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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Today, the Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War sent an open letter to the Office of the Prime Minister encouraging him to rescind his diplomatic boycott and get into the spirit of the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing. The open letter was sent with the co-sponsorship of a number of other organizations and individuals.

Next Monday, January 31^st, the day on which Parliament reconvenes, the Hamilton Coalition to Stop The War will organize an online press conference publicly to launch the open letter and two petitions which also relate to Canada-China relations. Details of the press conference will be made available soon.

The first petition, on the Action Network, is entitled, “Allow Huawei Canada to participate in Canada’s 5G rollout.” This petition to the prime minister and cabinet is to request them to continue to allow the participation of Huawei Canada, its products and services, in the development of Canada’s new 5G network. The petition lists ten good reasons for the cabinet to do so.

The second petition is a parliamentary petition, sponsored by Hamilton Centre NDP MP Matthew Green. It arose from a resolution passed overwhelmingly at the Hamilton and District Labour Council and calls on the government “not only (to) refuse any participation in the AUKUS pact but also to strongly condemn AUKUS as a breach of the UN’s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a dangerous escalation of military tensions with the People’s Republic of China and in the Asia-Pacific region.”

*

The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau
Prime Minister of Canada
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2

Dear Sir,

We, the undersigned, ask you to drop your petty “diplomatic” boycott of the upcoming Beijing Winter Olympic Games: this “diplomatic” boycott flouts the Olympic spirit, is based on false reports, and promotes cold war with China.

For more than one thousand years, the ancient Olympics brought Greeks together in a peaceful, sporting, cultural, and social festival, despite inter-city conflicts. An Olympic Truce was declared so all Greeks could travel, participate, and return home safely.

Impressively, on December 2nd, 2021, in a rare consensus vote, the 193-member UN General Assembly reaffirmed the Olympic Truce for the Beijing Games. UNGA President Abdulla Shahid observed: “Nations should use sport as a tool to support dialogue and reconciliation, striving for a peaceful world aligned with the principles and values enshrined in the United Nations Charter.” International Olympic Committee Chair Thomas Bach stated, “We can only accomplish this mission… if the Olympic Games are politically neutral and do not become a tool to achieve political goals.” Clearly, in mimicking Biden’s petty “diplomatic” boycott, you are playing politics and are out of step with this international consensus.

In addition, your “diplomatic” boycott is based upon false charges of human rights abuses in China. Contrary to statements by you and ministers of your government, China’s Uyghur population is growing in number and prosperity. Unlike Canada’s native peoples, Chinese Uyghurs have an Autonomous Republic. Along with 800 million Chinese, Uyghurs were lifted out of poverty during the past five years – an unprecedented accomplishment in world history.

We note that Canada’s history is replete with systemic racism against numerous ethnic, religious, native, and racial minorities and that the continuing discoveries of the bodies of children in unmarked graves at the sites of former residential schools renders Canada an unworthy critic of the Chinese government. Simply put, people in glass houses should not throw stones.

Furthermore, we question the sincerity of your government’s concern about Uyghur Muslims in the context of Canada’s role in recent US wars. In mainly-Muslim Afghanistan, Canadian soldiers routinely conducted night-time raids on civilian homes and reportedly turned over hundreds of Afghanis for torture at the hands of the Afghan authorities, which the Government of Canada supported. Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament to avoid this scandal in 2008, but the Canadian public has yet to gain access to some 40,000 documents regarding the torture allegations. In predominantly-Muslim Libya, a Canadian general led NATO’s attack, turning Libya into a failed state. Canada was part of the US regime-change coalition in mainly-Muslim Syria, where a half million were killed and more than thirteen million turned into displaced persons. Concerning the Occupied Territories of Palestine, your government has voted against numerous United Nations’ resolution condemning Israeli violations of the human rights and national sovereignty of the mainly-Muslim Palestinian population there. So, we ask why you are so concerned about Muslims in China? We suggest there must be an ulterior motive.

It appears to us that the Obama, Trump, and Biden Administrations were and are intent on promoting a cold war with China. And that’s the ulterior motive, we believe, for calling for a “diplomatic” boycott of the Beijing Games. So far, it appears only a tiny handful countries have formally joined with the “anglosphere”- Canada, USA, UK, Australia – in promoting this “diplomatic” boycott. This tiny cabal is out of step with most of the world on many issues but especially on China, with which, since Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”, it appears endlessly to be causing problems and raising military tensions, for example most recently, on Taiwan. But there is also the AUKUS pact, in which the US and UK agreed to violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by selling nuclear submarines to Australia and the move by the Five Eyes Intelligence Network to ban Huawei Technologies from the deployment of 5G networks in Canada, the USA, UK, Australia, and New Zealand.

Canada used to have exemplary friendly relations with China to the point that it became our second-largest trading partner. With your arrest of Meng Wanzhou at the urging of former US President Trump, who promptly announced he intended to use Ms. Meng as a “bargaining chip” in his trade war with China, Canada-China relations took a nosedive. Similarly, Canada used to abide by a One-China Policy. In fact, it was your father, Pierre, who recognized that the People’s Republic of China had sovereignty over all of China, including Taiwan, a move which opened up diplomatic and trade relations with China and created five decades of prosperity for both countries. Now, your government facilitates the opening of Taipei Economic and Cultural Offices in two Canadian cities. How would your government like it if the People’s Republic of China provided office space for Canadian separatist organizations, such as the Independence Party of Alberta, inside of Canada?

The rest of the world looks to China for prosperity through its Belt-and-Road Initiative. Canada should too. Most countries are increasingly focussed on preventing the twin nightmares of nuclear warfare and climate chaos. But the “anglosphere”, to which you stubbornly adhere, Mr. Trudeau, seems intent on recreating a cold war with China, which could, in an instant, turn into a hot war. The ulterior motives behind a new cold war are US global hegemony and profits through an arms race, including Canada’s obscenely-expensive, proposed new fighter jets, warships, and predator drones.

Your “diplomatic” boycott is one more reason that Canadians have been calling for an independent foreign policy. Instead of aping US pettiness, Canadians should applaud the Olympic Truce and celebrate the participation of our athletes in Beijing. The fact that the US government has recently announced it would send forty-six officials to the Beijing Games makes a further mockery of your “diplomatic” boycott, which is actually, in our view, an UNdiplomatic boycott.

We urge you to rescind your “diplomatic” boycott today and send along Canadian officials to Beijing to demonstrate some Olympic spirit and show support for the world’s most high-profile peaceful international competition.

Yours truly,

Ken Stone
on behalf the Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War

co-sponsored by:

Cross-Canada Campaign to Free Meng Wanzhou

Canadian Peace Congress

Canada-China Council for Cooperation and Development

Global Peace Alliance, BC Society

Regina Peace Council

Mobilization Against War and Occupation (MAWO)

Fire This Time Movement For Social Justice

 

and these individuals:

Tamara Lorincz

Bruce Katz

Khawla Ibrahim

Mark Hagar

Larry Wasslen

Charles Posa McFadden

Karen Howell McFadden

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

A 2 p.m. appeals court hearing is scheduled after yesterday’s decision by a state Supreme Court judge to strike down NY’s mask mandate.

A New York State Supreme Court judge has struck down Gov. Kathy Hochul’s mask mandate for schools and public locations.

According to a court document, Judge Thomas Rademaker said that neither the governor nor the state health commissioner had the authority to enact the mandate without the state Legislature, since the governor no longer has emergency powers.

The document says in part,

“There can be no question that every person in this State wishes, wants and prays that this era of COVID ends soon and they will surely do their part to see that is accomplished. However, enacting any laws to this end is entrusted solely to the State Legislature. While the intentions of Commissioner Bassett and Governor Hochul appear to be well aimed squarely at doing what they believe is right to protect the citizens of New York State, they must take their case to the State Legislature.”

Read the full Court document here.

Schools in Plainedge and Massapequa have recently made their own plans to eliminate the mask mandate next month.

The Board of Education for the Island Trees School District also voted unanimously Monday to leave the decision to wear a mask up to the person who enters the school buildings once the mandate expires.

The superintendent says Monday’s ruling shows that things could change. Even though they voted to give people the choice, he says he recognizes there could be legal challenges that impact their vote.

Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman says he is hopeful the ruling will stand.

“I’m very energized by the court’s ruling and I believe that is an appellate court reviews the decision of Justice Rademaker they will see that it is a well principled,” Blakeman says. “…That it’s based on the law and the constitution of the state of New York.”

Some parents were excited to hear about the court’s decision.

“Commend the judge for listening to what the community and the students have been asking for,” says Brian Peranzo. “Parent’s choice is what we’ve been asking for all along.”

Professor James Sample, of Hofstra University, says that he doesn’t believe the mandate will disappear that quickly.

“In terms of what the average rank and file New Yorkers can anticipate, I would expect that tomorrow, for example, schools, stores and businesses will still be subject to the mask mandate…” Sample says.

Sources tell News 12 that the governor’s office plans to appeal the judge’s ruling.

With the appeal expected, the State Education Department says schools must continue to follow the mask rule.

However, a parent in the Copiague school district tells News 12 they were told by the school that “as they await further direction from the court, masks will be optional in our schools.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The volume of pesticide use and exposure is occurring on a scale that is without precedent and world-historical in nature. Agrichemicals are now pervasive as they cycle through bodies and environments. The herbicide glyphosate has been a major factor in driving this increase in use.

These statements appear in a 2021 paper ‘Growing Agrichemical Ubiquity: New Questions for Environments and Health’ (Community of Excellence in Global Health Equity). 

The authors state that when the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared glyphosate to be a “probable carcinogen” in 2015, the fragile consensus about its safety was upended.

They note that in 2020 the US Environmental Protection Agency affirmed that glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) pose no risk to human health, apparently disregarding new evidence about the link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as well as its non-cancer impacts on the liver, kidney and gastrointestinal system.

The multi-authored paper notes:

“In just under 20 years, much of the Earth has been coated with glyphosate, in many places layering on already chemical-laden human bodies, other organisms and environments.”

However, the authors add that glyphosate is not the only pesticide to achieve broad-scale pervasiveness:

“The insecticide imidacloprid, for example, coats the majority of US maize seed, making it the most widely used insecticide in US history. Between just 2003 and 2009, sales of imidacloprid products rose 245% (Simon-Delso et al. 2015). The scale of such use, and its overlapping effects on bodies and environments, have yet to be fully reckoned with, especially outside of countries with relatively strong regulatory and monitoring capacities.”

According to Phillips McDougall’s Annual Agriservice Reports, herbicides made up 43% of the global pesticide market in 2019 by value. Much of the increase in glyphosate use is due to the introduction of glyphosate-tolerant soybean, maize, and cotton seeds in the US, Brazil and Argentina.

The global pesticide industry is valued at over $50 billion (Phillips McDougal 2018).

Eating poison

In December 2021, a piece appeared in the prominent Danish newspaper ‘Weekendavisen’. Written by Niels Bjerre, agricultural affairs manager at Bayer CropScience in Copenhagen, ‘Thank goodness for pesticides’ set out to convince readers that sustainable modern agriculture cannot be done without using pesticides.

Denmark-based environmental campaigner Rosemary Mason has responded with the document ‘Open Letter to Bayer: Monsanto concealed the toxicity of Roundup to human health and the environment’ which mentions but goes beyond the now well-documented duplicity of Monsanto (which Bayer bought in 2018) – see the ‘Monsanto Papers’ – to highlight the ongoing damage being done by pesticides like glyphosate. 

Mason lists many pertinent studies. For instance, a French team has found heavy metals in chemical formulants of GBHs in people’s diets. As with other pesticides, 10–20% of GBHs consist of chemical formulants. Families of petroleum-based oxidized molecules and other contaminants have been identified as well as the heavy metals arsenic, chromium, cobalt, lead and nickel, which are known to be toxic and endocrine disruptors. 

In 1988, Ridley and Mirly (commissioned by Monsanto) found bioaccumulation of glyphosate in rat tissues. Residues were present in bone, marrow, blood and glands including the thyroid, testes and ovaries, as well as major organs, including the heart, liver, lungs, kidneys, spleen and stomach. Glyphosate was also associated with ophthalmic degenerative lens changes.

A Stout and Rueker (1990) study (also commissioned by Monsanto) provided concerning evidence with regard to cataracts following glyphosate exposure in rats. It is interesting to note that the rate of cataract surgery in England “increased very substantially” between 1989 and 2004: from 173 (1989) to 637 (2004) episodes per 100,000 population. 

A 2016 study by the WHO also confirmed that the incidence of cataracts had greatly increased: ‘A global assessment of the burden of disease from environmental risks’ says that cataracts are the leading cause of blindness worldwide. Globally, cataracts are responsible for 51% of blindness. In the US, between 2000 and 2010 the number of cases of cataract rose by 20% from 20.5 million to 24.4 million. It is projected that by 2050, the number of people with cataracts will have doubled to 50 million.

The authors of ‘Assessment of Glyphosate Induced Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance of Pathologies and Sperm Epimutations: Generational Toxicology’ (Scientific Reports, 2019) noted that ancestral environmental exposures to a variety of factors and toxicants promoted the epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of adult onset disease.

They proposed that glyphosate can induce the transgenerational inheritance of disease and germline (for example, sperm) epimutations. Observations suggest the generational toxicology of glyphosate needs to be considered in the disease etiology of future generations.

In a 2017 study, Carlos Javier Baier and colleagues documented behavioural impairments following repeated intranasal glyphosate-based herbicide administration in mice. Intranasal GBH caused behavioural disorders, decreased locomotor activity, induced an anxiogenic behaviour and produced memory deficit.

The paper contains references to many studies from around the world that confirm GBHs are damaging to the development of the foetal brain and that repeated exposure is toxic to the adult human brain and may result in alterations in locomotor activity, feelings of anxiety and memory impairment.

Highlights of a 2018 study on neurotransmitter changes in rat brain regions following glyphosate exposure include neurotoxicity in rats. And in a 2014 study which examined mechanisms underlying the neurotoxicity induced by glyphosate-based herbicide in the immature rat hippocampus, it was found that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup induces various neurotoxic processes.

In the paper ‘Glyphosate damages blood-testis barrier via NOX1-triggered oxidative stress in rats: Long-term exposure as a potential risk for male reproductive health’ (Environment International, 2022) it was noted that glyphosate causes blood-testis barrier (BTB) damage and low-quality sperm and that glyphosate-induced BTB injury contributes to sperm quality decrease.

The study Multiomics reveal non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats following chronic exposure to an ultra-low dose of Roundup herbicide (2017),  revealed non-fatty acid liver disease (NFALD) in rats following chronic exposure to an ultra-low dose of Roundup herbicide. NFALD currently affects 25% of the US population and similar numbers of Europeans.

The 2020 paper ‘Glyphosate exposure exacerbates the dopaminergic neurotoxicity in the mouse brain after repeated of MPTP’ suggests that glyphosate may be an environmental risk factor for Parkinson’s.

In the 2019 Ramazzini Institute’s 13-week pilot study that looked into the effects of GBHs on development and the endocrine system, it was demonstrated that GBHs exposure, from prenatal period to adulthood, induced endocrine effects and altered reproductive developmental parameters in male and female rats.

Aside from glyphosate, Mason also notes that in 1991 Bayer CropScience introduced a new type of insecticide into the US: imidacloprid, the first member of a group now known as neonicotinoids.

Imidacloprid was licensed for use in Europe in 1994. In July of that year, beekeepers in France noticed something unexpected. Just after the sunflowers had bloomed, a substantial number of their hives would collapse, as the worker bees flew off and never returned, leaving the queen and immature workers to die. The French beekeepers soon believed they knew the reason: a brand new insecticide called Gaucho with imidacloprid as active ingredient was being applied to sunflowers for the first time.

In the 2022 paper ‘Neonicotinoid insecticides found in children treated for leukaemias and lymphomas’ (Environmental Health), the authors stated that multiple neonicotinoids were found in children’s cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), plasma and urine. As the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, they are ubiquitously found in the environment, wildlife and foods. The data revealed multiple neonicotinoids and/or their metabolites in children’s CSF, plasma and urine.

Bottom line

If the ‘Monsanto Papers’ told us anything, it is that a corporation’s top priority is the bottom line (at all costs, by all means necessary) and not public health. A CEO’s obligation is to maximise profit, capture markets and – ideally – regulatory and policy-making bodies as well.

Corporations must also secure viable year-on-year growth which often means expanding into hitherto untapped markets. Indeed, in the previously mentioned paper ‘Growing Agrichemical Ubiquity’, the authors note that while countries like the US are still reporting higher pesticide use, most of this growth is taking place in the Global South:

“For example, pesticide use in California grew 10% from 2005 to 2015, while use by Bolivian farmers, though starting from a low base, increased 300% in the same period. Pesticide use is growing steeply in countries as diverse as China, Mali, South Africa, Nepal, Laos, Ghana, Argentina, Brazil and Bangladesh. Most countries with high levels of growth have weak regulatory enforcement, environmental monitoring and health surveillance infrastructure.”

And much of this growth is driven by increased demand for herbicides:

“India saw a 250% increase since 2005 (Das Gupta et al. 2017) while herbicide use jumped by 2500% in China (Huang, Wang, and Xiao 2017) and 2000% in Ethiopia (Tamru et al. 2017). The introduction of glyphosate-tolerant soybean, maize, and cotton seeds in the US, Brazil, and Argentina is clearly driving much of the demand, but herbicide use is also expanding dramatically in countries that have not approved nor adopted such crops and where smallholder farming is still dominant.”

In response to the increasing use of GBHs in India, the influential Swadeshi Jagaran Manch recently demanded a complete ban on the use of glyphosate in the country. A petition with more than 201,000 signatories favouring a complete ban on glyphosate was submitted to the minister for agriculture.

The minister was also informed that the herbicide is blatantly being used for illegally grown genetically engineered herbicide tolerant (HT) cotton. He was told that “miscreant seed companies” are trying to illegally spread HT Bt cotton on hundreds of thousands of acres of land to promote the use of glyphosate.

In a 2017 paper, academics Glenn Stone and Andrew Flachs describe how cotton farmers in India have been encouraged to change their ploughing practices, leading to more weeds. The outcome in terms of yields (or farmer profit) is arguably no better but the change (conveniently) coincided with the appearance of an increasing supply of these illegal HT cotton seeds. Farmers are being pushed onto herbicide-intensive treadmills.

Industry figures like Niels Bjerre claim pesticide use is necessary in ‘modern agriculture’. But this is not the case: there is now sufficient evidence to suggest otherwise. It is simply not necessary to have our bodies contaminated with toxic agrochemicals, regardless of how much the industry tries to reassure us that they are present in ‘safe’ levels.

There is also the industry-promoted narrative that if you question the need for synthetic pesticides in ‘modern agriculture’, you are somehow ignorant or even ‘anti-science’. This is simply not true. What does ‘modern agriculture’ even mean? It means a system adapted to meet the demands of global agrocapital and its international markets and supply chains.

As writer and academic Benjamin R Cohen recently stated:  

“Meeting the needs of modern agriculture – growing produce that can be shipped long distances and hold up in the store and at home for more than a few days – can result in tomatoes that taste like cardboard or strawberries that aren’t as sweet as they used to be. Those are not the needs of modern agriculture. They are the needs of global markets.” 

What is really being questioned is a policy paradigm that privileges a certain model of social and economic development and a certain type of agriculture: urbanisation, giant supermarkets, global markets, long supply chains, external proprietary inputs (seeds, synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, machinery, etc), chemical-dependent monocropping, highly processed food and market (corporate) dependency at the expense of rural communities, small independent enterprises and smallholder farms, local markets, short supply chains, on-farm resources, diverse agroecological cropping, nutrient dense diets and food sovereignty.  

The effects of this paradigm has had devastating ecological, environmental, social, economic and agronomic consequences on highly productive traditional agrarian systems (see Bhaskar Save’s 2006 open letter to Indian officials). Furthermore, despite claims to the contrary, it is not as though the chemical-intensive Green Revolution actually led to increased food production per capita in the first place (see Glenn Stone’s paper ‘New Histories of the Green Revolution’).  

Nevertheless, predatory agri-food conglomerates have been driving this policy paradigm. In doing so, they have actively consolidated their position throughout the entire global food system while promoting the false narrative that they and their inputs are necessary for feeding the world.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) in Montreal.

Rosemary Mason is a retired doctor and environmental campaigner.

Featured image is from CounterPunch

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The Biden administration withdrew its COVID vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers, saying the administration recognized the Emergency Temporary Standard could not be revived after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked it earlier this month.

The Biden administration is withdrawing its COVID vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers, the U.S. Department of Labor announced today.

In pulling the rule, the department said it recognized the Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) could not be revived after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked it earlier this month.

Instead, the Biden administration is working to set a permanent standard for the vaccine mandate based on the Supreme Court’s ruling, according to a notice provided to the court by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

OSHA said in a press release:

“Although OSHA is withdrawing the vaccination and testing ETS as an enforceable emergency temporary standard, the agency is not withdrawing the ETS as a proposed rule. The agency is prioritizing its resources to focus on finalizing a permanent COVID-19 Healthcare Standard.”

OSHA could move a version of the vaccine-or-test rule through its rule-making process, but would still likely face legal challenges, according to David Michaels, a former OSHA administrator and professor at George Washington University.

The Labor Department’s decision to withdraw the rule means pending legal proceedings will be dropped. The case was on its way back to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to be heard on the merits, although the lower court most likely would have followed the Supreme Court’s lead, The New York Times reported.

Without OSHA’s vaccine mandate in effect, employers must follow state and local laws on COVID workplace safety. Some states have banned vaccine mandates for private employees, while other states, like New York, require them.

“OSHA continues to strongly encourage the vaccination of workers against the continuing dangers posed by Covid-19 in the workplace,” the Labor Department wrote in the notice of its withdrawal.

The Supreme Court on Jan. 13, rejected the Biden administration’s employer mandate.

The court’s conservative majority said the administration overstepped its authority by imposing OSHA’s vaccine-or-test rule.

The Supreme Court’s decision reversed the lower court ruling, imposing a stay on the OSHA mandate.

The conservative majority expressed concerns over the implications of allowing OSHA to implement a widespread mandate without congressional authorization.

“Permitting OSHA to regulate the hazards of daily life — simply because most Americans have jobs and face those same risks while on the clock — would significantly expand OSHA’s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization,” the opinion stated.

Furthermore, the court said, Congress has “indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational dangers,” but it “has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly.”

“Requiring the vaccination of 84 million Americans, selected simply because they work for employers with more than 100 employees, certainly falls in the latter category,” the opinion read.

The minority justices said OSHA’s mandate is comparable to a fire or sanitation regulation imposed by the agency, while the majority said a vaccine mandate is strikingly unlike the workplace regulations that OSHA has typically imposed as a vaccination “cannot be undone at the end of the workday.”

A majority of the Supreme Court’s justices concluded the applicants challenging OSHA’s mandate were likely to succeed in the merits of their claim and the secretary of labor lacked authority to impose the mandate, resulting in a stay while the case works its way through the 6th Circuit Court.

After the ruling, many companies were left scrambling to decide whether they should abandon the mandate or force their employees to be vaccinated while the lawsuit played out in the lower courts.

Starbucks was one of the first major retailers to backtrack on its plans to require workers to be vaccinated against COVID. Starbucks last week told its 228,000 employees at more than 9,000 U.S. coffee shops it would no longer require workers be fully vaccinated or submit to weekly COVID testing.

In a Jan. 18 memo to employees, Starbuck CEO John Culver said the company respects the court’s ruling and will comply even though it doesn’t align with the company’s beliefs.

A coalition of attorneys general from 27 states called on OSHA to rescind its ETS saying the agency lacked authority to issue a broad mandate.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

The lunatic occupant of the Oval Office has arbitrarily yanked from use the only “establishment approved” Covid treatment, monoclonal antibodies. As Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis correctly states: Biden’s “indefensible edict takes treatment out of the hands of medical professionals and will cost some Americans their lives. There are real-world implications to Biden’s medical authoritarianism – Americans’ access to treatment is now subject to the whims of a failing president.”

Why did the White House fool do this?

For two reasons.

One reason is to strike back at DeSantis who proved that Florida did better by ignoring the counterfactual “Covid protocols” than did the states that imposed them. DeSantis proved that Trump was right: lockdowns are unnecessary and damaging. Moreover, DeSantis set up monoclonal antibody clinics in Florida that cured infected people, thus making the dangerous “vaccine” irrelevant. Biden’s evil ruling deprives Florida’s clinics from being able to save lives. Biden is causing Florida residents to die as his punishment of DeSantis.

The other reason is that Biden is a puppet of Fauci and Big Pharma. His job is to ensure maximun vaccine profits and to protect the false narrative of deception that Fauci, Big Pharma, and the corrupt medical establishment, aided and abetted by the presstitutes, imposed on trusting Americans.

If you really believe Biden was elected, you have to accept that the American voters are the most utterly stupid people imaginable.

US regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, and public health agencies, such as NIH and CDC, have become captives of the pharmaceutical companies they are supposed to regulate. Their rulings favor the companies over public health and the people they are supposed to protect.

Americans must learn that they cannot trust any public or private institution. Everything is driven by money; nothing by truth and the public interest. The need for money has destroyed even education. In the social sciences university professors, economists for example, bring in money by producing “studies” that serve corporate interests and global capital. Physicists are primarily dependent on federal research grants, which means they must stay silent about the fake official 9/11 narrative. Our soldiers are sent to fight to defend armaments industry profits, oil interests, and Washington’s hegemony, not someone’s freedom. Wherever you look in America people cannot say what they think without being fired. You are rewarded for lying for the controlling interest groups. All the talk about defending freedom is hogwash. There is no freedom to defend.

See this.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Amid surging tensions over Ukraine, the head of Germany’s navy had the courage to voice Europe’s fears over this totally unnecessary, contrived crisis.

In a speech to an Indian think tank, Vice-admiral Kay-Achim Schonbach proposed the Western powers ‘respect’ Russian leader Vladimir Putin and accept that Crimea would remain in Moscow’s hands.

The German admiral’s remarks produced a major uproar in Washington and tut tuts in Europe where hatred of Russia has become a state fetish.  Most aggrieved were the British and Americans who deeply fear an alliance or at least entente between Germany and Russia that might undermine US domination of the continent.

Germany, Europe’s leading military force and mainstay of NATO, has hollowed out its military power.  Thanks to unqualified female defense ministers, Germany’s armed forces have degenerated into parade troops.  Armor and aircraft, once hallmarks of German military power, have become feeble toys, lacking in munitions, spare parts and capable crews.

Polls show Germans have very little interest in confronting Russia.  Memories of World War II are still raw.  Today’s Germans live in a nation that was 50% destroyed by US and British bombing.  Millions of Germans come from families driven out of eastern Europe. 

There is not a lot of sympathy for Ukraine’s current government that was installed by a US-financed and stage-managed coup in 2013-2014.  Germany’s US-dominated media and government support Washington’s hard line on Ukraine but many ordinary Germans and French don’t agree. 

America’s media and politicians strongly support the military confrontation with Russia, a low-cost way of being loudly patriotic without actually doing anything serious. 

Only Poland, the Baltic states and American neocons really hunger for war – provided it is waged by the US.  US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, a rising star among the pro-war neocons, is pushing the confrontation with Russia – yet another bureaucrat with no military experience.

Military men quickly understand the logistic and climactic problems of fighting in the Black Sea region, but not Washington’s desk warriors and their European satraps.  The US has been unwise to provoke a confrontation with Russia in its backyard.  Though Russia has lost much of its Soviet-era military power, it would be a mistake to underestimate its combat capabilities and overestimate those of NATO. 

Remember, Napoleon (who was seriously defeated in Russia) prayed ‘oh Lord, if I must go to war, please make it against a coalition.’

Washington’s sofa samurais are playing with fire.  The neocons’ latest effort to overthrow President Putin risks backfiring badly by drawing China into the fray and undermining US domination of the continent.  Let’s say US-led NATO forces thrash the 106,000 Russian troops around Ukraine’s borders. What then? An advance on Moscow? An assault on Crimea?  Might Romania join the war to recover Moldova lost in WWII?  Or tiny Finland? The Russians are unlikely to be quivering in their boots.  Romanian troops, let’s recall, were defending the flank of Germany’s 6th Army at the Stalingrad disaster.

We are not going to see a rerun of the Great Northern War of the early 1700’s.  What we are seeing is the re-birth of Russian power in its traditional sphere of influence.  Admiral Schonbach is quite right.  Russia will never relinquish Crimea any more than Germany would give over Hamburg or the US cede Baltimore to Cuban control. 

Luckily for us, Russia is currently being run by hard men from the old KGB who are experienced and cautious.  It is well that they are because Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at the US and its allies.  No one in their right mind should contemplate a nuclear confrontation.  Russia has repeatedly made clear that if backed into a corner, it may well use tactical nuclear weapons.  China is coming around to the same thinking.

Beaten in Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan, the US is seeking a cheap victory in Ukraine.  But the northern rim of the Black Sea is not known for its low-hanging geopolitical fruit.  And Russia always surprises. 

Mr. Blinken, be cautious lest a hypersonic Russian missile comes flying through your office window.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Eric S. Margolis [send him mail] is the author of War at the Top of the World and the new book, American Raj: Liberation or Domination?: Resolving the Conflict Between the West and the Muslim World. See his website.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In mid-February 2021, Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University published a scientific meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials involving the use of ivermectin. The review, funded by the World Health Organization and UNITAID, found the drug increased viral clearance and reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%, yet the conclusion of the paper was dismissive

In early April 2021, Hill was accused of scientific misconduct by the French civic group, Association BonSens. BonSens claims Hill manipulated data to downplay the usefulness of ivermectin. Hill admitted that the study sponsor had crafted the conclusion

In early August 2021, Hill published a public notice stating one of the six studies included in his analysis had been withdrawn due to fraudulent data. A revised analysis excluding that study was published in November 2021

In the November revision, Hill included 23 randomized clinical trials, concluding ivermectin had no statistically significant effect on survival or hospitalizations

Other meta-analyses of 13 to 24 studies have found reductions in death ranging from 62% to 91%. Recent research has also found a five-day course of ivermectin at a dose of 12 mg per day sped up viral clearance, reducing the duration of symptomatic illness by three days compared to placebo (9.7 days versus 12.7 days)

*

In mid-February 2021, Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University published a scientific meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials involving the use of ivermectin in 1,255 COVID-19 patients. (The paper was initially posted on a preprint server.)

The review, which was funded by the World Health Organization and UNITAID, found that ivermectin increased viral clearance and reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%. This is a rather massive benefit, yet the conclusion of the paper was dismissive, saying additional large clinical trials were needed to make a determination about whether or not to recommend its use.

Hill Accused of Scientific Misconduct

In early April 2021, Hill and his coauthors were accused of scientific misconduct by a French civic group called the Association BonSens. The TrialSite News video report from April 5 above reviews the details of this story. BonSens — labeled by some a “controversial group” based on its anti-mask mandate stance — accused Hill of data manipulation to downplay the usefulness of ivermectin.

According to BonSens, Hill’s analysis was then used by the WHO to recommend against ivermectin, even though it appears to have significant benefit. BonSens called on Hill to retract the paper, but Hill remained “resolute and stands behind the study,” TrialSite News said.

At the time, TrialSite News claimed to have been in conversation with “relevant and associated parties,” some of whom have asked to remain anonymous, who say Hill’s study was in fact modified, but that this was done “separate and apart from the investigator,” and that Hill had no say in the matter.

However, since then, one of the six studies Hill included in his analysis has been withdrawn “due to fraudulent data.” In a public notice¹ dated August 9, 2021, Hill and his coauthors addressed the matter, saying they would submit “a revised version excluding this study, and the currently posted paper will be retracted.” A revised and updated meta-analysis was published in November 2021.²

The updated review includes data from 23 randomized clinical trials with a total of 3,349 patients. Studies with “high risk of bias” were excluded. In this analysis, Hill found that “Ivermectin did not show a statistically significant effect on survival or hospitalizations,” and had only “borderline significant effect on duration of hospitalization in comparison with standard of care.”

No significant effect on clinical recovery time was detected. In conclusion, the paper states that the WHO “recommends the use of ivermectin only inside clinical trials.” Curiously, it also states that “a network of large clinical trials is in progress to validate the results seen to date.” What results might those be? Surely, they must be referring to positive results, or else a network of clinical trials would hardly be justified.

Positive Ivermectin Studies Largely Barred From Publication

December 3, 2021, TrialSite News interviewed Dr. Tess Laurie (above) about her own ivermectin analyses and that of Hill. She points out that she was concerned when she saw the initial meta-analysis Hill published, as the conclusion didn’t match the data. The reduction in death was significant, yet the conclusion was dismissive.

Laurie contacted Hill, asking him to explain his conclusion to her. He then told her that the conclusion of the paper was not his own. It had been written by his sponsor — the WHO. Laurie was shocked, she said, as this struck her as a clear conflict of interest.

In the interview, Laurie also discusses the general difficulty researchers have had, since the beginning, in getting papers published that support ivermectin. She admits her own team has downplayed the benefits by using extremely conservative analyses in an effort to get published.

“It seems, if you tell it like it is, you are not going to get published because you might be accused of overstating your case. And if you understate it, you’re told there’s not enough evidence,” Laurie says.

According to Laurie, the evidence for ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 is strong. In a previous interview, she reviewed a 13-study meta-analysis that found a 68% reduction in deaths. A follow-up review that included 15 studies found a 62% to 72% reduction in deaths.³

A meta-analysis⁴ by Laurie and her team published in the July-August 2021 issue of the American Journal of Therapeutics, which included 24 randomized controlled trials with a total of 3,406 participants, reported reductions in death ranging between 79% and 91%.

A study published February 2021 also reported that a five-day course of ivermectin at a dose of 12 mg per day sped up viral clearance, reducing the duration of symptomatic illness by three days compared to placebo (9.7 days versus 12.7 days).⁵

According to Laurie, what makes ivermectin particularly useful in COVID-19 is that it works both in the initial viral phase of the illness, when antivirals are required, and in the later inflammatory stage, when the viral load drops off and anti-inflammatories become necessary.

Dr. Surya Kant, a medical doctor in India who has written a white paper⁶ on ivermectin, claims the drug reduces replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by several thousand times.⁷ Kant’s paper led several Indian provinces to start using ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and as treatment for COVID-19 in the summer of 2020.⁸

Africa and Japan Defy the Odds With Ivermectin

Japan and Africa have also defied the odds with ivermectin. As reported by NewsRescue at the end of August 2021, “Melinda Gates, co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation predicted disaster in the developing world, but so far she has been dead wrong, at least as far as Africa is concerned.”⁹

Indeed, despite having nearly 1.4 billion people, Africa has maintained one of the lowest COVID caseloads and death rates in the world, accounting for just 4% of the global reported death rate as of mid-May 2021.¹⁰ While media feign confusion, ivermectin may well be the explanation for this phenomenon.

A study¹¹ published at the end of December 2020 found that African countries that participated in the African Program for Onchocerciasis Control (APOC), where intensive ivermectin mass campaigns were carried out between 1995 and 2015, had 28% lower COVID-19 mortality and 8% lower infection rates than non-APOC countries that did not participate in the ivermectin campaign.

“That a mass public health preventive campaign against COVID-19 may have taken place, inadvertently, in some African countries with massive community ivermectin use is an attractive hypothesis,” the authors said.¹²

Similarly, Japan has seen a massive decline in cases after adopting ivermectin as standard treatment against COVID. November 3, 2021, Free West Media reported:¹³

“The head of the Tokyo Medical Association appeared on national television in September urging doctors to use Ivermectin and they listened. A little over a month later, COVID-19 is under control in Japan …

Japan had slavishly adhered to all the Big Pharma prescriptions, including quarantine, contact tracing, masking, social distance, but finally the pandemic had hit them hard after they started aggressive vaccination in May 2021.

The results looked good initially, but in mid-July they started rising again and on August 6 cases hit a new all-time high and continued to rise.

Ivermectin was allowed as a treatment on August 13 and after 2 weeks the cases started to come down. In fact, they are now down 99% from the peak … In Japan, doctors can now prescribe it without restrictions, and people can buy it legally from India.”

Doctors Urge Acceptance of Ivermectin to Save Lives

In the U.S., the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has been calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.^14,15

FLCCC president Dr. Pierre Kory, former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020,¹⁶ and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel January 6, 2021.¹⁷ As noted by the FLCCC:¹⁸

“The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.

Dr. Kory testified that Ivermectin is effectively a ‘miracle drug’ against COVID-19 and called upon the government’s medical authorities … to urgently review the latest data and then issue guidelines for physicians, nurse-practitioners, and physician assistants to prescribe Ivermectin for COVID-19¹⁹ …

… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.”²⁰

A one-page summary²¹ of the clinical trial evidence for Ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website. A more comprehensive, 31-page review²² of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology.

At the time of this writing, the number of trials involving ivermectin has risen to 71, including 31 randomized controlled trials. A listing of all the ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com.²³

The FLCCC’s COVID-19 protocol was initially dubbed MATH+ (an acronym based on the key components of the treatment), but after several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+²⁴ while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+,²⁵ due to the addition of ivermectin.

The two protocols^26,27 are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages.

Take Control of Your Health Care

If COVID-19 were an actual medical crisis and not an excuse for a tyrannical power grab, doctors would have been allowed, indeed encouraged, to work together to find solutions. Their successes would then have been announced everywhere. Without doubt, ivermectin would have featured heavily in such reports, as doctors around the world have attested to its benefits.

That’s not what happened, though, which tells us we’re not dealing with a medical crisis that governments actually want to solve. As reported by the FLCCC, its members have “been blocked in attempts to disseminate scientific information about ivermectin on Facebook and other social media with the FLCCC’s pages repeatedly being shut down.”²⁸

Seasoned researchers like Laurie can’t get their research published, and the main thing they have in common is that they’re reporting positive results using ivermectin (and other common remedies). For nearly two years now, doctors and scientist have repeatedly shown we can control the COVID endemic, even with new variants. We can save the vast majority from severe illness and death.

Yet “authorities” within government, regulatory agencies and health agencies have refused to listen and insist there’s only one way forward — we need novel gene transfer injections that direct our cells to churn out the very toxin that makes COVID-19 so problematic. And when those shots are proven failures, the answer, these same “leaders” say, is more boosters!

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. The good news is you can choose who you listen to. You can listen to frontline medical experts, like the FLCCC, and follow their advice.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

¹ Open Forum Infectious Diseases August 9, 2021; 8(8): ofab394

² Open Forum Infectious Diseases November 2021; 8(11): ofab358

³ YouTube Ivermectin Discussion with Dr. Tess Laurie April 7, 2021

⁴ American Journal of Therapeutics July/August 2021; 28(4): e434-e460

⁵ International Journal of Infectious Diseases February 2021; 103: 214-216

⁶ Indian Journal of Tuberculosis July 2020; 67(3): 448-451

⁷ Antiviral Research June 2020; 178: 104787

⁸ Financial Express April 14, 2021

^9, 10 NewsRescue August 31, 2021

^11, 12 Colomb Med (Cali) December 30, 2020; 51(4): e2014613

¹³ Free West Media November 3, 2021

^14, 16, 19 FLCCC December 8, 2020

¹⁵ Medpage Today January 6, 2021

¹⁷ FLCCC January 7, 2021 Press Release (PDF)

^18, 28 Newswise December 8, 2020

²⁰ FLCCC January 7, 2020 Press Release (PDF)

²¹ FLCCC Summary of Clinical Trials Evidence for Ivermectin in COVID-19 (PDF)

²² Frontiers of Pharmacology 2020 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.643369

²³ c19Ivermectin.com

^24, 26 FLCCC Alliance I-MASK+ Protocol

^25, 27 FLCCC MATH+ Hospital Protocol

Featured image is from Zero Hedge

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

The US Senate will soon vote on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s nomination to a second term. One of the senators opposing Powell is Elizabeth Warren. I don’t often agree with Senator Warren, but I do agree with her assessment that Powell is “dangerous.” However, Warren actually doesn’t understand what makes Powell, or any Fed chairman, intrinsically dangerous to liberty and prosperity.

Warren thinks Powell is dangerous because she thinks he will not be supportive enough of imposing her desired new regulations on banks and other financial institutions. Senator Warren, like most progressives, clings to a fantastical notion that regulations benefit workers, consumers, and small businesses. The truth is most regulations benefit large corporations by imposing costs that big businesses can easily absorb, but that their smaller competitors cannot.

Powell is a threat to the American people. Under his tenure, the Fed has kept interest rates at or near zero. The Fed’s balance sheet has grown to over eight trillion dollars. This has caused prices to climb at a rate America has not seen in several decades.

At his nomination hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, Powell reiterated the Fed’s intention to fight inflation by reducing its monthly 120 billion dollars purchase of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities. Powell also stated that the Fed is planning to increase interest rates this year. However, even if the Fed follows through on this, interest rates will remain at historically low levels.

Powell, like Elizabeth Warren and other progressives, dangerously believes that the Fed should go “woke.” However, Powell is still not “woke” enough for progressives who lobbied President Joe Biden to replace Powell with Fed board member Lael Brainard, the biggest supporter of Elizabeth Warren-style regulations on the Fed board. Brainard is more committed than Powell to using monetary and regulatory policies to advance the “woke” agenda. President Biden did end up nominating Brainard to become vice chairman at the Fed.

A Powell-Brainard Fed would likely use “social and climate justice” as a justification for expanding the Fed’s easy money policies. President Biden has recently nominated Sarah Bloom Raskin to the Fed board, who also has advocated for the Fed to use its power to fight climate change.

A central bank committed to the social justice and climate change agendas will inevitably increase the Fed’s “inflation tax.” Contrary to the claims of some progressives, lower-income Americans are primary victims of this hidden and regressive tax.

Powell prefers to push his rather zealous and extremist philosophies behind the scenes. Thus, not surprisingly, he is a leading opponent of Audit the Fed. Powell claims that bringing transparency to the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy would somehow jeopardize the Fed’s independence. Powell’s claim is truly fake news. There is nothing in the Audit the Fed bill giving Congress or the executive branch any new power over monetary policy.

Any group of individuals given the power to manipulate the money supply, and manipulate the interest rates that are the price of money, poses a threat to our liberty and prosperity. The solution is not to replace Powell with a “better” Fed chairman, or to force the Fed to follow a “rule” that still allows it to erode the dollar’s value. The only way to protect the people from dangerous individuals like Jerome Powell, Lael Brainard, and the rest of the Fed board is to audit and then end the Fed.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is licensed under Public Domain

Dear Readers,

As everyone faces difficult times, the company which deals with the fulfillment of book sales on behalf of Global Research is no longer able to provide its services. We are unfortunately suspending the sale of print books until further notice.

We will be contacting and refunding readers who have purchased our books in print format. Meanwhile, PDF versions are still available for purchase. We hope to be able to resolve this matter as soon as possible. Our apologies for the inconvenience.

Thank you for your valuable support.

***

#TruckersConvoy2022

By Free to Fly Canada, January 26, 2022

As most of you certainly know, a growing convoy of truckers and freedom-loving Canadians are heading to Ottawa, planning to converge on January 29th. Free to Fly supports this peaceful and much-needed demonstration of collective resolve.

US to Close Borders to Unvaccinated Canadian, Mexican Truckers on Saturday

By Nate Tabak, January 26, 2022

The U.S. will close its borders to unvaccinated and partially vaccinated Canadian and Mexican truck drivers on Saturday, the Department of Homeland Security said on Thursday.

“Manifest Destiny” Done Right. China and Russia Succeed Where the U.S. Failed. Historical Analysis

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, January 25, 2022

It should be obvious that the world is being sucked into a new Cold War, with old school iron curtains, anti-communist rhetoric and even nuclear sabre rattling pushed by unipolar war hawks in the west.

History of World War II: Overview of the Nazi-Soviet War in Early 1942, Eighty Years Ago

By Shane Quinn, January 25, 2022

By the beginning of 1942 Adolf Hitler had led Nazi Germany into a desperate situation, from which there was probably no escape. At the time, this was not easily apparent to the Wehrmacht or the German population, nor indeed to the Third Reich’s enemies, particularly those in the West.

Join the Battle to End Slavery by Vaccines and 5G

By Emanuel Pastreich, January 25, 2022

The war has already started. The drive to implement 5G microwave electronic broadcast across the United States, and around the world, as a follow up to the push for the COVID-19 vaccines that contain nano-devices and the electricity-responsive toxin graphene oxide, is an indication that we are about to enter the next stage of this war.

As the Pandemic Devastates the Poor, the World’s 10 Richest Have Multiplied Their Wealth into Trillions

By Thalif Deen, January 25, 2022

The numbers are unbelievably staggering: the world’s 10 richest men more than doubled their fortunes from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion —at a rate of $15,000 per second or $1.3 billion a day, according to a new study from Oxfam International.

None Dare Call It “Encirclement”. Washington Tightens the Noose Around China

By Michael T. Klare, January 25, 2022

The word “encirclement” does not appear in the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), signed into law by President Joe Biden on December 27th, or in other recent administration statements about its foreign and military policies. Nor does that classic Cold War era term “containment” ever come up.

Europe in the Trenches Against the “Invented Enemy”

By Manlio Dinucci, January 25, 2022

The State Department, “as a precautionary measure against a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine”, ordered the evacuation of family members and part of the staff from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, which with 900 officials is among the largest in Europe, and raised to level 4 of risk, the maximum, the warning to U.S. citizens not to go to Ukraine.

Is Washington Under Alien Control? “The most Frightening Foreign Policy Misadventure since … “

By Philip Giraldi, January 25, 2022

The drama currently unfolding in which the Biden Administration is doing everything it can to provoke a war with Russia over Ukraine is possibly the most frightening foreign policy misadventure since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and the 1967 Lyndon Johnson attempt to sink the USS Liberty and blame it on Egypt, either of which could have gone nuclear.

What Kind of Threat Is China?

By Kim Petersen, January 25, 2022

The “brutalist philosophy” of the US was made public (曝光) by Robert Daly, a former US diplomat stationed in Beijing, in 2015. Currently, he is the director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States. No diplomatic niceties here, Daly frankly states the policy of the US: China must never reach the level of the US.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

As most of you certainly know, a growing convoy of truckers and freedom-loving Canadians are heading to Ottawa, planning to converge on January 29th.

Free to Fly supports this peaceful and much-needed demonstration of collective resolve. Mandates and lockdowns are violating the most fundamental of our constitutional rights, not to mention destroying lives, the economy and jeopardizing the same for future generations. This convoy has been greatly encouraging and helped galvanized much of the nation saying “Enough!”.

“This path will be easier and shorter for all of us if we take it by mutual efforts and in close rank. If there are thousands of us, they will not be able to do anything with us. If there are tens of thousands of us, then we would not even recognize our country.” (Aleksander Solzenitysn)

I’m sure many of you will be lining highways or even joining in the convoy. For those who would like more information, please read further below. Let’s add tens of thousands of us from Free to Fly!

*

The East and West routes will be arriving in Ottawa on Jan 29th.

Kingston has multiple days where people will be coming thru.  The earliest people will get to Kingston is Jan 27th.  Starting Jan 28th people will begin to head up to Ottawa and the last day people will be departing out of Kingston is Jan 29th.

Participating Groups

Click image above to access more details

West Route

Click here to view details of the West route.

East Route

Click here to view details of the East route.

South Route

Click here to view details of the South route.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from the author

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The U.S. will close its borders to unvaccinated and partially vaccinated Canadian and Mexican truck drivers on Saturday, the Department of Homeland Security said on Thursday.

“These updated travel requirements reflect the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to protecting public health while safely facilitating the cross-border trade and travel that is critical to our economy,” Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement.

NEW: Beginning Saturday, January 22, DHS will require non-U.S. individuals seeking to enter the U.S, via land ports of entry and ferry terminals at the U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada borders to be fully vaccinated for #COVID19 and provide related proof of vaccination.

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 20, 2022

The restrictions, which apply to all foreign essential workers, had been expected since U.S. officials announced them in October. They follow a similar rule that took effect at the Canadian border last Saturday.

The border COVID-19 vaccine mandates are coming into force despite pushback from the truck industry. The impact will be felt most acutely for the U.S.-Canada freight market, where around 160,000 truckers regularly cross the border — 75% of whom are Canadian.

Already capacity has tightened significantly, with huge price increases in the spot market. It adds to existing pressures, including COVID-19 itself, which left many fleets operating below full strength.

“The supply chain is already fragile — so it puts all of us in a precarious situation,” Dan Einwechter, CEO of Canadian trucking and logistics firm Challenger Motor Freight, told FreightWaves.

The Canadian Trucking Alliance and American Trucking Alliance have projected that 10%-15% of drivers may leave cross-border trucking as a result of the mandates, and exacerbate existing supply chain issues. On Monday, several dozen Canadian truckers protested near the U.S. border in Emerson, Manitoba.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Nate Tabak is a Toronto-based journalist and producer who covers cybersecurity and cross-border trucking and logistics for FreightWaves. He spent seven years reporting stories in the Balkans and Eastern Europe as a reporter, producer and editor based in Kosovo. He previously worked at newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area, including the San Jose Mercury News. He graduated from UC Berkeley, where he studied the history of American policing. Contact Nate at [email protected].

Featured image is from Jim Allen/FreightWaves

O Departamento de Estado, “como medida de precaução contra uma possível invasão russa da Ucrânia”, ordenou a evacuação de familiares e parte do pessoal da Embaixada dos EUA em Kiev, que com 900 funcionários é uma das maiores da Europa e elevou ao nível 4, risco máximo, a advertência aos cidadãos estadunidenses para não irem à Ucrânia ao nível 4. Imediatamente depois, o Foreign Office anunciou, com a mesma motivação, a retirada de funcionários da Embaixada Britânica em Kiev. Essas operações de guerra psicológica, destinadas a criar alarme sobre uma iminente invasão russa da Ucrânia e das três repúblicas bálticas, preparam uma escalada EUA-Otan ainda mais perigosa contra a Rússia.

A Casa Branca anunciou que o presidente Biden está considerando “deslocar milhares de soldados, navios de guerra e aviões dos EUA para países da Otan no Báltico e na Europa Oriental”. Inicialmente, espera-se a chegada de 5.500 soldados norte-americanos que, juntando-se aos 4.000 já na Polônia e seguidos por outros milhares, estenderão sua instalação permanente ao Báltico, conforme solicitado pela Letônia. Trens especiais já estão transportando tanques americanos da Polônia para a Ucrânia, cujas forças armadas são treinadas há anos, e de fato comandadas, por centenas de conselheiros e instrutores militares dos EUA, ladeados por outros da Otan. Washington, que no ano passado forneceu a Kiev armas no valor oficial de 650 milhões de dólares, autorizou a Estônia, a Letônia e a Lituânia a transferir as armas dos EUA em sua posse para a Ucrânia, em particular os mísseis Javelin. Outros armamentos são fornecidos pela Grã-Bretanha e pela República Tcheca.

A Otan informa que os países europeus da Aliança estão colocando suas forças armadas em estado de prontidão operacional e enviando outros navios de guerra e aviões de combate para serem instalados na Europa Oriental. A Itália, com os caças-bombardeiros Eurofighter, assumiu o comando da missão da Otan de “polícia aérea reforçada” na Romênia. A França está pronta para enviar tropas à Romênia sob o comando da Otan. A Espanha está enviando navios de guerra das forças navais da Otan e caças-bombardeiros para a Bulgária. A Holanda está se preparando para enviar caças F-35 para a Bulgária. A Dinamarca envia caças F-16 para a Lituânia. Ontem (24) começou o grande exercício naval Nato Neptune Strike ’22 no Mediterrâneo sob o comando do vice-almirante Eugene Black, comandante da Sexta Frota com quartel general em Nápoles Capodichino e base em Gaeta. O porta-aviões nuclear norte-americano Harry Truman participa do exercício, que dura 12 dias, com seu grupo de combate, incluindo cinco lançadores de mísseis prontos para um ataque nuclear para “tranquilizar os aliados europeus, especialmente na frente oriental ameaçada pela Rússia”.

Imediatamente após o Nato Neptune Strike ’22, o exercício da missão Clemenceau 22 ocorrerá em fevereiro, que verá engajados, em uma “operação de três porta-aviões”, o francês Charles de Gaulle, movido a energia nuclear, e seu grupo de combate, incluindo um submarino de ataque nuclear, que entrará no Adriático; o Harry Truman com seu grupo de combate e o porta-aviões italiano Cavour com os F-35 a bordo. Este exercício, é claro, também é dirigido contra a Rússia.

Enquanto a Otan ordena que a Rússia “reduza a escalada”, alertando que “qualquer agressão adicional acarretará um alto custo para Moscou”, os ministros das Relações Exteriores da União Europeia – reunidos em Bruxelas e conectados por teleconferência com o secretário de Estado dos EUA Blinken – decidiam outras medidas contra a Rússia. A União Europeia dos 27, dos quais 21 pertencem à Otan sob o comando dos EUA, ecoa a advertência  da Otan à Rússia, declarando que “qualquer agressão militar adicional contra a Ucrânia teria consequências muito sérias para a Rússia”. Desta forma, a UE participa da estratégia de tensão, através da qual os EUA criam fraturas na Europa para mantê-la sob sua influência.

Manlio Dinucci

 

Artigo original em italiano :

L’Europa in trincea contro il nemico inventato

Tradução : Resistência

Manlio Dinucci : Jornalista e geógrafo; publicado originalmente em ll Manifesto; taduzido pela redação de resistencia.cc

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

“The best way to predict the future is to create it.” –Abraham Lincoln

It should be obvious that the world is being sucked into a new Cold War, with old school iron curtains, anti-communist rhetoric and even nuclear sabre rattling pushed by unipolar war hawks in the west. Unlike the first Cold War, this new variant strain features Russia and China working closely together along with Iran and a growing chorus of nations which are increasingly integrating into the Belt and Road Initiative.

What crime have these Eurasian nations committed such that the U.S./NATO military industrial complex has placed targets on them?

Simply that they have chosen to not submit to a unipolar technocratic scientific dictatorship.

Instead of embracing a dystopic destiny locked inside a shrinking geopolitical cage as Boris Yeltsin or Zhao Ziyang were happy to do not too long ago, today’s Eurasian intelligentsia has recognized that the only solution to the multifaceted crisis threatening civilization is located in the future. This may sound like a simplistic platitude to some, but from a geostrategic standpoint, the future is where creativity lives.

When resources are monopolized and systems of rules shaped by a sociopathic elite antagonistic to the basic rights of humanity, the only viable pathway of resistance to engage in successful combat is to change the rules of the rigged game and create new resources. This is done by increasing the opportunity to

1) make new discoveries which

2) create new resources,

3) translate newly discovered principles into new technological improvements that

4) increase the productive powers (mental, spiritual and physical) of humanity.

If steps 1-4 don’t exist in the present, then where are they to be found?

I say it again: The Future.

The concept of positive future ideals teleologically (1) driving society forward was a powerful notion that once governed much of western civilization. The idea that man was made in the living image of a Creator, capable of participating in the continuous process of creation itself was an empowering notion which animated some of the greatest upward leaps in scientific progress, liberty, sovereignty, increased quality of life and population growth ever seen. In the early United States, this concept became known as “manifest destiny”… that God had a plan to expand the best of civilization and extend the fruits of progress to all in order to fulfill the Biblical mandate that humanity was expected to “be fruitful and multiply” and “replenish the earth and subdue it”.

While many goods to humanity arose out of this idea, it was also a double-edged sword that did great damage if used by tyrants, slave owners, or imperialists who ignored the reality that ALL humanity was endowed by the creator with inalienable rights, and not just a select few who felt they had the right breeding, religion, language, or racial characteristics.

A popular painting extolling the virtue of manifest destiny during the pioneering days of the 19th century which at times resulted in great good and at many other times, justified great evil

A New Eurasian Manifest Destiny Awakens

In Russia, this future orientation has taken the form of a sort of 21st century “Russian Manifest Destiny” which aims to extend civilization into the Siberian Far East and Arctic, and beyond Central Asia, Mongolia, Japan, China and beyond. While many are accustomed to myopically analyze world events from a “bottom up” mode of analysis, it is clear that

Since 2018, Russia’s eastern development ambitions have increasingly merged with China’s northern extension of the BRI dubbed The Polar Silk Road which has amplified the growth of railways, roads, telecommunication hubs, ports, energy projects and sea corridors through regions long thought inhospitable to human civilization.

China has seen the birth of its own version of “Manifest Destiny” in the form of the Belt and Road Initiative, which was unveiled in 2013, displaying a power of transformation, interconnectivity, and win-win cooperation beyond anything even its greatest fans imagined eight years ago.

Within a short period of time, over $3 trillion has been spent on small, medium and large-scale infrastructure projects now involving 140 nations (to varying degrees of participation.)

Glancing across the thousands of BRI projects springing up around the globe, we find the greatest array of rail lines (including high speed: maglev and conventional), integrated development corridors, new smart cities, new industrial hubs, pipelines and advanced science initiatives touching on space exploration, atomic power, fusion research, quantum computing and much more.

These corridors of development have stretched through northern lines via Russia as well as Central Asian states which includes the “Middle Corridor of the BRI”. More recently, we have seen the blossoming of a southern route from China to Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon also take form with Syria finally signing up on January 12th, 2022. Nations across Africa have also enthusiastically jumped on board with over 48 of 54 African nations signing onto the BRI. Currently, 18 Ibero American and 20 Arab states have also joined the program.

Must Diversity Be Sacrificed for Unity?

Both China and Russia have extremely large nations with vast potential in terms of undeveloped resources, manpower, and technological needs, but they also host a diverse array of smaller cultural, religious, linguistic and ethnic groups from all walks of life.

The vast majority of Russia’s 146 million citizens live in the Westernmost 1/5th of the country with 80% of the population living in or near urban zones extending from the Baltic to Caspian Sea. In the expansive north-eastern regions of Siberia (occupying a landmass 1.3 times the size of Canada), only 24 million citizens are diffused throughout this underpopulated land.

China faces similar problems with its population density and developed sectors locked up not in the west, but narrowly along its eastern pacific coast. Nearly 94% of China’s population still lives in the east of the Heihe-Tengchong Line with the vast inner heartland housing only 6% of the Chinese population.

Russia hosts 193 ethnic groups comprising nearly 20% of its population and although China’s Han population is by far the largest demographic (representing 91% of the population), there are 56 distinct ethnic groups representing 113 million people, many of whom live scattered across Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia.

The pressing quandary faced by Eurasian leaders planning out their programs of outward expansion can be stated in the following manner:

How is it possible to extend scientific and industrial development across multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic territories both domestically and internationally without destroying the cultural heritage of the hundreds, if not thousands of smaller cultural groups along the way? Must development always occur at the expense of cultural diversity of smaller ethnic groups as has been too often the case in world history, OR is there an organic way to balance both factors?

How NOT to do Manifest Destiny

The irony is that up until recently, the concept of Manifest Destiny has been traditionally associated with the United States which shares many demographic characteristics with both China and Russia with the vast majority of population concentrated in the eastern half of the continent.

Sadly, the forces who shaped American expansion- especially during those first 125 years when Manifest Destiny had its greatest influence, have too often failed this test miserably. In its first 12 decades of life, the USA grew from 13 backward colonies in 1776 to 45 industrially-advanced states in 1900. Throughout those years, the wiser anti-slavery voices of Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Charles Sumner, William Seward, and William Gilpin were too often subverted by an anglophile deep state parasite class that ran both Wall Street in the north and the southern slave power.

This multiheaded hydra lurking within the heart of the USA had its own perverse ideas of “Manifest Destiny” which stood in diametric opposition to the ambitions of the great statesmen listed above.

Where abolitionist-leading figures like Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton encouraged the sharing of knowledge, technical skills, science and the fruits of technological progress to both blacks and natives without forcing religious conversions or crushing their local traditions, the deep state in both northern and southern zones of influence sought to only expand their power through the conquerors whip.

The southern perversion of Manifest Destiny promoted by Andrew Jackson, Jefferson Davis and Albert Pike envisioned increased black slavery and Native Americans crushed under the heel of the “superior” white race, and cordoned off into cage-like plantations or reservations never to have a say in their own destiny. Jackson’s 1830 Indian Removal Act emptied out valuable lands quickly handed over to southern cotton planters who quickly expanded the influx of black slaves from Africa vastly increasing the tension between free vs slave states leading to the inevitable Civil War of 1861-65.

It is often forgotten that under the Mazzini-connected freemasonic-laden presidency of Franklin Pierce (1853-1857), then-Secretary of War Jefferson Davis (later Confederate President) and General Albert Pike were in charge of advancing a “southern alternative” to the trans continental railway through slave states. Unlike the northern line (begun by Lincoln in 1863) which was designed to spread industrial growth and ultimately connect with China, (2) the southern version simply served as an iron cage to keep the enslaved under the control of masters. In this way, the confederate “Manifest Destiny” was no different from the Cecil Rhodes racist vision of the Cape to Cairo rail line that sought to keep the continent under the British heel or today’s EU-London “Green Belt Initiative”/OSOWOG Plan to force green energy grids from Africa to India.

During the Civil War, the British were more than happy providing weapons, warships, logistic support, intelligence hubs in Canada and funding to the rebels nearly resulting in Lincoln fighting a war on two fronts early on (one against the south and the other against the British Empire) (3).

While the legitimate defenders of American Manifest Destiny sought to avoid war, relying instead on diplomacy to grow their territories (see: the Louisiana purchase of 1804, Oregon Territory in 1848, or Alaska purchase of 1867), the “America” of Wall Street and Virginia’s slave power were always happy to pick a fight with a neighbor to spread their imperial ambitions (see the Mexican war of 1846-48, or overthrow of Hawaii’s monarchy in 1893).

Unfortunately, those American traditions that once resisted imperialism have withered away, with today’s republic a poor shell of its former self, purged of genuine patriots in positions of federal power. Today’s USA has hollowed out its industrial base, destroyed its cultural connection to Christian values and its faith in scientific progress resulting in an alienated nation of nihilistic consumers without a vision for the future.

The Growth of Eco-Colonialism in the 20th Century

The racist program of ghettoization of natives in the form of tribal reservations has segregated First Nation tribes from the rest of society for generations, keeping them locked into cycles of dependence, poverty, substance abuse, infant mortality rates and suicide magnitudes higher than the national average.

This manipulation of Native Americans has also seen these abused people used by game masters attempting to block broader continental development projects under a policy of “human ecosystems-management”. Since the late 1960s, it has become increasingly fashionable to treat native populations as just extensions of their local ecosystems- both of which are presumed to exist in stationary equilibrium by computer models which have been used to calculate conservation regions and optimal population growth for decades.

For anyone struggling to understand why the large-scale economic growth policy advanced by the likes of Franklin Roosevelt and JFK were derailed in the late 1960s with the onset of the Vietnam War, understanding this racist use of native reserves and ecosystem management is vital. The vast growth of conservation parks and federal lands kept off limits from all infrastructure investment was not the effect of warm-hearted nature lovers as many have been led to believe, but rather the effect of a cold calculated policy by geopolitical gamemasters intent on keeping society locked into a small controlled world of “limited resources”.

Source: Conservation lands (top) and national reserve parks (below): National Academy of Sciences of North America

While liberal imperialists shed crocodile tears for the plight of natives long abused by selfish white colonizers, they were too happy supporting mass sterilization of native women throughout the 1970s, and keeping the natives without clean drinking water, reliable electricity, healthcare or even access to quality jobs.

One of the most vocal proponents of the trans-continental railway (extending into Eurasia) was Lincoln-ally William Gilpin (Colorado Governor during the Civil War) who astutely identified the reservations to be “like blocks of stone in the wall of a jail against the frontier line”.

Under the veil of this new type of modern colonialism, money was often infused into the coffers of corrupt tribal leaders who have been happy letting oil cartels exploit their resources while keeping their people locked in cycles of dependence and zero technological growth.

From this perspective, one can see a clear parallel in the application of a similar neo-colonial policy applied to Africa.

China: A Manifest Destiny with Dignity

Despite the loud denunciations from the western Five Eyes-managed political class, China’s approach to both African BRI partners and their own minority groups stands in stark contrast to this nefarious tradition of exploitation and cultural genocide deployed by the western oligarchy for generations.

What we have seen in places like Tibet and Xinjiang are cultural heritage centers, exploding literacy rates, the celebration and teaching of traditional languages, songs, stories and dances given full government patronage. In Xinjiang per capita GDP has increased 100 fold since 1979 and average life expectancy increased from 30 years on average in 1949 to 72 years today.

As I write this, running from Lanzhou-Urumqi totalling 1776 km and running parallel to the electrified Lanxin passenger railway completed in 2014. With the new high-speed route completed, the Lanxin passenger railway will be transformed to freight rail servicing the Eurasian Continental Landbridge with goods flowing 11,000 km from East China to Rotterdam.

Other rail projects now underway in Xinjiang involve the Ruoqiang-Hotan railway which completes a loop circling the Taklamakan desert, and also the 600 km Kashgar to Osh railway from China to Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. This latter project will provide a vital boost of needed growth to Uzbekistan’s Ferhana Valley which has served as a landing point for Saudi Wahabism since the 1990s, where radicalized jihadis were infused into Pakistan and Afghanistan (and also back into China). A new highway from Kashgar City in Southern Xinjiang to Pakistan is now being finalized as an extended component of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor as well as a new railway cutting through the desert.

While evidence of this cultural growth has grown across all minority ethnic zones, we have also seen a dramatic growth in longevity, population density, quality of life, poverty reduction, infant mortality reduction, and access to advanced industrial skills, clean water, internet and abundant electricity.

On a religious level, over 24,400 mosques currently exist in Xinjiang, not to mention 59 Buddhist temples and 253 churches. In only eight years, the bane of Saudi-US funded terrorism in China has been dealt with without a single Arab state bombed back to the stone age which is no small accomplishment.

In Tibet, high speed and conventional rail has connected the local communities that had long lived in poverty, to broader global markets with durable technical skills and training growing vibrantly among the younger population.

Buddhist temples are also thriving with the full support of the government. NED-controlled propaganda outlets in either region would have you remain blind to these demonstrable facts of Chinese life.

While concessions favoring Chinese firms are certainly built into most BRI-connected projects springing up across Southwest Asia, Africa, and beyond, the fact is that infrastructure (both hard and soft), new industrial hubs and educational opportunities are springing to life at breakneck speed.

Across Africa, we have found local cultural traditions thrive in tandem with the same policy we have witnessed in Tibet and Xinjiang. If this is news to you, try putting down the Epoch Times and watching some local African news or CGTN’s African channels.

China’s approach stands in stark contrast to those IMF-World Bank-USAID programs that have systematically kept poor nations in usurious debt-trap enslavement for decades providing money to buy a few fish, but never allowed the capability to fish for themselves. China, on the other hand has encouraged the growth of vast construction projects, manufacturing hubs, and perhaps most importantly, advanced engineering skills.

Overcoming Russia’s Monetarist Obstacles

In Russia, a privatized central banking system still largely influenced by monetary protocols shaped by the IMF has made actualizing Putin’s Far Eastern vision much more difficult than in China where a vibrant state owned banking system provides an invaluable instrument of long-term growth. Russia’s private central bank, established (in its current form) in 1990, still suffers from deep-seeded structural ties to the IMF, WTO and liberal ideologues swarming across the bureaucratic landscape ensuring that a doctrine of “balanced budgets” and free markets takes precedence over the emission of productive credit.

Despite these blocks, Russia’s unique version of Manifest Destiny has begun to spring into life with Sergei Shoigu’s “grand masterplan for Siberia” starting with the construction of five new cities housing 500,000 to a million citizens.

Additionally, the plans to expand and improve both the 9300 km Trans-Siberian Railway and its 4300 km southern Baikur-Amal Mainline rail being modernized, double tracked and integrated ever more deeply into Mongolia, China and even Japan. This dovetails the expanding International North South Transportation Corridor from Moscow to India via central Asia and Iran which should now be seen as another dimension of BOTH the BRI and Far East Vision [see map below]. As the project advances, freight traffic along these rail lines will increase from 120 million tons/year to 180 million tons/year in 2024.

This rail expansion is tied closely to Russia’s Development Plan for the Northern Sea Route adopted in 2019 and which seeks to increase annual shipments to 80 million tons by 2024. On top of ports and new arctic mining hubs, this plan includes the construction of 40 new vessels (including more nuclear icebreakers), railways, and northern seaports which will see 10 days of shipping time slashed from goods between China and Europe.

If this wasn’t enough, on January 15, 2022, Putin announced that proposals to construct a long awaited Arctic railway to the Barents Sea must be submitted by May 10 2022.  This rail will extend to the Indiga Port in the Nenets Region which will host a year-round arctic port with a capacity of processing 80-200 million tons of cargo/year.

China and Russia have agreed to build Arctic science research centers in 2019 in order to “promote the construction of ‘Silk Road on Ice’”, while new designs for a new international scientific research base in Yamal called Snezhinka (aka: “Snowflake”) will be opened in 2022. In both instances, pure scientific research on Astro-climatology (the Arctic is the densest entry point for interstellar cosmic radiation which plays a driving role in climate change), species evolution and chemistry will be done in such new centers. Perhaps the most exciting fields of research will involve the testing of new artificial ecosystem designs requisite for sustaining human life comfortably not only in the Arctic but also on other celestial bodies like the Moon or Mars. Both nations have after all, agreed to co-develop a permanent lunar base which will be unveiled in the coming decade.

If we can avoid the trappings of nuclear war, then the discoveries that will be made along this exciting new chapter of inter-civilizational development are beyond the capacity of any computer model to predict, but they will happen nonetheless. The unleashing of creative discoveries by educated, inspired, goal-oriented human minds will increasingly awaken new technologies, and redefine humanity’s relationship to the periodic table of elements as new uses are found for the atom with wider access to the thousands of isotopes that still have yet to find a role in our economic systems. In this way, space and time itself will be condensed as magnetic levitation rail, nuclear propulsion systems and new energy sources will be brought online revolutionizing our ideas of “near”, “far”, “slow” and “fast” in dramatic ways.

Just think of the many months one would have to travel from old to new worlds in colonial days, to the mere hours such a transit takes on a hypersonic plane today. This is the sort of quantum leap expected as the 300 days transit to Mars currently required with chemical rockets will fall to a matter of weeks with nuclear propulsion.

Perhaps one might wish to accuse me of an overabundance of idealism, but so what?

This process is already unfolding before our very eyes, as political and scientific realities which many thought impossible only a decade ago, have already begun changing the trajectory of our collective future. If humanity’s phase shift into a mature self-conscious species is subverted once more… at a time when thermonuclear weapons litter the globe, there is no guarantee that we will get another chance.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was first published on The Canadian Patriot.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas (which you can purchase by clicking those links or the book covers below). In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) The term “teleological” refers to the idea that there is an intrinsic purpose or design shaping the material world, and that human ideas of law, and even economic ambitions are only good to the degree that they square with this purpose built into the fabric of the universe.

(2) One of the Trans Continental Railways most vigorous champions was Senator Charles Sumner, who passed a resolution in defense of the 1867 Alaska purchase (through which rail and telegraph lines were planned to move from the Americas through Eurasia via the Bering Strait crossing): “To unite the East of Asia with the West of America is the aspiration of commerce now as when the English navigator (Meares) recorded his voyage. Of course, whatever helps this result is an advantage. The Pacific railroad is such an advantage; for, though running westward, it will be, when completed, a new highway to the East.”

(3) This 2nd front against Britain was nearly sparked in 1861 due to the Trent Affair

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.

Il Dipartimento di Stato, «quale misura precauzionale contro una possibile invasione russa dell’Ucraina», ha ordinato l’evacuazione dei familiari e di una parte del personale dall’Ambasciata Usa a Kiev, che con 900 funzionari è tra le maggiori in Europa, e ha elevato a livello 4 di rischio, il massimo, l’avvertimento ai cittadini statunitensi di non andare in Ucraina. Subito dopo il Foreign Office ha annunciato, con la stessa motivazione, il ritiro del personale dall’Ambasciata britannica a Kiev. Queste operazioni di guerra psicologica, miranti a creare allarme su una imminente invasione russa dell’Ucraina e delle tre repubbliche baltiche, preparano una ulteriore e ancora più pericolosa escalation Usa-Nato contro la Russia.

La Casa Bianca ha annunciato che il presidente Biden sta considerando di «dispiegare diverse migliaia di soldati Usa, navi da guerra e aerei nei paesi Nato del Baltico e dell’Europa Orientale». Si prevede che inizialmente arriveranno 5.500 soldati Usa che, unendosi ai 4.000 già in Polonia e seguiti da altre migliaia, estenderanno al Baltico il loro schieramento permanente, come ha richiesto la Lettonia. Speciali convogli ferroviari stanno già trasportando carrarmati Usa dalla Polonia all’Ucraina, le cui forze armate sono da anni addestrate, e di fatto comandate, da centinaia di consiglieri militari e istruttori Usa affiancati da altri della Nato. Washington, che l’anno scorso ha fornito a Kiev armi per l’ammontare ufficiale di 650 milioni di dollari, ha autorizzato Estonia, Lettonia e Lituania a trasferire all’Ucraina armamenti Usa in loro possesso, in particolare missili Javelin. Altri armamenti sono forniti dalla Gran Bretagna e dalla Repubblica Ceca.

La Nato comunica che i paesi europei dell’Alleanza stanno mettendo le loro forze armate in stato di prontezza operativa e inviando altre navi da guerra e aerei da combattimento agli schieramenti in Europa Orientale. L’Italia, con i cacciabombardieri Eurofighter, ha preso il comando della missione Nato di «polizia aerea potenziata» in Romania. La Francia è pronta a inviare truppe in Romania sotto comando Nato. La Spagna sta inviando navi da guerra nelle forze navali Nato e cacciabombardieri in Bulgaria. L’Olanda si prepara a inviare caccia F-35 in Bulgaria. La Danimarca invia caccia F-16 in Lituania. Ieri è iniziata nel Mediterraneo la grande esercitazione navale Nato Neptune Strike ’22 sotto il comando del viceammiraglio Eugene Black, comandante della Sesta Flotta con quartier generale a Napoli Capodichino e base a Gaeta. All’esercitazione, che dura 12 giorni, partecipa la portaerei nucleare Usa Harry Truman col suo gruppo di battaglia, comprendente 5 unità lanciamissili pronte all’attacco nucleare per «rassicurare gli Alleati europei soprattutto sul fronte orientale minacciato dalla Russia».

Subito dopo la Nato Neptune Strike ’22, si svolgerà in febbraio l’esercitazione Mission Clemenceau 22 che vedrà impegnate, in una «Operazione di tre portaerei», la francese Charles de Gaulle a propulsione nucleare col suo gruppo di battaglia, comprendente anche un sottomarino da attacco nucleare, che entrerà nell’Adriatico; la Harry Truman col suo gruppo di battaglia e la portaerei italiana Cavour con a bordo gli F-35. Anche questa esercitazione, ovviamente, è diretta contro la Russia.

Mentre la Nato intima alla Russia di «de-escalare», avvertendola che «qualsiasi ulteriore aggressione comporterà un alto costo per Mosca», i ministri degli Esteri dell’Unione Europea (per l’Italia Pietro Benassi in sostituzione di Luigi Di Maio) – riuniti a Bruxelles e collegati in teleconferenza col segretario di stato Usa Blinken – hanno decretato ieri altre misure contro la Russia. L’Unione Europea dei 27, di cui 21 appartengono alla Nato sotto comando Usa, riecheggia l’avvertimento Nato alla Russia, dichiarando che «qualsiasi ulteriore aggressione militare contro l’Ucraina avrebbe pesantissime conseguenze per la Russia». In tal modo la UE partecipa alla strategia della tensione, attraverso cui gli Usa creano fratture in Europa per mantenerla sotto la loro influenza.

Manlio Dinucci

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

We spent decades preparing to fight the Second World War again and we piled up over-priced fighter planes, flawed tanks, bulky battle ships, and antiquated aircraft carriers that now rust away in silence.

But the next world war, and more critically, the next civil war, are shaping up to be fundamentally different in nature, if not in motivation.

The war has already started. The drive to implement 5G microwave electronic broadcast across the United States, and around the world, as a follow up to the push for the COVID-19 vaccines that contain nano-devices and the electricity-responsive toxin graphene oxide, is an indication that we are about to enter the next stage of this war. The conflict of Ukraine, real or imagined, is dwarfed in comparison.

When I say that it is a war over slavery, just like the civil war of 1861 to 1865 was, the comparison is not idle.

In the 1850s in America, slavery was expanding, the rights of slave owners over runaway slaves was strengthened, and the rights of Americans were in decline. The aristocracy of the South, with finance from the North, had taken steps to render all common men without land in the South, black or white, the equivalent of slaves before the law.

The abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison denounced this catastrophe, as he would surely have denounced mRNA vaccines and unregulated 5G radiation. He attacked those who were silent about slavery thus:

“They who desire me to be dumb on the subject of slavery, unless I will open my mouth in its defense, ask me to give the lie to my professions, to degrade my manhood, and to stain my soul. I will not be a liar, a poltroon, or a hypocrite, to accommodate any party, to gratify any sect, to escape any odium or peril, to save any interest, to preserve any institution, or to promote any object. Convince me that one man may rightfully make another man his slave, and I will no longer subscribe to the Declaration of Independence. Convince me that liberty is not the inalienable birthright of every human being, of whatever complexion or clime, and I will give that instrument to the consuming fire. I do not know how to espouse freedom and slavery together.”

We face such a moment again when freedom is promoted in the media and slavery is the reality on the ground.

The bogus vaccines to weaken the body through mRNA, the 5G assault on the body and mind, the degraded educational and journalistic content that we drown in, all of this is aimed at reducing us to slavery, those of us who survive.

At the core of the drive for a new slavery, in response to false gods of finance, lies the cynical extension of the methods for creating meat at factory farms into the governance of man. The destruction of the genetic code of cows and pigs that rendered them as a helpless GMOs is being repeated right now as our citizens are made GMOs by vaccination.

The identification and tracking of cows and pigs by QR codes will soon be a universal reality for all of us.

The feeding of slop pumped full of chemicals to cows and pigs is identical with the feeding to our citizens of chemical-laden processed foods churned out by multinational corporations.

And the endless injection of cows and pigs with growth hormones, stimulants and, yes, a range of bogus vaccines, is the precise model for what is being done to us.

Cows and pigs are worse than chattel today. They are like flies to the wanton technocrats and bio-fascists who kill them for their sport. Those cows and pigs are our leaders. They show us the way to the grim future that awaits us.

The process for rendering us as slaves can be divided into four steps.

The first step is the demolition of constitutional rights and the creation of a metastasized corporate-government administrative structure that is accountable to no one and that makes all long-term policy in response to demands from the super-rich, multinational investment banks and IT monopolies like Facebook, Amazon and Google (Alphabet).

This horrific rape of democracy has been going for a long time. The Federal Reserve and Department of the Treasury were outsourced in toto to global finance already starting in the Clinton years. [The Financial Services Modernization Act]

The second step is the destruction of the local economy so that citizens can no longer produce anything for themselves and must obtain food, services and all products from multinational corporations. At the same time, they can only find work in organizations run, directly or indirectly, by such multinational corporations.

This step towards economic slavery, although undetectable to the naked eye, fundamentally altered the structure of society through the concentration of wealth and the loss of independent thinking among citizens, and does so to a degree that is not easily reversed.

A class of billionaires, like the antebellum Southern planters, has emerged that treats the rest of humanity as its slaves.

The third step is the destruction of bodily autonomy through the forced vaccinations and for-profit corporate medicine. We can trace the origins of this abomination back to John D. Rockefeller’s purchase of doctors and medical schools exactly one hundred year ago, but the process of decay has sped up exponentially. The corporate state stealthily has laid the foundations for a claim, by means of a bogus pandemic, to ownership of the bodies of all citizens.

The bombardment of citizens with advertising on TV, which they have no choice but to watch, that encourages the thoughtless use of pharmaceutical products detrimental to the body is also part of this campaign.

The fourth step is the destruction of spiritual autonomy and of intellectual freedom. The billionaires are set on creating a new class of trans-humans.

Trans-humans are slaves who are dependent on AI, who have nano-devices in their blood and in their brains, and who are reduced to passive customers whose desires are dictated to them by corporations.

These four steps will render the entire population as physical, economic, spiritual, and intellectual slaves without the vast majority even being capable of understanding what is taking place.

There is no sign of a meaningful opposition to the enforcement of vaccines and the illegal irradiation of citizens by 5G.

We must go back to that brave decision of John Brown and his followers to oppose the secret and silent war of slavery against humanity at Harper’s Ferry on October 16, 1859.

Do not deceive yourself into thinking that a criminal attack on citizens, on this scale, can be stopped by passing few laws or by a posting a few memes on Facebook.

The start of C-Band 5G service by AT&T and Verizon is scheduled for this month, January 2022, in the United States, a month that will live in infamy.

The Biden administration has pushed for it at every level to pay back its supporters in high tech, media, and global finance.

Thousands of medical and scientific studies have confirmed with undisputable evidence that high EMF’s (electric and magnetic fields) are dangerous. Thousands more scientists have signed petitions calling for the immediate halt of 5G deployment. Its negative impact on navigation in airplanes as well is a proven fact.

The bogus pandemic slowed down your mail service, and made it impossible to see a doctor, but construction of 5G networks has only sped up.

Vaccines, 5G and other schemes to control the us, and to play nations against each other, are part of the “Great Reset,” the “fourth industrial revolution.”

This multi-trillion dollar scheme, promoted by the World Economic Forum, is a move to connect everyone to the grid, like it or not, and thereby enable those who control technology to have a complete lock on manufacturing, food production, sales, public services, transportation, finance, and education. It is not an accident that this plan is being pushed for at precisely the moment that the vaccines and 5G are deployed to destroy the capacity to resist.

Some 10,000 peer-reviewed clinical studies describe the molecular injury (damage to the DNA) that results from exposure to 5G and link that damage to the degradation of cellular function and organ function.

The impact on the brain of 5G is most obvious. The functionality of the brain is modified by exposure with resulting loss of memory and concentration, the onset of depression, and other long-term psychiatric conditions.

Diseases that can be traced directly back to 5G radiation include low fertility, cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, strokes, heart attacks, and autism.

Numerous studies, dismissed or ignored by the corporate media, show that COVID-19 vaccines are meant to ready the bodies of citizens for control via these powerful 5G irradiation platforms, broadcasting systems whose intensity can be increased without the knowledge of citizens.

The vaccines released by Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson, and others contain nano-devices and materials sensitive to electricity intended to create a direct link between 5G broadcasts and the functionality of the body.

Nano-routers, nano-antennas, and most importantly the toxin graphene oxide have been found in these fluids.

The nano-devices and microdots that can operate in the bloodstream and circulate though the body to the brain, are no fantasy. The Department of Defense’s research institute DARPA has conducted numerous projects in this field (many of which are classified, but some of which are accessible).

These devices can be activated by 5G radiation as they enter the nervous system—thus allowing for manipulation of the emotions, the thinking and the actions of the citizen via external stimulation.

Graphene oxide is attracted to electrical activity and therefore gravitates to the spine, the brain, and the heart: the organs that release the largest amounts of electricity. We have already witnessed the resulting heart attacks, and the sudden deaths, among athletes resulting from vaccines containing graphene oxide.

The combination of vaccines that contain nano-structures with the intensification of 5G broadcast will usher in the next stage of this war. You may be able to avoid a vaccination if you have money, or if you can work at home. But no one who interacts with society will escape the dangers of 5G.

We must first recognize the dire situation and end the psychology of denial and distraction.

We must first admit that we live under a complete dictatorship that cloaks its daggers and maces with the trappings of democratic process on minor issues.

This is what happens when a nation carelessly trusts presidents and legislators whose campaigns are bankrolled by the telecomm giants and Silicon Valley tyrants and listens to a media empire ruled by serial liars running disinformation campaigns for private interests.

We must also think deeply about how we can create institutions that will replace these corrupt criminal syndicates that lead us to slaughter. That process is not a matter of elections, or of passing laws, or of interpreting the law by courts, or even of posting critical articles in newspapers. It is already far too late for that.

We must undertake a revolutionary transformation while at the same time remaining loyal to the Constitution and to our moral principles.

It will be an extremely difficult painful process. But, at this point, we have no choice.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on usprovgov.asia.

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 https://worldunitednews.blogspot.com/

---

I Shall Fear No Evil

Why we need a truly independent candidate for president

Author: Emanuel Pastreich

Paperback ISBN: 9781649994509

Pages: 162

Click here to order.

.

.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

As of January 21, the Turkish military is still struggling to secure the areas occupied by its forces in Syria’s northern and northwestern region. Syrian government forces has been also facing security challenges in the country’s central and southern regions.

In the northern region, a new rocket attack targeted the Turkish-occupied area of Afrin on January 20.

Several rockets hit Afrin city center, killing six people, including three children and a woman. At least 24 others were wounded, including ten children and seven women.

The rockets were reportedly launched from a small pocket of land in southern Afrin held by Kurdish forces, namely the Syrian Democratic Forces.

The Turkish military and its proxies responded to the deadly rocket attack by shelling the Kurdish-held pocket. Material losses were reported. A child was also wounded.

Kurdish forces may have carried out the attack to commemorate the fourth anniversary of the Turkish invasion of Afrin that began on 20 January 2018. Turkey could use the attack to justify a new military operation in Syria.

In the northwestern region, known as Greater Idlib, the situation was not better for the Turkish military and its proxies.

On January 19, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) shelled the outskirts of a Turkish military post near the town of Qoqfin. No casualties or material losses were reported.

On January 20, the army’s artillery pounded the outskirts of Qoqfin post once again, without causing any losses. Later during the same day, the army struck another Turkish military post located near the town of Kansafra. This time, the shelling wounded three of the post’s guards. The wounded were reportedly Turkish service members and Syrian militants of the Turkish-backed Sham Legion.

The real target of the SAA’s recent artillery strikes was likely militants of al-Qaeda-affiliated Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham and its allies, who usually take shelter near Turkish posts.

Meanwhile in Syria’s central region, government forces and their allies continue to operate against ISIS cells.

On January 20, the SAA and other government formations kicked off a new large-scale combing operation in the region. The operation will cover the eastern Homs countryside, the Hama-Aleppo-Raqqa triangle and the western desert of Deir Ezzor.

Warplanes of the Russian Aerospace Forces carried out a series of airstrikes on hideouts of ISIS in the eastern Homs countryside and the western desert of Deir Ezzor in support of the new operation. The airstrikes claimed the lives of eight terrorists and wounded at least ten others.

The pressure mounted by government forces and their allies have forced ISIS cells in central Syria to temporary halt their operations. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the terrorist group’s insurgency will be over soon.

In the southern region, the security situation appears to be deteriorating, once again. Two attacks were reported in Daraa’s eastern countryside.

On January 18, unidentified gunmen attacked a checkpoint of the SAA’s 52nd Brigade and the Air Force Intelligence Directorate near the town of Mlaiha al-Garbiah. Two service members were allegedly killed.

On January 19, at least 14 Syrian security officers were lightly wounded when an improvised explosive device (IED) targeted a bus that was carrying them as it was passing on a road between the towns of Saida and Eastern Ghariyah. The officers on their way back from the Nassib crossing on the border with Jordan to their base in the capital Damascus.

Government forces may soon impose strict security measures in Daraa. This could anger the locals leading to a new conflict in the governorate.

The situation in Syria will not likely improve much in the near future. In fact, a new military confrontation between Turkish and Kurdish forces may start soon.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 The numbers are unbelievably staggering: the world’s 10 richest men more than doubled their fortunes from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion —at a rate of $15,000 per second or $1.3 billion a day, according to a new study from Oxfam International.

These phenomenal changes in fortunes took place during the first two years of a Covid-19 pandemic that has seen the incomes of 99 percent of humanity fall, and over 160 million more people forced into poverty—60 million more than the figures released by the World Bank in 2020.

“If these ten men were to lose 99.999 percent of their wealth tomorrow, they would still be richer than 99 percent of all the people on this planet,” said Oxfam International’s Executive Director Gabriela Bucher.

“They now have six times more wealth than the poorest 3.1 billion people.”

“It has never been so important to start righting the violent wrongs of this obscene inequality by clawing back elites’ power and extreme wealth including through taxation —getting that money back into the real economy and to save lives,” she said.

According to Forbes magazine, the 10 richest people, as of 30 November 2021, who have seen their fortunes grow, include Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bernard Arnault & family, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Ballmer and Warren Buffet.

The pandemic has hit the poorest people, women and racialized and marginalized groups the hardest. For example, in the US, 3.4 million Black Americans would be alive today if their life expectancy was the same as White people —this is directly linked to historical racism and colonialism, according to the study titled “Inequality Kills” released January 17, ahead of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) online Davos Agenda.

The report finds that a new billionaire is created every 26 hours while inequality is contributing to the death of at least 21,000 people each day, or one person every four seconds.

Other findings include:

• The pandemic has set gender parity back from 99 years to now 135 years. 252 men have more wealth than all 1 billion women and girls in Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean combined.
• During the second wave of the pandemic in England, people of Bangladeshi origin were five times more likely to die of COVID-19 than the White British population. Black people in Brazil are 1.5 times more likely to die from COVID-19 than White people.
• Inequality between countries is expected to rise for the first time in a generation. The proportion of people with COVID-19 who die from the virus in developing countries is roughly double that in rich countries.

Asked for his comments, Ben Phillips, author of How to Fight Inequality, told IPS the new report “confirms four vital truths about inequality are now proven beyond doubt.

Firstly, inequality kills. Inequality is not just inefficient and unfair. As the data shows, it is deadly.

Secondly, inequality is spiralling. The driving cause is neoliberalism, but it has now been supercharged by the pandemic.

Thirdly, inequality is a political choice. The rise in inequality is not inevitable. Governments can reduce inequality if they decide to do so.

Fourthly, policy-makers will only shift if we make them do so. A reversal in inequality depends on us, ordinary citizens, organizing to push our leaders to make them do their job and put in place the policies that will deliver a fairer, safer, world.”

Striking a hopeful note, Phillips said:

“Though the crisis has made inequality even worse and even harder to bear,” he said, “the crisis also, paradoxically, has generated an opportunity for transformational shift to tackle inequality, if we seize this moment”.

“We know the policy mix needed – get the vaccine to everyone by sharing the rights and recipes, drop the debt, expand public services like free health and education, raise up ordinary people’s wages and worker’s rights, tackle discrimination, put money in the hands of ordinary people, and properly tax, and restrain the economic and political power, of big corporations and the super-rich.”

Change depends on ordinary people, Phillips said.

“The myths of equal opportunity and rising tides have been busted, but the truth alone will not set us free. Left to itself, the rigged economy will continue to worsen inequality. Left to themselves, politicians will allow it, even enable it, to do so.

Only pressure from below can secure a reversal of rising inequality. The good news is that around the world, frustration is increasingly being channelled into a resurgence of organizing that has potential to shift the balance of power.

Unions, community organizations, women’s groups, progressive faith organizations and social movements are standing up and standing together. This is the source of hope. This is our chance – if enough people join in. Inequality defines this moment but need not be our fate,” declared Phillips.

According to the Oxfam report, billionaires’ wealth has risen more since COVID-19 began than it has in the last 14 years. At $5 trillion dollars, this is the biggest surge in billionaire wealth since records began. A one-off 99 percent tax on the ten richest men’s pandemic windfalls, for example, could pay:

• to make enough vaccines for the world;
• to provide universal healthcare and social protection, fund climate adaptation and reduce gender-based violence in over 80 countries;
• All this, while still leaving these men $8 billion better off than they were before the pandemic.

“Billionaires have had a terrific pandemic. Central banks pumped trillions of dollars into financial markets to save the economy, yet much of that has ended up lining the pockets of billionaires riding a stock market boom. Vaccines were meant to end this pandemic, yet rich governments allowed pharma billionaires and monopolies to cut off the supply to billions of people. The result is that every kind of inequality imaginable risks rising. The predictability of it is sickening. The consequences of it kill,” said Bucher.

Extreme inequality is a form of economic violence, where policies and political decisions that perpetuate the wealth and power of a privileged few results in direct harm to the vast majority of ordinary people across the world and the planet itself.

Oxfam recommends that governments urgently:

• Claw back the gains made by billionaires by taxing this huge new wealth made since the start of the pandemic through permanent wealth and capital taxes.
• Invest the trillions that could be raised by these taxes toward progressive spending on universal healthcare and social protection, climate change adaptation, and gender-based violence prevention and programming.
• Tackle sexist and racist laws that discriminate against women and racialized people and create new gender-equal laws to uproot violence and discrimination. All sectors of society must urgently define policies that will ensure women, racialized and other oppressed groups are represented in all decision-making spaces.
• End laws that undermine the rights of workers to unionize and strike, and set up stronger legal standards to protect them.
• And rich governments must immediately waive intellectual property rules over COVID-19 vaccine technologies to allow more countries to produce safe and effective vaccines to usher in the end of the pandemic.

Antonia Kirkland, global lead for Legal Equality & Access to Justice at Equality Now, told IPS the socio-economic fallout of COVID-19 has disproportionately impacted women, compounding pre-existing inequalities in the home and workplace. Women have been more likely to shoulder an even greater burden of responsibility for unpaid childcare and household chores in comparison to men.

“Women have lost paid work and had to take on more unpaid work, and of particular concern is how mothers have been pushed out of the workforce because of a lack of affordable childcare options. The expectations put on mothers in particular to take on the lion’s share of childcare and manage their children’s remote schooling forced many women to reduce their working hours, be furloughed, or drop out of the labor force altogether. Unequal pay because of gender discrimination means women in heterosexual family households have been more likely to leave employment if their spouse or partner brings in more income.”

She said the unprecedented disruption caused by the COVID19 pandemic should be seized upon as a catalyst for positive change and business recovery planning needs to prioritize attracting and retaining women within the workplace. This includes fostering flexible, inclusive working policies and practices, and supportive hiring and promotion processes that benefit women and families.

“As this startling report – Inequality Kills – shows, income inequality and gender inequality are intimately linked. And to stop COVID related inequality from killing women and other vulnerable people and instead put both gender and income equality first, States must get rid of all discriminatory laws. Sexist laws and gender stereotypes during the pandemic have perpetuated economic violence against women and exacerbated physical domestic violence,” Kirkland declared.

Download the “Inequality Kills” report and summary and the methodology document outlining how Oxfam calculated the statistics in the report.

Oxfam’s calculations are based on the most up-to-date and comprehensive data sources available. Figures on the very richest in society come from Forbes’ 2021 Billionaires List. Figures on the share of wealth come from the Credit Suisse Research Institute’s Global Wealth Databook 2021. Figures on the incomes of the 99 percent are from the World Bank.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from UNICEF/Malumbo Simwaka

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The drama currently unfolding in which the Biden Administration is doing everything it can to provoke a war with Russia over Ukraine is possibly the most frightening foreign policy misadventure since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and the 1967 Lyndon Johnson attempt to sink the USS Liberty and blame it on Egypt, either of which could have gone nuclear.

I can well recall the Robert Heinlein sci-fi book The Puppet Masters, later made into a movie, which described how alien-slugs, arriving by way of a flying saucer landing in Iowa, invaded the earth and parasitically attached themselves to the central nervous systems of humans and became able to completely control their minds. What the humans know, they know. What the slugs want, no matter what, the human will do. And the tale gets really scary in geopolitical terms when some Secret Service Agents are “occupied” by the invaders and they are thereby poised to capture the President of the United States. I would point out that the movie came out when Bill Clinton was president, which should have provoked some concerns about whether it was fact or fiction.

Well, does anyone currently wonder why I think of The Puppet Masters when an incoherent Joe Biden in particular makes a speech? And also consider the befuddled look of Secretary of State Tony Blinken or the bewildered expressions of Vice President Kamala Harris or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, all of which might also suggest that the slugs now completely control the Administration. The Biden and Blinken possibly slug-controlled automatons are now stating their conviction, based on no evidence whatsoever, that Russia is about to invade Ukraine and they are threatening sanctions like Putin “has never seen before.” There will no doubt be more slug-derived pronouncements to reinforce that warning in the next few days after the latest round of talks breaks down. Evacuation of US Embassy staff families in Kiev is already underway, deliberately escalating rather than attempting to defuse the crisis which could lead to nuclear war, destroying the human race and replacing it with the alien slugs.

Consider for a moment the inconsistencies and sheer contradictions in US foreign policy, which might support the credibility of the alien slug theory. The State Department’s management of foreign relations is supposed to serve the interests of the American people, but has not actually done so for decades. Can anyone explain why Washington’s foreign policy during the decade 2010 to 2020 constantly hammered at Russia, which, if anything, should have been the one country with which the US would seek to have a respectful relationship. Where is the logic in condemnation of Russia’s non-violent annexation of the Crimea, which was carried out based on a long-term historic relationship and a popular referendum, while also enabling “allies” like Israel’s illegal occupation and annexation of both Palestinian and Syrian land which has relied on force majeure to drive hundreds of thousands of local inhabitants from their homes. And then there are the Saudis using American made weapons to terrorize and kill the people of Yemen. Slug Biden is now considering aiding the murderous Saudi onslaught by declaring Yemen’s Houthis to be terrorists, legitimizing their slaughter.

Even if one rejects the alien slug theory, at a minimum, there has been a great deal of hypocrisy in terms of how Washington deals with the rest of the world and that has been increasingly the case under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Targeting and killing civilian populations and permanently driving them from their homes are, by the way, unambiguously war crimes and the United States is signatory to the Geneva Conventions that define the Israeli and Saudi actions as such. Israel, which claims a form of perpetual victimhood thanks to the so-called holocaust narrative, is the only nuclear power in the Middle East, though its arsenal is regarded as so secret that US government officials are not allowed to mention it, possibly another indication of alien slug control. It uses that advantage to carry out undeclared open and covert warfare against its neighbors, most notably targeting Syria and Lebanon as presumed proxies for its number one designated enemy Iran. Saudi Arabia for its part does not seem to care at all regarding the devastation it is delivering on the largely defenseless Yemenis.

Israel goes far beyond the actions of any other belligerent nation in the world, and the US is the only nation that even comes close, as recent reports regarding a particularly reckless bombing in Syria suggest. Israel, often with American complicity, engages in covert sabotage and assassination operations inside Iran, which have been sometimes reported, though hardly condemned, in the mainstream Western media. Less well covered are the more-or-less routine bombing attacks conducted against Syria, frequently also violating Lebanese airspace when the Israeli jets stand off in the Mediterranean Sea to fire their missiles at the Syrian targets. It should be noted that attacking a nation with which one is not at war and which poses no direct threat is also a war crime, in this case a war crime that the Israeli and Saudi governments repeat on a regular basis without any objection coming from Washington, which itself has attacked Syria on at least four occasions while also illegally stationing troops inside the country to “protect” its oilfields.

A recent devastating attack by Israel on Syrian targets consisted of a missile strike launched by Israeli air force planes against the Mediterranean port of Latakia on December 28^th. Israel’s attack on Latakia has to a certain extent shifted the focus of the war on Syria being conducted by Israel and the United States and their Gulf allies including the UAE and Saudi Arabia. In the past, the port was protected by its proximity to the major Russian base at Tartus in Syria and the actual presence of some Russian personnel assisting in Latakia ship cargo unloading operations, which threatens to bring Moscow more directly into the conflict. And as Washington is Israel’s enabler that will no doubt lead to US involvement in the UN and other fora if any attempts are made to limit or even condemn the Israeli actions. The situation is nasty and threatens to explode if Israel stages a false flag attack intended to lead to demands for direct military action by the US, a concern that some outside the Biden Administration have expressed.

What is particularly disturbing is the fact that while Israel and the Saudis continue to do their best to engage the United States in their own quarrels in the Middle East, President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Tony Blinken do nothing but look the other way so as not to annoy the Israeli leaders and their powerful domestic lobby in the US. At the same time, they unnecessarily provoke a nuclear armed and capable Russia and an emerging superpower China, both of which are regularly demonized both in the media and by leading politicians from both parties. The actions taken together are so irrational as to suggest that Robert Heinlein knew what he was writing about.

And then there is what might be described as the “hidden hand.” It should be observed that many of those US politicians and government officials most keen on baiting Russia are strong and vocal supporters of Israel. Many are neocons, who have penetrated the foreign and national security teams of both political parties and are dominant in the media while also having close ties to the Israeli government. Most of them are Jewish, to include all four of the top officials in the Department of State, while prominent politicians in both political parties, to include the president, have self-described as Zionists. For various reasons, many in the Jewish diaspora have a visceral hatred of Russia, so Israel in an odd way is part of the war party machinations to provoke an armed conflict over Ukraine.

That America is Israel’s poodle and both Russia and China are considered fair game to score political points is really the crux of the matter and it makes Americans complicit in Israeli crimes as Washington provides both arms and money as well as political cover to Jerusalem. It also reduces major US national interests involving Moscow and Beijing to sideshows and in so doing turns American national security on its head, supporting the unspeakable to make political points and ignoring what is important. One might even suggest that never before in history has a great nation so enthusiastically pursued policies that could easily lead to its own destruction. It is not in our interest, or even our survival, to continue along this path and it is past time that the politicians and bureaucrats begin to recognize that fact. Or maybe I should instead be addressing my advice to that alien-slug mothership hidden somewhere in a corn field in Iowa.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from TUR

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

At a time when Washington continues its campaign of escalations in Ukraine in the hope that Russia will make a gross miscalculation so that a NATO intervention can be justified, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby said that up to 8,500 US troops have been told that they can be deployed to Eastern Europe. Kirby said that the “bulk of” US troops placed on heightened alert were intended to bolster NATO’s quick response force.

“The United States has taken steps to heighten the readiness of its forces at home and abroad, so they are prepared to respond to a range of contingencies, including support to the NATO response force if it is activated,” Kirby said, noting that the NATO Response Force “comprises [of] around 40,000 multinational troops.”

Prior to the troop alert announcement, Biden had spoken with some of his European counterparts and said “I had a very, very, very good meeting – total unanimity with all the European leaders.” However, this is a gross exaggeration as the meeting was not with “all the European leaders,” but just the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and officials of the European Union.

In fact, the agreement between the meeting participants was for the fact that harsher sanctions against Russia should be imposed if it invades Ukraine, something that the Kremlin has repeatedly stressed that it has no intention of doing.

There still remains huge divisions within the West on how to resolve the Ukraine crisis, with the Anglo Alliance of Washington and London, along with its Polish and Baltic partners, opting for escalations. The rest of the European Union wants dialogue and calmness to prevail instead. For this reason, Russian and Ukrainian officials will meet with their French and German counterparts in Paris on Wednesday to find an impasse out of the crisis.

Whilst the French and Germans are attempting to deescalate the crisis, the Anglo Alliance (with minor partner Australia), started the process of withdrawing diplomats from Ukraine only hours before announcing that up to 8,500 US troops are on deployment alert.

It is recalled that the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, responded to the Anglo diplomatic withdrawal from Ukraine, saying: “We are not going to do the same thing because we don’t know any specific reasons. I don’t think we had to dramatize as far as the negotiations are going on.”

Despite Biden claiming that there is “total unanimity with all the European leaders” and the Anglo press and media running similar headlines (such as the BBC’s “Western leaders declare unity against Russia threat”), there was not a united Western front against Russia, just merely on the fact that sanctions should be strengthened if the Russian military were to invade Ukraine.

In action, there are clear differences between the Anglo and European (with the obvious exceptions of Poland and the Baltic states) responses to the crisis in Ukraine, with the Europeans seeking de-escalation as they will be the ones to directly face the consequences of a major war on the continent. Such a war would not be like the one in Donbass, that for now has been contained only in the region and at a low intensity. Such a war would spill across European borders and could see millions of refugees, thousands killed and a major energy crisis.

For a European Union that primarily prioritizes on economic development, such a scenario would be disastrous and one that the US would not be directly impacted by. Britain is also fanatically emboldening Poland and the Baltic States as it too would not be directly impacted by a war on the continent – in fact, such a war could be advantageous for the British in form of enacting revenge on a European Union that it still has deep animosities with.

None-the-less, despite the Polish and Baltic states de-Sovietisation transforming into ultra-nationalism and Russophobia, for now calmer heads are prevailing among the real power brokers of the European Union – France and Germany. For now, Russian patience and European desire to negotiate is prevailing, but amidst the Anglo Alliance’s provocations and escalations, the delicate line between war and peace is being challenged.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst. 

Featured image is from NaturalNews.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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

 

 

The “brutalist philosophy” of the US was made public (曝光) by Robert Daly, a former US diplomat stationed in Beijing, in 2015. Currently, he is the director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States. No diplomatic niceties here, Daly frankly states the policy of the US: China must never reach the level of the US.

Paolo Urio, a professor emeritus at the University of Geneva, points out in his book, America and the China Threat: From the End of History to the End of Empire (Clarity Press, 2022), that the US has “started to understand that China’s development risked putting an end of the world that America made, the foundation of the dominant U.S. role in the world … certainly for the U.S. establishment, the major threat.” (p 5)

The Barack Obama administration with its “pivot to Asia” sought to contain China. (p 22)

Obama boasted in his 2016 State of the Union Address of US leadership:

Surveys show our standing around the world is higher than when I was elected to office, and when it comes to every important international issue, people of the world do not look to Beijing or Moscow to lead–they call us. (p 27)

One might argue that the mere fact that Obama felt the need for such bluster indicated some anxiety.

“American reactions to China’s rise is the fear of losing the U.S. capacity to lead the world, to lose the status of sole super-power that sets the rules of the international system…” (p 232) President Joe Biden recognizes that fear to which he said “That’s not going to happen on my watch because the United States is going to grow and expand.” (p 235)

America and the China Threat examines the validity of the the China threat and whether the US will succeed in denying China’s ascendancy. The book is divided into three chapters with a concluding section. In chapter one, Urio debunks myths about the United States and China. In chapter 2, he examines the ideological differences between the US and China throughout history. Chapter 3 is titled “The Policy and Power Divide,” which again examines the differences over time between the US and China. The book concludes by pondering the question “If America Is Back, Then What Kind of America Is It?”

Urio begins by dismantling the myth of a free market upon which US capitalism is rooted. The Swiss author cites Adam Smith who promoted “a market free from the realization of rent (in his time, the rent from land) that is not the result of work.” (p 44) The market that exists now, writes Urio, is one massively tilted in favor of a tiny wealthy minority. (p 45)

Next, Urio exposes the myth of democracy. Within capitalist countries, the major problem, finds Urio, are the interferences of the economy and major political organizations. (p 48) And, of course, there is the influence of money. (p 49) Concerning the protest movement in Hong Kong, Urio writes that the West depicts it as “a desperate demand for democracy due to the interferences of the Chinese dictatorship. There is certainly some truth in this…” (p 53) What was this “some truth”? Urio did not elaborate. He did state that it was not about a democratic deficit but rather the inequality in Hong Kong.

Urio makes clear later that China is not a dictatorship. (p 86-92) The government serves the needs of the Chinese people and is supported widely by the people. (p 91)

Urio derides what passes for democracy in western media: a merger between political and economic elitists. (p 57) The US, he says, is a non-democracy: a plutocracy. (p 341) In contrast, author Wei Ling Chua wrote, “The strength of China’s political system is that they need not compromise with corporate interests like in the West…”¹

Urio writes, “Since the beginning of the 20th century the U.S. has not won a single great war on its own.” (p 61) Two riders hang on this claim. First there is nothing great about war. But obviously, Urio refers to a large war. In the 20th century, there were only two large wars: WWI (which many call the Great War) and WWII. There were so many combatants involved in these large wars that renders “on its own” nugatory. The US has won a few wars on its own (e.g., the invasion of Panama and Grenada), but such wars against comparatively tiny opponents reveals the US to be at best a bully. A bully is a morally deficient person. That the United States is a morally flawed entity is clear from the deeply racist history of European settler-colonists having spawned the country through wars and broken treaties against the Original peoples on Turtle Island. (p 207-209) This was followed by the forced transfer of Africans to provide slave labor. (p 79-83) Urio did not mention, what is usually omitted from history, that Indigenous peoples were also enslaved in America.²

American superiority and invincibility is another myth that is deflated in America and the China Threat. The US is a warring nation, having been at war for 229 out of 239 years (93%) of its existence from 1776 to 2015. (p 66) To that number can be added the continuation of warring from 2016 to 2022. The belief in military superiority is dangerous reveals Urio, especially when applied to China: “The consequence of over-estimating present power can be … devastating if a competitor is on an ascending trajectory as far as its power resources are concerned.” (p 74)

China’s last war was its shameful, truncated invasion of Viet Nam in 1979.

Another myth debunked about China is the claim that it has a state-capitalist economy. Urio explains that, among other reasons, China is a socialist-market economy: land is collective property, its anti-neoliberal orientation is people first, and banking is controlled by the state.( p 94-95)

To anyone closely observing the agricultural and technological leaps by China, the myth of China being a copycat manufacturer is balderdash. Robert Temple wrote of the myriad inventions that sprang first from the Chinese mind in The Genius of China: 3000 Years of Science, Discovery and Invention (1998), based on the research of Dr. Joseph Needham. Chinese innovations today are a continuation of its historical creativity.

However, China’s being at the technological, innovative forefront chagrins many westerners. A prime example is the vendetta against the 5G, and 6G on the way, communications leader Huawei.

This has evoked enormous jealousy and consternation among US elitists. Among the many examples of Chinese excellence is its state-of-the-art high-speed train network, including maglevs; cutting-edge AI and robotics technology; quantum computing breakthroughs; it announced plans to construct the Circular Electron–Positron Collider (CEPC), five times larger than the CERN Large Hydron Collider in Switzerland; China continues research into nuclear fusion and its “artificial sun” — Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) — project has sustained a nuclear fusion reaction for more than 17 minutes; in space, there is humanity’s first soft landing on the far side of the moon, China is the first nation to carry out an orbiting, landing, and rovering mission on Mars successfully on its first try. The US shut China out of participation in the International Space Station, so China put the Tiangong space station into orbit, to which China invites foreign participation.

Won’t the growing Chinese middle class demand a western style political system? The expectation that Chinese would pine for the purportedly superior western political system likeliest reflects western smugness. One ought to give the highly educated Chinese more credit. The mere fact is that China has risen so far and so fast, conquered extreme poverty, and is preparing to put a nuclear-powered research station on the moon while a sizeable segment of the West still struggles with tent cities, hunger, unemployment, stagnant wages, drug addiction, etc. Why would Chinese people opt for the western political system that has wrought so much misery?

Oria also debunks the notion of China becoming imperialist. Chairman Xi has on many occasions denounced hegemony. As Oria notes, the West seems stuck in projecting itself onto other countries. (p 114)

American ideology is predicated on its chosenness, its exceptionalism, its having a manifest destiny, being the indispensable nation, and being the leader of the free world. (p 120-131) Being the leader, it has the right to decree what is right or wrong and to intervene at its choosing. Writes Urio, “the U.S. tendency has remained, constantly and consistently, to intervene everywhere, whenever possible, by any means, to diffuse the good news of the new world order.” (p 131)

The Monroe Doctrine has been expanded around the world. Thus, the US breaks promises and sends military assets to the Russian frontier, to the former Soviet republic, Ukraine — what Russia has indicated is a redline. The US feels no embarrassment to tell NATO-ally Germany to not buy Russian gas. “This is another example of how the U.S. plans to lead the world and tell its allies what their interests are.” (p 145)

The key US-designated adversary, though, is China. (p 150)

Urio contrasts the static ideology of the US with the Chinese view of the world as perpetually changing. Thus, China remains prepared to adjust accordingly to seek harmony. The vehicle for that harmonization since 1949 has been Marxist-Leninism adapted to Chinese circumstances. Confucianism, molded to the present circumstances, holds the ruler is duty-bound to be moral and look after the people. (p 171, 187, 203) To this end, the Chinese people, writes Urio, will stand by the CPC as long as they can live comfortably. (p 186)

Urio identifies the US as in decline because the politicians have favored the capitalists over the well-being of the country and its people. (p 243) Spending for the military-industrial complex is rampant (p 244) and has diminished spending in other social areas. (p 247) It is a priority markedly different than in China.

Militarism is obviously out of the question to any sane analysis against a formidable, nuclear-armed China. Propagandizing is left as a tactic of choice. The US has targeted, in particular, Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong. Available facts belie western propaganda, disinformation, and incitement concerning these regions. Moreover, given that the continental US is based on the genocide and dispossession of the Original peoples, that Hawai’i was dispossessed from the Hawaiian people, that Guam, Saipan became administered territories of the US through far flung wars, it seems, moderately speaking, outrageous to criticize another country.

Under Xi, the goal is attaining the Chinese Dream. Part of paving the way for the Chinese Dream means getting the economy right. In terms of economic growth China is faring extremely well, but as is detailed in America and the China Threat, getting the balance right between rural and urban, among the regions, and the narrowing the gap between the wealthy and struggling people (China has a high GINI coefficient) is a work in progress. Urio finds, “The overall result is that China is improving the living conditions of all strata of its society, thus realizing a satisfactory level of social cohesion, stability, unity and harmony, in spite of the persistence of disparities.” (p 287)

One challenge for China, and other nations, is obtaining a level playing field in global commerce to break the stranglehold of the US dollar. Urio describes how this is being realized by China and other countries. China has entered several economic associations, among them the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS, and effective since 1 January 2022, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a “free” trade agreement among the Asia-Pacific nations of Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Some indications point to the supremacy of the US dollar eroding.

Near the end of the book, the lynchpin of the Chinese policy, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is fleshed out. The BRI is daring and brilliant. With a road belt across Eurasia and a maritime road connecting Africa, the BRI encircles the globe. It is an ever-expanding project encouraging economic development, sharing possibilities among several countries, and attracting the interest of other countries. Who’d like to be left out of such a massive project? The US is opposed to the BRI since it represents leadership by China. Part of the genius of the BRI is that it skirts much of the US military encirclement of China. Says Urio, “BRI is above all a geo-strategic project that, if fully realized, will allow China to reclaim its status as a world power, thereby putting an end to the unipolar ‘world America made.’” (p 337)

Biden and preceding administrations have not understood that it is economic not military values that will attract other countries. (p 349) China seeks win-win relationships, respects national sovereignty, and does not interfere in the domestic affairs of other nations. (p 351)

On January 18, 2022, Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng spoke to a forum hosted by Renmin University:

Let the 1.4 billion Chinese people live a good life and satisfy the people’s yearning for a better life is the goal of the Communist Party of China. You must know that there are still 1 billion people in China who have never been on a plane, and more than 200 million Chinese families do not have toilets. The proportion of Chinese people who have obtained a college degree or above is only 4%, compared with 25% in the United States. This is what we should attach great importance to and strive to change. Compared with whether GDP is super beautiful, we value our ideology, governance ability, and contribution to the world to catch up and surpass, and strive to be more advanced, more in line with people’s expectations, and more in line with the trend of the times.

Does that sound threatening? America and the China Threat lays out the background and foreground in detail to the dynamism between the US and China. One can comprehend the apprehension of US empire observing the unabating ascendance of China, and the US’s unwillingness to accept the rise of China. For most observers it is a fait accompli. The US can squawk about China ascendancy or work with it. Volens nolens, China will continue ascending.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be emailed at: kimohp at gmail.com. Twitter: @kimpetersen. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

1. Wei Ling Chua, author of Democracy: What the West Can Learn from China (review: location 1692.
2. See Andrés Reséndez, The Other Slavery: The Uncovered Story of Indian Enslavement in America (2016).

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

The word “encirclement” does not appear in the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), signed into law by President Joe Biden on December 27th, or in other recent administration statements about its foreign and military policies. Nor does that classic Cold War era term “containment” ever come up. Still, America’s top leaders have reached a consensus on a strategy to encircle and contain the latest great power, China, with hostile military alliances, thereby thwarting its rise to full superpower status.

The gigantic 2022 defense bill — passed with overwhelming support from both parties — provides a detailed blueprint for surrounding China with a potentially suffocating network of U.S. bases, military forces, and increasingly militarized partner states. The goal is to enable Washington to barricade that country’s military inside its own territory and potentially cripple its economy in any future crisis. For China’s leaders, who surely can’t tolerate being encircled in such a fashion, it’s an open invitation to… well, there’s no point in not being blunt… fight their way out of confinement.

Like every “defense” bill before it, the $768 billion 2022 NDAA is replete with all-too-generous handouts to military contractors for favored Pentagon weaponry. That would include F-35 jet fighters, Virginia-class submarines, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and a wide assortment of guided missiles. But as the Senate Armed Services Committee noted in a summary of the bill, it also incorporates an array of targeted appropriations and policy initiatives aimed at encircling, containing, and someday potentially overpowering China. Among these are an extra $7.1 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, or PDI, a program initiated last year with the aim of bolstering U.S. and allied forces in the Pacific.

Screenshot from the armed-services.senate.gov

Nor are these just isolated items in that 2,186-page bill. The authorization act includes a “sense of Congress” measure focused on “defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific Region,” providing a conceptual blueprint for such an encirclement strategy. Under it, the secretary of defense is enjoined to “strengthen United States defense alliances and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region so as to further the comparative advantage of the United States in strategic competition with the People’s Republic of China,” or PRC.

That the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act passed with no significant opposition in the House or Senate suggests that support for these and similar measures is strong in both parties. Some progressive Democrats had indeed sought to reduce the size of military spending, but their colleagues on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees instead voted to increase this year’s already staggering allotment for the Pentagon by another $24 billion — specifically to better contain (or fight) China. Most of those added taxpayer dollars will go toward the creation of hypersonic missiles and other advanced weaponry aimed at the PRC, and increased military exercises and security cooperation with U.S. allies in the region.

For Chinese leaders, there can be no doubt about the meaning of all this: whatever Washington might say about peaceful competition, the Biden administration, like the Trump administration before it, has no intention of allowing the PRC to achieve parity with the United States on the world stage. In fact, it is prepared to employ every means, including military force, to prevent that from happening. This leaves Beijing with two choices: succumb to U.S. pressure and accept second-class status in world affairs or challenge Washington’s strategy of containment. It’s hard to imagine that country’s current leadership accepting the first choice, while the second, were it adopted, would surely lead, sooner or later, to armed conflict.

The Enduring Lure of Encirclement

The notion of surrounding China with a chain of hostile powers was, in fact, first promoted as official policy in the early months of President George W. Bush’s administration. At that time, Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice went to work establishing an anti-China alliance system in Asia, following guidelines laid out by Rice in a January 2000 article in Foreign Affairs. There, she warned of Beijing’s efforts to “alter Asia’s balance of power in its own favor” — a drive the U.S. must respond to by deepening “its cooperation with Japan and South Korea” and by “maintain[ing] its commitment to a robust military presence in the region.” It should, she further indicated, “pay closer attention to India’s role in the regional balance.”

This has, in fact, remained part of the governing U.S. global playbook ever since, even if, for the Bush team, its implementation came to an abrupt halt on September 11, 2001, when Islamic militants attacked the Twin Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., leading the administration to declare a “global war on terror.”

Only a decade later, in 2011, did official Washington return to the Rice-Cheney strategy of encircling China and blunting or suppressing its growing power. That November, in an address to the Australian Parliament, President Obama announced an American “pivot to Asia” — a drive to restore Washington’s dominance in the region, while enlisting its allies there in an intensifying effort to contain China. “As president, I have… made a deliberate and strategic decision,” Obama declared in Canberra. “As a Pacific nation, the United States will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future… As we end today’s wars [in the Middle East], I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in the Asia Pacific a top priority.”

Like the Bush team before it, however, the Obama administration was blindsided by events in the Middle East, specifically the 2014 takeover of significant parts of Iraq and Syria by the Islamic State, and so was forced to suspend its focus on the Pacific. Only in the final years of the Trump administration did the idea of encircling China once again achieve preeminence in U.S. strategic thinking.

Led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the Trump effort proved far more substantial, involving as it did the beefing-up of U.S. forces in the Pacific; closer military ties with Australia, Japan, and South Korea; and an intensified outreach to India. Pompeo also added several new features to the mix: a “quadrilateral” alliance between Australia, India, Japan, and the U.S. (dubbed the “Quad,” for short); increased diplomatic ties with Taiwan; and the explicit demonization of China as an enemy of Western values.

In a July 2020 speech at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library, Pompeo laid out the new China policy vividly. To prevent the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from demolishing “the rules-based order that our societies have worked so hard to build,” he declared, we must “draw common lines in the sand that cannot be washed away by the CCP’s bargains or their blandishments.” This required not only bolstering U.S. forces in Asia but also creating a NATO-like alliance system to curb China’s further growth.

Pompeo also launched two key anti-China initiatives: the institutionalization of the Quad and the expansion of diplomatic and military relations with Taiwan. The Quad, or Quadrilateral Security Dialogue as it’s formally known, had initially been formed in 2007 by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (with the support of Vice President Dick Cheney and the leaders of Australia and India), but fell into abeyance for years. It was revived, however, in 2017 when Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull joined Abe, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Donald Trump in promoting a stepped-up effort to contain China.

As for Taiwan, Pompeo upped the ante there by approving diplomatic missions to its capital, Taipei, by senior officials, including Health Secretary Alex Azar and Undersecretary of State Keith Krach, the highest-ranking members of any administration to visit the island since 1979, when Washington severed formal relations with its government. Both visits were roundly criticized by Chinese officials as serious violations of the commitments Washington had made to Beijing under the agreement establishing ties with the PRC.

Biden Adopts the Encirclement Agenda

On entering the White House, President Biden promised to reverse many of the unpopular policies of his predecessor, but strategy towards China was not among them. Indeed, his administration has embraced the Pompeo encirclement agenda with a vengeance. As a result, ominously enough, preparations for a possible war with China are now the Pentagon’s top priority as, for the State Department, is the further isolation of Beijing diplomatically.

In line with that outlook, the Defense Department’s 2022 budget request asserted that “China poses the greatest long-term challenge to the United States” and, accordingly, that “the Department will prioritize China as our number one pacing challenge and develop the right operational concepts, capabilities, and plans to bolster deterrence and maintain our competitive advantage.”

In the meantime, as its key instrument for bolstering ties with allies in the Asia-Pacific region, the Biden administration endorsed Trump’s Pacific Deterrence Initiative. Proposed PDI spending was increased by 132% in the Pentagon’s 2022 budget request, rising to $5.1 billion from the $2.2 billion in 2021. And if you want a measure of this moment in relation to China, consider this: even that increase was deemed insufficient by congressional Democrats and Republicans who added another $2 billion to the PDI allocation for 2022.

To further demonstrate Washington’s commitment to an anti-China alliance in Asia, the first two heads of state invited to the White House to meet President Biden were Japanese Prime Minister Yoshi Suga and South Korean President Moon Jae-in. In talks with them, Biden emphasized the importance of joint efforts to counter Beijing. Following his meeting with Suga, for instance, Biden publicly insisted that his administration was “committed to working together to take on the challenges from China… to ensure a future of a free and open Indo-Pacific.”

On September 24th, in a first, leaders of the Quad all met with Biden at a White House “summit.” Although the administration emphasized non-military initiatives in its post-summit official report, the main order of business was clearly to strengthen military cooperation in the region. As if to underscore this, Biden used the occasion to highlight an agreement he’d just signed with Prime Minister Scott Morrison of Australia to provide that country with the propulsion technology for a new fleet of nuclear-powered submarines — a move obviously aimed at China. And note as well that, just days before the summit, the administration formed a new alliance with Australia and the United Kingdom, called AUKUS, and again aimed at China.

Finally, Biden has continued to increase diplomatic and military contacts with Taiwan, beginning on his first day in office when Hsiao Bi-khim, Taipei’s de facto ambassador to Washington, attended his inauguration. “President Biden will stand with friends and allies to advance our shared prosperity, security, and values in the Asia-Pacific region — and that includes Taiwan,” a top administration official said at the time. Other high-level contacts with Taiwanese officials, including military personnel, soon followed.

A “Grand Strategy” for Containment

What all these initiatives have lacked, until now, is an overarching plan for curbing China’s rise and so ensuring America’s permanent supremacy in the Indo-Pacific region. The authors of this year’s NDAA were remarkably focused on this deficiency and several provisions of the bill are designed to provide just such a master plan. These include a series of measures intended to incorporate Taiwan into the U.S. defense system surrounding China and a requirement for the drafting of a comprehensive “grand strategy” for containing that country on every front.

A “sense of Congress” measure in that bill provides overarching guidance on these disparate initiatives, stipulating an unbroken chain of U.S.-armed sentinel states — stretching from Japan and South Korea in the northern Pacific to Australia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Singapore in the south and India on China’s eastern flank — meant to encircle and contain the People’s Republic. Ominously enough, Taiwan, too, is included in the projected anti-China network.

That island’s imagined future role in such an emerging strategic plan was further spelled out in a provision entitled “Sense of Congress on Taiwan Defense Relations.” Essentially, this measure insists that Washington’s 1978 pledge to terminate its military ties with Taipei and a subsequent 1982 U.S.-China agreement committing this country to reduce the quality and quantity of its arms transfers to Taiwan are no longer valid due to China’s “increasingly coercive and aggressive behavior” toward the island. Accordingly, the measure advocates closer military coordination between the two countries and the sale of increasingly sophisticated weapons systems to Taiwan, along with the technology to manufacture some of them.

Add all this up and here’s the new reality of the Biden years: the disputed island of Taiwan, just off the Chinese mainland and claimed as a province by the PRC, is now being converted into a de facto military ally of the United States. There could hardly be a more direct assault on China’s bottom line: that, sooner or later, the island must agree to peacefully reunite with the mainland or face military action.

Recognizing that the policies spelled out in the 2022 NDAA represent a fundamental threat to China’s security and its desire for a greater international role, Congress also directed the president to come up with a “grand strategy” on U.S.-China relations in the next nine months. This should include an assessment of that country’s global objectives and an inventory of the economic, diplomatic, and military capabilities the U.S. will require to blunt its rise. In addition, it calls on the Biden administration to examine “the assumptions and end-state or end states of the strategy of the United States globally and in the Indo-Pacific region with respect to the People’s Republic of China.” No explanation is given for the meaning of “end-state or end states,” but it’s easy to imagine that the authors of that measure had in mind the potential collapse of the Chinese Communist government or some form of war between the two countries.

How will Chinese leaders react to all this? No one yet knows, but President Xi Jinping provided at least a glimpse of what that response might be in a July 1st address marking the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party. “We will never allow any foreign force to bully, oppress, or subjugate us,” he declared, as China’s newest tanks, rockets, and missiles rolled by. “Anyone who would attempt to do so will find themselves on a collision course with a great wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people.”

Welcome to the new twenty-first-century Cold War on a planet desperately in need of something else.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Michael T. Klare, a TomDispatch regular, is the five-college professor emeritus of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and a senior visiting fellow at the Arms Control Association. He is the author of 15 books, the latest of which is All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change. He is a founder of the Committee for a Sane U.S.-China Policy.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The State Department, “as a precautionary measure against a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine”, ordered the evacuation of family members and part of the staff from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, which with 900 officials is among the largest in Europe, and raised to level 4 of risk, the maximum, the warning to U.S. citizens not to go to Ukraine. Immediately afterwards the Foreign Office announced, with the same motivation, the withdrawal of staff from the British Embassy in Kiev. These operations of psychological warfare, aimed at creating alarm about an imminent Russian invasion of Ukraine and the three Baltic republics, prepare for a further and even more dangerous US-NATO escalation against Russia.

The White House announced that President Biden is considering “deploying several thousand U.S. troops, warships and aircraft to NATO countries in the Baltics and Eastern Europe.” Initially, 5,500 U.S. troops are expected to arrive, joining the 4,000 already in Poland and followed by thousands more, extending their permanent deployment to the Baltic, as Latvia has requested. Special rail convoys are already transporting U.S. tanks from Poland to Ukraine, whose armed forces have been trained for years, and in fact commanded by hundreds of U.S. military advisers and instructors flanked by others from NATO. Washington, which last year provided Kiev with weapons for the official amount of 650 million dollars, has authorized Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to transfer to Ukraine US weapons in their possession, in particular Javelin missiles. Other armaments are provided by Great Britain and the Czech Republic.

NATO informs that the European countries of the Alliance are putting their armed forces in a state of operational readiness and sending other warships and fighter planes to the Eastern Europe deployments. Italy, with Eurofighter fighter-bombers, has taken command of NATO’s “enhanced air policing” mission in Romania. France is ready to send troops to Romania under NATO command. Spain is sending warships in NATO naval forces and fighter-bombers to Bulgaria. The Netherlands is preparing to send F-35 fighters to Bulgaria. Denmark is sending F-16 fighters to Lithuania. Yesterday began in the Mediterranean Sea the great NATO naval exercise Neptune Strike ’22 under the command of Vice Admiral Eugene Black, commander of the Sixth Fleet with headquarters in Naples Capodichino and base in Gaeta. The exercise, which lasts 12 days, involves the US nuclear aircraft carrier Harry Truman with its battle group, including 5 missile launchers ready for nuclear attack to “reassure the European Allies especially on the eastern front threatened by Russia”.

Immediately after the NATO Neptune Strike ’22, the exercise Mission Clemenceau 22 will take place in February. It will involve, in an “Operation of three aircraft carriers”, the French nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle with its battle group, including a nuclear attack submarine, which will enter the Adriatic; the Harry Truman with its battle group and the Italian aircraft carrier Cavour with the F-35 on board. This exercise, of course, is also directed against Russia.

While NATO enjoins Russia to “de-escalate”, warning that “any further aggression will involve a high cost for Moscow”, the foreign ministers of the European Union – meeting in Brussels and connected by teleconference with the US Secretary of State Blinken – have decreed yesterday other measures against Russia. The European Union of 27, of which 21 belong to NATO under US command, echoes NATO’s warning to Russia, declaring that “any further military aggression against Ukraine would have very serious consequences for Russia”. In this way the EU participates in the strategy of tension, through which the U.S. create fractures in Europe to keep it under their influence.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

After Arab Spring protests erupted in the Middle East in 2011, toppling longtime dictators of the Arab World, including Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Yemenis also gathered in the capital’s squares demanding removal of Ali Abdullah Saleh.

Instead of conceding to protesters’ fervent demand of holding free and fair elections to ascertain democratic aspirations of demonstrators, however, the Obama administration adopted the convenient course of replacing Yemen’s longtime autocrat with a Saudi stooge Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi.

Having the reputation of a “wily Arabian fox” and being a Houthi himself, Ali Abdullah Saleh wasn’t the one to sit idly by and retire from politics in ignominy. He colluded with the Houthi rebels and incited them to take advantage of the chaos and political vacuum created after the revolution to come out of their northern Saada stronghold and occupy the capital Sanaa in September 2014.

Meanwhile, while events were unfolding in Yemen in the aftermath of the Arab Spring movements, the Saudi-Iran conflict in the Middle East region was also exacerbating. Saudi Arabia, which was vying for power as the leader of Sunni bloc against the Shia-led Iran in the regional geopolitics, was staunchly against the invasion of Iraq by the Bush administration in 2003.

The Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein constituted a Sunni Arab bulwark against Iran’s meddling in the Arab World. But after Saddam was ousted from power in 2003 and subsequently when elections were held in Iraq which were swept by Shia-dominated parties, Iraq has now been led by a Shia-majority government that has become a steadfast regional ally of Iran. Consequently, Iran’s sphere of influence now extends all the way from territorially contiguous Iraq and Syria to Lebanon and the Mediterranean coast.

The Saudi royal family was resentful of Iran’s encroachment on the traditional Arab heartland. Therefore, when protests broke out against the Shia-led Syrian government in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011, the Gulf States along with their regional Sunni allies, Turkey and Jordan, and the Western patrons gradually militarized the protests to dismantle the Iranian resistance axis comprised of Iran, Syria and their Lebanon-based proxy, Hezbollah.

The decade-long conflict in Syria that gave birth to myriads of militant groups, including the Islamic State, and after the conflict spilled across the border into neighboring Iraq in early 2014 was directly responsible for the spate of Islamic State-inspired terror attacks in the West from 2015 to 2017.

Since the beginning of the Syrian conflict in August 2011 to June 2014, when the Islamic State overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq, an informal pact existed between the Western powers, their regional Arab and Turk allies and jihadists of the Middle East against the Iranian resistance axis. In accordance with the pact, militants were trained and armed in the training camps located in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan to battle the Syrian government.

This arrangement of an informal pact between the Western powers and the jihadists of the Middle East against the Iran-allied forces worked well up to August 2014, when the Obama Administration made a volte-face on its previous regime change policy in Syria and began conducting air strikes against one group of militants battling the Syrian government, the Islamic State, after the latter overstepped its mandate in Syria and overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq from where the US had withdrawn its troops only a couple of years ago in December 2011.

After this reversal of policy in Syria by the Western powers and the subsequent Russian military intervention on the side of the Syrian government in September 2015, the momentum of jihadists’ expansion in Syria and Iraq stalled, and they felt that their Western patrons had committed a treachery against the jihadists’ cause, hence they were infuriated and rose up in arms to exact revenge for this betrayal.

If we look at the chain of events, the timing of the spate of terror attacks against the West was critical: the Islamic State overran Mosul in June 2014, the Obama Administration began conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State’s targets in Iraq and Syria in August 2014, and after a lull of almost a decade since the Madrid and London bombings in 2004 and 2005, respectively, the first such incident of terrorism occurred on the Western soil at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in January 2015, and then the Islamic State carried out the audacious November 2015 Paris attacks, the March 2016 Brussels bombings, the June 2016 truck-ramming incident in Nice, and three horrific terror attacks took place in the United Kingdom within a span of less than three months in 2017, and after that the Islamic State carried out the Barcelona attack in August 2017, and then another truck-ramming atrocity occurred in Lower Manhattan in October 2017 that was also claimed by the Islamic State.

More to the point, the dilemma that the jihadists and their regional backers faced in Syria was quite unique: in the wake of the false-flag Ghouta chemical weapons attacks in Damascus in August 2013, the stage was all set for yet another no-fly zone and “humanitarian intervention” a la Gaddafi’s Libya, as Obama had unequivocally stated that a chemical weapons attack by the Bashar al-Assad government was a “red line” for his administration.

The war hounds were waiting for a finishing blow and then-Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and former Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan were shuttling between the Western capitals to lobby for the military intervention. Francois Hollande, then the president of France, had already announced his intentions and David Cameron, then the prime minister of the UK, was also onboard.

Here it should be remembered that even during the Libyan intervention, the Obama administration’s policy was a bit ambivalent and France under the leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy, then the president of France, had taken the lead role. In Syria’s case, however, the British parliament forced David Cameron to seek a vote for military intervention in the House of Commons before committing the British troops and air force to Syria.

Taking cue from the British parliament, the US Congress also compelled Obama to seek approval before another ill-conceived military intervention, and since both the administrations lacked the requisite majority in their respective parliaments and the public opinion was also fiercely against another Middle Eastern war, therefore Obama and Cameron dropped their plans of enforcing a no-fly zone over Syria.

In the end, France was left alone as the only Western power still in favor of intervention; at that point, however, the seasoned Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov staged a diplomatic coup by announcing that the Syrian government was willing to ship its chemical weapons stockpiles out of Syria and subsequently the issue was amicably resolved.

Turkey, Jordan and the Gulf Arab states, the main beneficiaries of the proxy war against the Baathist government in Syria, however, had lost a golden opportunity to deal a fatal blow to their regional rivals.

To add insult to the injury, the Islamic State, one of the numerous militant outfits fighting in Syria, overstepped its mandate in Syria and overran Mosul and Anbar in Iraq in 2014, from where the US troops had withdrawn only a couple of years ago in December 2011.

Additionally, when the graphic images and videos of Islamic State’s executions surfaced on the internet, the Obama administration was left with no other choice but to adopt some countermeasures to show that it was still sincere in pursuing Washington’s dubious “war on terror” policy; at the same time, however, it assured its Turkish, Jordanian and Gulf Arab allies that despite fighting a war against the maverick jihadist outfit, the Islamic State, the Western policy of training and arming the so-called “moderate” Syrian militants will continue apace and that Bashar al-Assad’s days were numbered, one way or the other.

Moreover, declaring the war against the Islamic State in August 2014 served another purpose too: in order to commit the US Air Force to Syria and Iraq, the Obama administration needed the approval of the US Congress which was not available, but by declaring a war against the Islamic State, which was a designated terrorist organization, the Obama administration availed itself of the war on terror provisions in the US laws and thus circumvented the US Congress.

But then Russia threw a spanner in the works of NATO and its regional Middle Eastern allies in September 2015 by its surreptitious military buildup in Latakia that was executed with an element of surprise unheard of since General Rommel, the Desert Fox.

When Russia deployed its forces and military hardware to Syria in September 2015, the militant proxies of Washington and its regional clients were on the verge of drawing a wedge between Damascus and the Alawite heartland of coastal Latakia, which could have led to the imminent downfall of the Bashar al-Assad government.

With the help of the Russian air power, the Syrian government has since reclaimed most of Syria’s territory from the insurgents, excluding Idlib in the northwest occupied by the Turkish-backed militants and Deir al-Zor and the Kurdish-held areas in the east, thus inflicting a humiliating defeat on Washington and its regional clients.

Therefore, although Turkey, Jordan and the Gulf States still toe Washington’s line in the region publicly, behind the scenes there is bitter resentment that the US let them down by making an about-face on the previous regime change policy in Syria and the subsequent declaration of war against one group of Sunni militants in Syria, the Islamic State. This change of policy by the US directly benefited the Iranian-led axis in the region.

Coming back to Yemen, after Ali Abdullah Saleh colluded with the Houthi rebels and incited them to take advantage of political vacuum created after the revolution to come out of their northern Saada stronghold and occupy the capital Sanaa in September 2014, meanwhile a change of guard took place in Riyadh as Saudi Arabia’s longtime ruler King Abdullah died and was replaced by King Salman in January 2015, while de facto control of the kingdom fell into hands of ambitious and belligerent Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

Already furious at the Obama administration for not enforcing its so-called “red line” by imposing a no-fly zone over Syria after the false-flag Ghouta chemical weapons attacks in Damascus in August 2013 and apprehensive of security threat posed to the kingdom from its southern border along Yemen by Houthi rebels under the influence of Iran, the crown prince immediately began a military and air warfare campaign against regional rivals with military assistance from the crown prince of Abu Dhabi and de facto ruler of UAE, Mohammad bin Zayed al-Nahyan, in March 2015.

Mindful of the botched policy it had pursued in Libya and Syria and aware of the catastrophe it had wrought in the Middle East region, the Obama administration had to yield to the dictates of Saudi Arabia and UAE by fully coordinating the Gulf-led military campaign in Yemen not only by providing intelligence, planning and logistical support but also by selling billions of dollars’ worth of arms and ammunition to the Gulf States during the conflict.

After the Democrats lost the presidential election in November 2016, the Yemen conflict has further escalated during four years of Trump presidency, who was on even friendlier terms with the Saudi royal family. In order to appreciate the nature of cordial relationship between the Trump family and the Gulf’s petro-monarchs, here are a few relevant excerpts from Bob Woodward’s book, Rage.

In an informal conversation with Woodward, Trump boasted that he protected Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman from congressional scrutiny after the brutal assassination of Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi at Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018. “I saved his ass,” Trump said in 2018, according to the book. “I was able to get Congress to leave him alone. I was able to get them to stop.”

When Woodward pressed Trump if he believed the Saudi crown prince ordered the assassination himself, Trump responded: “He says very strongly that he didn’t do it. Bob, they spent $400 billion over a fairly short period of time,” Trump said.

“And you know, they’re in the Middle East. You know, they’re big. Because of their religious monuments, you know, they have the real power. They have the oil, but they also have the great monuments for religion. You know that, right? For that religion,” the president noted. “They wouldn’t last a week if we’re not there, and they know it,” he added.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

First published on GR in November 2018.

On November 11, 100 years ago, the First World War ended. At glamorous commemorative events, Western leaders will shed thick crocodile tears over the “twentieth-century catastrophe.”

However, this does not stop them from stirring the war drums for the next big war on behalf of the ruling elite at the same time: The US-led Nato exercises in Norway near the Russian border with 50,000 soldiers from 31 countries ever before the “emergency”, the two Great powers Russia and China are already preparing for war to protect their countries. (1) Instead of “kneeling down” on the occasion of this centenary of the millions of victims of the largest military conflict in world history to date, the leading Western elite seeks sole world domination and gigantic war profits.

Reports from contemporary witnesses of the Great War from 1914 to 1918 remind us of what war means to combatants and civilians alike. But the Godless and history-forgotten warmongers of the Deep State and their puppets in politics and corporate media will not stop even in the face of these terrifying contemporary witnesses.

Erich Maria Remarque: “The youth died before they could begin to live.”

The German writer Remarque (1898-1970) was drafted into the imperial army as a reserve recruit in November 1916, joined the Western Front as a soldier in June 1917 and was wounded at the end of July. In the army hospital in Duisburg he worked in a writing room and began to write down his war experiences here. (2) After his recovery he returned to the army. His famous work “Im Westen nichts Neues” (“All Quiet on the Western Front”), the “classic experience book of a front soldier”, first appeared in 1928 and was translated into more than 50 languages.

Remarque begins his novel with a personal explanation:

“This book is neither an accusation nor a confession. It is only an attempt to report on a generation that was destroyed by war – even if it escaped its shells.” (3)

He then describes the cruelty of the First World War from the perspective of a young front-line soldier who sees himself and his comrades as a lost generation. At the age of 18, his class had already joined the voluntary military service at the insistence of the teacher. They all went straight to war from their school desks, without being able to develop a perspective for their lives beforehand.

Countless comrades lost their lives during missions on the Western Front. Some of the fallen are replaced by inexperienced soldiers from the recruiting camp who are helplessly at the mercy of the extreme demands of the war of positions. The front-line soldier experiences how his comrades are killed in hopeless battles; they are killed in drumfire, shredded by grenades or suffocated by gas attacks. He himself falls shortly before the end of the war as the last of his group on a very quiet day: the army report reports that there is all quiet on the Western front.

Three years after the classic “All Quiet on the Western Front”, Remarque’s anti-war novel “The Way Back” appears as a consistent continuation. In it he paints the picture of a “youth who died before they could begin to live”. The content can be summarized as follows: “November 2018: finally peace. From France, a few front-line soldiers retreat to their homeland, the path to life. The revolution is raging in Germany, nothing has remained of the enthusiasm with which they were sent into the struggle for their fatherland years ago. Instead, the former heroes are met with incomprehension, indifference and open contempt. They feel strange and superfluous, desperately searching for a meaning: ‘Our ideals are bankrupt, our dreams broken’. All that remains is comradeship, but even that is gradually crumbling.” (4) 

The course of the historical events has bitterly proved Erich Maria Remarque’s stirring accusation right. For this reason he called for a “fight against the threatening militarization of the youth, against militarism in all its forms” for the time after the end of the war. (5) In Nazi Germany his works were banned as “harmful and undesirable literature” and publicly burned in 1933. He himself was expatriated from Germany in 1938.

Ernst Friedrich: “War against War!”

Ernst Friedrich (1894-1967) was an anarchist pacifist. Between the two World Wars he was politically, agitatorially and artistically engaged against the war. When he was drafted into the First World War, he refused military service for reasons of conscience. Since he refused to wear a uniform, he was sent to an observation station for the mentally ill. He was sentenced to prison in 1917 for sabotage in an important factory. (6) 

With his book “Krieg dem Kriege!” (in the original in four languages: Krieg dem Kriege! Guerre à la Guerre! War against War! Oorlog aan den Oorlog!), which first appeared in 1924 and was translated into another 50 languages, Friedrich erected a monument to the victims of the Great War. The book shows its true face: battlefields, the horrors of the trenches, the severely wounded, the mutilated, the executed, the suffering, the misery and the dying. Friedrich tried to shake the people awake by showing the horrors of war. The book also attracted worldwide attention because the disfigured war victims were largely hidden from the public in secluded homes for the war-disabled.

Kurt Tucholsky (1890-1935), politically committed journalist, writer and one of the most important publicists of the Weimar Republic, commented on the book “War against War!”: “The photographs of the battlefields, the photographs of the war-mutilised are among the most terrible documents I have ever seen”. (7) And he made the suggestion: “To those who have so often affirmatively listened to me, I suggest: to buy the book in one or more copies and to ensure its distribution”. (8) For Robert Jungk (1913-1994), Austrian publicist, journalist and one of the first futurologists, the book “War against War!” was an “eye opener”: “Ernst Friedrich opened my eyes to the most terrible of all epidemics, to the great cripple, the senseless destroyer war. (9) 

But Ernst Friedrich also writes positive and encouraging things in his book: He made far-sighted suggestions on how to prevent wars. Addressing to parents, he writes in the chapter “Prevention of war”: “(…) How many people overlook all too easily the fact that in their own home, in their family, war is prepared voluntarily! And here is the beginning of all vice. (…) You parents, who do not want your sons of other parents to murder loving sons, you should bear in mind that the child you bestow with helmet, sabre and rifle plays its tender soul from the young body! But those children who are brought up to love and solidarity, to unconditional respect for the inviolably holy life of man, the children will certainly be unfit for military service and war use. (…).“ (10) 

Rudolf Archibald Reiss / Henri Barbusse: “The eyewitness accounts of the war crimes in Serbia caused horror in the civilized world.”

The First World War is commonly referred to as the “primal catastrophe of the twentieth century”, because without a thorough examination of this great war European history would not be understood. It had determined the further course of the 20th century – until today. An example are the wars in former Yugoslavia. The “primordial catastrophe” began with the fact that Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on 28 July 1914 after the Sarajevo shots and a completely unacceptable ultimatum. It was waged by the great and powerful nation with extreme harshness and cruelty.

On the occasion of the hundredth anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War, the “Serbian Literature Co-operative” together with the “Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals” published the excellently researched historical work “Serbia in the Great War 1914-1918”. It was also published in English, Russian and German. The authors are two famous Serbian historians and members of the board of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU), Mira Radojevic and Ljubodrag Dimic. In the introduction to the book, they state their motive: “The authors of this book had the modest intention, born out of a desire to affirm the scientific results of Serbian historiography, to embed them in the stimulating scientific perceptions of historians of other cultures, and thus to draw attention to the shameful effects of a politically motivated revision of history”. (11) 

This war was waged by Austria-Hungary not only against Serbia as a state, but also against the entire Serbian people. This is evident from the statements of the German Emperor, who was allied with Austria, as well as from the orders of the army leadership, which it gave to the Austro-Hungarian soldiers when they invaded Serbia. The famous “guiding principle” of Emperor Wilhelm II before the beginning of the war is well known: “Now or never”, followed by the words: “The Serbs must be cleared up, and soon. Everything goes without saying, and these are truisms.” (12) The Austrian cultural critic Karl Kraus has described the Serbophobe mood prevailing in Austria at that time in the World War tragedy “The last days of mankind” with the winged cry “Serbia must die! – whether it wants to or not”. (13)

The order of General Lothar Elder von Hortstein, commander of the 9th Corps of the Austro-Hungarian Army, which he gave after the entry of his troops into Serbia, also revealed the intentions of the great power Austria: “The war leads us into an enemy country with a population that is full of fanatical hatred against us; into a country, where the assassination, as the catastrophe of Sarajevo shows, is permitted even to higher classes, where it is even celebrated as heroism. Against such a population any humanity and generosity is completely out of place, it is even harmful (…). I order that during the operations and throughout the war everyone be treated with extreme harshness, severity and mistrust. (…) Above all, I cannot tolerate the imprisonment of ununiformed but armed inhabitants of the enemy country (…); they must be killed unconditionally. Those who show mercy in such cases will be severely punished.” (14)

In order to inform the world of the crimes committed against the Serbian civilian population as a result of these orders, the Serbian government commissioned a group of criminologists to investigate their character and extent. The famous Swiss physician and university professor Rudolf Archibald Reiss led this group of experts. His first report, based on the collected facts, had the title: “How Austria-Hungary Fought in Serbia”. What is written in this report is difficult to bear: “The type of death chosen by the executioners was very diverse. Very often the victims were mutilated before or after death. I noticed the following types of killing or mutilation: The victims were perforated by shots, murdered, their throats were cut with a knife, raped and then murdered, stoned, hanged, beaten to death with shafts and sticks, stabbed, burnt alive; there were victims (…)”. (15) What follows becomes more and more cruel and sadistic. 

The reports of Archibald Reiss were confirmed by other doctors and eyewitnesses and “caused horror in the civilized world”. (16) Shocking facts about the crimes committed in Serbia were also reported by other foreign correspondents such as the American journalist John Reed and the French politician and writer Henri Barbusse (1873-1935), known from his war diary “The Fire” published in 1916. 

In the book “Serbia in the Great War 1914-1918” Radojevic and Dimic write: “According to Henry Barbusse, the population was ‘driven mad by terror and fear’. For the Austro-Hungarian army began ‘its annihilation work as soon as it entered Serbia’ with cruelty and ‘hellish orgies’. ‘How often have I been petrified with shock,’ he says, ‘given the results of the murderous drunkenness, fires or sadism of these soldiers who belong to a great country proud of its civilization! What Austria wanted ‘a great and powerful nation, throwing itself at a small people, was nothing other than to destroy Serbia, and had sworn to do it systematically, with fire and sword, with the destruction and burning down of towns and villages, and also with the annihilation and massacre of the Serbs’.“ (17)

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung NRhZ”.

Notes

(1) „RT Deutsch“ vom 30.10.2018: „Russischer UN-Diplomat: ’Ja, Russland bereitet sich auf einen großen Krieg vor’“ und „Chinas Präsident Xi Jinping ordnet für das Militär Kriegsvorbereitung an“.

(2) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Maria_Remarque.

(3) Remarque, E. M. (1957). Im Westen nichts Neues. West-Berlin. Buchdeckel. 

(4) Remarque, E. M. (2009⁷). Der Weg zurück. Köln. „Über das Buch“.

(5) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Maria_Remarque.

(6) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Friedrich.

(7) Friedrich, E. (2004). Krieg dem Kriege. München. Buchdeckel.

(8) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krieg_dem_Kriege.

(9) A.a.O.

(10) Friedrich, E. (2004). Krieg dem Kriege. München, S. 10.

(11) Radojevic, M./Dimic, L. (2014). Serbien im Großen Krieg… Belgrad, S. 9.

(12) A.a.O., S. 94.

(13) Kraus, K. (2014). Die letzten Tage der Menschheit. Salzburg und Wien, S. 75f.

(14) Radojevic, M./Dimic, L. (2014) Serbien im Großen Krieg… Belgrad, S. 143.

(15) A.a.O., S. 144f.

(16) A.a.O.

(17) A.a.O., S. 146f.

FDA Dr Rubin Admits to Unknown Safety of Experimental Jabs

By Dr. Mark Trozzi, January 25, 2022

On October 26, 2021 The FDA met to debate the approval of the Pfizer Covid Injection for children. One of the voting FDA members Dr Eric Rubin said: “We’re never gonna learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes… I do think we should vote to approve it,” and they did.

Thailand Government Will Pay Compensation for Vaccine “Side Effects” and Deaths: One Billion Baht

By Bangkok Post, January 25, 2022

What is important in this report by the Bangkok Post is that the Royal Thai Government (member state of the UN and the WHO) firmly acknowledges the deaths and adverse events affecting Thais who have taken the vaccine jab.

COVID Vaccines Were Designed to Fail; That’s How They Won Authorization

By Jon Rappoport, January 25, 2022

For the past two years, I’ve been demonstrating that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a fake. It doesn’t exist. Now let’s enter the bubble where people assume the virus is real, and examine a few of the major crimes and contradictions that exist inside that lunatic bubble.

Big Pharma Conglomerate with a Criminal Record: Pfizer “Takes Over” the EU Vaccine Market. 1.8 Billion Doses

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 25, 2022

These shots are NOT vaccines.  They are not meant to protect you against the virus. And why on Earth would you trust a Big Pharma company which has a criminal record? Did you know that?

COVID-19 Booster Mandates in Light of Emerging Evidence of Viral Transmission and Severe Harm. Letter to University Administrators

By Children’s Health Defense, January 24, 2022

It is clear at this point that there is no scientific or public health justification to mandate COVID-19 injections. We now know that none of the available COVID-19 injections are capable of stopping the spread of the virus, especially with respect to the now-dominant variant, Omicron.

Vaccine Mandates for US, Canadian and Mexican Truck Drivers: Disruption of Supply Chains. Food Shortages in Canada

By Brian Shilhavy, January 24, 2022

A COVID-19 mandatory vaccine requirement for all non-U.S. citizens coming across the borders from Canada and Mexico that includes truck drivers went into effect today, Saturday, January 22, 2022.

“Vaccination Is Suicide”, Criminal Forced Vaccinations. Booster Farce Exposed

By Rodney Atkinson, January 24, 2022

The COVID tyranny is on the retreat! The UK Office for National Statistics admits just 6,000 people died of Covid-19 in England and Wales between Feb 2020 and Dec 2021. This is less than the rate of those killed in car accidents.

Alberta Canada Inadvertently Published (and Quickly Deleted) Health Data Exposing that More Than Half of Vaccinated Deaths Have Been Counted as Unvaccinated

By Julian Conradson, January 24, 2022

In yet another absolute bombshell revelation the government of Alberta, Canada exposed itself this week when it accidentally published damning evidence that exposes how the public health authorities have been manipulating the Covid-19 statistics.

Rockets Destroy Ozone and Cause Climate Change – Aerospace Programs’ Deadly Impacts to the Earth

By Nina Beety, January 24, 2022

Since its beginnings, the space industry has used PR, Hollywood, and a parade of stars to carve itself into the public psyche, including targeting children. Aerospace costs have been largely ignored or hidden, but these costs are serious and accelerating.

US Military Supports Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi National Guard. Are US Forces Involved in Combat Operations?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 24, 2022

The influx of US and NATO Special Forces involved in the training of the Neo-Nazi Azov battalion has not been discontinued.  According to the Ottawa Citizen (December 2021) the U.S. Congress in 2018 “banned the use of U.S. funds to provide arms, training and other assistance to the Azov Battalion because of its links to the far-right and neo-Nazis”.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

This article was originally published in September 2020.

We, Belgian doctors and health professionals, wish to express our serious concern about the evolution of the situation in the recent months surrounding the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We call on politicians to be independently and critically informed in the decision-making process and in the compulsory implementation of corona-measures. We ask for an open debate, where all experts are represented without any form of censorship. After the initial panic surrounding covid-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore.

The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good.

We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.

‘A cure must not be worse than the problem’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation. We note, however, that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all sections of the population than the number of people now being safeguarded from corona.

In our opinion, the current corona measures and the strict penalties for non-compliance with them are contrary to the values formulated by the Belgian Supreme Health Council, which, until recently, as the health authority, has always ensured quality medicine in our country: “Science – Expertise – Quality – Impartiality – Independence – Transparency”. ¹

We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.

Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.²

The concept of health

In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment’.³

Health, therefore, is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual. Belgium also has a duty, from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights, to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health. ⁴

The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights. Measures include compulsory wearing of a mask (also in open air and during sporting activities, and in some municipalities even when there are no other people in the vicinity), physical distancing, social isolation, compulsory quarantine for some groups and hygiene measures.

The predicted pandemic with millions of deaths

At the beginning of the pandemic, the measures were understandable and widely supported, even if there were differences in implementation in the countries around us. The WHO originally predicted a pandemic that would claim 3.4% victims, in other words millions of deaths, and a highly contagious virus for which no treatment or vaccine was available.  This would put unprecedented pressure on the intensive care units (ICUs) of our hospitals.

This led to a global alarm situation, never seen in the history of mankind: “flatten the curve” was represented by a lockdown that shut down the entire society and economy and quarantined healthy people. Social distancing became the new normal in anticipation of a rescue vaccine.

The facts about covid-19

Gradually, the alarm bell was sounded from many sources: the objective facts showed a completely different reality. ^{5 6}

The course of covid-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season. As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.

The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture.  This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.⁷

The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of genome is amplified each time. Any contamination (e.g. other viruses, debris from old virus genomes) can possibly result in false positives.⁸

The test does not measure how many viruses are present in the sample. A real viral infection means a massive presence of viruses, the so-called virus load. If someone tests positive, this does not mean that that person is actually clinically infected, is ill or is going to become ill. Koch’s postulate was not fulfilled (“The pure agent found in a patient with complaints can provoke the same complaints in a healthy person”).

Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity, this does not justify the social measures taken, which are based solely on these tests. ^{9 10}

Lockdown

If we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns (Sweden, Iceland …), we see similar curves.  So there is no link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection. Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate.

If we look at the date of application of the imposed lockdowns we see that the lockdowns were set after the peak was already over and the number of cases decreasing. The drop was therefore not the result of the taken measures. ¹¹

As every year, it seems that climatic conditions (weather, temperature and humidity) and growing immunity are more likely to reduce the wave of infection.

Our immune system

For thousands of years, the human body has been exposed daily to moisture and droplets containing infectious microorganisms (viruses, bacteria and fungi).

The penetration of these microorganisms is prevented by an advanced defence mechanism – the immune system. A strong immune system relies on normal daily exposure to these microbial influences. Overly hygienic measures have a detrimental effect on our immunity. ^{12 13} Only people with a weak or faulty immune system should be protected by extensive hygiene or social distancing.

Influenza will re-emerge in the autumn (in combination with covid-19) and a possible decrease in natural resilience may lead to further casualties.

Our immune system consists of two parts: a congenital, non-specific immune system and an adaptive immune system.

The non-specific immune system forms a first barrier: skin, saliva, gastric juice, intestinal mucus, vibratory hair cells, commensal flora, … and prevents the attachment of micro-organisms to tissue.

If they do attach, macrophages can cause the microorganisms to be encapsulated and destroyed.

The adaptive immune system consists of mucosal immunity (IgA antibodies, mainly produced by cells in the intestines and lung epithelium), cellular immunity (T-cell activation), which can be generated in contact with foreign substances or microorganisms, and humoral immunity (IgM and IgG antibodies produced by the B cells).

Recent research shows that both systems are highly entangled.

It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g. influenza and other viruses. This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19. Most of the passengers were elderly and were in an ideal situation of transmission on the ship. However, 75% did not appear to be infected. So even in this high-risk group, the majority are resistant to the virus.

A study in the journal Cell shows that most people neutralise the coronavirus by mucosal (IgA) and cellular immunity (T-cells), while experiencing few or no symptoms ¹⁴.

Researchers found up to 60% SARS-Cov-2 reactivity with CD4+T cells in a non-infected population, suggesting cross-reactivity with other cold (corona) viruses.¹⁵

Most people therefore already have a congenital or cross-immunity because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus.

The antibody formation (IgM and IgG) by B-cells only occupies a relatively small part of our immune system. This may explain why, with an antibody percentage of 5-10%, there may be a group immunity anyway. The efficacy of vaccines is assessed precisely on the basis of whether or not we have these antibodies. This is a misrepresentation.

Most people who test positive (PCR) have no complaints. Their immune system is strong enough. Strengthening natural immunity is a much more logical approach. Prevention is an important, insufficiently highlighted pillar: healthy, full-fledged nutrition, exercise in fresh air, without a mask, stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts.

Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health

Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse.¹⁶

Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences. ¹⁷

The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors. However, sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning, reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health, energy levels, well-being and, in general, quality of life.¹⁸

Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health. ¹⁹

A highly contagious virus with millions of deaths without any treatment?

Mortality turned out to be many times lower than expected and close to that of a normal seasonal flu (0.2%). ²⁰
The number of registered corona deaths therefore still seems to be overestimated.

There is a difference between death by corona and death with corona. Humans are often carriers of multiple viruses and potentially pathogenic bacteria at the same time. Taking into account the fact that most people who developed serious symptoms suffered from additional pathology, one cannot simply conclude that the corona-infection was the cause of death. This was mostly not taken into account in the statistics.

The most vulnerable groups can be clearly identified. The vast majority of deceased patients were 80 years of age or older. The majority (70%) of the deceased, younger than 70 years, had an underlying disorder, such as cardiovascular suffering, diabetes mellitus, chronic lung disease or obesity. The vast majority of infected persons (>98%) did not or hardly became ill or recovered spontaneously.

Meanwhile, there is an affordable, safe and efficient therapy available for those who do show severe symptoms of disease in the form of HCQ (hydroxychloroquine), zinc and AZT (azithromycin). Rapidly applied this therapy leads to recovery and often prevents hospitalisation. Hardly anyone has to die now.

This effective therapy has been confirmed by the clinical experience of colleagues in the field with impressive results. This contrasts sharply with the theoretical criticism (insufficient substantiation by double-blind studies) which in some countries (e.g. the Netherlands) has even led to a ban on this therapy. A meta-analysis in The Lancet, which could not demonstrate an effect of HCQ, was withdrawn. The primary data sources used proved to be unreliable and 2 out of 3 authors were in conflict of interest. However, most of the guidelines based on this study remained unchanged … ^{48 49}

We have serious questions about this state of affairs.

In the US, a group of doctors in the field, who see patients on a daily basis, united in “America’s Frontline Doctors” and gave a press conference which has been watched millions of times.^{21 51}

French Prof Didier Raoult of the Institut d’Infectiologie de Marseille (IHU) also presented this promising combination therapy as early as April. Dutch GP Rob Elens, who cured many patients in his practice with HCQ and zinc, called on colleagues in a petition for freedom of therapy.²²

The definitive evidence comes from the epidemiological follow-up in Switzerland: mortality rates compared with and without this therapy.²³

From the distressing media images of ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) where people were suffocating and given artificial respiration in agony, we now know that this was caused by an exaggerated immune response with intravascular coagulation in the pulmonary blood vessels. The administration of blood thinners and dexamethasone and the avoidance of artificial ventilation, which was found to cause additional damage to lung tissue, means that this dreaded complication, too, is virtually not fatal anymore. ⁴⁷

It is therefore not a killer virus, but a well-treatable condition.

Propagation

Spreading occurs by drip infection (only for patients who cough or sneeze) and aerosols in closed, unventilated rooms. Contamination is therefore not possible in the open air. Contact tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people (or positively tested asymptomatic carriers) are virtually unable to transmit the virus. Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk. ^{24 25}
Transfer via objects (e.g. money, shopping or shopping trolleys) has not been scientifically proven.^{26 27 28}

All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.

Masks

Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven at-risk groups or people with upper respiratory complaints take place, and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting. They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing. Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections. ^{29 30 31}

Wearing a mask is not without side effects. ^{32 33} Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.³⁴

Our Labour Code (Codex 6) refers to a CO2 content (ventilation in workplaces) of 900 ppm, maximum 1200 ppm in special circumstances. After wearing a mask for one minute, this toxic limit is considerably exceeded to values that are three to four times higher than these maximum values. Anyone who wears a mask is therefore in an extreme poorly ventilated room. ³⁵

Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognised safety specialists for workers.

Hospitals have a sterile environment in their operating rooms where staff wear masks and there is precise regulation of humidity / temperature with appropriately monitored oxygen flow to compensate for this, thus meeting strict safety standards. ³⁶

A second corona wave?

A second wave is now being discussed in Belgium, with a further tightening of the measures as a result. However, closer examination of Sciensano’s figures (latest report of 3 September 2020)³⁷ shows that, although there has been an increase in the number of infections since mid-July, there was no increase in hospital admissions or deaths at that time. It is therefore not a second wave of corona, but a so-called “case chemistry” due to an increased number of tests. ⁵⁰

The number of hospital admissions or deaths showed a shortlasting minimal increase in recent weeks, but in interpreting it, we must take into account the recent heatwave. In addition, the vast majority of the victims are still in the population group >75 years.

This indicates that the proportion of the measures taken in relation to the working population and young people is disproportionate to the intended objectives.

The vast majority of the positively tested “infected” persons are in the age group of the active population, which does not develop any or merely limited symptoms, due to a well-functioning immune system.

So nothing has changed – the peak is over.

Strengthening a prevention policy

The corona measures form a striking contrast to the minimal policy pursued by the government until now, when it comes to well-founded measures with proven health benefits such as the sugar tax, the ban on (e-)cigarettes and making healthy food, exercise and social support networks financially attractive and widely accessible. It is a missed opportunity for a better prevention policy that could have brought about a change in mentality in all sections of the population with clear results in terms of public health. At present, only 3% of the health care budget goes to prevention. ²

The Hippocratic Oath

As a doctor, we took the Hippocratic Oath:

“I will above all care for my patients, promote their health and alleviate their suffering”.

“I will inform my patients correctly.”

“Even under pressure, I will not use my medical knowledge for practices that are against humanity.”

The current measures force us to act against this oath.

Other health professionals have a similar code.

The ‘primum non nocere’, which every doctor and health professional assumes, is also undermined by the current measures and by the prospect of the possible introduction of a generalised vaccine, which is not subject to extensive prior testing.

Vaccine

Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.³⁸

Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. ^{39 40} We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.

On a global scale, 700 000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine.⁴¹

If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.

The role of the media and the official communication plan

Over the past few months, newspaper, radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically behind the panel of experts and the government, there, where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication. This has led to a public communication in our news media, that was more like propaganda than objective reporting.

In our opinion, it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible, aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power, with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves.

This view is supported by the journalistic codes of ethics.⁴²

The official story that a lockdown was necessary, that this was the only possible solution, and that everyone stood behind this lockdown, made it difficult for people with a different view, as well as experts, to express a different opinion.

Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed. We have not seen open debates in the media, where different views could be expressed.

We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities, which were and are still being removed from social media. We feel that this does not fit in with a free, democratic constitutional state, all the more so as it leads to tunnel vision. This policy also has a paralysing effect and feeds fear and concern in society. In this context, we reject the intention of censorship of dissidents in the European Union! ⁴³

The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either. War terms were popular and warlike language was not lacking. There has often been mention of a ‘war’ with an ‘invisible enemy’ who has to be ‘defeated’. The use in the media of phrases such as ‘care heroes in the front line’ and ‘corona victims’ has further fuelled fear, as has the idea that we are globally dealing with a ‘killer virus’.

The relentless bombardment with figures, that were unleashed on the population day after day, hour after hour, without interpreting those figures, without comparing them to flu deaths in other years, without comparing them to deaths from other causes, has induced a real psychosis of fear in the population. This is not information, this is manipulation.

We deplore the role of the WHO in this, which has called for the infodemic (i.e. all divergent opinions from the official discourse, including by experts with different views) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship.^{43 44}

We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here!

We demand an open debate in which all experts are heard.

Emergency law versus Human Rights

The general principle of good governance calls for the proportionality of government decisions to be weighed up in the light of the Higher Legal Standards: any interference by government must comply with the fundamental rights as protected in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Interference by public authorities is only permitted in crisis situations. In other words, discretionary decisions must be proportionate to an absolute necessity.

The measures currently taken concern interference in the exercise of, among other things, the right to respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, the right to education, etc., and must therefore comply with fundamental rights as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

For example, in accordance with Article 8(2) of the ECHR, interference with the right to private and family life is permissible only if the measures are necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, the economic well-being of the country, the protection of public order and the prevention of criminal offences, the protection of health or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, the regulatory text on which the interference is based must be sufficiently clear, foreseeable and proportionate to the objectives pursued.⁴⁵

The predicted pandemic of millions of deaths seemed to respond to these crisis conditions, leading to the establishment of an emergency government. Now that the objective facts show something completely different, the condition of inability to act otherwise (no time to evaluate thoroughly if there is an emergency) is no longer in place. Covid-19 is not a cold virus, but a well treatable condition with a mortality rate comparable to the seasonal flu. In other words, there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health.

There is no state of emergency.

Immense damage caused by the current policies

An open discussion on corona measures means that, in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients, we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population. These include damage in the psychosocial domain (increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse)¹⁶ and economic damage.

If we take this collateral damage into account, the current policy is out of all proportion, the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law.

As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.

• We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures.
• We are questioning the legitimacy of the current advisory experts, who meet behind closed doors.
• Following on from ACU 2020 ⁴⁶  we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organisation. It was also at the heart of the fight against the “infodemic”, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media. This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.⁴³

Distribution of this letter

We would like to make a public appeal to our professional associations and fellow carers to give their opinion on the current measures.

We draw attention to and call for an open discussion in which carers can and dare to speak out.

With this open letter, we send out the signal that progress on the same footing does more harm than good, and call on politicians to inform themselves independently and critically about the available evidence – including that from experts with different views, as long as it is based on sound science – when rolling out a policy, with the aim of promoting optimum health.

With concern, hope and in a personal capacity.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

1. https://www.health.belgium.be/nl/wie-zijn-we#Missie
2. standaard.be/preventie
3. https://www.who.int/about/who-we-are/constitution
4. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-rights-and-health
5. https://swprs.org/feiten-over-covid19/
6. https://the-iceberg.net/
7. https://www.creative-diagnostics.com/sars-cov-2-coronavirus-multiplex-rt-qpcr-kit-277854-457.htm
8. President John Magufuli of Tanzania: “Even Papaya and Goats are Corona positive” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=207HuOxltvI
9. Open letter by biochemist Drs Mario Ortiz Martinez to the Dutch chamber https://www.gentechvrij.nl/2020/08/15/foute-interpretatie/
10. Interview with Drs Mario Ortiz Martinez https://troo.tube/videos/watch/6ed900eb-7459-4a1b-93fd-b393069f4fcd?fbclid=IwAR1XrullC2qopJjgFxEgbSTBvh-4ZCuJa1VxkHTXEtYMEyGG3DsNwUdaatY
11. https://infekt.ch/2020/04/sind-wir-tatsaechlich-im-blindflug/
12. Lambrecht, B., Hammad, H. The immunology of the allergy epidemic and the hygiene hypothesis. Nat Immunol 18, 1076–1083 (2017). https://www.nature.com/articles/ni.3829
13. Sharvan Sehrawat, Barry T. Rouse, Does the hygiene hypothesis apply to COVID-19 susceptibility?, Microbes and Infection, 2020, ISSN 1286-4579, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.07.002
14. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30610-3?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867420306103%3Fshowall%3Dtrue
15. https://www.hpdetijd.nl/2020-08-11/9-manieren-om-corona-te-voorkomen/
16. Feys, F., Brokken, S., & De Peuter, S. (2020, May 22). Risk-benefit and cost-utility analysis for COVID-19 lockdown in Belgium: the impact on mental health and wellbeing. https://psyarxiv.com/xczb3/
17. Kompanje, 2020
18. Conn, Hafdahl en Brown, 2009; Martinsen 2008; Yau, 2008
19. https://brandbriefggz.nl/
20. https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/#overall-mortality
21. https://www.xandernieuws.net/algemeen/groep-artsen-vs-komt-in-verzet-facebook-bant-hun-17-miljoen-keer-bekeken-video/
22. https://www.petities.com/einde_corona_crises_overheid_sta_behandeling_van_covid-19_met_hcq_en_zink_toe
23. https://zelfzorgcovid19.nl/statistieken-zwitserland-met-hcq-zonder-hcq-met-hcq-leveren-het-bewijs/
24. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html
25. http://www.emro.who.int/health-topics/corona-virus/transmission-of-covid-19-by-asymptomatic-cases.html
26. WHO https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-we-did-not-say-that-cash-was-transmitting-coronavirus-2020-03-06
27. https://www.nordkurier.de/ratgeber/es-gibt-keine-gefahr-jemandem-beim-einkaufen-zu-infizieren-0238940804.html
28. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-banknotes/banknotes-carry-no-particular-coronavirus-risk-german-disease-expert-idUSKBN20Y2ZT
29. 29. Contradictory statements by our virologists https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K9xfmkMsvM
30. https://www.hpdetijd.nl/2020-07-05/stop-met-anderhalve-meter-afstand-en-het-verplicht-dragen-van-mondkapjes/
31. Security expert Tammy K. Herrema Clark https://youtu.be/TgDm_maAglM
32. https://theplantstrongclub.org/2020/07/04/healthy-people-should-not-wear-face-masks-by-jim-meehan-md/
33. https://www.technocracy.news/blaylock-face-masks-pose-serious-risks-to-the-healthy/
34. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200315/Reusing-masks-may-increase-your-risk-of-coronavirus-infection-expert-says.aspx
35. https://werk.belgie.be/nl/nieuws/nieuwe-regels-voor-de-kwaliteit-van-de-binnenlucht-werklokalen
36. https://kavlaanderen.blogspot.com/2020/07/als-maskers-niet-werken-waarom-dragen.html
37. https://covid-19.sciensano.be/sites/default/files/Covid19/Meest%20recente%20update.pdf
38. Haralambieva, I.H. et al., 2015. The impact of immunosenescence on humoral immune response variation after influenza A/H1N1 vaccination in older subjects. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26044074/
39. Global vaccine safety summit WHO 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJXXDLGKmPg
40. No liability manufacturers vaccines https://m.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20200804_95956456?fbclid=IwAR0IgiA-6sNVQvE8rMC6O5Gq5xhOulbcN1BhdI7Rw-7eq_pRtJDCxde6SQI
41. https://www.newsbreak.com/news/1572921830018/bill-gates-admits-700000-people-will-be-harmed-or-killed-by-his-covid-19-solution
42. Journalistic code https://www.rvdj.be/node/63
43. Disinformation related to COVID-19 approaches European Commission EurLex, juni 2020 (this file will not damage your computer)
44. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30461-X/fulltext
45. http://www.raadvst-consetat.be/dbx/adviezen/67142.pdf#search=67.142
46. https://acu2020.org/
47. https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0049384820303297?token=9718E5413AACDE0D14A3A0A56A89A3EF744B5A201097F4459AE565EA5EDB222803FF46D7C6CD3419652A215FDD2C874F
48. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext
49. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31324-6/fulltext
50. There is no revival of the pandemic, but a so-called casedemic due to more testing.
    https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/crucial-viewing-understanding-covid-19-casedemic1
51. https://docs4opendebate.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/white-paper-on-hcq-from-AFD.pdf

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Americans who cherish our country’s legacy are horrified by our headlong rush to war. America at its best was the very motor of world progress, higher living standards and peace.

That is our true national identity. We betray “the better angels of our nature” by making military threats against those who are advancing world powers, as we once were. We commit suicide when we dishonor historic agreements that keep the world safe from nuclear annihilation.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the U.S. promised Russian leaders that the U.S.-led military alliance known as NATO would not be extended eastward toward Russia. The transatlantic Globalist war-making faction broke this promise. NATO has moved eastward with eight new members, heavily armed and hostile to Russia. The U.S. installed a far-right anti-Russian regime in Ukraine on Russia’s border, and armed them for conflict.

China has been similarly ringed by threatening U.S. fleets and military bases.

Russia and China have made it plain they find this intolerable, and cannot permit it to go further.

The world is hurtling toward the unimaginable horror of nuclear war.

We must look soberly and deeply into U.S. history to see how our nation changed from a force for peace into an aggressive provocateur.

We were industrialized by progressive patriots. They won out against Southern slave-owners and imperial financiers who blocked American progress. The U.S. at its best boosted other nations to technological prowess.

Abraham Lincoln and his allies organized the greatest advances ever made in technology and living standards, and a long era of peace with the world. Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy sought a partnership with Russia to bring peace and a humane existence to all mankind.

America changed course after Kennedy’s murder. We gave up our industries and lost our skills. We gave power to unaccountable Globalist financiers. Their speculation and deindustrialization have bankrupted the Western world. Other powers are now rising who won’t follow Globalist rules into poverty and national suicide.

The gravest danger now comes from America abandoning its own historic mission, which is to elevate the common man. Those who know history are especially challenged to act now, to speak out, so that we may protect the civilization that America at its best did so much to advance.

Over the past half century since Kennedy’s death, the United States, guided by a transatlantic war-making faction, has launched war after war, winning nothing and bringing chaos and suffering to countless millions.

Our greatest past leaders warned that waging aggressive war would destroy our country

George Washington led our Revolution against the British Empire’s invading armies. But as President, Washington sought peace with the world. He warned,

The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred … is a slave to its animosity … which … lead[s] it astray from its duty and its interest. [This hatred] disposes each [country] more readily to offer insult and injury … and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur … The government … makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations has been the victim.”

(Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796)

Abraham Lincoln as a congressman exposed the lies that President James Polk used to justify aggressive war against Mexico. (Lincoln’s “Spot Resolutions,” December 22, 1847). And just before he himself ran for President, Lincoln denounced war-makers as barbarians:

From the first appearance of man upon the earth … the words “stranger” and “enemy” were … almost synonymous. Long after civilized nations had defined robbery and murder as high crimes, and had affixed severe punishments to them, when practiced … upon their own people … it was deemed no offence, but even meritorious, to rob, and murder, and enslave strangers, whether as nations or as individuals … To correct the evils … which spring from want of sympathy … among strangers … is one of the highest functions of civilization.

(Lincoln, speech to Wisconsin Agricultural Fair, September 30, 1859).

As President, leading the defense of the Union against the slave-owners’ attack, Lincoln urged peace with the world:

With malice toward none; with charity for all … let us … do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.

(Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865)

President Franklin Roosevelt organized the United Nations and proposed that world peace and poverty-fighting must be centered on continuing the anti-fascist partnership of the U.S., Russia, Britain and China.

The UN Charter begins,

We the peoples of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war…

This is the bedrock of real human rights, not a phony cover-up for regime-change.

President John Kennedy pulled the USA and Russia away from nuclear catastrophe by a deal that removed U.S. missiles from Turkey in exchange for Russian missiles taken out of Cuba.

Kennedy asked Americans to

re-examine our attitude toward the Soviet Union… the American people [should] not … fall into the same trap as the Soviets, … to see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side, … [with] communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.

No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity. But we can still hail the Russian people for their many achievements—in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage….

[Our] two countries have … [a] mutual abhorrence of war…. [W]e have never been at war with each other. And no nation … ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in … the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives…. A third of the nation’s territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland…

Today, should total war ever break out again … all we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours…. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the Communists’ interest to agree on a genuine peace….

(Kennedy, Commencement Address at Washington University, June 10, 1963)

A pioneering international treaty partially banning nuclear weapons was soon thereafter signed by the U.S., U.S.S.R., and 100 nations.

President Kennedy fired top officials (Allen Dulles, CIA, and Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer, Pentagon) who treacherously sabotaged U.S. peace policy. As he was working to prevent full-scale war in Vietnam, and seeking diplomatic ties with Cuba’s Fidel Castro, Kennedy was murdered.

Martin Luther King risked increased government oppression and even the condemnation of his civil rights allies when he took upon himself leadership of the movement against the Vietnam War.

King’s 1967 New York speech reaches out to us today and calls us to action.

I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours…

Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies… they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism…

The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality…, we will find ourselves organizing [anti-war] committees for the next generation… [We will have war] without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy…

[The] words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable” …

[The] Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch antirevolutionaries….

[We] call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class, and nation … an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind…

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation…

A time comes when silence is betrayal…

(Martin Luther King, Speech at Riverside Church, April 4, 1967)

Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy and King, who inspired America and the world, urge us not to remain silent when humanity’s existence is threatened.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Our thanks to Matthew Ehret for sending us this article.

Historian Anton Chaitkin is the author of Who We Are: America’s Fight for Universal Progress, from Franklin to Kennedy (Volume 1, 2020, Amazon).

Featured image: George Washington (Image by W Kennedy on wikimedia commons)

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

.

.

.

.

Voice? Check. Lyrics? Check. Looks? Ahhhhh. Well, as Marvin Lee Aday, who died on Jan 20 at 74, like to say….Two Out Of Three Ain’t Bad.

The stage name? Meat Loaf. For Crying Out Loud. OK.

How’s this for a pitch in 1977 to record companies for the breakthrough hit, Bat Out Of Hell? It’s a song about a guy on a motorbike crashing, dying, with his heart leaving his body like a bat.

That song will give the album its title, then we’ll have a song about a guy rejecting his girl by telling her there ain’t no way I’m ever going to love you and another about a man who wants to end the relationship and is praying for the end of time so I can end my time with you.

What record producer in their right mind would consider such an outlandish proposal? Remember, this was the late seventies. The Carter presidency. Music was polarized. In the blue corner, disco. In the red, punk. Bruce Sprinsgteen and Queen were fighting the good fight but the dross seemed overwhelming.  Rudely flapping its wings along comes the Bat Out of Hell album with its Wagnerian overtones and sense of Gotterdamerung and an overweight singer named after a dish not known for its gastronomic appeal. T-bone steak, roast lamb, leg of pork, roast potatoes maybe, but Meat Loaf?

After a slow burn, something happened, word of mouth and radio play resurrected it and soon, say 1978, no high school or college dance was complete without a track or two, especially Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad. This was before MTV. It’s still appealing to young and not-so-young romantics with global sales in excess of 40 million and the album sales hit 200,00 a year.

But Meat Loaf was never about commercial success. At first he worked in harmony with songwriter Jim Steinman who died last year aged 73 before he fell out of harmony and then reunited.

Meat Loaf and Steinman gave angst-ridden teens, and I was a card-carrying member of the group, a tutorial in Wagnerian emotion and intensity. Music as theater with more than a hint of opera. Melodramatic? Yes but never schmaltzy. Meat Loaf was aiming not for intelligence but for the heart, for an adrenaline rush. We were teens or in our early 20s. All Reved Up With No Place To Go. Every Saturday night we felt the fever grow. This was soul music but not spiritual and not as we knew it. The frustration, the angst, the pent-up energy. He Took The Words Right Out Of My Mouth.

 

Sure, at times it verged on the ridiculous. I’m Going To Love Her For Both Of Us is utter nonsense. And there is nothing uplifting about Not A Dry Eye In The House.

But when on song, Meat Loaf made music fun. Especially with his use of melodrama. Rock And Roll Dreams Come Through or Life Is A Lemon And I Want My Money Back. Go on listen to them and stop your feet from moving.

Bombastic, certainly but never bullying or threatening. Sad, melancholy at times, especially when he was Left In The Dark.

Never morbid either. Not all the albums worked but when they did, when it all came together, you could imagine angels singing along.

The music wasn’t just for teens He could pack venues with all ages.

Meat Loaf was not for the faint hearted, after all faint heart never won fair maiden. With his music young men became knights of the night.

I first heard him when I was a teenager. Now I am past 60. I have never revved a motorbike’s engine. But he made me feel as if I could.

His voice was the soundtrack to my life. Memories? It’s All Coming Back To Me Now.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Geopolitical analyst Tom Clifford reporting from Beijing. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is licensed under Public Domain

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

For the past two years, I’ve been demonstrating that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a fake. It doesn’t exist. Now let’s enter the bubble where people assume the virus is real, and examine a few of the major crimes and contradictions that exist inside that lunatic bubble.

I wrote and posted this piece while the clinical trials of the COVID vaccine were in progress. It reveals how and why those trials were doomed to fail. They did fail. Since then, nothing has changed.

The vaccine makers DESIGNED a series of clinical trials that, even on their own terms (“the virus is real, fear the virus”) were destined to be a complete flop.

PART ONE:

Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.

They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.

September 22, 2020, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know” [1]:

“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”

“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”

“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”

This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.

They are only designed to show effectiveness in preventing “mild cases of COVID,” which nobody should care about, because mild cases (cough, fever) naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

The leading vaccine clinical trials are useless, irrelevant, misleading, and deceptive.

Now let’s go deeper. Read the next section from the Times piece, and then I’ll make comments.

“The Moderna and AstraZeneca studies will involve about 30,000 participants each; Pfizer’s will have 44,000. Half the participants will receive two doses of vaccines separated by three or four weeks, and the other half will receive saltwater placebo shots. The final determination of efficacy will occur after 150 to 160 participants develop Covid-19…”

Here’s how it works. The vaccine companies are looking for a total of 150 mild COVID cases to occur, combined, in the two groups— those receiving the placebo and those receiving the vaccine. How would that happen? The researchers believe “the coronavirus is spreading everywhere” and it will pounce on some of the volunteers in the clinical trial.

Let’s say that, during the trial, 100 people receiving the placebo develop mild COVID-19, and only 50 people receiving the vaccine develop mild COVID.

The vaccine companies would say, “We just proved the vaccine is 50% effective in preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to do, in order to win emergency authorization from the FDA. Release the vaccine. Inject the world.”

The outcomes for 150 people equal “let’s shoot up seven billion people.” That’s staggering.

But it gets even worse. The magic number of 150 COVID cases? How is a COVID case defined? The authors of the Times piece have the answer:

“In the Moderna and Pfizer trials, even a mild case of Covid-19 — for instance, a cough plus a positive lab test — would qualify and muddy the results. AstraZeneca is slightly more stringent but would still count mild symptoms like a cough plus fever as a case.”

But wait. The NY Times itself recently published an article [2] stating that up to 90% of US COVID cases could very well be false positives—in other words, not cases at all. Why? Because the diagnostic PCR test, as it is performed by many labs, is too sensitive. It registers “positive for COVID” when it shouldn’t.

So, in these vaccine clinical trials, the whole process of determining that “150 people developed COVID-19” is completely unreliable, useless, absurd, and nonsensical. On the one hand, a positive PCR test is unreliable and means nothing. On the other hand, a cough and fever (“mild COVID”) are nothing to worry about, and don’t require a vaccine at all. We’re talking about 150 cases of “who cares.” That’s what the COVID vaccine is designed to prevent.

“So the magic number is 150? That’s the number that will decide the immediate fate of the planet?”

“Of course.”

“And these 150 people, who you say develop mild COVID-19…no one should care, because those symptoms cure themselves, and no vaccine is needed.”

“Correct.”

“And come to think of it, the people receiving the vaccine in the clinical trials could develop symptoms indistinguishable from mild COVID-19, as a result of the effects of the vaccine.”

“Yes, that’s right.”

“But you’re very confident in the success of the vaccine.”

“Indeed.”

“Why?”

“I have to be confident. If we’re exposed as incompetent frauds, our bottom line will take a huge hit. And we’ll wind up in prison.”

“Thank you, sir. And that’s tonight’s news. Make sure you take the vaccine, everyone. It’s vital. This is Fred J Clown, for CBS-NBC-ABC-CNN-FOX-PBS-AP-Reuters and all official news sources East, West, North, and South. The News, brought to you by Venom-X-2, a medicine that has only 463 adverse effects. Ask your doctor if Venom is right for you.”

PART TWO: THE DEVIOUS TRICK:

Now I’m going to go over the vital information again, but this time I’m going to show you how…

The vaccine companies can use the fatal flaw in their protocol design to…

Actually win approval of their COVID vaccine.

Stick with me. This is big.

Only 150 people are needed to make the major clinical trials of a COVID vaccine look like a success.

Out of 30,000 volunteers in a trial, researchers are waiting for 150 people to “come down with COVID-19.” MILD cases. They assume this will happen because they believe the coronavirus is everywhere, and it’ll infect their volunteers.

Of course, their definition of a mild case of COVID-19 is meaningless. Cough plus fever, and a positive PCR test. The test spits out false positives like a rigged slot machine, and the visible mild symptoms could result from flu, polluted air, or too many candy bars.

Nevertheless, the researchers are waiting for a total of 150 people to “catch a mild case of COVID.” When that number is reached, everything stops.

Now comes the big moment. How many of those 150 COVID cases occurred in the group that received the vaccine, and how many in the group that received the placebo shot of salt water?

Let’s say only 50 COVID cases occurred in the vaccine group, and 100 in the placebo group. The researchers pop champagne corks. They say, “Look, the vaccine is 50% effective at preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to win emergency authorization from the FDA.”

BUT suppose 75 cases occurred in the vaccine group and 75 in the placebo group? No good. No good at all. No way to call the vaccine effective.

Now comes the “reshaping of the data.”

HERE WE GO.

The researchers say, “Wait. Thirty of the COVID cases in the vaccine group were REALLY just adverse reactions to the vaccine. They weren’t cases of COVID. You see, the vaccine can cause symptoms that are indistinguishable from mild COVID. Cough, fever, chills. ACTUALLY, there were only 40 cases of COVID in the vaccine group. There were 110 in the placebo group. The vaccine IS effective. We’re good. We’re golden. We can get emergency authorization from the FDA right now to shoot up everybody.”

Vaccine manufacturers HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG that they could pull this trick.

Why leave things to chance?

Why risk a few hundred billion dollars of profit on a random distribution of mild COVID cases among the volunteers in their clinical trials?

The definition of a mild COVID case is EXACTLY what the vaccine manufacturers needed. It enabled them to hatch a plan, to make sure they didn’t fail.

They could pawn off a MILD case of COVID as a reaction to the vaccine. They could fake that without causing ripples. The FDA would say, “The vaccine reactions aren’t serious. All right, no problem. We’ll approve this vaccine for emergency use.”

However…If the manufacturers designed their clinical trial protocol to prevent serious cases of COVID, they would be waiting to see 150 cases of really sick people to occur. That might never happen.

If it did happen, and the manufacturers had to pull their devious switcheroo trick and blame the vaccine for some of these SERIOUS cases…

They would have to tell the FDA that their vaccine was causing life-threatening pneumonia; and the FDA, under a lot of scrutiny these days, would find it very difficult to overlook that.

FDA: “We can’t approve this vaccine. It could cause a few million cases of dire pneumonia…”

The vaccine companies didn’t make a titanic stupid mistake in their protocol design. In gearing the protocol to prevent MILD COVID cases, they did what they did on purpose. It allows them to “reshape their data” and win FDA emergency approval for their vaccine.

These companies have no intention of failing, starting over, and spending a year recruiting 30,000 new volunteers. They want success and money now. They want to win the race.

And they will win, if the truth isn’t known and shared widely.

EPILOGUE:

The punchline.

Every “expert,” in August 2021, is instructed to say the vaccine is definitely protecting people against severe illness and hospitalization. This is their promotional message to the world.

“Yes, even if you’re vaccinated, you could become infected with the virus, you could develop COVID, and you could pass the virus to other people, BUT you must take the shot. It will protect you from becoming severely ill.”

As you can see from what I’ve written above, this is a straight-out lie.

It was always a fantastic lie, from the beginning of COVID vaccine development, because the design of the clinical trials had nothing to do with preventing serious illness.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29^th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Notes

[1] nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/covid-vaccine-coronavirus.html

[2] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

On October 26, 2021 The FDA met to debate the approval of the Pfizer Covid Injection for children. One of the voting FDA members Dr Eric Rubin said: “We’re never gonna learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes… I do think we should vote to approve it,” and they did.

Here’s a 47 second recording of the FDA’s Dr Rubin stating this in the meeting. We agree with the video source’s musical out-take, and we understand how Dr Rubin and the FDA made the criteria for his channel called “Bullshit Man”.

Despite Dr. Rubin’s admission, the panel’s decision ended up being unanimous, with one abstention, in favor of formally recommending Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine for kids 5 to 11 years old under the current emergency use authorization.

They admittedly chose to experiment with children’s lives, on mass. They did this despite the fact that children have statistical zero risk of serious disease or death from covid. The FDA, like others, already knew about the record setting death and harm caused by these injections. So we rightfully accuse them of voting for child sacrifice.  Anyone who still trusts government with their health and their children’s lives, has not been paying attention.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

First published by Global Research on April 27, 2021

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).

***

“Hundreds of millions of people have taken an injection that allows a bio-reactive “gene-therapy” molecule to be injected into their bodies because of fear, ignorance, and a refusal to consider that the people who are promoting this … have ulterior motives.” (Edward Curtin, April 2021)

***

Author’s Note and Update

There is evidence that Pfizer is routinely involved in bribing numerous politicians at the highest levels of  government. 

In turn, draconian governmental measures are being applied which consist in instructing people to take the mRNA  vaccine,  despite ample evidence that this so-called “vaccination program” has already resulted in countless deaths and injuries, most of which are documented by official statistics. 

These shots are NOT vaccines.  They are not meant to protect you against the virus. 

And why on Earth would you trust a Big Pharma company which has a criminal record? Did you know that?  

The media has failed to remind us that in 2009 Pfizer Inc. pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It was “The Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement” in the History of the U.S. Department of Justice. 

And now Pfizer is upheld as a “Reliable Partner” by the President of the European Commission (EU) representing some 450 million citizens in the EU’s 27 countries.

The criminality surrounding the 2020-21 mRNA vaccine far surpasses the 2009 “fraudulent marketing” charges directed against Pfizer.

“Fraudulent marketing” of an illegal and experimental “vaccine” is an understatement.

What is at stake is the outright “Criminalization of the state apparatus” whereby politicians, members of parliament, senior government officials are routinely bribed, coopted or threatened to abide by a diabolical project which is literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide.

In recent developments (September 26, 2021

“The European Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly, the EU’s chief accountability and governance officer, has launched an investigation into the European Commission’s refusal to reveal the content of communications between Ursula von der Leyen and the CEO of an unnamed pharmaceutical company.

 

In April, the New York Times reported that von der Leyen had spent a month exchanging texts and calls with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla as part of negotiations to procure vaccines for the EU. The newspaper cited “personal diplomacy” as having contributed largely in securing the vaccines.”

Corruption and Fake Science

Say NO to the Covid Vaccine. 

Michel Chossudovsky,  September 27, 2021

***

Introduction

On April 14, 2021, the President of the European Commission confirmed that Brussels is negotiating  a contract with Pfizer for the production of 1.8 billion mRNA vaccine doses.

This astronomical figure represents 23 percent of the World’s population. It is exactly four times the population of the 27 member states of the European Union (448 Million, 2020 data). 

This is the largest vaccine project in World history which is accompanied by the imposition of a diabolical “Timeline” on the people of the European Union consisting of recurrent mRNA inoculations over “the next two years and beyond”.

The entire process will be coupled with a relentless fear campaign and the embedded ID vaccine passport, approved by the European Parliament barely a few weeks prior to the EU’s announcement.

The EU Digital Vaccine Passport to be implemented by Pfizer BioNTech is part of  the infamous ID2020 project sponsored by Bill Gates’ Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) “which uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity“.

If this EU contract with Pfizer extending into 2023 were to be  carried out as planned, every single person in the European Union would be vaccinated four times over a two year period (2021-2023).

And bear in mind, at the time of writing, Pfizer’s mRNA (as well as those of its competitors including Astrazeneka, Moderna and J & J) are legally categorized (in the US) as “unapproved” and “experimental products”. They are illegal drugs.

In the US, the FDA in its ambiguous statement  provided a so-called Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, namely “to permit the emergency use of the unapproved product, … for active immunization…” (see below)

A Multi-billion Dollar Bonanza for Pfizer BioNTech

Coinciding with the EU April 14, 2021 historic decision, Pfizer has announced that the price of its vaccine has been hiked up to $23 a dose.

Big Money for Big Pharma. The 1.8 billion doses vaccine project will cost 41 billion dollars, largely to be financed by the creditors of EU member states. The vaccine project will thereby contribute to the spiralling public debt crisis affecting most European countries, which was triggered by the closure of economic activity and the lockdowns in the course of last 13 months.

Meanwhile, Pfizer has extended its global market largely to the detriment of its competitors.

• A contract to supply the US with up to 600 million doses,
• Brazil, approximately 100 million,
• South Africa 20 million doses,
• Philippines, 40 million,
• etc.

The Medium Term: 2021-2023 and “Beyond”. No Return to the “New Normal” once Vaccinated

What is envisaged in the EU is a so-called “medium term” plan extending into 2022/23. Does this “medium term” timeline imply a fourth and a fifth wave?

The “medium term” project will be carried out in liaison with the “Great Reset” proposed by the World Economic Forum. It will most probably be accompanied by lockdown and other restrictive measures. No foreseeable return to the “New Normal” is contemplated:

But let me [President of EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen] also focus on the medium term. ... It is clear that to defeat the virus decisively, we will need to be prepared for the following: … we might need booster jabs to reinforce and prolong immunity; … we will need to develop vaccines that are adapted to new variants; and we will need them early and in sufficient quantities. Having this in mind we need to focus on technologies that have proven their worth. mRNA vaccines are a clear case in point.

Based on all this, we are now entering into a negotiation with BioNTech-Pfizer for a third contract. This contract will foresee the delivery of 1.8 billion doses of vaccine over the period of 2021 to 2023. And it will entail that not only the production of the vaccines, but also all essential components, will be based in the EU.

The negotiations we are launching today [April 14, 2021]– and hope to conclude very rapidly – are a further important step in Europe’s response to the pandemic.

…

I want to thank BioNTech-Pfizer. It has proven to be a reliable partner. It has delivered on its commitments, and it is responsive to our needs. This is to the immediate benefit of EU citizens. ( President of EU Commission)

Reliable Partner? Pfizer’s Criminal Record

There is another dimension, a “can of worms” which the EU does not want to open. The largest vaccine project of an “unapproved drug” is to be implemented by a Big Pharma company which has a longstanding record of bribing medical doctors and public health officials.

Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results. Since 2002 the company and its subsidiaries have been assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards. (Dr Robert G. Evans, National Institutes of Medicine)

To view the C-Span Video Click Screen below 

 

How on Earth can you trust a Big Pharma vaccine conglomerate which pleaded guilty to criminal charges by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) including “fraudulent marketing” and “felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”? 

In this 2009 DOJ Judgment, Pfizer was so to speak “Put on Probation” for a four year period. Pfizer was ordered to enter into “a corporate integrity agreement” with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting as a de facto “Parole Officer”. “That agreement provided for “procedures and reviews to … avoid and promptly detect” (future) misconduct on the part of Pfizer, Inc.

The Killer “Vaccine”

Corporate Integrity? Pfizer BioNTech’s “Fraudulent Marketing” behaviour prevails with regard to the projected 1.8 billion doses of its  “unapproved” “experimental” mRNA COVID‑19  Tozinameran “vaccine”, sold under the brand name Comirnaty.

What we are dealing with is the “fraudulent marketing” of what is best described as a killer “vaccine”.

But in fact, the mRNA “vaccine” which modifies the human genome “is NOT” a vaccine. It is based on gene therapy combined with an embedded ID vaccine passport.

Deaths and Injuries Resulting From the MRNA “Experimental Vaccine”

Is the European Commission intent on edging out Astrazeneka and J & J (on behalf of Pfizer??). Official statements suggest that Pfizer BioNTech will eventually be taking over the entire EU vaccine market.

In early March 2o21, 18 European countries including France, Italy, Germany and Spain decided to suspend the AstraZeneka mRNA vaccine. Astrazeneka was the target of national EU governments, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as well as the EU Commission.

The EU has now confirmed that it will not renew its contracts with J and J and AstraZeneka despite the fact (according to EU and UK data) that the deaths and injuries resulting from the Pfizer BioNTech “vaccine” are much higher than those of AstraZeneka.

Official EU data pertaining to vaccine deaths and injuries  for Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca point to: 3,964 Dead and 162,610 Injuries  (December 27, 2020 – March 13, 2021) 

The Breakdown (Astrazeneka, Pfizer, Moderna)

Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222 (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca: 451 deaths and 54,571 injuries to 13/03/2021

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2, Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 2,540 deaths and 102,100 injuries to 13/03/2021

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 973 deaths and 5,939 injuries to 13/03/2021

UK data also confirms  that the so-called side effects of the mRNA are significantly higher for the Pfizer BioNTech “vaccine” (in comparison with AstraZeneka). See British Government Shocking Report on Side Effects of Corona Vaccines: Strokes, Blindness, Miscarriages

So why are Pfizer’s competitors, namely Astrazeneka and J & J being shoved out of the EU market?

There is War within Big Pharma. 

Concluding Remarks

Amply documented, the vaccine is not required.  There is no pandemic. 

And why would the EU Commission representing 450 million people in 27 countries commit itself to purchasing 1.8 billion doses of Pfizer’s mRNA Tozinameran”vaccine” which at the very outset is known to have resulted in countless deaths and injuries including autoimmune reactions. blood clotting abnormalities, stroke and internal bleeding?

Who is behind this despicable project??

See the Rebuttal of Doctors for Covid Ethics addressed to the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Say NO to the Killer Virus. The EU sponsored Pfizer “vaccine” must be the object of  a coordinated grassroots movement in all 27 member states of the European Union, as well as  Worldwide.

The scientific evidence amply confirms that a Covid-19 vaccine is NOT required. Quite the opposite.

The estimates of so-called covid-19 positive cases are based on the RT-PCR test which according to the WHO’s latest statement (January 20, 2021)  is totally unreliable and which has served to hike up the numbers, while also justifying the need for a mRNA vaccine, which in effect is not a vaccine.

See:The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

While the media will highlight the “Killer virus”, with scanty and contradictory “evidence”, what is at stake is best described as “a killer vaccine”.

Misleading Covid Death Estimates

Moreover, the estimates of Covid deaths used to justify the need for a vaccine are fake. In the US, certifiers have been instructed to indicate the “underlying cause of death” as Covid-19 “more often than not”.

See Covid-19 and the Falsification of Death Certificates: The CDC’s “More Often Than Not” Clause

For a broader review see Michel Chossudovsky’s ten chapters E-Book entitled:

The 2020-21 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. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

This TV Documentary by Pangea featuring Manlio Dinucci and Michel Chossudovsky was broadcast live on the evening of December 31st, 2021 in all major regions of Italy.

***

Crolla l’impalcatura dei dati ufficiali sulla Covid A questa puntata di Grandangolo partecipa l’economista Michel Chossudovsky, direttore di Global Research (Centro di ricerca sulla globalizzazione con sede a Montreal in Canada), visiting professor in Europa, Asia e America Latina, consigliere economico di paesi in via di sviluppo e consulente di diverse organizzazioni internazionali, autore di libri pubblicati in decine di lingue. Rivolgendosi al pubblico italiano, il prof. Chossudovsky, uno degli analisti più impegnati a smascherare le menzogne mediatiche sul Covid e i vaccini, ringrazia Byoblu, il canale televisivo che dice la verità.

La rassegna stampa si apre con una notizia esplosiva, nascosta dal mainstream: il CDC – il Centro statunitense per il controllo e la prevenzione delle malattie – comunica ufficialmente che, dopo il 31 dicembre 2021, ritirerà la richiesta di autorizzazione all’uso del test molecolare RT-PCR per il rilevamento di Covid-19, usato dal febbraio 2020. Il CDC raccomanda di adottare, al suo posto, un metodo che possa “facilitare il rilevamento e la differenziazione dei virus della Covid e dell’influenza”.

Ciò significa che il test molecolare RT-PCR, definito anche dal nostro Ministero della Salute “il gold standard internazionale per la diagnosi di Covid-19”, non è in grado di distinguere in modo affidabile il virus della Covid da quello dell’influenza. Crolla in tal modo l’impalcatura dei dati ufficiali diffusi dall’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità: in circa 2 anni 280 milioni di “casi confermati di Covid-19”, equivalenti al 3,5% popolazione mondiale, tra cui 5,4 milioni di decessi equivalenti al 0,06% della popolazione mondiale, ossia lo 0,03% su base annua. Nonostante ciò, si usano metodi sempre più coercitivi per imporre l’uso dei vaccini, e le principali aziende che li producono – Pfizer, Moderna e BioNTech – realizzano enormi profitti, in continuo aumento.

La puntata di Grandangolo si conclude con un intervento del prof. Chossudovsky su “Natale e Nuovo Anno sotto lockdown”: una sintetica, chiara analisi dell’attacco in corso alla democrazia e delle basi di un fronte internazionale di resistenza.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

Interview questions already answered on 16 June 2021, but interview appeared only in the January / February Geopolitika issue 2022.

“Rudolf Hänsel, renowned scientist in the field of education, graduate psychologist, in an interview with “Geopolitika” magazine ‘Serbs, follow the teachings of Archibald Reiss'”.

Geopolitika: Dear Mr. Hänsel, you are one of the most active German intellectuals dealing with the geopolitical situation in the world. You have been particularly active since the beginning of the so-called Corona pandemic. How do you see the emergence of the corona virus and what is the ultimate goal of the Covid-19 project?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: First of all, I would like to thank you for the appreciation you have shown me. I am glad that the important magazine “Geopolitika” will appear again and that I will have the opportunity to express my personal opinion.

Then two things to clarify: a free thinker never claims to have the truth. For the free mind there is an unlimited number of truths to be discovered and subject to change. What is true is what is not a dogmatic shackle and does not separate people into believers and non-believers or those of other faiths, but rather benefits the coexistence of people and promotes their understanding. In this sense, I am only giving my personal opinion. And as a guest in your country, the dictates of decency forbid me to express criticism of your government’s policies.

Now to your questions: I feel it is my civic duty not to leave political and social developments to politicians alone, but, in the spirit of the Swiss poet and politician Gottfried Keller, to step outside the front door myself to see what’s what.

Despite the rising mood of fear and panic about a possibly deadly virus, I did not fall into an obedience reflex at the beginning of 2020, but discussed what was going on in the world with safe friends. We felt very quickly that something was rotten in the state of Denmark. Since I grew up free of fear, my parents did not demand absolute obedience from me and I was able to study psychology in adulthood with an excellent psychotherapist, a student of Alfred Adler, I retain my common sense even in difficult situations.

Since the civil societies of all countries were the leading victims of the state-imposed deprivation of liberty and other coercive measures, I felt that civil disobedience, vocal protest and genuine solidarity with the victims of state despotism were the order of the day. In countless comments and articles, which are clearly compiled in “Global Research” (www.globalresearch.ca), I have therefore tried to educate my fellow citizens and to encourage them to say no.

The emergence of an invisible and threatening “enemy” in the form of a virus was, according to independent scientists, planned and virtually acted out decades ago by an ultra-rich global “elite” and its institutions, which is why it can be assumed that the virus was deliberately brought among the people by a bio-lab.

The goal of the Covid 19 project should by now be well known to all alert and well-informed citizens. Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos called it “The Great Reset” in his publications.

Geopolitika: Most people do not seem to see the real danger lurking behind the Covid 19 mask, which is the fulfilment of the UN Agenda 2030, whose goal is a monopoly on seeds, food, water, the depopulation of humanity, the abolition of cash, digital man and total control of life. Do you agree with my statement?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: The majority of people who do not have access to alternative media cannot see the danger because of the sinister role of the mass media. These are entirely at the service of their governments, do not publish any dissenting expert opinions, and every day they fuel anew the citizens’ fears of a possibly agonising death by suffocation.

Therefore, as a rational, well-informed and self-thinking person, one can fully agree with your statement.

Geopolitika: As a professional psychologist, can you tell us what consequences the Corona crisis and the political measures taken have for people’s mental health? Are children more affected? Are there statistics on how many people have committed suicide?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: The consequences for the mental health of the people affected are catastrophic and irreparable. In the meantime, not only independent psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors and sociologists report on this, but also government institutions. Depression, exaggerated fears, insomnia, suicidal thoughts and completed suicides are mentioned unanimously.

Our children and young people are particularly hard hit by the inhumane political measures such as social distacing, bans on cultural and sporting leisure activities and digital lessons: Feelings of loneliness, fear of life, increase in computer game addiction and drug use, domestic (also sexual) violence as well as suicidal thoughts and completed suicides were and are the result. I wrote the well-received article “We are killing our children’s souls” on this subject, saying that parents, teachers and educators are complicit if they do not stand up against this lockdown madness.

I don’t know official statistics on this issue because they are not published. But I have read a lot of horror stories from heads of German youth psychiatries.

Geopolitika: From a professional point of view, can you tell us why people around the world are afraid of death because of the virus, even though all the relevant facts show that the mortality rate from the virus is much lower than from, for example, cardiovascular diseases and cancer? Does the mainstream media influence people’s awareness so strongly?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: Yes, that is correct: the mainstream media play a sinister role worldwide. According to national and international agreements, they are obliged to provide truthful information to citizens and to promote peace. They could thus make an important contribution to educating and encouraging people. But the opposite is the case: they are tools and servants of heavy men behind the scene who pull the strings. On their behalf, they stir up irrational fears day after day. This leads to an obedience reflex and mind paralysis in most people. Stirring up irrational fears has been a tried and tested means of discipline and domination since time immemorial.

It is the business of journalists in the mainstream media to distort the truth, bluntly lie, pervert, vilify, grovel at the feet of mammon and sell their own country and people for their daily bread. These journalists are, in a sense, “intellectual prostitutes” (John Swinton). This is why alternative media and independent magazines are crucial in raising the consciousness of the people.

Geopolitika: How do you think the story will end with the Corona pandemic? While the “world’s legal team” led by lawyer Dr. Reiner Füllmich filed lawsuits against the WHO, Bill Gates and all governments involved in the Corona genocide, the “creators of human destiny” announce a new, even more deadly virus wave. So a game without borders?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: The worldwide class action lawsuit of the German lawyer Reiner Füllmich and his qualified team is a great hope for the peoples, because the situation is very serious. But who can predict whether it will succeed in view of the worldwide corruption in all professions.

Furthermore, renowned medical experts report that the gene therapy experiments that have been carried out for some months now with the so-called vaccinations will have a very disastrous effect on the vaccinated people in the following years. As we know, the all-knowing eugenicists are planning to reduce the world’s population.

Also disturbing are press reports in alternative media that the present health dictatorship will be followed by a climate dictatorship – after the Corona lockdown a climate lockdown. The current Corona measures and “newly discovered” virus variants would only be a prelude to what would soon follow. It would indeed be a satanic game without limits. Let us hope for the best.

Geopolitika: You are closely following the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. How do you see this conflict and is it being manipulated by NATO and America to get as close as possible to the borders of the Russian Federation?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: I think that you don’t have to be a historian to see the role that the US-NATO and many European governments have played in the conflict you mentioned since the Ukraine coup in 2014. It is a game of fire. One can only hope (and pray) that this conflict does not degenerate into open war. At any rate, the US-NATO is doing everything it can at the moment to provoke Russia and is crossing “red lines” in the process. How long will Russian President Putin put up with this?

The peoples of Europe do not want a war against Russia. See a “Public Declaration” initiated by me and a friend in the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” (NRhZ) of 8/9 May 2018 in five languages with the possibility to sign: “We Europeans say NO to a war against Russia!”

Geopolitika: Why does the Western world not understand the Slavs, especially the Serbs and Russians? Slavs are even seen as a low race.

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: This is an important question. It would be the task of historians, sociologists, cultural scientists and other experts to scientifically clarify when and why these prejudices against Slavic people and peoples arose. What I can contribute to this question is modest: I believe that it is geopolitical reasons that led to the inhuman prejudices and why they continue to be upheld. The Vatican plays a decisive role in this. Christians within Slavic peoples are in fact viewed and treated quite differently from Orthodox fellow citizens.

As I said, these are prejudices that have nothing to do with reality. But these prejudices have existed for generations and it is high time to erase them from the minds of arrogant Western rulers. The “ordinary” people, in my opinion, do not have them.

Geopolitika: In intellectual circles you are considered to be a person who is very familiar with the political situation in the Balkans, especially in Serbia. How do you see the current geopolitical situation in Serbia? What advice would you give to the Serbian leadership?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: Although I am a friend of the Serbs and have lived here for over a year and a half, I doubt I am familiar with the political situation in your country. Moreover, as a German who was very kindly received in Serbia, it is not for me to give advice to the political leadership. The only thing I can contribute to your question comes from the political testament “Ecoutez, Serbes!” / “Uyjte me, Spbi!” by the Swiss criminologist and university professor Rudolf Archibald Reiss, a great friend of Serbia.

In his appeal of 1 June 1928, Reiss denounced both the politics and the society of Yugoslavia and Serbia because they seemed to him thoroughly corrupt. But he implored the Serbian people: “Do not allow the nation (…) to be enslaved by a handful of criminal profiteers and usurers. (…) Remember your glorious past, the ‘true’ democracy of the peasant community, morality, hospitality and patriotism.”

Geopolitika: How would you evaluate the Serbian people? What are the good and what are the bad sides of the Serbian people?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: I cannot and do not want to evaluate the Serbian people. They are a people like many other peoples. Courageous, full of life and capable of suffering. But one quality stands out: the Serbian people do not moan about their fate – and that distinguishes them very pleasantly from my pampered compatriots and the other Westerners.

Geopolitika: At the end of the interview I would like to ask you how you see the future of the world? Will the satanic agenda of the New World Order and the resetting of the old civilisation continue, or will good prevail as 95% of the world’s population wants – as opposed to the minority who rule from their shadows?

Dr. Rudolf Hansel: As a psychologist and because of my research work as an educationalist, I am convinced that human beings are good and social. The striving for violence and the sick lust for power of a few is the result of their upbringing and the capitalist system. I therefore hope that good will eventually triumph. But this will not happen automatically, that is, without our courageous action.

The greed for power and the desire for violence in society must be reduced and instead community feelings must be cultivated and strengthened. If we muster the courage to give up the fear of authority and the accompanying obedience reflex and make use of our own intellect, then we will associate with our fellow human beings in freedom and build a humane future together with them – for ourselves and our children.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Click here to read the Serbian version. 

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel is a graduate psychologist and educationalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from CODEPINK

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

Once again, the West is spreading fake news and unfounded theses about Russian-Ukraine relations. Now, American, and British officials are claiming that Russia plans to install a new, pro-Russian government in Kiev. As expected, there is no data to support this narrative, being just another unsubstantiated rhetoric with the sole purpose of defaming Russia.

This weekend, the West launched a new kind of anti-Russian narrative. On Sunday, the UK Foreign Office formally accused Moscow of trying to install a pro-Russian government in Kiev. No details were provided on how the British government would have reached such conclusions. There is no information on the investigation methods used or any mention of external sources, which makes the allegations really unjustified.

UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said:

“The information being released today shines a light on the extent of Russian activity designed to subvert Ukraine, and is an insight into Kremlin thinking (…) Russia must de-escalate, end its campaigns of aggression and disinformation, and pursue a path of diplomacy”.

In the same sense, Britain’s deputy prime minister Dominic Raab stated:

“There’ll be very serious consequences if Russia takes this move to try and invade but also install a puppet regime”.

At a later time, the accusations made by the British were endorsed by Washington. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said during an interview to CNN that the US had previously alerted its allies about possible Russian plans similar to those described by the UK. In his own words:

“I can’t comment on specific pieces of intelligence. But we’ve been warned about just this kind of tactic for weeks and we’ve spoken about it publicly. Just last week we sanctioned four Russian agents, Ukrainians in Ukraine, seeking to destabilize the government. This is part of the Russian tool kit. It runs the gamut from a large convention incursion in an attempt to topple the government. It’s important that people be on notice about that possibility”.

Blinken also briefly commented on the measures that would be “necessary” to prevent Russia from continuing to try to operate its plans in Kiev. For him, US sanctions are means of deterring Russia, and must be applied carefully so that they do not lose their deterrent effect. When asked by the interviewer if he could foresee a scenario of American intervention in the conflict, Blinken stated that the possibilities are being analyzed and that the American objective is to make it clear to Russia that there will be serious consequences in the case of failure of diplomatic resolution attempts:

“So when it comes to sanctions, the purpose of those sanctions is to deter Russian aggression. And so if they’re triggered now, you lose the deterrent effect. All of the things that we’re doing, including building up in a united way with Europe massive consequences for Russia, is designed to factor into President Putin’s calculations and to deter and dissuade them from taking aggressive action, even as we pursue diplomacy at the same time (…) We’re building up our defense, we’re building up our deterrence to make sure that Russia understands that if it doesn’t follow the diplomatic course, if it renews its aggression, there’ll be very significant consequences”.

What we are seeing here is no change in attitude on the part of the West. On the contrary, the US and UK continue to use the same tactic they have been using for years: inventing narratives about an alleged Russian threat in order to justify coercive measures, sanctions, military mobilizations and all their interventionist apparatus in Eastern Europe. The only thing that is partially changing is the content of the narrative itself. Until now, Washington and London were concerned with convincing the world that Moscow would attack Ukraine – now the tactic is to say that the Russians will “subvert” Kiev.

This seems like an interesting way of trying to maintain the validity of Western discourse. Global public opinion is less and less confident in the discourse about Russian invasion, considering that year after year, since 2014, this issue remains and so far no invasion has taken place. If public opinion ceases to believe in the existence of a Russian threat, the Western governments’ plans to boycott Moscow are in risk of entering into a crisis of legitimacy. So, it is necessary to renew the speech. The bet now is on spreading the news that Moscow is planning regime change in Kiev.

For now, this new narrative may seem more convincing. In a world marked by color revolutions and regime change operations, it may seem likely that this is the Russian plan for Ukraine. But, as happened with the speech about the invasion plan, this narrative will lose validity with time because Russia will not promote such a change – simply because that is not Moscow’s plan either.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio da Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

From a distance, one gets the impression that this past Friday’s face to face meeting between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, could’ve been done over the phone. Both sides reiterated their differences and announced another meeting, with the Biden administration saying that it’ll soon provide a written answer to the Russian government’s security proposal. 

The Biden-Lavrov get together in Geneva gave the two parties a setting to further highlight their respective views to a world media giving them prime coverage. As expected, the usual slants were put in place in much of the coverage. At the same time, there’s an increased acknowledgement of Russian geostrategic concerns.

On the media bright side, CGTN America featured an informatively diverse panel, with Serhiy Kudelia, Anton Fedyashin, Vladimir Golstein and Lincoln Mitchell. The core views of Fedyashin and Goldstein are typically omitted in the major Western mass media venues.

Over the past weekend, Fedyashin provided excellent insight in a CNN segment. CNN nonetheless remains skewed in an anti-Russian leaning direction. In that CNN segment, Fedyashin sarcastically wonders whether British Intel is using Christopher Steele on the claim of a Kremlin plan to install a pro-Russian Ukrainian government.

I’ve some disagreement with Kudelia’s uncritical reference of a poll saying that 54% of Ukrainian citizens are pro-NATO membership. The Ukrainian NATO membership issue is discussed further down this article. Mitchell’s belief that the situation in Donbass isn’t so much a civil Ukrainian conflict as a Russia-Ukraine dispute is addressed in my commentary of this past December 17.

Speaking from Lviv, Kudelia observes that the majority of Ukrainians aren’t expecting a Russian attack. US President Joe Biden and some others in the West differ. Anti-Russian leaning pro-NATO expansion advocates, tend to be the most enthusiastic believers of an impending Russian strike on Ukraine.

These individuals will use that action as a basis to expand NATO and seek to somehow end the German initiated Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This joint Russo-German project benefits Europe. Utilizing a non-Russian alternative will be more problematical and costly.

Lavrov’s press conference highlights Russia’s differences with Western neocons, neolibs and flat out Russia haters. In his answer to a CNN reporter, the issue is brought up of a nation having the right to choose its own military alliance at the expense of the security of another country.  On CNN, The New York Times’ David Sanger (who is also a CNN contributor) brings up the matter of Ukrainian public opinion on NATO membership, while noting that Ukraine continues to be lacking in democracy.

When mentioned, Western mass media has tended to uncritically reference the survey putting  Ukrainian pro-NATO membership support at 54%. That poll result has been credibly challenged. There’s also a canvass finding a Ukrainian majority opposed to NATO exercises in Ukraine.

Regardless, upon further review, the subject of Ukraine joining NATO exhibits the ongoing differences within the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. If I’m not mistaken, Crimea (reunified with Russia in 2014) and the rebel Donbass area, weren’t included in the 54% pro-NATO membership result. In majority terms, these two territories don’t support the further expansion of NATO.

In Kiev regime controlled Ukraine, there’re noticeable differences. Paraphrasing Volodymyr Ishchenko:

The western part of Ukraine, once affiliated with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, is the most pro-NATO territory of that former Soviet republic. In central Ukraine, there’s a plurality of support for NATO membership. Putting aside central Ukraine and the former Habsburg ruled western portion, the rest of Kiev controlled Ukraine is under 50% in favor of NATO membership.

Concerning the mood in Kiev, I came across a rather interesting conversation.

Kiev regime controlled Ukraine signed the UN approved Minsk Protocol, which supports a negotiated autonomy for the rebel Donbass area. Since then, the Ukrainian government has openly expressed its reluctance to honor that agreement. Ukraine’s democratically challenged status and censoring of pro-Russian sentiment are main obstacles to securing a more stable situation.

The British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss unintentionally gave support to the pro-Russian position in Ukraine, when she said “Ukraine is a proud country with a long history. They have known invading forces before – from the Mongols to the Tatars.” That very same thought applies to Russia which shares a lengthy history of togetherness with Ukraine. Some Brits and others are quite ironic in their historical overview of Russia-Ukraine. That aspect prompted Paul Robinson’s rebuttal to the Scottish UK Defence Minister Ben Wallace.

The same Robinson says that a US State Department report on RT (released about the time of the Lavrov-Blinken meeting) lies about an article of his at that venue. The timing of the report’s release appears to be a further sign of the US government looking to decrease the likelihood of improved US-Russian relations. I trust that Robinson will provide details to substantiate his comment. From the US State Department, I’m reminded of a put mildly misinformative report on the Strategic Culture Foundation and some other venues in August of 2020.

During Lavrov’s press conference, a BBC reporter presented an editorialized question, suggesting Russia was seeking a chaotic situation in Ukraine, for the purpose of coaxing it into a Russian sphere of influence. Lavrov replied by noting how some American elites question the regional alliance of others far away from America’s borders in a most hypocritical way. He noted Blinken questioning the legitimacy of Russian forces being invited into Kazakhstan by the Kazakh government and a prevailing EU mindset that Russian relations in the Balkans should be limited, unlike what Brussels does there.

Lavrov also addressed what’s negatively associated with the spheres of influence term. Specifically, a previous era when empires encompassed vast areas of territory now comprising independent nations.

Realist oriented folks who aren’t in a diplomatic position can be less negative towards the spheres of influence term. On the matter of Lavrov’s exchange with a BBC reporter, I’m reminded of this excerpt from my commentary of this past December 24:

“Many Russians including Putin and other former Soviets, have a reasoned basis to oppose the level of suffering which occurred on account of how the Soviet breakup happened. This belief isn’t by default synonymous with a yearning to recreate the USSR.

Among numerous Russians, the romantic recollection of the past is often balanced by a realistic understanding about the present and most probable future realities running counter to the likelihood of another Soviet Union or Russian Empire. By the way, it’s not as if many mainstream thinking Russians don’t acknowledge the shortcomings of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union.

A key difference is their non-acceptance of the negative inaccuracies pertaining to their nation’s past and present. There’re also the categories of some support and sympathy for the Russian Empire/not as much for the Soviet Union and vice versa – indicative of the diversity level among Russians.

Post-Soviet Russia has formally recognized the independence of the non-Russian former Soviet republics. Keeping in mind the EU and NATO memberships of the three former Soviet Baltic republics, this Russian recognition includes having a noticeable, but not complete sphere of influence approach. That stance is on par with how former colonial powers like France and the UK maintain close economic and/or military ties with some of its onetime colonies.

It’s understandable for Russia to oppose actions which are unnecessarily anti-Russian and premised on misinformation.“

A sphere of influence scenario doesn’t necessarily involve a major power completely dominating others in its near abroad. The economically and militarily Russian allied Kazakh, Belarusian and Armenian governments dominate what goes on in their respective nation. These non-Russian former Soviet republics don’t always agree with Russia.

The post-Soviet period has seen several high profile instances where superior military force was used by the American government on lands far away from the US. American National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said the Biden administration would take decisive action if Russia were to deploy a military presence in Venezuela and/or Cuba.

A more balanced understanding of geopolitics is likely to limit questionable calls for provocation. Over a year ago, the Washington Post ran an article “The Less Americans Know About Ukraine’s Location, the More They Want the US to Intervene“. This dynamic brings into play US government efforts to demean some venues with a viably different perspective. An objectively greater knowledge of issues like the former Soviet Union poses a greater challenge to neocon-neolib leaning foreign policy elites.

I’ve acknowledged media imperfections in Russia. No one is perfect, with the “false equivalency” claim not always being so evident as some suggest.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on Eurasia Review.

Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. 

Featured image: Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken meets with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva, Switzerland, on January 21, 2022. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha/ Public Domain]

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

A COVID-19 mandatory vaccine requirement for all non-U.S. citizens coming across the borders from Canada and Mexico that includes truck drivers went into effect today, Saturday, January 22, 2022.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security confirmed that it will require non-U.S. individuals – including truck drivers – seeking entry into the United States from Canada and Mexico to provide proof of vaccination beginning Saturday, Jan. 22.

“Starting on Jan. 22, the Department of Homeland Security will require that non-U.S. individuals entering the United States via land ports of entry or ferry terminals along our northern and southern borders be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and be prepared to show related proof of vaccination,” Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas said in a news release. “These updated travel requirements reflect the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to protecting public health while safely facilitating the cross-border trade and travel that is critical to our economy.” (Source.)

Canada implemented a similar COVID-19 vaccine mandate for U.S. truck drivers entering Canada last week, and it is already disrupting the supply chains in Canada.

Canada’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers went into effect over the weekend. Now, the United States plans to implement a similar mandate beginning Saturday, Jan. 22.

Each country’s rule prevents unvaccinated or partially vaccinated foreign national truckers from crossing the border. Both rules have been criticized because they could create more supply chain disruptions.

Bloomberg reported this week that Canada’s rule already has led to a surge in produce prices. George Pitsikoulis, president of Montreal-based distributor Canadawide Fruits, told Bloomberg that the cost of transporting produce out of California and Arizona to Canada jumped 25%. In addition, a recent Wall Street Journal article stated that two-way trade in merchandise goods between the United States and Canada totaled more than $600 billion in 2019. It is estimated that about 80% of those goods moved on trucks.

The rules could lead to a significant reduction in truckers willing to cross each country’s border. The American Trucking Associations estimates that about half of truck drivers have not received the COVID-19 vaccine. According to an OOIDA Foundation survey from April 2021, about 75% of OOIDA’s members who responded said they didn’t plan to receive the vaccine.

Canada’s rule requires American truck drivers to be fully vaccinated before crossing into Canada. (Source.)

Besides higher prices, food shortages have also been reported in Canada this past week.

Overwhelmed supply chains and truck driver shortages worsened when Canada imposed new border mandates prohibiting unvaccinated American truckers. With low vaccination rates among US drivers, Canadian supermarkets are already reporting rising food inflation and shortages of certain products, according to Bloomberg.

Canada’s vaccine mandate for truckers came into effect on Saturday. The new rule requires US truckers to be vaccinated to cross the border. We warned earlier this week such a mandate would have “consequences.”

The vaccine mandate has exacerbated the shortage of truck drivers and made wait times at border crossings even longer. Eighty percent of trade between the US and Canada is transited by truck. America exports about 90% of Canada’s fruits and vegetables during the winter season. As shipments decline because only about half of US truck drivers are vaccinated, grocery stores report shortages.

“We’re seeing shortages,” said Gary Sands, senior vice president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers. “We’re hearing from members they’re going into some stores where there’s no oranges or bananas.’”

Source.

Canadian truck drivers protested earlier this week at a Manitoba border crossing.

Defiant Canadian truckers are protesting the federal government’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate today after the federal government flip-flopped on reversing the policy last week.

A rolling protest by a transport convoy at the Manitoba border crossing has already led to major delays for travellers hoping to cross into the US.

@TissenTobias

According to one driver, trucks are blocking all lanes at the border as they slowly follow a circular route along Hwy. 75 while blasting horns in opposition to the federal government.

“Truck drivers are circling MB-75 between Emerson Duty Free and the Commercial Inspection station blocking all lanes heading south to the United States and Northbound traffic coming from the USA,” Jamie Throp told Global News. (Source.)

A Canadian truck convoy, The Convoy For Freedom 2022, has started with Canadian truck drivers from all parts of Canada heading to the Canadian capital in Ottawa for a rally next Saturday, January 29, 2022. There is a Gofundme page setup to solicit funds for the truck drivers to help with their expenses in driving to Ottawa, and it has already raised more than $1.6 million.

A group of truckers is planning to drive across the country to protest a federal vaccine mandate in Canada’s capital.

The first leg of the convoy, dubbed The Convoy For Freedom 2022 , is set to leave B.C. on Sunday. Convoy organizers plan to arrive in Ottawa on Jan. 29, where truckers from other provinces will join.

“I know a lot of drivers who are impacted by this. It has basically removed them from the workforce,” B.C. truck driver Colin Valentim told the Vancouver Sun .

Valentim will lead the B.C. leg of the convoy taking the western route and expects to be accompanied by others along the way. Two other convoys have different starting points: The eastern route is to begin on Jan. 27 in Enfield, Nova Scotia. The southern route will leave on the same day from Windsor, Ont.

A Go Fund Me page for the cause has raised more than ($1.6 million) to help with food, lodgings and fuel for the truckers.

“We are taking our fight to the doorsteps of our Federal Government and demanding that they cease all mandates against its people,” wrote Go Fund Me organizer Tamara Lich. “Small businesses are being destroyed, homes are being destroyed, and people are being mistreated and denied fundamental necessities to survive.”

The decision for Canadian truckers to meet in Ottawa to protest the vaccine mandate comes as the industry struggles with issues , such as disruptions to the supply chain and a shortage of drivers.

The federal vaccine mandate could result in a loss of 12,000 to 16,000 cross-border commercial drivers, according to the Canadian Trucking Alliance. (Source.)

There is as of now no vaccine mandate for truck drivers entering Mexico, but depending on how strict they are at the Mexican borders on enforcing the U.S. mandate on Mexican truck drivers, this could have devastating impacts on the U.S. economy.

The top imports from Mexico are:

1. Machinery & Electrical 

Over one fifth (22%) of U.S. imports from Mexico are classified as machinery and electrical products—items like televisions, household appliances, and smartphones. Mexico is a major manufacturing hub for some of the largest global brands, including Samsung. The South Korean electronics giant sources much of its Amazon-bound inventory from Querétaro.

2. Chemicals & Allied industries

Chemical products make up nearly 15% of U.S. imports from Mexico in 2020. This includes household staples like soap, garden fertilizer, and multivitamins.

Some of the world’s largest brands source their chemical products from Mexico. Colgate, for example, imports its toothpaste from Monterrey.

3. Vegetable Products

Just over 10% of the U.S.’s 2020 imports from Mexico are classified as vegetable products.  A broad category, Vegetable Products includes plant products like fresh-cut flowers, dried fruit, and an Amazon staple: roasted coffee beans.

Beloved by caffeine lovers, Mexican beans account for much of the global supply of coffee, including 60% of the world’s organic coffee.

Source.

The top imports from Canada are:

1. Crude oil and petroleum

Canada’s largest export to the U.S., by far, is crude oil with the vast majority coming from Alberta’s oil sands to the Western and Southern U.S.

2. Vehicles

Combining the large and medium-sized passenger vehicle categories, car exports make up approx. 13% of Canadian exports. Canada’s automobile-related exports are a legacy of the Auto Pact under which American car companies set up plants in Canada and parts were shipped back and forth across the border.

3. Natural gas

Like oil, most of the natural gas is produced in Alberta. Using a similar distribution pattern as oil, Canadian exports go from Alberta into the Western and Southern U.S.

4. Potassium chloride

Potassium chloride is found in potash, which is used to make the world’s fertilizers. Saskatchewan is the second largest producer of potash in the world.

5. Gold

Canada is a major exporter to the U.S. of non-monetary gold – bullion, powder or any other semi-manufactured form. It does not include watches or jewelry. Although the United States is a net exporter of gold, much of its production depends on higher prices for gold to make it profitable.

6. Wood

Canada is the United States’ main supplier of wood.

Source.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from WOKE Guru

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The deaths and injuries following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines” continue at an unprecedented rate as we now enter the second year of their “emergency use authorization.”

The U.S. Government updated their Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database today, and there have now been 1,053,830 cases of deaths and injuries reported to VAERS following COVID-19 experimental vaccines since they were given emergency use authorization in December of 2020. (Source.)

By way of contrast, there have been 914,393 cases of deaths and injuries reported to VAERS following all FDA-approved vaccines since VAERS started in 1990, through the end of November, 2020, the last month before the COVID-19 vaccines were authorized for emergency use. (Source.)

There have been more deaths, more permanent disabilities, and more hospitalizations following the experimental COVID-19 vaccines, than there have been following all FDA-approved vaccines for the previous 31 years COMBINED.

This is the most censored news in the United States, and it is based on the U.S. Government’s own statistics.

Infanticide and Sterilization

The update to VAERS released today also shows that there have been 3,306 fetal deaths reported following COVID-19 vaccines since they were given emergency use authorization in December, 2020. (Source.)

By way of contrast, there have been 2,493 fetal deaths reported following all FDA-approved vaccines for the previous 31 years. (Source.)

Will these women ever be able to conceive children again?

This is all information coming directly from the Government’s own VAERS database maintained by the CDC and FDA. Any member of the public can access this information and confirm that it is true.

The United States is run by criminals who are allowing these shots to continue, and they are all guilty of mass murder.

And these numbers, as horrible as they are, do not take into account the fact that very few vaccine adverse events following COVID-19 injections are ever reported. Most doctors and healthcare professionals do not even know that VAERS exists, and there is tremendous pressure put on them not to report these deaths and injuries, as it obviously affects the sales of Big Pharma.

When you take into consideration the unreported factor in VAERS, we see that about 400,000 people died in 2021 following these experimental shots. See: 2021: COVID Deaths Increase, Flu Deaths Disappear, 400,000+ More Total Deaths than 2020

What’s Going on in England? Mandates Canceled

This week, Boris Johnson announced that the British Government was scrapping COVID-19 vaccine passports and facemask requirements.

This announcement has caught everyone by surprise in the Alternative Media, wondering just what is behind this announcement.

It would have been one thing if arrests had been made for mass murder, and a statement had been made admitting guilt to allowing this to go on so long, but that is not the reason Boris Johnson gave to end these mandates.

He credited the British people for doing a good job in getting their boosters and obeying the mandates.

This makes us all wonder, what are they planning next? What is really going on here?

COVID-19 Vaccine Authorizations: Criminal Intent from the Start

Jon Rappoport published a great piece today showing how the criminal intent of approving these “vaccines” has been present from the start.

*

 

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

[1] nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/covid-vaccine-coronavirus.html

[2] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The COVID tyranny is on the retreat! The UK Office for National Statistics admits just 6,000 people died of Covid-19 in England and Wales between Feb 2020 and Dec 2021. This is less than the rate of those killed in car accidents. And for that the Government closed down the entire economy with catastrophic bankruptcies, suicides, loss of income and pensions and closed hospitals resulting in untreated cancer and other deadly conditions and the release of hospital patients into care homes where record deaths occurred from covid infections.

In response to a freedom of information request the Office for National Statistics has admitted that just 6,183 people actually died of Covid-19 in England and Wales between February 1st 2020 and 31st December 2021, exposing the 150,000 death toll as an extraordinary (but long reported on Freenations) lie.… See this.

This was not a real pandemic. Even taking the completely flawed definition of a COVID death (both the American CDC and the British Office for National Statistics are now admitting they have been fraudulent), Infection Survival rates have been extremely high. As of 3/12/2021

 

Disastrous vaccination programme

Deaths following vaccination in the USA, UK and EU have now reached some 50,000 with millions of adverse reactions, half of them serious. In the UK the evidence is surely now incontrovertible – that the rise and fall in UK vaccination levels produces the rise and fall in COVID infections.

Between 10th December and 21st December the booster daily rate rose by 125%. This was followed by a 142% increase in cases between 21st December and 4th January.

The reverse has also proven to be the case for as the booster rate fell by 85% between 21st December and 3rd January so there followed a big fall of 67% in COVID cases between 4th January and 16th January.

There has been a further rise in booster take up between 2nd January (111,000 per day) and 8th January (235,000) which produced a rise in infections between 16th January (74,494 infections) and 19th January (108,069 infections) – another direct linkage!

Nor can the Government claim a saving of lives for since the booster programme started on 1st October daily deaths doubled between 14th October and 8th January.

NHS forced vaccinations

As the deadline for NHS “frontline” staff to be vaccinated looms it is worth recording not only the many conventions, declarations and standards of international medical practise which forbid compulsory or coerced vaccinations but also the recent statement

from the World Health Organisation “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.”

But we know that the vaccines prevent neither infection nor infectiousness and recent statistics from the UK Government demonstrate that by weeks 49 to 52 of 2021 all age groups which have been triple vaccinated show an immune system performance far inferior to the unvaccinated (between 7% and 60% according to age group).

Other statistics from the UK Health Security Agency Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 42 Page 13 show covid cases in the vaccinated between 27% and 124% higher than the unvaccinated. COVID cases:

The UK’s Office for National Statistics admit a large increase in deaths among 15-19 year old males since vaccination was rolled out for that age group.

• May-Dec, 2020: 257 deaths
• May-Dec, 2021: 402 deaths (of which 2 deaths were due to covid)

There are thousands of immunology experts, researchers and medical practitioners who know these dangers and reject the vaccination programme. In a great embarrassment for the British Government an NHS doctor was filmed telling the Health Secretary why he would not be vaccinated.

In the light of this evidence and the quite clear statements of the Council of Europe, UNESCO, the Geneva Convention and the Nuremberg Code politicians who press ahead with the compulsory vaccinations for health care staff are courting serious legal liability – in addition to the thousands of doctors and nurses who will resign rather than be vaccinated (they have witnessed too many deaths and too much suffering among those who have been vaccinated).

Australian dictatorship proves a disaster

Australian politicians have instituted some the most draconian and anti democratic controls and vaccine mandates on their people – and yet 69% of New South Wales  hospitalisations are of the vaccinated and the post vaccination deaths have reached an historic peak.

Australia’s vaccine fanatics have certainly been proven wrong. Since the rapid increase in the Australian’s vaccination programme in the latter part of 2021 covid infections rose from 31,000 on 15th July to over 2 million on 21st January (a 6,600% increase). A familiar pattern in other countries as readers of Freenations will know from past posts. But a pattern the vaccine fanatics and criminal political and media establishments ignore, deny and censor!

Worldwide vaccine deaths and injuries

The above table, while it may contain duplicates also gives figures which (as the table rightly notes) could be between 1% and 10% of the actual figures. It is very time consuming to fill in a VAERS (USA) or Yellow Card (UK) report and doctors are busy. And those who die after vaccination in their own homes are often reliant on their grieving relatives to 1. link the death with the vaccine and 2. persuade doctors to make a report.

Foetal deaths and airline pilot deaths

In the USA up to 31st December 2021 3,147 foetal deaths were recorded following COVID vaccinations among pregnant women or women who became pregnant shortly after receiving a vaccination. This is certainly also a big under -reported number. 

It has been well established that the vaccines have caused abnormalities in women’s menstrual cycle and the tragic deaths of pregnant women or their babies are well documented. See this.

One of the many tragic deaths was reported by Stephanie Dias Whitmore who received a Pfizer 1st Dose 13th September, 2nd Dose 4th October 2021 and her perfectly healthy baby up to that point died on 9th October from a blood clot in the brain. See this.

“Giving a still birth to my daughter was one of the most traumatic things I have experienced in my life and I would never wish this upon anyone. I have asked my friends to please think twice if you are pregnant, from someone who believed this was the right thing to do, I never thought this would happen”

Also in the USA the life assurance industry has observed a big increase in the death rate among the 18- 64 age group. They say the 40% rise is unprecedented. Unlike politicians and medical professionals life insurance companies actually suffer financially when deaths occur and their entire business requires constant actuarial assessment of the probability of death. See this.

The head of Indianapolis-based insurance company OneAmerica said:

“We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica,” the company’s CEO Scott Davison said during an online news conference this week. “The data is consistent across every player in that business.”

“and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica. Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”

One of the biggest compulsory vaccination programmes in the USA was for airline pilots. As a result hundreds have died: – see the table. As with otherwise healthy young footballers collapsing and dying this is no coincidence.

Taking vaccine is suicidal says French court

NO wonder a French Court has ruled that taking a COVID vaccination which results in death is a suicide (and therefore the insurance company did not have to pay out on the policy of the insured!)

The Insurance company refused to pay out because the taking of experimental drugs, treatments, etc., is excluded from the policy. The judge said 

“the experimental vaccine side effects are publicised and the deceased could not claim not to have known about them when he voluntarily took the jab. There is no law or mandate in France (at the time) which forced him to be jabbed. Therefore, his death is essentially suicide”.

And Suicide is of course excluded from his policy. See this.

Triple vaccinated far worse immunity than unvaccinated

As mentioned above UK deaths are far more likely to occur among the triple vaccinated with the immune systems of the vaccinated massively underperforming the immune systems of the unvaccinated (see final column)

See this.

Booster farce

There have been many (unreported on the msm) examples of the deaths of footballers, pregnant women, babies and those vaccine fanatics who have attacked the unvaccinated but have then died after their own vaccination. Recently on Brazilian television Rafel Silva a presenter collapsed and was taken to hospital, having received his booster some days before. The TV presenter boasted on social media that he had received the COVID booster shot. “Long live the Third dose. I’m sorry for people who don’t have this opportunity. Vaccines save Lives.”

See this.

Fewer UK calls for boosters now

There have been far fewer calls by politicians to get Booster jabs recently. Perhaps they are becoming aware of the catastrophic results of those boosters which have produced a big rise in cases and have resulted in more deaths than before they started, rising from 127 deaths per day at the end of September to 438 deaths per day by the 18th January.

Now even the EU Drugs Regulator is warning about Boosters: “Boosters compromise the immune system. Repeated boosters are dangerous.”

See this.

Gradually the whole conduct and claims of the medical and political authorities are beginning to unravel. The fanatics are on the retreat. Biden has lost two important cases taken against forced vaccination. Johnson is radically reducing COVID restrictions, there are several well documented and expert supported cases reaching the national and international courts naming leading medical regulators, Governments and doctors as defendants.

Now the reckoning! The globalist corporatist authoritarians who have exploited the virus for purposes of political and economic hegemony are at last on the defensive. They must be pursued and prosecuted.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In yet another absolute bombshell revelation the government of Alberta, Canada exposed itself this week when it accidentally published damning evidence that exposes how the public health authorities have been manipulating the Covid-19 statistics.

After seemingly realizing what it had just done, the corrupt Canadian province quickly scrambled to delete the incriminating data off their website, but, thanks to internet sleuths like Twitter user Metatron – and his substack post, we have the receipts.

After… pic.twitter.com/WpBCCx4Aew

— Metatron (@mdccclxx) January 15, 2022

According to its latest Covid-19 update, the Alberta Government admitted to following the fraudulent standard that was in use by vaccine manufacturers during clinical trials – which is to ignore the adverse outcomes, including Covid infection, hospitalizations, and deaths, for fourteen days after vaccine administration – no matter how many doses they have had.

But instead of just ignoring the cases like the vaccine manufacturers, the corrupt Alberta government has been lumping them in with the unvaxxed.

In other words, anyone who was infected – was hospitalized – or even died, in the two weeks following their first, second, or even THIRD dose would be recorded as an unvaccinated case.

And now, thanks to the now-deleted data, we can tell exactly how many cases have been fraudulently manipulated by inadvertently including the time from dose to infection for each of the events – and as it turns out, over half of the vaccinated deaths were added to the unvaccinated.

THanks to Substack author Metatron for exposing this information.

As illustrated in the chart below, almost 56% of ‘recorded’ Covid-related deaths among the vaccinated occurred within 14 days of vaccination – and almost 90% within 45 days, which is noteworthy because that is what’s claimed to be the timeframe of the vaccine’s effectiveness.

And another illustrated by the number of deaths.

As for hospitalizations, the numbers aren’t that much better. Almost half of the severe cases among the vaccinated happened within the two-week window, meaning they were tallied as unvaccinated in the official record.

80% of which occurred within the first 45 days post-vaccination.

And again in total case numbers.

Overall, the data showed that Covid infections post-vaccination also followed a similar trajectory.

However, the percentage occurring in the first two weeks was lower than hospitalizations and deaths, checking in at 40% – which seemingly contradicts the approved narrative that the vaccines are extremely effective at preventing severe cases as opposed to mild ones.

Even if you cede the fact that the prioritizing of the sick and elderly in the beginning is a contributing factor to the heightened deaths over hospitalizations, and subsequent hospitalizations over cases, the experimental vaccine doesn’t seem to have done much at all to protect those people, as Metatron points out in his Substack thread:

“I guess it could be possible that the excess hospitalizations over cases and deaths over hospitalizations could be subject to prioritization of the sick but I don’t think it really matters. It’s the sick that needed protection anyway, not the healthy! And if it didn’t improve [the] outcome for the sick then what exactly is the point??”

It has long been assumed that the US and others around the world have been fudging the data just like the Canadian Government has been doing. If this is the case, it is yet another evