if you believe that this event which we had two years ago (Covid 19) is a continuation of the same policy of structurally adjustable programs?”.

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky: Well, let me say I am delighted to have the opportunity of this dialogue on the important subject, namely the crisis, which is affecting the world, in fact, this Corona crisis but I think the question you asked is that in many regards what is happening today, is part of a historical process and I wrote that book about more than 10 years ago.

Iv.Grouev: 2001 actually.

Chossudovsky: Well, actually the first edition came out in 1997 the first and there was a second edition in 2001, but the thing is you mentioned the issue of conditionality now the ad hoc conditionalities which were imposed on countries as part of a neoliberal agenda that meant IMF missions would go into the countries negotiate, come up with an agreement and they would impose what was called strong economic medicine and what we are witnessing is a crisis which mistakenly identified as a public health crisis. It is not a public health crisis, the crisis creates a public health crisis, but if we look at the logic and these economists have failed to understand it. Is that on March 11, 2020, there were instructions via the World Health Organization to 193 member states of the United Nations to literally” close” their economy. Now of course it did not happen exactly in one way, it was applied in different ways in different countries, but the main principle of that was one the confinement of the labor force on health grounds, in other words to set so-called to save lives which it did not save lives you can find the labor force and you instruct the various entities of various national economies to deal. Well, in some cases it is close down but with limitations but when you apply these measures at a global level inevitably what you have engineered is the most serious economic, social, and political and world history.

Iv.Grouev: Okay in this context I would like to add something, you mentioned 193 countries, I think it were actually 192 countries, there was one country which did not follow that instruction. It was a relatively small European country, called Belarus. Now my question, I want to reiterate my previous points: “Do you believe that with the IMF and World Bank (you’ve been quite amazingly describing in your book in the 1980’s and 1990’s these supra national agencies like IMF and World Bank) in this case, in fact are bypassing the elected national governments therefore, we are entering to unshattered territory of the post Westphalia nation-state system.

Chossudovsky: Well, I mean the procedure at the decision-making level is very complex for an entity such as WHO which incidentally is controlled by financial interests, and it is in large part private, it is not strictly an intergovernmental organization, but the instructions came from the financial establishment and they used the Covid 19 as a pretext. There were 44,000 so-called positives cases worldwide out of China, for population of 6.4 billion people outside China. There were several stages: there was the freezing of air travel which came immediately on January 31st, 2020, when President Trump froze travel with China but that led to subsequent stages where air travel was destabilized and transport was destabilized and then you had in the month of February 2020 a major financial crisis which was justified with something of the other of 1,076 Covid positive cases, and that was when the director general of WHO, announced the pandemic and he says situation is very, very serious, we have to control it.  The windows are closing and so on and of course that same day the stock markets collapsed. Now he has 1,076 cases out of China!

Iv. Grouev: To reiterate my point Michel, now we are in a kind of really very unshattered territory because essentially national governments are becoming much less powerful in terms of being able to maintain social cohesion, they are no longer responsible for public health strategies Do you believe that just like at the beginning of this conversation regarding your book “Globalization of Poverty”, are these structural adjustment programs affecting the capacity of national governments to actually maintain political order?

Chossudovsky: Well, what I think is unfolding, is that this decision to close down more than 190 countries, of course with some exceptions, was a decision which was bypassing the nation-state was taken at the upper echelons of the financial establishment. It meant that, they had to have control over decision-makers, in other words, politicians, health officials at different levels in these 190 countries. It’s a very complex decision-making process but essentially, you’re right that the leaders of the nation-states have been bypassed and the shots are being called by very powerful interests under the guise of the World Health Organization. Now it is very clear that there was absolutely no justification with a view to saving lives when those measures were implemented and unfortunately there is not a single economist that I know which has analyzed the relationship between the Covid 19 crisis and economic variables and economic financial variables. The consensus among economists as well as social scientists is to say that it is the virus that contributed to economies chaos and financial meltdown when in fact was a very carefully engineered process. The virus does not affect economic variables and there is no invisible hand but economists have a tendency to look at market mechanisms, they do not understand necessarily that those markets are manipulated, and this was a means to manipulate market worldwide.

Iv.Grouev: This is exactly what happened in 2008 – without any “invisible hand” of the market that was a very “visible hand” coming from Wall Street with the creations of these exotic CDOS which created an incredible economic chaos in 2008. I believe 22 trillion dollars of savings disappeared and we had a financial crash. Close to 40 million people lost their jobs, so that was the manipulation of the financial markets, but the solution of the problem, if you remember, was to pump money into the largest financial institutions – the largest banks. The public debt that exploded back in 2008 is nothing comparable to what happened in 2020. Now public debt of the United States is 30 trillion dollars! When I started teaching many years ago, I was concerned about the (US) public debt and back then it was something like 5 or 6 trillion dollars. According to the US debt clock and IMF forecast in less than 7 years the public debt of the United States is going to be 89 trillion dollars which is an astonishing number and the debt/GDP ratio is going to be close to 300 percent. I am not an economist but if I recall correctly if you get 130 -140 percent debt to GDP then basically you have a failed state, you are bankrupt….

Chossudovsky: Well, I think you are right if we compare this situation to 2008 or if we compare it to previous economic crisis going back to 1929, this is by far the most serious economic crisis because it’s also hitting the real sector of the economy and it is worldwide. In one fell swoop on one day instructions are given and it is a form of interference and it’s an act of economic warfare. Now we can analyze who are the architects behind it and we can see the process of enrichment which has occurred because essentially you raise the issue of the debt. Well, the debt is also the consequence of these measures because in a national economy where there is literally a paralysis of basic economies activities, trade, agriculture industry, what happened to the fiscal structure of the states, the government are not getting any tax revenues. There is paralysis and they’re dependent on particularly developing countries, they are dependent on external foreign creditors who come in and also finance the handouts; now I think as far as the airlines are concerned the airlines are bankrupt.

Iv.Grouev:  But the problem is that if you don’t have the revenues and obviously because of the latest crisis the middle class not only the United States (because essentially this is the discussion about the global hegemon here), but in European Union, in all OECD’s countries, the middle class has been decimated. So how these national governments continue to provide financing to their social security and Medicare …I don’t know. I don’t want to sound alarmist but there are some discussions about legalizing Euthanasia that was in France, and also here in Canada. If you cannot afford (your) medical bills and if you don’t have, if I quote correctly Trudeau’s government if you can’t have a” decent lifestyle”, I don’t know what he exactly means by ”decent lifestyle”, then you may consider actually euthanasia. How you going to respond to it.

Chossudovsky: Listen, well first when I started looking at these impacts of these policies, right from the outset and I can say that first, there has been a massive concentration of wealth, there’s been creation of mass unemployment and marginalization of the labor force. Of course, this has had an impact on mental health, in some countries we have seen the emergence of famines they are well documented even beyond famines because the confinement of the labor force in some countries let’s take the case of India where a large sector of the urban population is homeless, they come in from the villages they work and …

Iv.Grouev: If I am not mistaken according to the United nations, 2.5 billion people are living in bidonvilles.

Chossudovsky: Precisely the (bidonvilles) are still in some cases their homes. There was a segment in India, there’s a segment of the population and the seasonal workers, what did the Indian government order them to do – he said to go back to their villages. Now they never reached their villages which were several thousand kilometers away and they died, on the road for they had no money. Now these are the kind of realities which people, which journalists do not want to talk about. We had reports from the FAO that famine hit many countries again from official UN sources, and I can say from my own analysis of cases studies that the impacts of this crisis are absolutely devastating and as you mentioned it is not only impoverishment of poor countries which means beyond poverty certainly beyond what I studied in my book of “Globalization of poverty.” There you have a situation of total despair, it’s beyond, it’s poverty and despair, marginalization and morbidity and mortality that’s where the health crisis come in, as well.

Iv.Grouev: You’re right about despair and social collapse, especially in the poor south but if we look from another angle, this crisis was exceptionally lucrative business for some. Every 30 hours we have a new billionaire because of this pandemic. Forbes before pandemic wrote in 2021 reported 4 billion increase in (Bill) Gates worth, obviously involved in this kind of saga. Gates net worth across 2017 and 2018 increased to 4 billion dollars, so, working off a yearly wage 4 billion means Gates would earn $10,959,000 per day that’s $456,000 an hour or 7$,000 a minute $127 per second. So, we are going to live in a different environment as the result of this crisis of 2020. What are going to be the long-term repercussions from a political and economic point of view?

Chossudovsky: Well, I have documented these changes in the process of enrichment which occurred right from the beginning of this crisis, in fact starting in February 2020, and what this means first this process of enrichment which seems without bounds is a means for the financial establishment to literally control the nation state. They are also the creditors of the nation-state and immediately after March 11 lockdown which created, in fact destabilized economic activity but not only economic activity, the whole structures of civil society, as we understand — schools, universities, hospitals, sport events, cultures that was totally destabilized — and the creditors were in fact financing the safety nets, because for the government to endorse, to have the support of the broader population which is affected by this crisis, they had to have payments to unemployed workers to small and medium sizes enterprises that are on the verge of bankruptcy, to airlines which are inevitably bankrupt where they paid off the CEO’s of the airlines and so on. There’s a payment of which goes through the state and the nation-state and its whole fiscal structure now is controlled by creditors and these creditors are also, it is not strictly the IMF and the World Bank and so on. These are instruments of much more complex financial entities. There’s the Blackrock portfolio investment fund or Vanguard, they have a leverage in financial terms of the entire global economy, and what is suggested are the following. First of all the state what we used to call the welfare state is going to be wiped out totally, no more welfare state! That was a project, at least in the Western countries, let’s say developed countries, it was a post-world war to project the development of the welfare state. Based on Keynesians premises initially but with this crisis the welfare state is going to disappear and the whole state apparatus will be privatized. And then, of course what the financial establishment is pushing for, particularly the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum is a visible entity, the actual power structures are in the shadows, but what they are proposing essentially is the structure of global governance, and now global governance is essentially a construct of the financial elites. It was coined by the late David Rockefeller who said global governance is far more effective than the elected government that we have.

Iv.Grouev: Absolutely, this is really a fascinating prospect to see in reality how this “”Brave New World “is going to look like.

Chossudovsky: Well, it’s a totalitarian project.

Iv.Grouev: Of course, and I think again coming from the Canadian perspective, I think you remember this famous statement coming from our current prime minister who mentioned that an ideal manifestation of social order is coming from Asia, namely China, and if we look at it how the Chinese society is functioning these days this is probably not very consistent with the premises of the traditional liberal democracy in the West.

Chossudovsky: Well, I am not entirely, that was a statement made by Trudeau which I think was misleading and mistaken because he was saying that the Chinese have already a system of digital control over their citizens.

Iv.Grouev: Social credit?

Chossudovsky: Yeah, but the social credit in fact, what is unfolding is the contours of a global governance whereby the financial elites would be controlling but they will probably control it via their proxies, but to get back to the quotation of David Rockefeller, he said that global governance as he defined is the alliance between bankers and intellectuals, selected intellectuals of course! Because those intellectuals are there to give some justification to a process which is essentially that is impoverishing the whole population and enriching the smaller….…

Iv.Grouev: This is actually happening right now in Europe in the European Unions as a result of the military operation / war in Ukraine, correct?

Chossudovsky: Absolutely.

Iv.Grouev:  I would like to add to our discussion, you’re absolutely right when you mentioned about selected intellectuals and selected media. I don’t know what selected media is these days… It’s essentially a censorship. What it does this “selected media”, to be quite honest, is a very distorted interpretation of what is happening in Ukraine. The narrative goes like that: everything started in February 2022 with the military operation, but in fact, this is not correct. We had a coup in 2014 and after this coup we had 14 000 Ukrainians citizens  who have been slaughtered  in Donetsk , Kramatorsk, Mariupol, in all these cities and the collective West was not very interested in discussing why the central government in Kiev (after the coup) was using air force, heavy artillery, tanks against the civilian population in Eastern Ukraine, very sizable, actually population – 6.8 million comparable to all Baltic states,(Latvia, Lithuania Estonia) and they were using their army against  civilians for 8 years! How are we going to use this example, this current war in Ukraine when we talk about this “Brave New World” presented by selected intellectuals, selected media and selected narratives?

Chossudovsky: Well, I think that we must understand the Covid 19 agenda which as led to economic and social chaos at the world level is intimately related to the geopolitics of warfare in different regions of the world. And I am saying that the areas, the hot spot areas, of course, is the Eastern Europe and Ukraine at the moment on Russia’s border and that has been ongoing even before 2014. it’s NATO and the U.S NATO expansionism to the Russian border that’s one, the second hot spot in the South China sea in the Taiwan straits, it’s the continuous threat against China. The logic is very different to what’s happening of course in Eastern Europe, and then you have, of course, other areas of confrontation which are in the Middle East and specifically Iran is a target and North Korea is a target. The United States has been simulating their military actions in this various region of the world, and so in a sense the war in Ukraine has arrived in the wake of 2 years period of economics and social destabilization and it has also weakened every single country of the planet and it has indebted every single national economy in the planet and its government. What they are now seeking is a consensus which is directed against so called enemies of America which are: Russia and some of its allies but and of course also China, I recall the earlier war games in which were revealed that was several years ago where they had 4 countries which were: Russia, China, North Korea and Iran and they had war games of World War 3 addressed to those 4 countries. Now it’s a bit more complex in the real world, but the thing is that we are now in a situation where all means I said that the Covid mandates is a form of economic warfare, and that is part of the process of warfare since the down of mankind, except it is now taken on a different modality which we did not had in previous wars.

Iv.Grouev: Yeah, but you mentioned quite correctly Russia and China but keep in mind  the world after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Charles Krauthammer quite famously coined (the term)  unipolarity , I think he added – ”unipolarity” and then ”moment”, moment is an instant, it is not going to last very long so this unipolarity obviously is an issue for the global hegemon simply because the competitors coming from obviously China and Russia are going to create a very different type of axis of power and the ”tension:” in Ukraine is par excellence (an effort) actually to postpone the creation of this multipolarity especially in the context of much more reassuring (as they call it regional power) Russia, and especially after the creation the BRICS and the Shanghai cooperation agreement.. I want to just add to this discussion a statement coming from a quite ”famous” scholar who predicted the ”End of the History” Fukuyama. Last year in the “Economist” (our viewers are perhaps familiar with this name who famously declared “End of history” and essentially (unipolarity) the only model based on the US interpretation of what liberal democracy is supposed to be!. So, in 2021 Francis Fukuyama said something very different, he said: ”United States it’s not likely to regain its earlier hegemonic status nor should it aspire to what it can hope is to sustain with like-minded countries world order friendly to democratic values, whether it can do this will depend on recovering(and then that’s interesting elaboration) sense of national identity and purpose at home.”  Isn’t that the (same) language which the previous administration, the Trump administration, proclaimed being the main discourse, going back to the principle of sovereignty and not of the ”benevolent hegemony”. Do you think that this is what we are going to see perhaps in the very near future?

Chossudovsky: Well, listen, I think again Fukuyama is an instrument of propaganda because there’s very little and now that is individual..

Iv.Grouev: Selected individuals.

Chossudovsky: This is absolute nonsense what he says, because he is not doing any kind of analysis of the past configuration of the militarization of Western society and so on, so forth and of the contradictions okay. The contradictions are very important, but we are certainly at the crossroads of one of the most serious crises in the world history, but we have to understand the nature of the that crisis. We also have to understand that the possibility that this could lead to nuclear warfare, and I spent many years investigating the issue of nuclear warfare and I know that if you look at recent statements, the US government is saying that the nuclear war is winnable. And they also say that we now have nuclear weapons which are low yield and usable. Now, all this rhetoric because there is no such thing as a low yield. Well, a low yield nuclear weapon is three times Hiroshima as opposed to maybe a hundred times Hiroshima for the strategic nuclear weapons even the use of the low yield nuclear weapon is the avenue to World War 3 and it is the end of humanity. But the thing is that you have to analyze how this new nuclear doctrine of preemptive warfare was initiated in 2001. It was 2001, 2002 with a nuclear posture review and essentially, they started building a new doctrine which went against the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) which describe what a nuclear confrontation would result in, and then they said preemptive now, preemptive signifies defensive, it means self-defense. We are using nuclear weapons to defend ourselves and will say, well, you have this mini nuke up to 12 times the Hiroshima bomb and we change the label safe for civilians because explosion is underground quote, unquote. It is a bit like cigarettes, is good for your health you change the label and the dangers are that these concepts then enter into the military manuals they become tenants of US foreign policy and then you have a person like Hilary Clinton says: “Nuclear weapons are on the table” and then you will have somebody else now. The thing is that, very few of US politicians really understand the dangers of nuclear war and they are actually prepared to use nuclear weapons against Russia which has similar capacities, in fact in some cases even more sophisticated. Then, what they have and this is the end of humanity now Fukuyama is a load of bull…. from my standpoint and he is there to sustain some kind of ideological perspective of what is really happening but he does not analyze what is really happening, he does not look at and how policy errors could lead..

Iv.Grouev: He is just an organic intellectual as Antonio Gramsci famously said in his “Prison Notebooks”. He supposes to sell certain concepts…. But you are absolutely right about this new discussion about preemption, and I think it was in 2002 in the National Strategy in the United States when they put it as one of the 4 cardinal principles: The first one is a unilateral approach. The second one is preemption, and this is what they have done in Iraq, if you remember in 2003 before finding any weapons of mass destruction. We have to preemptively attack him (Saddam Hussein) but going forward 20 years in 2022. We have a major crisis in Europe, and it involves one the superpowers, namely the Russian federation and yesterday we had a meeting in Madrid by the NATO member states and I am going to just read, they have 22 points of their kind of declaration at the very end of this meeting, but number 4 is particularly interesting and I would like to have you take on this point. This is what they say: ”We warmly welcome president Zelenski participation in this summit, we stand in fully solidarity with the government and the people of Ukraine meaning one position in this kind of conflict in the heroic defense of their country, we reiterate our unwavering support for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders extending to, its territorial waters, (what does it mean Crimea is going to be an open question for NATO) we fully support Ukraine’s inherent right to self-defense and to choose it own security arrangement, we welcome effort to all allies engaged in providing support to Ukraine, we will assist them adequately , recognizing their specific situation. This language suggests, in my humble opinion, the firm position of NATO to be actually participant in this conflict, what does it mean?

Chossudovsky: Well, it is not entirely clear as to what decisions were taken but they certainly have opened the door for the participation of members NATO inside, within this war, which was not previously, with support through weapons deliveries and advisory functions and so the fourth facto NATO is already in the war theater but if they start to, if they enter formerly as a part of a NATO operation. Well, the logic then becomes entirely different because in that case they would be directly targeting the Russian federation.

Iv.Grouev: But, according to the National Security Strategy of the Russian federation they also have the same principle of preemption, and this preemption is when we are entitled to use nuclear weapons in case the survival of the Russian state is in danger. So here, the key point coming from the declaration of NATO meeting is when they say :”Allied leaders agree on fundamental shift in NATO’s deterrence and defense with strengthening towards defenses enhanced battle groups in eastern part of the alliance and an increase of the number of higher readiness forces to well over 300 000” . So we are going to see escalation, or we are going to see de-escalation of this crisis, according to you…

Chossudovsky: I think that what the logic of NATO which is ultimately controlled by Washington by the Pentagon is to incite NATO member states to mobilize their conventional war abilities in other words, I don’t think that at this stage they are talking about nuclear war but they have said they are expanding their military capabilities and they also announced in fact even before the Madrid’s meeting that Britain was going to become involved with the deployment of British armed forces within the European space. Now, I think it’s too early to reach any kind of conclusion as to what is going to happen, but this statement obviously is very far reaching, the question is also not so much, the debate which might occur within the European Union but the debate which might occur within the US Congress as to whether they will go along with this. But bear in mind that the history of US sponsored wars has always consisted in promoting their allies to do the dirty work for them, and they have dome systematically to keep a sort of to not necessarily…

Iv.Grouev: During the First World War and the Second World War….

Chossudovsky: Well, second world war, that’s very complex but the US was behind Nazi, Germany. The economic support, the fact that without the United States they would never be able to conduct operation Barbarossa because they needed oil and the oil came from Standard Oil of New Jersey, primarily there was some oil in Romania etc… But it was essentially delivery of oil which enabled the armed forces.

Iv.Grouev: There is a famous quote by Harry Truman when you mentioned operation Barbarossa, he said: “Look if we see Germany winning, then we have to support Russia. if we see Russia, winning then we have to support Germany.” So, this is (their) strategic point of view. Obviously United States is very much keen in keeping its position.

Chossudovsky: But, Harry Truman did not actually understand what was actually ongoing because on the 15th of September 1945, the war department f the United states issued a secret plan which had already been worked on years before under the Manhattan project which is consisted bombing 66 urban areas of the Soviet Union with more than 200 atomic bombs, so that happened less than two weeks after the end of World War II, when both countries United States and Russia were at that stage of the Soviet Union were allies that they already had a plan to destroy the Soviet Union in the immediate wake of the World War II.

Iv.Grouev: Yeah, you are absolutely correct, I would like to add to your statement that actually Churchill was also very keen in expanding the list to, if I am not mistaken, to 220 sites to be (precise), but they did not have the capacity ….

Chossudovsky: Well Winston Churchill was proposing, I think it was in April 1945 he has a proposal to go after the Soviet troops in Germany, and that plan was immediately abandoned because it was unfeasible but it was discussed at the highest levels. What Winston Churchill did not comprehend is that the Second World war was also a war against the British Empire, and it was the British empire completely very ….

Iv.Grouev: I am very happy that you mentioned that because it was just months after that when Harry Truman declared the so-called Truman doctrine, he mentioned the issue of Greece and Turkey.  Well, he said to the world – you know the Brits are bankrupt they don’t have money, and you know they have to say goodbye to their British Empire and by the way, we, the United States we are the only country capable of providing intelligence, financial support and capital to these regimes in Turkey and in Greece. And number 3, – security of Turkey, Greece and everywhere in the world is going to be linked directly to the security of the United States. Therefore, just months after the end of the war, he just declared publicly the ”Dead Sentence” of the British empire which was the purpose of the

Chossudovsky: Absolutely, and I mean there was another element it was the whole dynamics of the Marshall plan and the Bretton Woods institutions and in fact the whole Marshall plan was precisely to create a credit better relationship with the countries which were the object of World War II, including of course Germany, Italy and so on, and it was called reconstruction but in effect   was  ultimately to instate the dollar, the nominated economy and the mechanism of debt which were imposed in the wake of World War II. So, I think in a sense, World War II was a means to destroy what was previously called the Prussian empire but it was also a means to destroy the British Empire and all the other empires.    The Italians, well, all the European countries and, of course Japan, which had an imperial project and that was the avenue to this unipolar world. It was the destabilization of the Spanish empire which came much earlier, of course, to a third Reich and the only remaining power which confronted the United States or at least was the Soviet Union        ultimately. The whole post war years were built around destabilizing this and then ultimately then taking control of various parts of its zone of influence not strictly in Eastern Europe but also within what was the Soviet Union I mean the various republics many of which of course are now allies of the West and several are member of NATO. So I think what its unfolding it is being implemented by installing worldwide proxy regimes and you will have proxy regimes in countries like, Japan which are big.     US orders European union but let’s say, let’s take the powerful countries of the world okay, but certainly Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Brazil, all of these countries are actually controlled through a very, it’s not a straightforward process but they have either been the victims of regime change or they have installed proxy regimes and so on, and the irony is that, in  many cases the US will use so-called leftist groups.

Iv.Grouev: To go back to the British empire and its former prime Minister Churchill. I think I actually like his quote, I think it was in 1946 or something like when he said : “Future empires are going to be the empires of the mind”,  the “empires of the mind”?  so essentially if you control the superstructure if you control the realm of ideas, you know that it will be very easy to manipulate, to control societies these days (unfortunately for someone like myself when I was very young, I was a journalist). The media failed civil societies and in general, journalists are supposed to be the “healers” of society, they have to identify the problems, they have to offer solutions if they find the right source of expertise, of course. But the media these days is heavily censored, I don’t know what the solutions to this climate of 24/7 propaganda might be, which essentially is making particularly young minds very reluctant to use their independent and critical thinking. What might be your take about that?

Chossudovsky: It’s very clear that the so-called mainstream media are dominated by a handful of large corporations worldwide they’re very much related to the financial establishment to the military-industrial complex. And it is clear they have now become an instrument of propaganda and that’s instrument of propaganda is there to enforce the lies of the government and also the lies of the pharmaceutical companies and so on, so forth. They are very powerful structures but it’s clear that without the mainstream media’s propaganda apparatus their agenda would collapse like a deck of cards. In other words we have statements which are made by the governments to justify their mandates, their covid vaccine mandate for instance knowing that the vaccine is resulting in mortality and morbidity worldwide and we have official data to support that statement but the media will always present something else. And I think of course, the main issues is to dispel the lie where in a sense we are in a inquisitorial environment it not quite the Spanish inquisition, which lasted 300 years of the French inquisition but it is a society where lies become the truth and once the lies becomes the truth it is very difficult to move backwards. So that essentially, we have to block this media propaganda and I can say that is no easy task because independent media is not necessarily what you’re doing with global research.

Iv.Grouev: Some of my students would like to be little bit more well informed and to have a balanced understanding about whatever, we may call or frame, as reality, what you may suggest to these young minds?

Chossudovsky: Well, I think that we have to build a grassroots movement, it’s not simply a question of pundits and authors and scientists making statements, we have to build a consensus which confronts the media and governmental lies, and we have to have an understanding of the workings of this crisis, we have to understand how the establishment controls the institutions of civil society how they manipulate. It said that the truth is a powerful weapon or instrument in its own right but to undertake the formation of a vast social movement at the grassroots level we have to break down the divisions within respective societies and we are not dealing with a left-right, we are not dealing with political parties there, we have to build a movement which encompasses all sectors of society and we are not necessarily looking at labor rights, we are there also to establish links between small and medium-sized enterprises member of the military at the grassroots level public sector employees, decision makers, scientists intellectuals, air pilots and university professors and students

Iv.Grouev: So essentially nothing new – it should be organic, and it should be bottom-up social….

Chossudovsky: Well, but the problem is that if you look at social movements and the landscape of social movements today, most of them are funded by Rockefellers and Soros and out.

Iv.Grouev: They have been co-opted obviously…

Chossudovsky: And then we have prominent leftist intellectuals which will say, which will make statements to the fact that NATO is making the right decision, I won’t get into the details, but we have to build cohesive movement which integrates different areas of civil society and it’s across the land.

Iv.Grouev: But again, it comes with the understanding, you have to identify the problem, you have to have the right sources of information and obviously mainstream media is not the right choice, so what might be the solution?

Chossudovsky: Well, this is a very difficult question because you have an anti-war movement which endorses the Covid narrative, you have political scientist which an economist that do not understand the logic of the lockdown and other words , if we are to reveal the truth as a means of establishing a grassroots resistance , I would say to simplify matters we have, to first of all repeal the covid narrative it’s a lie and it’s the most serious lie in world history and we have all the documents to prove that it’s a lie.

There is no pandemic! I have spent 2 years working on that, and there is no pandemic and the reason there is no pandemic is that they use the PCR test and the PCR test does not identify the virus and it does not distinguish between Covid 19 and other infections. So, there is no pandemic and the definition of the Covid 19 as an infection is not a threatening disease, we have to, I don’t want to get into the complexities of that but that’s very important.

Secondly, the vaccine is a biological weapon, it is a crime against humanity and we have ample evidence that this vaccine has resulted in an upward movement of mortality and morbidity right from the inception, we have confidential documents of Pfizer which corroborate the fact their data is resulting in injuries and mortality, and when it’s applied worldwide, we are talking about genocide being refuted, but they havebe carefully documented. And if I have to say that Covid mandates, including the lockdowns, the confinements as well as the vaccine are invalid totally invalid, there is proof of that and there is proof that the decision makers are applying something which contrary to the welfare state is in in fact resulting in a process which some people call genocide, and I think that is a correct statement we have to look at the various facets of that lockdown triggers the collapse of the global economy.  and ultimately diversified in the state system.  And the vaccine is another instrument, which is presented as a solution to the crisis when in fact, it is not a solution at all, it simply leads to a wave of mortality and morbidity and then the 3rd element is, understanding war warfare and the fact that what is happening in Ukraine is leading us to the possibility of a World War III scenario, despite the fact that at the very early period of this crisis in the month of April there were preliminary peace negotiations which were held in Istanbul under the auspices of the Turkish government and there was an agreement and then there was sabotage of those peace negotiations, so that is very important to build a consensus regarding the need for peace negotiations particularly in view of the fact that militarily the Russians have won this war and all the analysts accept that . But what we have now seen following the NATO summit in Madrid is a situation where they want to go one step further in the process of escalation and then as you pointed out, it is also the collapse of international diplomacy of interchange between nation states are literally controlled by powerful financial interests either through bribes and payoff’s and so on but ultimately also the grassroots in these individuals countries must take control of their governments and reinstate a workable system of democracy, which is based on sovereignty and that also means taking very drastic measures. I think the debt must be dismissed as a criminal undertaking, those debts have to be wiped out..

Iv.Grouev: I think probably the most valuable concluding remark is to have regain sovereignty, absolutely. Thank you so much for this wonderful discussion and thank you for your time and your hospitality.

Chossudovsky: Thank you.

***

For comprehensive reading on the worldwide corona crisis and the engineered economic depression, below is link to Prof. Michel Chossudovsky’s e-Book:

The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The COVID-19 Pandemic: Pretext for Launching A Global Economic and Social Crisis. Michel Chossudovsky and Ivaylo Grouev

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 July 12,  the UN Security Council extended the authorization for humanitarian aid to cross through Bab al Hawa on the Turkey-Syria border for another six months.  The US and allies had wanted a one-year extension, but Russia vetoed it.  The US, UK and France abstained on the six-month approval, while all others supported it.

There is much misinformation and deceit about the Bab al Hawa crossing in Idlib province, Syria. First, Western media rarely mention that after the aid crosses the border, it is effectively controlled by Syria’s version of Al Qaeda, Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS).

Second, they fail to explain that HTS hoards much of the aid for its fighters. When Aleppo was liberated by the Syrian Army, reporters found large stashes of medicines and food in their headquarters that were set aside for the use of the militia. Third, HTS makes millions of dollars by taxing the aid that it distributes to the rest of the population under its control.

Source: Dissident Voice

In May 2018, HTS was added to the US State Department’s list as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). HTS’s 15000 fighters are able to manipulate the numbers by including their names and the names of their accompanying families as civilians, thus receiving huge amounts of aid from UN agencies such as the World Food Program.  It is rarely mentioned that thousands of these civilians are not Syrian. They are Uyghurs and Turkmen supporters of Al Qaeda, from Turkey, China and elsewhere.

The Bab al Hawa crossing is also an entry point for weapons and sectarian fighters smuggled in with the copious aid. This is not new. In 2014, legendary journalist Serena Shim reported how she witnessed fighters and weapons entering Syria using World Food Organization trucks at Bab al Hawa. She was killed in Turkey two days after her report.

It is claimed over 4 million persons are in Idlib. That is a huge exaggeration. Before the conflict began in 2011 there were 1.5 million. When sectarian militants seized control, many civilians fled for Aleppo or Latakia. Even including fighters coming from other areas, the population is much LESS than before the conflict. The number of civilians in Idlib is grossly inflated for political and economic reasons.

The media also fail to mention that the aid across Bab al Hawa serves only the Al Qaeda-controlled area (the northern green section of the map) and not the rest of Syria. While western states send massive amounts of aid to this minority, the vast majority of Syrians suffer with little aid. Moreover, they are under the extreme US “Caesar” sanctions designed by the US to crush the economy by outlawing the Syrian Central Bank, make it impossible for Syrians to rebuild infrastructure, and punish Syrians and anyone who would trade or assist them.

Russian, Chinese and other representatives on the UN Security Council have pointed out that aid to Syria should be going through the UN recognized government in Damascus. Aid to civilians in Idlib should be distributed via the Syrian Red Crescent or a comparable neutral organization.

Providing aid through Bab al Hawa via hostile Turkey to an officially designated terrorist organization should be prohibited.  It is a clear violation of Syrian sovereignty. In December 2022, when the authorization again comes to a UN Security Council vote, the crossing may finally be shut down. At that point, the legitimate aid to civilians in Idlib province can be delivered from within Syria as it should be.

*

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 Light and Shadows of the Korean Peninsula

July 28th, 2022 by Emanuel Pastreich

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.

***

How many times have I seen an American expert pointing to a satellite photo of the Korean Peninsula at night and remarking that the striking difference between the darkness that envelops North Korea and the bright lights that illuminate South Korea, as well as Japan, symbolizes the insularity, the oppressiveness and the pathetically backward economic state of the North. The obvious point is that the brightly lit South is a model of progress, of technology, of democracy and of free markets. 

This contrast between the light of progress and democracy and the darkness of dictatorship and ignorance has a certain aesthetic perfection that easily feeds the imagination of viewers; the narrative is intellectually predigested and it goes down smooth.

In the political debate in South Korea, this narrative is not seriously questioned in the media, among scholars, or among politicians.

The progressive politicians argue that we should engage with North Korea and invest more in such projects as the Kaesong industrial complex so that North Koreans can find opportunities for employment and South Koreans can make profits from the cheap labor and abundant natural resources that North Korea offers.

The conservatives argue that North Korea is a dictatorship and that it threatens South Korea militarily and cannot be trusted. They say that North Korea must first open itself up completely to the international business, and allow complete inspections of all its nuclear facilities.

But the assumptions made by the progressives and conservatives in South Korea do not differ fundamentally. Both are assuming that South Korea is more advanced and that a future North Korea should look more like South Korea where citizens enjoy a far greater GDP, drive cars, live in spacious houses with televisions and smartphone and produce K Pop hits that sell around the world.

Of course, it would be ludicrous to make an argument that North Korea is a model for others. The closed environment and the repressiveness of the government is no myth.

But as someone who has lived in South Korea for twelve years, I have been forced to admit, despite my hesitancy, that there is something seriously wrong here too. Whether it is the high suicide rates, the polluted air, the ruthless competition in schools, the deep alienation felt by young people, the extraordinary dependence on imported food and imported fuel or the tremendous numbers of the elderly who live in poverty, there are deep, deep shadows that cross all of South Korea.

There are two important points that are often buried in the shadows in the official narrative about North and South Korea. We need to look at North and South Korea from the ground up, not from high up in space.

I have heard from numerous South Koreans who had the opportunity to visit North Korea that they had a strong sense that something vital had been lost in South Korea when they walked through the small vegetable markets in North Korea, observed the modest décor in the clean-scrubbed hotels and encountered the unadorned and unpretentious behavior of the citizens of Pyongyang.

Such South Korean friends noted that women in North Korea, although they may not have the luxuries of the South, are also not under the same pressure to wear makeup and to compete with each other in consumption. There is not the demand for brand clothing.

South Koreans detect decency in the manner in which people treat each other on the street in Pyongyang. Many are reminded of the Korea of the 1960s and 1970s when there were far closer relations in South Korea between family members, and between members of the community. For that matter, the absence of automobiles, of youth addicted to cell phones, of endless advertising that drives people to buy things that they do not need or want for the sake of profit—all these aspects of North Korea evoke an original Korean culture that has been lost.

But there is an even more important issue that has been completely buried in the media of South Korea, and in our discussions about North Korea.

All the discussion by “experts” by journalists, about North Korea is based on issues involving economic growth, GDP, standard of living, production and consumption. According to these standards, North Korea is helplessly far behind advanced nations, and South Korea in particular. That means that South Korea can be the big brother and teach the North Koreans how to be “advanced” and “modern.” But all those terms are subjective and ideological in nature. The assumption made in South Korea is that wasteful consumption of resources is a positive and that it should be actively encouraged. It is assumed that it is progress to live in bigger, overheated homes and to own automobiles and smartphones.

But there is no scientific evidence, whatsoever, that underlies these assumptions. They are as accurate as saying that praying to the moon will bring rain or using leeches to drain blood will cure the diseases.

In fact, research shows that such behavior patterns focused on consumption can have profoundly destructive effects on society as a whole including deep alienation and increased levels of suicide and substance abuse. That is to say that the assumptions about what North Korea should become, and what South Korea has been successful at, are based on ideology, on unfounded assumptions and on a myth of modernity. The result is that South Koreans are convinced that they are successful even as profound stress and frustration sweep through families.

When we approach this image of the Korean Peninsula at night using a scientific approach, this image tells a profoundly different story; the lights and shadows are completely reversed.

The overwhelming opinion among experts based on objective scientific analysis, not based on ideology, or profit, or warm fuzzy feelings, is that humanity faces an unprecedented crisis in the form of global warming (climate change) and that at the current rate we will be lucky if we manage to avoid extinction as a species.

There are numerous reports and books on the catastrophic changes in our climate, and the resulting extinctions taking place already. We can already see in Seoul that mosquitos manage now to survive until December, and often flowers are found blooming into January. That is just the beginning of what will be rapid, life threating changes.

If we let things progress as this rate, the oceans will warm, and grow acidic until fish are extinct, deserts will spread until much of Earth is uninhabitable and South Korea, hopelessly dependent on imported food and on the export of fossil-fuel intensive products, will be devastated

So what should South Korea do if it wants to survive?

The answer is quite clear. It should start looking more like North Korea in terms of energy consumption and frugality.

It should stop wasting energy and be dark at night, the way it has been for tens of thousands of years.

It should get rid of all the useless lights on apartment buildings, end those electrified signs on commercial buildings, reduce dramatically unnecessary internal heating and end the wasteful design of high ceilings and concrete, glass and steel exteriors found in its buildings. It should go back to the traditions of frugality and simplicity that characterize much of its history.

South Korea should be dark at night. Its citizens must be aware of the tremendous cost of keeping its cities illuminated, in terms of the expense of importing fuel, in terms of the terrible pollution generated by subsidized fossil-fuel power plants, in terms of increasing global warming that is destroying the future for our children.

But there is a deeper, hidden secret. We have been fed a myth that Korea must grow, must advance, must consume and consume more to be modern, to be advanced, to be recognized as being special, as opposed to the unwashed masses of “developing countries.”

Becoming modern has been assumed to be the highest priority for generations. But what is modern if consuming fossil fuels and wasting natural resources is destroying our ecosystem and damning our children?

The numerous problems that exist in North Korea are quite serious, but from the perspective of climate change, South Korea should be benchmarking North Korea’s low-consumption, rather than planning to vastly increase consumption and build highways and expensive wasteful apartments.

Many people may find that my words sound odd, even nonsensical. It is so obvious to many that South Korea’s modernity and its high level of consumption is a badge of honor, a sign that it is a member of advanced nations. Consumption considered as a major factor in calculating the state of the economy? If people consume less (and that means consuming less energy) then the growth rate will go down.

But if we are facing extinction because climate change, who cares what stupid things the newspapers tell us about consumption? We must stop subsidizing fossil fuels immediately. Those numerous lights that burn all night in South Korea do not represent cultural advancement, but rather a dark and dangerous game of living for the moment by sacrificing the futures of our children.

There are infinite meaning and depth, spiritual and personal experience, to be derived from talking with family and friends, from reading books, writing letters and essays, walking in the woods or putting on plays and musical performances for each other. It requires almost no and does far more for us than a jungle of smartphones, lit up Starbucks Cafes, or throw-away plastic toys and cups that we are given, whether we want them or not.

As we think about the future of a unified Korean Peninsula, we must first move beyond this dangerous concept that being modern and advanced is a priority. We should ask ourselves rather what does it mean to be human? How do we live a meaningful and fulfilling life and contribute to society?

I do hope that North Koreans can live in a freer way than they do today and that they can eat more nutritious food. Yet they will not find any nutritious food in the convenience stores that have taken over South Korea and destroyed the family-owned stores that once gave citizens economic independence.

But I also hope that South Koreans can be set free also from the invisible chains that bind them to mindless consumption, that force them to consume increasing amounts of coal (heading in the opposite direction of almost every country in the world) and that leave so many feeling deeply alienated from friends and from family because of a brutal culture of endless competition.

The move toward unification must be about freedom for North Koreans and South Koreans. How unfair it would be if we assumed that only North Koreans are entitled to be free.

*

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

Russia to Exit WHO, WTO and Other UN Agencies?

July 28th, 2022 by Peter Koenig

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.

***

 

 

Is Russia about to leave the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) – and possibly other UN and international bodies?

This topic has received little or no coverage by the western mainstream media.

According to Russian Duma’s Deputy Speaker Pyotr Tolstoy, the Russian Government is evaluating the possibility to withdraw from a number of UN agencies, most visibly WHO and WTO which they consider do Russia more harm than good. This may be particularly the case with WTO which Russia only joined in 2012 after 8 years of negotiations, because WTO allows countries under the western sanctions program to increase tariffs on Russian goods way above the WTO guidelines.

WTO removed Russia’s “most favored nation” status in response to its invasion of Ukraine, which led several countries to suspend Moscow’s trade preferences and impose tariffs in excess of what WTO rules typically allow. WTO, created under the Charter of the UN, is not to take political decisions in favor, or against a member of its 164 member-organization.

See this.

Under pressure from the US and European governments, hundreds of western businesses, from Adidas, McDonald’s, and Pepsi to BP, Renault, British American Tobacco, Starbucks and many many more, have pulled out of Russia for fear of direct western sanctioning. McDonald’s said its cost for leaving Russia was equivalent to US$ 1.3 billion. Is the sacrifice worth it?

Never mind, it is contributing to anti-Russian propaganda – which in itself, contributes to the ever-mounting western pressure for “regime change”. 

As to WHO – while the agency pretends being non-political, in reality it is just the contrary, only political. WHO, under pressure from Bill Gates and the US, never approved the Russian Sputnik V as an official “vaccine” – like Pfizer, J&J, Moderna and all the western fake vaxxes.

WHO joined the west in condemning Russia for the war in Ukraine, never looking at the reasons that may have prompted the war, and never looking into the health impacts of 8 years bombarding and aggressing the Donbas Region by the Kiev regime with the help by Neo-Nazi Azov Battalions.

While no war is justified, analyzing the reasons that led up to war might help negotiating for peace and preventing other wars.

Nor did WHO evaluate independently the damage on Eastern Ukraine’s health facilities and inhabitants since the beginning of the war on 24 February 2022. Because most, if not all, attacks on Donbas health facilities, as well as outright killing of civilians Kiev claims and the west confirms, were Russian inflicted, when in fact the very Ukraine government carried out “false flags” against their own people.

It would behoove a neutral WHO to analyze causes of mass death, disease and injury reports. Not doing so and instead simply supporting the western version is a serious breach of WHO’s Constitution and role in determining the cause of the deteriorating state of a society’s wellbeing.

No war is justified – including economic wars (sanctions), wars with fear as the chief weapon, and wars destroying food, causing famine and death. The UN Human Rights Commission did not speak out against the WEF’s Great Reset nor did the UN. In fact, on June 13, 2019, the UN signed a Strategic Partnership Framework with the WEF, outlining areas of cooperation, notably the infamous UN Agenda 2030.

By doing so, the 193 member-UN body not only lost its luster (if it still had any), but more importantly its role as Peace Arbiter in the world, and as a defender of justice and human rights. The WEF is an insanely wealthy NGO at the service of Big-Big Finance and individual oligarchs.

The Great Reset which was in the making long before the Partnership Framework Agreement with the UN, is the ultimate control mechanism for the world’s resources and for humanity.

Russia is not only by far the world’s largest country, surface-wise, but arguably also by far the wealthiest in terms of natural resources. Russia is, therefore, in the crosshairs of western empire forces, including and foremost the WEF and its handlers.

Hence, the Russian Foreign Ministry is right when claiming that many of the UN institutions are working against the interests of Russia — which is a good reason to exit them.

Looking back at recent history may bring some insight as to why Russia, and especially President Putin, is so much slandered and outright hated by the west – of course, 24/7 supported by Western-corrupted media propaganda.

The West would have loved Boris Yeltsin (10 July 1991 – 31 December 1999) to stay in power into the 21st century. Yeltsin allowed the West – mainly FED, IMF and World Bank – ravage and privatize Russia’s state-owned economy during his ten-year tenure.

Perhaps out of remorse for his leniency towards Western depredation of his country, Yeltsin was looking out for a strong and intellectually brilliant successor. In August 1999, he appointed the then little-known KGB Officer, Vladimir Putin, as Prime Minister. It was a clear sign that President Yeltsin was preparing Putin for leading the Kremlin.

Nobody in the West suspected Putin to bring Russia up from her knees to a full world power position. And that in less than two decades.

Russia, close ally of China and active member of Eastern integration, will not only survive the pressure but will thrive under the slandering pressure.

Leaving nefarious UN agencies may give other think-alike countries which wanted, but didn’t so far dare, to take such drastic action, a signal that they too may be better off not belonging to this Western-corrupted international network, including the European Union.

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia to Exit WHO, WTO and Other UN Agencies?
  • Tags: , , ,

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.

***

Irresponsible use of new and very advanced technologies by the military is life-threatening

Engineered viruses can be used to edit genes in a target species, including in a heritable manner

“Insect Allies” is a DARPA program designed to genetically modify mature plants in a live environment by releasing insects infected with genetically modified viruses

Some scientists, although on board with genetic modification in principle, are questioning DARPA’s motives and raising concerns

Researchers in Singapore, as well as DARPA in the U.S. have developed “remote-controlled insects”

*

The craziest crazies have somehow escaped the asylum and installed themselves in high positions of power. Insane, they are coming up with one bad idea after another and barking orders at us, mad shine in their eyes and saliva coming out of their mouths. They are crazy — and in charge of institutions, schools, newspapers and armies.

They are running around with their high-tech pistols filled with high-tech poisons and their little sadistic CRISPR scissors. They are crazy — yes, they are crazy — and they are killing us slowly, and sometimes not so slowly. Welcome to the future where toxicity is health and the old crazy is the new normal. We are not crazy — they are crazy — and they have been from the beginning. And in 2020, they stopped pretending. What now?

Project “Insect Allies”

You may think that you have seen it all but here is a great idea. Take some insects, infect them with a genetically modified virus designed to genetically edit mature plants in real time, and release them. Release them into wild and repeat, “it’s safe and effective.”

Sweet idea, right? Well, DARPA thought so, and so in 2016, they started a project called “Insect Allies” that is designed to do that. (This is a different project from Oxitec’s controversial release of GM mosquitos.) DARPA’s official story is that in the name of national security, a good way to protect the American crops from potential threats is to genetically modify them using GM viruses as genetic modifiers and insects as flying syringes. And that they just need to test it!

insects as flying syringes

Source: www.darpa.mil/news-events/2016-10-19

In a 2016 release titled, “DARPA Enlists Insects to Protect Agricultural Food Supply,” the agency stated:

“A new DARPA program is poised to provide an alternative to traditional agricultural threat response, using targeted gene therapy to protect mature plants within a single growing season.

DARPA proposes to leverage a natural and very efficient two-step delivery system to transfer modified genes to plants: insect vectors and the plant viruses they transmit. In the process, DARPA aims to transform certain insect pests into ‘Insect Allies,’ the name of the new effort.”

“‘Insect Allies’ three technical areas — trait design, insect vector optimization, and selective gene therapy in mature plants — layer together to support the goal of rapidly transforming mature plants to protect against natural or intentional agricultural disruption without the need for extensive infrastructure. The foundational knowledge and generalizable tools developed under the program could also support future agricultural innovation.”

Some suspicious peasants may foolishly wonder: What will happen in the short term and in the long term to the people who eat those plants, to the people and animals possibly bitten by those insects, to the wild insects who mate with the infected insects, and to all other life in the area and beyond that may get impacted? What ridiculous nonsense. Here is the answer, peasant: No one knows — and importantly, no one cares. Any more questions?

The first Insect Allies funded paper, titled, “Multiplexed heritable gene editing using RNA viruses and mobile single guide RNAs,” was published in 2020. Please note the word “heritable” in the headline. The paper stated:

“Mutant progeny are recovered in the next generation at frequencies ranging from 65 to 100%; up to 30% of progeny derived from plants infected with a virus expressing three sgRNAs have mutations in all three targeted loci.”

DARPA never disclosed if they tested this program outside of greenhouses.

Objections From the Scientific Community and Even the Pre-2020 Media

Actually, it turned out that a few scientists care — and at least during the pre-COVID era, they have objected.

Here is a short 2019 educational animation made by the German Max Planck Society (formerly the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History). Their main objection is the potential weaponization of the technology, they don’t mind the gene editing in principle.

But our standards for health and dignity are so low that this objection is better than no objection, and even this limited kind of objection and questioning DARPA takes some courage (even though it’s unknown if they would have objected in 2020).

And here is what Vice (!!) had to say in 2018 about the outcry from scientists:

“In the editorial, published on Thursday in Science Magazine, scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology and the University of Freiburg in Germany, and France’s Université de Montpellier, requested more transparency and opportunities for public discussion regarding the project and its implications.

‘Easy simplifications could be used to generate a new class of biological weapons,’ a press release reads, ‘weapons that would be extremely transmissible to susceptible crop species due to insect dispersion as the means of delivery.’”

What did DARPA say?

“In an email to Motherboard, a DARPA spokesperson rebutted the thesis of the Science Magazine piece and denied any intent to deploy technology developed through Insect Allies in an offensive setting.

‘We created Insect Allies specifically to develop technology that can deliver positive, protective traits to plants to help them survive unanticipated and/or fast-moving agricultural threats,’ the spokesperson wrote. ‘We see it as a critical addition to the national security toolkit, part of a layered strategy to preserve the security of the food supply.’”

“The Insect Allies program is a collaboration between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Environmental Protection Agency, US Army, and other agencies. According to a DARPA slide presentation, the goal of Insect Allies is to “stably transform multiple mature crop plants in a complex, multi-species plant and insect community with enhanced trait(s) of agricultural interest” by mid-2021.”

Newsweek covered it, too. In a 2018 article, they said that “the U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been accused of trying to create a new class of biological weapons that would be delivered via virus-infected insects.”

“Scientists with DARPA are looking at introducing genetically modified viruses that can edit chromosomes directly in fields — these are known as horizontal environmental genetic alteration agents (HEGAAs). The DARPA program is using the principles of HEGAAs but, unlike traditional methods of dispersal — like spraying fields with them — it wants to spread them through insects.”

The researchers raising the alarm asked specifically why, for agricultural use, it was so important to use insects as gene modification vectors, given that spraying was available. In response to Newsweek at the time, DARPA denied all allegations of military use and reiterated that the project’s aim was to protect American crops. In 2022, another paper was published where researchers expressed their concerns:

“The hazard and exposure potential of an HEGAA approach can vary greatly depending on the viruses, vector insects, target plant species, and genetic modifications selected and their effects. However, at the current stage of development, the most critical aspect is the compromised reliability of the HEGAA approach, owing mainly to its complex design with three different species …

They are a cause for concern because of the numerous effects that can increase the potential for hazard and exposure. Combined with the current inadequacy of corrective measures, it is clear that there is an urgent need for early analysis of whether HEGAA approaches can be inherently contained and controlled by their specific technology design.”

“Horizontal Environmental Genetic Alteration Agents”

What are HEGAAs? According to Wikipedia, the term “genetic alteration agent” first appears in 2016 in relation to this project, in a “work plan by DARPA describing a tender for contracts to develop genetically modified plant viruses for an approach involving their dispersion into the environment. The prefixing of ‘horizontal environmental’ to the former to generate the acronym HEGAA was first used in the [aforementioned] 2018 scientific publication.”

“Agents such as pathogens, symbionts or synthetic protein assemblages that can be acquired through horizontal transmission in the environment can potentially be engineered to become HEGAAs. This would be achieved using biotechnology methods to confer to them the capacity to alter nucleotides in the chromosomes of infected individuals through sequence-specific editing systems like CRISPR, ZFNs or TALENs.

No known infectious agent naturally has the capacity to gene edit eukaryotes in a manner that can be flexibly targeted to specific sequences (distinct from substantially random natural processes like retroviral integration).”

By definition, HEGAA induced gene editing events are intended to occur outside of contained facilities such as laboratories or hospitals.

While genetically modified viruses with CRISPR editing have been successfully used as research tools in laboratories or for gene therapy in clinical settings, all gene editing events are intended to physically occur within contained facilities. By contrast, HEGAAs for their intended mode of action relies on inducing gene editing events that occur largely or exclusively in the environment.”

There are two types of HEGAAs: somatic and germline. Somatic HEGAAs are not inheritable, while germline ones “impact somatic cells and also cell lineages from which germline cells can be ultimately generated (e.g. sperm, oocytes, pollen, ovules, zygotes or seeds).”

When it comes to the “Insect Allies” project, it’s a gray area. The original assumption was that “Insect Allies” involved somatic HEGAAs but the aforementioned 2020 paper shows that the genetic changes in plants were heritable. Here is more detail:

  • HEGAAs are viruses which have been genetically modified to gain a capacity to edit the chromosomes of a target species (e.g. plant or animal) when intentionally released into the environment
  • The word “horizontal” comes from their ability to be transmitted in the environment by infection
  • The word “environmental” comes from the intention for these genetically modified viruses to be dispersed into the environment
  • The words “genetic alteration agents” comes from the capacity to alter the chromosomes of a target species. This might be through causing a random mutation or introducing a new DNA sequence
  • The specificity of HEGAAs is dependent on two things (1) the range of species the genetically modified virus can infect AND (2) the presence of the suitable DNA sequences in the plant chromosomes of cells that become infected
  • An example of an insect dispersed viral HEGAA which disrupts a specific plant gene is illustrated in this figure below

insect dispersed hegaa

Image source: web.evolbio.mpg.de/HEGAAs/available-illustrations.html

All in all, this informational Max Planck Society affiliated website, whose purpose is “to contribute towards fostering an informed and public debate about this type of technology,” is one of the best sources of information on HEGAAs and the “Insect Allies” project. Incidentally, this particular website covers self-spreading vaccines as well. Here is a little video promo of the Euroscience Open Forum 2020:

And here it the actual 2020 panel (some of it is already outdated but very educational):

“Project Coast”

One of the panelists above mentions “Project Coast” is South Africa — and while it is not directly related to “Insect Allies,” it kind of is.

Project Coast” was a toxin and bioweapon development project that took place in South Africa during the apartheid era. As a part of that project, scientists developed covert assassination tools and methods of covert sterilization, intended against the black population of South Africa. A warning? No really, a warning?

Back to DARPA

Here is more from the MPS-affiliated informational website:

“Even as the halfway point of the Insect Allies program approaches, DARPA has chosen not to publicly describe in its response to our Science article what is the basis of their having concluded that a developmental pathway exists that circumvents the early proliferation of biological weapons (described by the black development path in the accompanying image).

This is in addition to explaining in detail why their developmental plan is easier to develop than alternative paths (described by the red paths). As our Science article makes clear, this is central to justifying the wisdom of embarking on the development of HEGAAs, and many other types of GM viruses.

Over the next five years, only a minority of anticipated CRISPR-inspired innovations will involve intentional environmental releases (see recent NAS report). HEGAAs, and some other GM viruses, have the property of an early-stage biological weapons proliferation risk that is not shared with most other proposed techniques (including avant-garde ones like gene drive).

Choosing not to clearly address these obvious issues of global concern, as detailed in the Science article, makes their current model of develop first and explain later an especially unwise path, particularly for this insect-delivered program, that in many ways appears to be designed to get carried away.”

Living Foundries

To provide a backdrop for the “Insect Allies” project, here is a brief look at the DARPA “Living Foundries” bioengineering program, launched in 2010.

DARPA’s Living Foundries program aims to “enable adaptable, scalable, and on-demand production of critical, high-value molecules by programming the fundamental metabolic processes of biological systems to generate a vast number of complex molecules.”

“Programming Biological Systems”

In order to orient ourselves in this attempted new normal, we need to understand the mindset. Please note the use of term “engineer” all throughout this benevolent-sounding presentation:

DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office

DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office was founded in 2014. Here is an informational video on, in their own words, “DARPA’s way of thinking about biological technology to defend the homeland.”

According to DARPA’s website:

“DARPA has enjoyed a strong relationship with Silicon Valley since the early 1960s, working with innovators to lay the groundwork for new industries built around Agency investments in semiconductors, networking, artificial intelligence, user interfaces, programming, materials, microsystems, and more.

[We knew that!!!] Biotech is now emerging as a breakthrough opportunity space and it represents an area that is ripe for fresh collaboration among DARPA, the nation’s top researchers, venture capitalists, and entrepreneurs.”

Here are some of the listed topic of interests:

  • Building with Biology Using Engineered Living Materials, which focused on programming DNA to grow materials to specifications at the sites where they are needed and developing living materials that are responsive to their environments and can heal when damaged;
  • Staying on Target: Minimizing Off-Target Effects in Gene Editing, which focused on making personalized medicine feasible by conducting rapid, low-cost screens of an individual’s likely responses to tailored gene therapy;
  • Creating a Pandemic-free World, which focused on DARPA’s vision of distributed healthcare that combines technology to detect pandemic outbreaks, rapidly identify and grow potent antibodies to fight infectious disease, and response tools for creating a pandemic firebreak;
  • Immunity on Demand [emphasis mine], which focused on rapidly developing and delivering nucleic-acid-based protections against infectious disease;
  • Failing Faster: De-Risking the Path to FDA Approval, which focused on using organ-on-chip technology to better predict the efficacy of new drugs in the development pipeline;
  • A Real-time Window into Your Body’s Chemistry, which focused on tissue-integrating in vivo biosensors to continuously monitor physiology over the long term to predict the onset of disease;
  • Reinventing Psychiatry Using Neurotechnology, which focused on using implanted, closed-loop neural systems to record and stimulate the brain to treat neuropsychiatric illness;
  • MindFlight: Your Brain Will Be Your Pilot Today, which focused on direct neural control of complex physical systems;
  • Memory Enhancement in Everyday Life, which focused on non-invasive electrical and auditory stimulation technology to enhance memory by facilitating the neural replay process

Is it me, or is it that the crazies are running the asylum?

Remote-Controlled Insects

If you think that you have now seen it all, well, you haven’t. Here is a video of scientists in Singapore torturing live insects and turning them into cyborgs. Horrifying.

And here is, you guessed it, DARPA:

“Through a DARPA-funded program, scientists at the University of California invented a tiny rig that connects to an insect’s brain and flight muscles. Once implanted, the device takes over the insect’s body, turning it into a remote control cyborg capable of receiving flight commands wirelessly from a nearby laptop.”

It’s all good and fun (not really, more like a horror movie), and we could close our eyes — but will it be fun if the emboldened crazies try to remote-control your children?

*

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 is from Mercola

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 prevailing narrative has hitherto been that Western unity on Ukraine is an unprecedented display of solidarity with so-called “democratic principles”, yet now none other than a leading American official just discredited that interpretation of events.

CNN, which cannot realistically be described as so-called “Russian propaganda”, dropped a major bombshell earlier this week when it quoted an American official who said that Europe’s energy crisis will “be a major test of European resilience and unity against Russia.” Amos Hochstein, the presidential coordinator for global energy, reportedly said that during his latest trip to the continent. This statement flies in the face of everything that the US-led Western Mainstream Media’s (MSM) ongoing information warfare campaign against Russia has claimed since the start of the Ukrainian Conflict.

An American Official Told CNN That They’re Afraid Western Unity On Ukraine Is WeakeningScreenshot from CNN via OneWorld

The prevailing narrative has hitherto been that Western unity on Ukraine is an unprecedented display of solidarity with so-called “democratic principles”, yet now none other than a leading American official just discredited that interpretation of events.

The reality is now setting in that this so-called “unity” was never anything more than illusion, one that was imposed upon the EU by its American overlord after it ordered its proxies to counterproductively sanction Russia on that basis. No thought was placed into the long-term consequences of that development, which are only now becoming apparent.

Some European countries now realize that they committed economic suicide and might even be forced to confront riots in the coming future. About that scenario, this was officially shared by the Austrian security chief during his latest interview with local media, but other state representatives elsewhere across the EU have echoed similar concerns over the preceding five months. It’s therefore entirely possible that some of their decisionmakers might ease more of the anti-Russian sanctions that the American hegemon coerced them to impose earlier this year.

This is actually already happening to an extent too as evidenced by the EU Council recently allowing Europeans to conclude energy deals with Russia over the transport of such resources to third countries. That just goes to show that Western unity on Ukraine has already noticeably weakened and it therefore can’t be discounted that this trend will continue, hence Hochstein’s panicked trip to Europe this week. America is afraid that even more so-called “progress” on supposedly “isolating” Russia will be reversed across the coming months ahead of what many expect to be an unprecedented energy crisis this winter.

It’s precisely for this reason that Zelensky demanded that his country’s partners help him complete his anti-Russian campaign by that time since he knows very well that he probably can’t depend on them to continue supporting him to the extent that they have thus far after that point. Even former British Prime Minister Johnson and NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg earlier expressed concern about so-called “Western fatigue”, which has since begun to influence the US as proven by CNN’s latest bombshell report.

The average Westerner must be pretty confused after witnessing just how dramatically the official narrative on the conflict has shifted in recent months. This process began around May when it became undeniable that Russia was continuing to make slow but steady progress in the Battle for Donbass, after which the MSM produced a deluge of reports warning about how badly Kiev was losing there. Still, they insisted that the West was united in supporting that crumbling former Soviet Republic, yet now even that claim has been debunked by none other than CNN after it cited Hochstein to that end.

Nevertheless, nobody should expect that America won’t do something to arrest this trend since it threatens to weaken Washington’s restored hegemony over the EU if it continues unfolding. It’s unclear exactly what it might do, but everyone should brace themselves for something or another in the coming weeks. The lack of Western unity on Ukraine was entirely predictable, which is why it’s so surprising that the US itself seems to be caught completely off guard by it. If it isn’t effectively addressed, it might end up resulting in some major European countries like Germany throwing in the towel and dumping Kiev.

*

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 OneWorld.

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.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from South Front

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Prominent U.S. Official Told CNN that They’re Afraid Western Unity on Ukraine Is Weakening. “Economic Suicide” for the EU
  • Tags:

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.

***

Could Boris Johnson be tagged as the next Secretary General of NATO? That’s what a somewhat surprising new report in The Telegraph suggests, indicating that “Ukrainian and Tory MPs support idea of PM being a possible candidate, though sceptics suggest he would likely be greeted with a French veto.”

Jens Stoltenberg, who has been NATO chief since 2014, is expected to step down when his current term ends in September 2023. The recently scandal-plagued Johnson, perhaps looking to distract the public and media from the so-called “Partygate” ordeal at home, has already in six months of war visited Ukraine twice – and remains among the most outspoken hawkish Western leaders in frequently voicing condemnation of Russia and Vladimir Putin.

Stoltenberg’s own term was extended reportedly as a result of Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Other former UK prime ministers have been courted for the post in the recent past, such as David Cameron and Theresa May.

High-ranking Tories on the powerful defence select committee – Richard Drax and Mark Francois – have publicly backed Johnson for the position after he leaves UK office, with Drax telling the Telegraph, “Any distinguished Brit would be a great choice. If indeed that is what Boris Johnson wants to go and do, of course I would support that.”

And Francois highlighted his unwavering ‘anti-Russia, pro-Ukraine’ position:

“People will probably argue over Boris Johnson’s legacy for years – but one thing which is clearly inarguable is his absolutely staunch support for Ukraine in the face of Russian barbarity,” he was quoted in the report as saying.

This is also why he would likely receive support from the US and (though only with a symbolic voice given it’s not in NATO) from the Zelensky government in Ukraine as well.

In such a scenario as Johnson’s candidacy for the top NATO post being advanced, however, France would likely veto it, given Emmanuel Macron has in many ways taken a very different approach of constantly seeking a path forward to get the warring sides to the negotiating table.

Macron has himself come under fire from some corners of Europe for holding over a dozen phone calls with Russia’s Putin since the war began.

*

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: Boris Johnson made a surprise visit to Ukraine in April, during which he allegedly discouraged Zelensky from pursuing peace talks in Turkey. Photo: Boris Johnson

Ukraine Is Losing the War, and So Is Europe

July 28th, 2022 by Oscar Silva-Valladares

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.

***

Beyond the damage in Ukraine, the war also has significant casualties in the rest of Europe as the continent is losing its most competitive energy supplies, compromising the region’s manufacturing edge and accelerating an inflation wave that through higher energy costs will severely affect the wellbeing of its population this coming winter.

Europe has been trying for years to diversify its energy sources but it did not have a comprehensive contingency plan to counteract the impact of abruptly severing access to Russia’s oil and gas since the beginning of the Ukraine war. European politicians have grossly exaggerated the substitution potential of other energy sources (like LNG) and are facing the need to accept alternatives that not too long ago were considered politically unpalatable, like the reopening of coal production in Germany.

How this gross miscalculation took place? Clearly, the European leadership has been unable to foresee the true economic consequences in Europe and beyond of the economic war unleashed against Russia. One explanation for the boldness and self-confidence surrounding the European standing against Russia at the beginning of the war was a strong belief that the combination of anti-Russian sanctions and military support to Ukraine would cause a significant weakening of Russia’s political, social and military standing leading to its defeat. This explains for instance bold statements that the war would only be solved in the field as it was confidently said by the EU’s foreign affairs representative back in March.

It can be argued that the wrong assessment on the war outcome has its roots in faulty US-British intelligence which forecasted Russia’s defeat through economic warfare and, therefore, a limited impact of sanctions on Europe. This not being the case has now made European leadership to scramble for solutions. Meanwhile, the political fallout is already taking place, with Britain and Italy’s prime ministers being the most visible casualties as victims of domestic political events unleashed by their own Russian sanctions. More importantly, it doesn’t seem that the remaining European leadership (led by von der Leyen, Macron and Scholz) is willing to change course without losing significant credibility.

On the other hand, dissenting and unorthodox European political views are sounding louder, as Hungarian prime minister Orban’s recent speech where he boldly mentioned that Russian sanctions and arming Ukraine have failed, Ukraine can’t win the war, the more weapons go to Ukraine the more territory it will lose and that the West should stop arming Ukraine and focus on diplomacy.

At the heart of Europe’s current troubles is its inability to balance its economic and security interests with enough autonomy to be able to look after its own interests. European ambiguity is not new, has its roots on the post-World War II architecture and the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and in relation to Ukraine it manifested in its ineptitude to enforce the Minsk agreements that clearly offered a Russo-Ukrainian peace path but were unable to be enforced by France and Germany due to relentless US and Ukrainian pressure.

It seems that only significant political alterations in the European countries that matter -namely France, Germany and Italy- will allow a meaningful change of course from the current path of confrontation with Russia and ultimately economic self-destruction. Otherwise, any political initiative towards solving the war will be left in the hands of Russia and the United States and, if that is the case, any lasting agreement will not have European interests at heart. It would be tragic that a core European problem like the Ukraine war is finally solved through the dealings of an Euro-Asian and an American power.

*

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.

Oscar Silva-Valladares is a former investment banker that has lived and worked in North and Latin America, Western & Eastern Europe, Saudi Arabia, Japan, the Philippines and Western Africa. He currently chairs Davos International Advisory, an advisory firm focused on strategic consulting across emerging markets.

Featured image is from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Iran’s Oil Revenues Soar by 580% as Crude Prices Rally

July 28th, 2022 by Tsvetana Paraskova

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.

***

Iran’s revenues from exports of oil and condensate surged by 580% during the first four months of the current Iranian year that begins on March 21, Iranian Minister of Economic Affairs and Finance, Seyyed Ehsan Khandouzi, said on Tuesday.   

Between March 21 and July 21, international crude oil prices have largely held above $100 per barrel after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions on Russian oil exports upended global trade flows.

“Due to the increase in oil exports and our new budget’s currency conversion rate, we saw a 580% increase in the treasury’s income from the export of oil and condensate in the first four months of this year,” the Iranian finance minister was quoted as saying by local news agency IRNA.

Overall, Iran’s budget income jumped by 48% in March-July compared to the same period of 2021, while government expenditures rose by 16%, the minister added.

“The government was focused on this issue to be able to earn a more stable income. This means that compensating the budget deficit was on the agenda of the government and it was realized in the first 4 months of this year,” the minister said.

Iran’s 12-month inflation rate hit 40% in July, Iranian statistics showed last week. Prices of goods have soared since the government removed some subsidies earlier this year.

Despite the diplomatic impasse over the nuclear deal, Iran has been preparing to rejoin the global oil market. The country has boosted production, as well as exports to its main market, China. If a new deal is reached between Iran and the world powers, the flow of Iranian oil abroad could increase by between 500,000 bpd and 1 million bpd, according to analysts.

China has been the main outlet for Iranian crude oil exports since the U.S. re-imposed sanctions on the Islamic Republic’s oil industry in 2018 when then-President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the so-called Iranian nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

*

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.

Tsvetana is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing for news outlets such as iNVEZZ and SeeNews. 

Featured image is from OilPrice.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.

***

In late March, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine entered its second month, U.N. agencies began to issue dire warnings regarding the world’s food supply. The war, they said, was pushing food-insecure countries to the brink of a “devastating” hunger crisis, with the combination of brutal fighting in Ukraine and unprecedented economic sanctions on Russia threatening to disrupt as much as a third of the world’s wheat exports. Just two weeks after the war’s start, spot prices for a bushel of wheat skyrocketed from less than $8 to nearly $13.

The World Food Programme said the soaring prices were placing 345 million people at risk of “acute food insecurity,” with an additional 50 million drifting toward a state of emergency — particularly in North Africa, a region that relies on wheat imports from the two nations. Coming on the heels of a supply chain-disrupting pandemic, the situation was a “perfect storm,” as U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in early June.

Since March, the price of wheat has fallen precipitously. As of July 26, a bushel was trading at $9.37, according to the website Macrotrends — a drop of nearly 30% in just over four months. This whiplash-inducing turnaround hasn’t entirely rescued food-insecure countries; prices are still much higher than before the pandemic. But some of the worst-case projections now look far less likely to occur than they appeared in March.

However, the wild fluctuations in wheat prices during the unfolding war have exposed the fragility of the global food system, laying bare the vulnerability of a delicate international trade network and supply chain that can be near-instantaneously upended by conflict and other unforeseen events — including the intensifying impacts of climate change.

And with geopolitical conflict and climate change threatening to disrupt the production of wheat and other staple foods in the 21st century, understanding the links between financial industry profits and world hunger is a necessity.

Western diplomats have been eager to blame Russia’s war of aggression for the jarring rise in wheat prices, but some analysts say the causes are more complicated, blaming unregulated financial speculation for at least part of the recent crisis. Absent reforms to the way food is produced and how prices are set, more shocks are almost certain to be in store no matter what happens in Ukraine.

Russian soldiers guard an area next to a wheat field in Ukraine.

Russian soldiers guard an area next to a wheat field in Ukraine. Image by manhhai via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).

Power and grain

The wheat trade has long been associated with the rise and fall of great international powers and the development of national economies. The emergence of the United States as a global economic powerhouse in the 19th century was partly due to a massive boom in wheat production, which in turn fueled the growth of major European cities. And long before Vladimir Putin issued the order to invade Ukraine, Catherine the Great fought the Ottoman Empire for control of its fertile soil, establishing the port city of Odessa as a hub for lucrative commercial wheat exports to Western Europe.

Later, the failure of the Soviet Union’s collective farming schemes led to the socialist nation reaching out to the United States — at that point still the world’s largest wheat producer — to establish trade ties in the 1970s. After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1991, Russia underwent one of the most significant agricultural transitions in modern history, going from a net importer of wheat to the world’s largest exporter.

Russia maintains that position today, with nearly 40 million metric tons of its wheat sold on world markets in 2021, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture figures. Its closest competitors that year were the European Union and the U.S., at 30 million and 27 million metric tons, respectively, with Canada and Australia not far behind. Ukraine is also one of the world’s largest exporters, selling about 19 million metric tons between July 2021 and June 2022.

Most of the 800 million tons or so of wheat produced globally is consumed at home in the countries where it’s grown. Every year, around a quarter of that total is exported to other countries that consume more wheat than they grow, especially in North Africa and the Middle East. Together, Russia and Ukraine accounted for nearly 30% of those exports.

Russia and Ukraine's wheat export.

After1991, Russia underwent one of the most significant agricultural transitions in modern history, going from a net importer of wheat to the world’s largest exporter. Image by oec.world.

While wheat production in the world has steadily increased over the past two decades, helping contribute to an overall decline in global food insecurity, in recent years, unpredictable weather patterns — increasingly linked to climate change — have made harvests less reliable.

Despite the war in Ukraine, the USDA projects that overall global wheat production this and next year will be about the same as last year. But droughts in the U.S. and India damaged wheat harvests this year, and one 2019 study said that similar droughts could happen in 60% of the world’s wheat-growing areas in the coming years as climate change ramps up.

“We are facing highly unpredictable and likely precipitous kinds of ruptures rather than it just being a little bit hotter every year,” said Sophia Murphy, executive director of the Minnesota-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. “Food has always been highly weather dependent.”

More recently, commercial distribution networks that move wheat and other foodstuffs from one point on the globe to another were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The recent rise in prices is linked to the pandemic and was to do mostly with transportation issues,” Murphy said. “So bottlenecks emerged as systems shut down in various ways and countries lost their purchasing power, with ports and ships being affected by the lack of personnel. There was a whole shock to the global distribution system we rely on.”

Global wheat production by nation.

Global wheat production by nation. Image by Farmdoc Daily.

The start of the Ukraine-Russia war pushed those trends into crisis, which was made worse by an increase in the cost of fertilizer resulting from economic sanctions against Russia — the world’s biggest exporter of fertilizer. In a nine-day period after Russian tanks rolled across the Ukrainian border, wheat prices on the Chicago Board of Trade shot up by 54%, demonstrating how critical the two countries have become in world food markets.

In North Africa and the Middle East, which together imported nearly 85 million metric tons of wheat in 2020/21, the rise in wheat prices has placed enormous pressure on low-income households. Bread provides 30% of the calories consumed in Egypt, for example, and 80% of its wheat is imported from Russia and Ukraine. While rural populations further south in Africa often grow and consume wild rice and other grains like sorghum, bread is a staple food in many African cities, making their residents vulnerable to global wheat market price hikes.

“Twenty-five years ago it wouldn’t have been the same because [Russia and Ukraine] wouldn’t have been as important to the global supply,” Murphy said.

But some analysts say the startling speed and extent of the price increase in March can’t be explained by the war alone, nor supply and demand on agricultural markets. While U.S. politicians have taken to describing rising food and other commodity costs as the “Putin price hike,” some observers see a more familiar hand also at the lever: Wall Street.

Gambling on conflict, climate change, and starvation

While most people understand the bite of higher food prices, few recognize the role the financial industry plays in setting those prices. Spot prices for all commodities — iron, oil, and also wheat — are heavily influenced by what’s called the “futures market.” And that market, some experts say, is in turn shaped by bets Wall Street places on commodity prices in the form of “swaps,” most of which are held by their overseas subsidiaries and are largely unregulated.

Healthy futures markets are necessary for the production and distribution of commodities. By locking in a price at a set date for delivery of goods, producers know what they’ll make in exchange for their work and investment. If the actual price is higher than the price in the futures contract, their counterparty gets to pocket the profit.

In the case of wheat, this means farmers know they’ll be able to sell their harvest at a profit and then plant the next crop.

But since the 1990s, a parallel, opaque market for swaps has emerged alongside the futures market. Worth hundreds of trillions of dollars, commodities swaps don’t involve the delivery of actual goods and are in essence a form of gambling on their future price. But because of its huge size, the swaps market can exert a gravitational pull on commodity futures markets, pushing consumer prices higher than supply and demand would normally dictate.

“We’re in a market where speculators are driving prices up,” said Michael Greenberger, former head of the Division of Trading and Markets at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

For more than a decade, Greenberger has been sounding the alarm over a loophole in the Dodd-Frank Act, a U.S. law that covers Wall Street trading, that he says allows U.S. banks to dodge regulations on swaps, as long as they’re sold by their overseas subsidiaries and aren’t legally guaranteed by the parent institution.

According to Greenberger, a major factor in price inflation, including for wheat, is this unregulated speculation, which can rake in huge profits for banks at the expense of global consumer well-being. Typically, spot prices for a commodity are linked to its price on the futures market, meaning that when the latter soars, so do the prices that consumers and business have to pay.

“Commodity markets are supposed to be hedging markets for people who are dealing with the commodity involved,” he told Mongabay. “In the case of wheat, it would be farmers and people buying wheat. But if we looked at it, there would be banks in there with no interest in what the price of wheat is, writing swaps and controlling this price.”

Greenberger hasn’t been alone in noticing the disconnect between market fundamentals and the price of commodities like wheat this year. After Russia first invaded Ukraine, mania in futures markets reached such a fever pitch that at one point some farmers couldn’t sell their harvests because wheat buyers refused to pay prices they felt were out of touch with reality.

Wheat supply and use across the world.

Wheat supply and use across the world in 2021-22.

“Increased financial investment on grain futures markets coincided with a sharp increase in the price of grain, far beyond what supply and demand conditions would indicate in that moment,” explained Jennifer Clapp, a member of the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food) and professor at the School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability at the University of Waterloo in Canada. “While it is hard to say precisely what impact financial speculation has had on the markets, it almost certainly played a role pushing price trends beyond what the prevailing supply and demand conditions would indicate.”

Reporting for The Young Turks earlier this year, Jonathan Larsen made the case that exploitation of this loophole is a major factor pushing up commodities prices across the board, from oil to other foodstuffs. If true, it would mean that the Ukraine war isn’t entirely to blame for a potential rise in global hunger and starvation — Wall Street might be simultaneously worsening the crisis and profiting from it to boot.

“It’s a very distracted time,” Greenberger said. “And it’s too easy to say the war in Ukraine has unbalanced all these markets, [or that] supply chains and the ports are shot, and that there’s a supply and demand reason for these prices going up. My own best guess is anywhere from 10% to 25% of the price, at least, is dictated by deregulated speculative activity.”

While the role that commodity swaps have played in driving the price of wheat higher is hard to quantify, there’s no question that the underlying cause is Russia’s invasion, along with COVID-19-related supply chain issues and other factors.

“The war in Ukraine is very important, and does explain much of the increase in prices we saw between February and May of this year,” said Patrick Westhoff, director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri. “However, the weather, global demand, exchange rates, and a host of other factors have played a role as well.”

Wheat sacks in a warehouse

Wheat sacks in a warehouse in Portland, Oregon, U.S. Image by OSU Special Collections & Archives via Flickr.

Since early March, the price of wheat itself has tracked major developments on the ground in the Ukraine war by little, if at all. After the United Nations announced a deal between Russia and Ukraine to allow wheat exports through the Black Sea on July 22, according to the website Macrotrends the price remained largely unchanged, going from $9.55 per bushel on July 21 to $9.38 on July 25.

In contrast, the price plummeted from a March 8 high of $12.84 to $9.24 by June 24, at the same time that stocks and other equities collapsed due to fears of a global recession and hawkish U.S. Federal Reserve interest rate policies. The drop in wheat spot and future prices during this period — just as a Russian offensive in Ukraine’s breadbasket Donbass region began — strongly suggests that tanks and artillery weren’t the only forces affecting food markets.

In the long run, Westhoff told Mongabay, price spikes from speculative betting frenzies tend to settle down as market fundamentals reassert themselves. But during those periods of distortion, prices can skyrocket — which is precisely what may have happened earlier this year.

“I would suggest that more than just the Ukrainian crisis was at play, whether it’s some combination of other fundamentals or just the whims of people trading that particular day of the week,” he said.

For millions of people across the world, those whims could be determining whether they can afford to eat or not. Barring a reform that closes the Dodd-Frank loophole, in the future, any crisis — be it war, great power standoffs, or an environmental disaster — could become a driver of runaway speculation, bringing with it increased market volatility, and potentially food shortages and starvation.

The Wall Street sign.

Experts suggest that the Ukraine war isn’t entirely to blame for a potential rise in global hunger and starvation — Wall Street might be simultaneously worsening the crisis and profiting from it to boot. Image by Carlos Delgado via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0).

Planting the seeds of a new system

Beyond the immediate causes of the rise and fall of wheat prices this year lies a deeper, fundamental question regarding the resilience of global food systems. The underlying weaknesses in globalization and price setting that have been exposed by the current Ukraine crisis will almost certainly be tested in new and unpredictable ways by climate change.

In good times, the abundance of cheap wheat on international markets can be positive for importing countries. But the past two years are a stark reminder that market conditions can change fast, just as they did in the commodity price crisis of the late 2000s. That crisis led in part to the political upheavals of the so-called Arab Spring that rocked the Middle East and North Africa, eventually playing a role in the onset of multiple conflicts, many of which continue to smolder more than a decade later.

One lesson that is being learned: in precarious times, a nation’s food security depends on local production. Already, some of the countries most affected by this year’s rise in wheat prices have begun discussing ways to boost local crop yields and shift to native grains. Egypt plans to increase the amount of wheat planted on its own soil, and consumers in Africa are substituting expensive wheat imports with locally produced agricultural staples like sorghum and cassava. But building a new, locally focused food system won’t happen cheaply or without sustained effort.

“We need to invest in diversifying the places that food comes from,” Murphy of IATP said. “So that’s looking ahead to climate change and different changes in production. We saw with the COVID pandemic that in some places, the local system was resilient and able to respond and shift what it was producing to meet demand.”

And while the Ukraine war’s impact on wheat exports has captured headlines, extreme weather is also exerting its own destabilizing pull. According to a briefing paper put out in June by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a U.K-based nonprofit, projected losses in 2022’s wheat harvests due to drought in the U.S., India and France are expected to amount to 12.4 million tons — significantly more than the 9 million ton shortfall from Ukraine as a result of Russia’s invasion.

A boy carries bread in Egypt.

A boy carries fresh bread in Egypt. Bread provides 30% of the calories consumed in Egypt and 80% of its wheat is imported from Russia and Ukraine. North Africa and the Middle East together imported nearly 85 million metric tons of wheat in 2020/21. Image by Nasser Nouri via Flickr (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

On the other hand, some studies suggest climate change may counterintuitively prove to be a boon to wheat production — at least in the short term. A 2021 paper found that while unchecked warming could cause as much as a 24% decrease in maize harvests, wheat yields could rise by 17% as higher latitudes become more suitable for cultivation.

That contradiction highlights the uncertainty in accurately forecasting climate change impacts on global food systems, and the need to plan cooperatively for multiple scenarios. Given the difficulty in predicting how those impacts will play out, understanding the role that financial speculators play in times of crisis is a matter of urgent public interest — as is whether stricter regulations could prevent the kind of price spikes of basic foodstuffs like wheat that occurred earlier this year.

Escalating instability already seen over the first two decades of the 21st century make clear that the unexpected is becoming the norm for global food markets. It also presses home a case that some food advocates have been making for decades: The globalized system of production and distribution may have generated a world of abundance, but also one that’s dangerously fragile.

“More robust food systems — systems that are more resilient in the face of shocks — need to be based on the principle of diversity, rather than concentration and financialization,” Clapp of IPES-Food wrote. “That means more diverse production systems, more diverse trade and marketing systems, and more diverse diets. These kinds of diversity can ensure that there is enough slack in food systems to provide alternatives when things in one part of the system are disrupted.”

Genetic diversity of sorghum (left) and millet (right).

Genetic diversity of sorghum (left) and millet (right). Experts say crop diversity can ensure that there is enough slack in food systems to provide alternatives when things in one part of the system are disrupted. Image by ICRISAT via Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0).

*

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.

Sources

Trnka, M., Feng, S., Semenov, M. A., Olesen, J. E., Kersebaum, K. C., Rötter, R. P., … Büntgen, U. (2019). Mitigation efforts will not fully alleviate the increase in water scarcity occurrence probability in wheat-producing areas. Science Advances5(9). doi:10.1126/sciadv.aau2406

Jägermeyr, J., Müller, C., Ruane, A. C., Elliott, J., Balkovic, J., Castillo, O., … Rosenzweig, C. (2021). Climate impacts on global agriculture emerge earlier in new generation of climate and crop models. Nature Food2(11), 873-885. doi:10.1038/s43016-021-00400-y

Featured image: Somali workers unload a ship carrying sacks of wheat donated by European communities at the port of Mogadishu, Somalia. Image by Expert Infantry via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).

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

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

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

***

An official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) used data from a flawed preprint study that exaggerated the risk of death for children from COVID-19 in her presentations to CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisors who were responsible for recommending Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines for infants and young children.

The study, first published May 25 on the medRxiv preprint server, was authored by a group of U.K. researchers. On June 28, the authors published a revised version of the study, after critics questioned some of their original findings.

“It’s really disturbing that data this poor made its way into the meetings to discuss childhood COVID and that it took me less than a few minutes to find a major flaw (and then I found many more as I looked deeper),” said Kelley K, who was the first to point out some of the study’s flaws on her website COVID-Georgia.com.

After learning of Kelley’s analysis, The Defender reviewed the original preprint, confirmed Kelley’s findings and uncovered additional flaws in the original preprint and also in the June 28 revised version.

Study falsely claimed COVID was leading cause of death in U.S. children

During a June 17 meeting of its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to discuss pediatric COVID-19 vaccines in children under 5, Dr. Katherine Fleming-Dutra, a pediatrician and pediatric emergency medicine physician with the CDC, presented a table that falsely claimed COVID-19 was a leading cause of death in U.S. children.

Fleming-Dutra earlier that week presented the same table during the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee meeting, along with other slides from the original U.K. study that also falsely claimed COVID-19 as a “top 5 cause of death” in children.

The table, which was sourced from the U.K. study, was disseminated widely by physicians on Twitter who claimed the data “made the case” for vaccinating children under 5.

covid children leading cause death

The table was part of a slide deck on the epidemiology of COVID-19 in children and adolescents, developed under the direction of Fleming-Dutra.

A disclaimer at the end of the slide deck states, “The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The table illustrated the study’s claim that COVID-19 caused more than 1 million deaths in the U.S, including at least 1,433 deaths among children and young people ages 0 to 19 years old from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2022.

The study’s authors originally ranked COVID-19 ninth among all causes of death in children and adolescents ages 0 to 19, fifth in disease-related causes of death — excluding accidents, assault and suicide — and first in deaths caused by infectious/respiratory diseases.

The authors stated they “only consider COVID-19 as an underlying — and not contributing — cause of death.”

However, that statement is false — because the study in fact cited data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which tabulates COVID-19 deaths by including any death certificate that mentions COVID-19, not just those cases where COVID-19 was the primary reason for death.

Using NCHS data, there were 1,433 pediatric COVID-19 deaths through April 30.

However, using the CDC’s own mortality statistics, which count only those deaths where the virus was the underlying cause, there were only 1,088 pediatric deaths — nearly 25% less than the NCHS and the study stated.

After the misleading data was brought to the attention of the authors, they revised the study to reduce the number of COVID-19 deaths among children and adolescents, from 1,433 deaths to 1,088 deaths — making COVID-19 the eighth leading cause of death in the 0 to 19 age group.

Cumulative versus annualized death rates — why it matters

According to Kelley K’s analysis, one key misleading aspect of the U.K. study was that it ranked cumulative COVID-19 deaths alongside annual rates for other causes of death.

Cumulative death rate refers to the proportion of a group that dies over a specified time interval. Annualized deaths are those that occur over the course of a year.

In ranking COVID-19 deaths by age group, the authors of the preprint included both cumulative (over 26 months) and annualized deaths, which inexplicably ranked COVID-19 twice for each age group, according to Kelley.

For instance, in the 1 to 4 age group, the paper listed cumulative COVID-19 deaths as the fifth leading cause of death.

The annualized COVID-19 deaths also appeared on the same list in their proper position.

For each age group, the cumulative COVID-19 death rate was more than double the annualized death rate.

Kelley recreated the results of the preprint using CDC WONDER, which utilizes “a rich ad-hoc query system for the analysis of public health data.”

Using that system, she obtained data where COVID-19 is listed as the underlying cause of death during the time period listed in the original study. She then annualized the results.

Kelley also showed the annualized number of deaths when using only those deaths where COVID-19 was listed as the underlying cause.

chart corrected covid data

When the data is annualized and includes only those deaths where the virus was the underlying cause, COVID-19 does not rank as a leading cause of death for young children, the Daily Caller reported.

For kids under age 1, COVID-19 ranks ninth — behind influenza and pneumonia, heart disease and homicide. And accidents are almost 25 times more likely to kill an infant than COVID-19, according to the CDC WONDER data.

Among kids ages 1 to 4 and 5 to 9, COVID-19 ranked in a four-way tie for the eighth leading cause of death. For ages 10 to 14, it ranked in a two-way tie for eighth. For teenagers between 15 and 19 years old, it dropped from fourth to sixth.

Even using correct data, there are still issues with showing the impact of COVID-19 deaths in children using rankings, according to Kelley.

Kelley wrote:

“Rankings overstate the impact of COVID, because the top few causes of death far outweigh the causes further down the list. For example, in ages 1 to 4, accidents account for almost 25 times as many deaths as COVID-19 on an annualized basis.

“Furthermore, for each of the 4 age groups covered by the CDC slide, the very broad ‘accidents’ is the leading cause of death. If we break that down further, causes of death like drownings, vehicle crashes, and drug overdoses, would be individual causes of death greater than COVID in various age groups.”

Why did U.K. researchers use U.S. COVID death data?

Another issue with the preprint is the use of pre-pandemic data from 2019, instead of 2020 or 2021, to compare other causes of death with COVID-19.

According to the CDC website on “excess deaths associated with COVID-19,” the nation’s response to the pandemic may have altered mortality patterns.

The CDC states:

“The estimates of excess deaths reported here may not be due to COVID-19, either directly or indirectly the pandemic may have changed mortality patterns for other causes of death.

“Upward trends in other causes of death (e.g., suicide, drug overdose, heart disease) may contribute to excess deaths in some jurisdictions. Future analyses of cause-specific excess mortality may provide additional information about these patterns.”

In addition, U.K. researchers incorrectly analyzed U.S. deaths, by using NCHS data instead of CDC WONDER data, raising the question of why they didn’t use data in their own country, Kelley said.

“Could it be because the U.S. counts COVID deaths very generously, so our data made it easier to present COVID as a leading cause of death in children?” Kelley asked.

“In addition, why did they inflate the counts by including 18- and 19-year-olds in the data, when the pediatric population is generally accepted to be 0-17?”

Kelley wrote:

“On the CDC side, how did Dr. Katherine E. Fleming-Dutra, M.D. at the CDC — a pediatrician and doctor of emergency medicine — not realize this data was seriously flawed and out of line with all other data about the impact of Covid on pediatric mortality?

“How did a pre-print get used in an ACIP and FDA presentation with such little oversight without the quality of the data being fully vetted? How did I uncover these issues, instead of them being identified by someone whose job it is to evaluate this kind of data?”

“We are forced to believe that the CDC researchers who put this data together are either incompetent or liars when all the mistakes go in the same direction,” Kelley said.

“It certainly seems like the CDC uses whatever data they can find to push their agenda without any consideration to its veracity,” she said.

Researchers revise preprint but still use mismatched data

In a revised preprint released June 28, the study’s authors admitted they improperly calculated COVID-19 deaths and adjusted the rankings for each age group using CDC WONDER data.

However, the researchers utilized several tactics to exaggerate COVID deaths in children in their revised version of the study.

First, the authors reduced the study period from March 1, 2020 – April 30, 2022, to April 1, 2021 – March 31, 2022 — selecting the worst 12-month period of the pandemic.

The authors claimed that changing the date range “simplified” comparison time periods.

“We have fixed an error: our comparisons now use COVID-19 underlying cause of death data obtained from CDC Wonder. We have also simplified the comparison time periods,” the revised preprint states in a footnote.

Researchers then concluded, “COVID-19 mortality is a leading cause of death in CYP [children and young people] aged 0-19 years in the U.S.”

The authors of the study admitted in the revision that “deaths among U.S. CYP are rare in general” so they argued the mortality burden of COVID-19 in the younger age groups is “best understood in the context of all other causes of CYP death.”

The authors also altered the study, adding a “percentage of top 10 deaths” to the table for children ages 1 to 4, instead of noting where COVID-19 fits as a percentage of all-cause deaths.

COVID-19 appears as the seventh leading cause of death in children ages 1 to 4, however, it comprises only 2.7% of total deaths. To put that into perspective, the six more frequent causes add up to 89.5%.

The COVID-19 deaths were then compared to deaths from a different time period.

Kelley tweeted:

Dr. Susan Bewley, an obstetrician and BMJ award-winner, did a side-by-side comparison of the two preprints and concluded there should be a “major retraction” or “corrected post-publication” as the preprint was significantly altered.

CDC and FDA fail to acknowledge misleading data

The Daily Caller reached out to the CDC about its misleading data and asked how the study made it through the agency’s “rigorous review process.”

The CDC did not respond to multiple requests.

The Defender also contacted the CDC for comment on the preprint used as the basis for authorizing COVID-19 vaccines for emergency use in children. We were directed to call the CDC’s media relations department, but the number listed and provided by the CDC and its automated system is no longer a working number.

The Daily Caller also made multiple attempts to contact the FDA.

The FDA said:

“FDA speakers in the June 14-15th meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) did not cite the study in question in their presentations. FDA’s press release announcing the authorizations explains the basis for our determinations.”

But as the Daily Caller reported, and slides from the meeting show, that’s not entirely true.

Although the FDA itself did not present the paper during the meeting, the paper was presented by Fleming-Dutra who claimed COVID-19 was a leading cause of death among children and adolescents 1 to 19 years of age and cited the erroneous preprint and NCHS statistics as the source of the data.

That slide and others claiming COVID-19 was a leading cause of death among children helped form the basis of the panel’s decision to recommend expanding the Emergency Use Authorizationof Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines to infants and toddlers.

The Daily Caller reached out to all 11 authors listed as contributors to the research. Only Dr. Deepti Gurdasani, an epidemiologist and senior lecturer at Queen Mary University of London responded.

Gurdasani wouldn’t comment on the effect of publishing flawed research affecting the healthcare of millions of children other than to chastise Fox host and Daily Caller co-founder, Tucker Carlson.

Another author of the study, Seth Flaxman, with the U.K’s University of Oxford, tweeted after the flaws in the paper were exposed that his team was working on a revised version of the study.

To date, neither the CDC nor FDA have publically issued a comment or correction on the flawed study cited by the CDC during vaccine advisory meetings to determine whether COVID-19 vaccines should be authorized for infants and small children.

The study has not been retracted.

*

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.

Featured image is from CHD

Russia Scores Dismally in Oil and Gas Sector in Africa

July 28th, 2022 by Kester Kenn Klomegah

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.

***

According to the World Bank, Russia holds the world’s largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves, and the eighth largest oil reserves. Over the past years, Russia has expressed heightened interest in exploring and producing oil and gas in Africa. Emboldened African leaders and industry executives have accepted proposals, several agreements and whatever were signed with Russian companies, but little have been achieved in the sector. With the rapidly changing geopolitical conditions and economic fragmentation fraught with competition and rivarly, African leaders have to understand that Russia might not heavily invest in the oil and gas sector, not even in the needed infrastructure in this industry.

From our monitoring, research and several interviews with experts especially inside Africa, we can conclude that the Russia-Ukraine crisis has brought into its fold good opportunities. Russia is energy self-sufficient. It does not need to import energy from Africa, it can only act as a fortified gatekeeper. It has done this several years, primarily to ensure, to a considerable extent, control of Africa’s energy from entering the global market. Popular opinion now is that potential African producers can take advantage to attract investments required to build infrastructure that would enable them to expand exploration, production and exportation to meet the anticipated increase in demand in Europe.

Russia’s interests about possible participation in the oil and gas related projects is perceived by some experts as a bid to either sabotage or control the flow of oil and gas from Africa into Europe. Several experts have written about the implications of the Russia-Ukraine crisis, and its meaning for Africa. The crisis casts a long shadow across Africa. There is need to forge a pan-African solidarity and adherence to working towards developing the continent’s natural resources. If this is not done, Africa will continue importing oil and gas.

During June 2021 interview discussions with NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber, a pan-African company that focuses on research, documentation, negotiations and transactions in the energy sector, he expressed the urgent necessity for scaling up Africa’s production capacity in order to achieve universal access to energy. He further noted the challenging tasks and pointed strongly to the need for a transformative partnership-based strategy, (that requires transparency, good governance and policies that could create a favourable investment climate) and that aims at increasing access to energy for all Africans.

Natural gas, affordable and abundant in Africa, has the power to spark significant job creation and capacity-building opportunities, economic diversification and growth. Sustainable development of African economies can only be attained by the development of local industry – by investing in Africans, building up African entrepreneurs and supporting the creation of indigenous companies. It requires cooperative efforts by Africans.

Can there be a unified approach to collaborating on issues of energy projects in Africa? NJ Ayuk observes that Africa has already made an indelible mark in the oil and gas industry. Africans must therefore become more accountable, and plan better in the energy sectors. Some potential external investors, like Russia, have for many decades shown interest in this sector but have not operationalized their agreements and promises.

Approximately 840 million Africans, mostly in sub-Saharan countries, have no access to electricity. Hundreds of millions have unreliable or limited power at best. Even during normal circumstances, energy poverty should not be the reality for most Africans. The popular narratives about the prevalence of energy poverty on the continent has to change. We need good governance that creates an enabling environment for widespread economic growth and improved infrastructure. African leaders need an unwavering determination to make Africa work for us, even when there are missteps and things go wrong.

The African Energy Chamber is raising A Banner for African Oil & Gas. It plans to hold Oil and Gas conference this October. As part of the conference, its special report titled “State of African Energy Q2 2022 Report” will be presented during the conference. According to the report seen by this author, increasing oil and gas activity and a record number of new discoveries have set the stage for significant industry growth in the second half of 2022.

In Namibia alone, for example, two breakthrough discoveries, Shell’s Graff and Total Energies’ Venus-1X, have opened frontier oil play onshore. Industry experts estimate that Venus-1X may hold recoverable resources of some 3 billion barrels of recoverable oil, making it Sub-Saharan Africa’s largest-ever oil discovery. Namibia, in fact, has led the way in new oil and gas activity this year and is emerging as an exploration hot spot. In northeast Namibia and northwest Botswana, ReconAfrica has licensed operations for the newly discovered 8.5-million-acre Kavango Basin, one of the world’s largest onshore undeveloped basins.

This is great news for our industry, which was hit especially hard by Covid-19 and has struggled to regain momentum. The energy sector was crippled by historically low volumes in 2020 and 2021, creating an even more critical need for new exploration. And Namibia is just one example of the new discoveries being made all over Africa. The Q2 2022 report outlines a number of new developments across the continent.

Map of Africa (Source: Kester Kenn Klomegah)

Eni discovered the Baleine field in Cote d’Ivoire last year, which contains as many as 2 billion barrels of recoverable oil and nearly 2 Tcf of gas offshore. This is a big deal for Côte d’Ivoire, which up until now has been producing about 34,000 barrels of crude per day from four blocks. 

In Angola, TotalEnergies is drilling for the first time since 2018 and has executed a sale and purchase agreement with state-owned Sonangol for two blocks in the Kwanza Basin offshore. Other majors, including ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, and Eni, are active in Angola as well. More than a dozen high-impact wells are predicted in the next 18 months in Libya, Ghana, Mozambique, South Africa, Equatorial Guinea, Morocco, Egypt, and others. Egypt alone has awarded eight oil and gas exploration blocks to Eni, BP, Apex International, Energean, United Energy, Enap Sipetrol, and INA.

And after long delays because of Covid-19, licensing rounds are planned, open, or under evaluation in more than a dozen countries including Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Gabon, and Congo. The results are expected to be announced this year. Higher greenfield spending is also forecast as more projects get the green light. In Kenya, for example, large investments are expected in the greenfield onshore development of Tullow’s South Lokichar basin, Turkana County. At an estimated 585 billion barrels, this is widely considered one of the last big conventional onshore projects in the world.

These discoveries and others referenced in the Chamber’s Q2 2022 report are tremendously exciting. And if managed them properly, it could make significant progress toward the goal of a just energy transition: alleviating energy poverty, stimulating economic growth, and improving the lives of everyday Africans.

The State of African Energy Q2 2022 Report outlines an unprecedented level of new oil and gas discoveries on the African continent. The simple, staggering fact that more than half of Sub-Saharan Africans lack access to electricity means priority must continue to end energy poverty. With Africa’s population projected to exceed two billion by 2040, generation capacity will need to be doubled by 2030 and multiplied fivefold by 2050.

Oil and gas are Africa’s lifeblood and the foundation for economic development. The future depends on sustaining the longevity of the industry. Africa’s wealth of new oil discoveries is not only a chance to recover some of the devastating losses suffered in the last two years – it represents an opportunity to achieve an energy transition that benefits all Africans. According to the report, increasing oil and gas activity and a record number of new discoveries have set the stage for significant industry growth in the second half of 2022.

Some experts believe that Europe can look to Africa as preferred energy supplier. Africa is ready to welcome investors currently pulling out of Russia if they can genuinely invest in developing oil and gas infrastructure which Africa seriously lacks in this industry. That’s a real opportunity, I think, for Africa at this point in time. 

Mohammad Sanusi Barkindo, OPEC Secretary General, (before his death early July) stressed in his last speech that “It is essential if we are to develop new technologies, strengthen the human capacity and remain leaders in innovation so that we can do our part to meet the world’s growing need for energy, shrink our overall environmental footprint, and expand access to underserved communities. Yet the industry is now facing huge challenges along multiple fronts, and these threaten the investment potential now and in the longer term.” 

Regrettably, we are seeing global energy cooperation becoming more fragmented. New regional alignments are threatening to reverse years of progress towards creating a more stable and interconnected energy system. We cannot afford to allow multilateral energy cooperation and global energy security become collateral damage of geopolitics, the OPEC Secretary General said.

It is necessary to underscore the importance of cooperation in exploring and producing this resource to support the needed sustainable development goals, and attempt at becoming more prominent on the global energy stage.

Undoubtedly, Africa has the fastest-growing population in the world, but half of this population is without energy supply. That is why African leaders have to seriously prioritize the right energy policies to make access to energy the most effective way possible.

Russian Presidential Special Representative for Middle East and Africa, Mikhail Bogdanov, in an April interview to Interfax news agency, was asked

“many people in Europe are convinced that Africa is capable of increasing the production and supplies of gas to Europe instead of Russia’s. In your opinion, how realistic is this?”

He explained that “the world is governed by market rules. The reason is the existence of a whole system – consumer markets, traditional suppliers, contracts, not to mention pipelines and oil terminals. In short, this cannot be done in an instant. It will take years to replace supply chains and to build new infrastructure.”

Bogdanov says that Africa is beyond any doubt the continent of the future, both from the point of view of human resources and being a storeroom of the world’s riches. Another issue is that colonial powers, as well as neocolonialists, have never let the Africans take advantage of the treasure under their feet.

President Vladimir Putin addressed the plenary session of the VTB Capital Russia Calling! Investment Forum organized and held by VTB Bank. As usual, the forum brought together from all over the world, business leaders, investment managers and consultants, as well as international experts in the field of the economy and finance. Putin listened to academics and researchers, sometimes even opposing views of the current developments, and enjoyed interactive exchange of opinions with potential investors, an insight into the mood of business partners both from Russia and abroad.

On Africa, Putin noted at the VTB Capital’s Russia Calling Forum, that many countries had been “stepping up their activities on the African continent” but added that Russia could not cooperate with Africa “as it was in the Soviet period, for political reasons.” For decades, Russia has been looking for effective ways to promote multifaceted ties and new strategies for cooperation in energy, oil and gas, trade and industry in Africa.

But so far, Russia’s investment efforts in the region have been limited. Russia is very cautious about making financial commitments in Africa.  Russian companies currently have weak presence in Africa. There is no stimulus for efforts to localize production of equipment and strengthen technological partnership in the energy sector. Russia contentiously claims the leading position as a supplier and is now rapidly diversifying its products at discounted prices to the Asian market. 

With the emerging new economic order characterized by competition and rivalry, and an additional fact that Russia already has thousands of decade-old undelivered pledges and several bilateral agreements signed which are yet to be implemented with individual countries in the continent, it is simply logical that Africans should not expect much in this oil and gas (energy) sector from the Russian Federation.

*

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.

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a regular contributor to Global Research. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

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 I recently wrote, the US no longer has an economy.  America is a market for goods produced offshore with foreign labor that US global corporations sell to Americans.  The US which once produced its own manufactured goods and food now imports much of it.  The result is that fewer and fewer American incomes are based in the production of goods and services consumed by Americans.  This is the path of de-industrialization and poverty.

Not only does America no longer have an economy, it no longer seems to have any economic statistics or ones that make much sense.  For example, allegedly inflation is at 9 percent annually, but gold and silver prices have fallen, with gold down about $250 an ounce and silver down about $6 an ounce. Percentage wise, these are large declines.  Inflation is known to erode the value of paper fiat money, but the US dollar is up against the Euro and other currencies, and inflation is eroding the value of real money–gold and silver. 

According to the Annenberg Public Policy Center, the economy has regained 9 million of the lost lockdown jobs, dropping unemployment to 3.6%.  With about 2 job openings for every person seeking a job, we are at full employment.  Wages have risen strongly but by less than inflation, so real earnings are declining but corporate profits are high. There are slight decreases in the number of people without health insurance and in the number receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.  So there are signs that things are improving. 

But despite full employment and high profits, consumer confidence in the economy has reached the lowest point on record. 

Perhaps the explanation is high gasoline prices. 

Perhaps it is the decline in the stock market and pension accumulations.

Perhaps it is fear of higher interest rates which will further reduce the values of pensions and real estate assets. 

Perhaps it is the billions of dollars the Biden regime is throwing into the war in Ukraine.

Perhaps it is the attempt by the Democrats and a corrupt Department of Justice (sic) to criminalize Trump, his supporters,  and the Republican Party.

Perhaps it is the rise of virulent anti-Americanism in school boards and universities.  Perhaps it is the growing realization of the Covid vaccination deception which is arousing anxieties among the vaccinated.  

Whatever is the cause, it is nevertheless strange that inflation is causing the paper dollar to rise and gold to fall, and that full employment has brought the lowest consumer confidence on record. 

Perhaps the answer is that the numbers we are given are wrong and are serving some other secret agenda that is being fostered on us.

Clearly in the Western world confidence in government is collapsing.

The British prime minister has had to resign and also the Italian one.

Not even the Democrats will permit Biden to run for reelection. Many Western countries have governments comprised of coalitions in which the president or prime minister’s party only has 30% support.  In other words, it is becoming obvious even to the insouciant that there is no leadership in the West. 

Indeed, leadership is not possible. A leader would have to correct the situation, and that is against the interest of the established institutionalized interests.  

Wherever Western peoples look, they see their culture under attack and truth disregarded.  Corruption rules everywhere, even in the American Board of Internal Medicine which has decided to strip Dr. Peter McCullough of his board certification because he cured Covid patients with Ivermectin. 

For curing patients, the ABIM accuses Dr. McCullough, one of the most respected and accomplished doctors in the world, of “spreading misinformation.”  The ABIM has taken the position of Fauci and his corrupt colleagues at NIH and CDC that it is misinformation to say that there is a cure.

You see, the only way the untested “vaccine” could get into mass use was on the basis that there was no known cure.  This, of course, was an intentional lie. There were two known cures–Ivermectin with zinc and HCQ with zinc.  For proving beyond all doubt that Fauci, the CDC, FDA, and WHO were liars for Big Pharma profits, the corrupt ABIM, also a liar for Big Pharma profits, has to punish Dr. McCullough. See this. 

What the US medical system is doing to Dr. McCullough is identical to what Soviet Authorities did to Russian genetics by declaring scientific genetics to be misinformation — “a bourgeois pseudoscience”.

The same thing is now happening to American medicine. There is an effort underway to discredit and disqualify the thousands of doctors and medical scientists who have opposed the Covid protocol that served only Big Pharma’s profits at the expense of the lives and health of millions of people.

There has now been research published in Sweden that found that the mRNA “vaccines” do change the vaccinated person’s DNA.  If this finding is confirmed by other independent scientists, will science be strong enough to stand against Fauci, the whore Western media, and the bought-and-paid-for “scientists” of Big Pharma, or will American medical science suffer the fate of Soviet geneticists? 

*

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.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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 Dr. Stefanie Seneff, a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. She has published over 170 referred articles on various subjects related to the intersection of biology and computation. In recent years, she has been concentrating mainly on the relationship between nutrition and health. Some of her books (selection):

  • “Toxic Legacy: How the Weedkiller Glyphosate Is Destroying Our Health and the Environment”
  • “Fat and Cholesterol Don’t Cause Heart Attacks and Statins are Not The Solution “
  • “How to Prevent Autism: Expert Advice from Medical Professionals

This session is about her recently (June) published paper, written together with Greg Nigh, Anthony M Kyriakopoulos & Peter McCullough, entitled “Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs”.

In the paper, they present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health.

Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites.

*

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 is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: COVID-19 Vaccine Induces a Profound Impairment in Type I Interferon Signaling, Which Has Diverse Adverse Consequences
  • Tags: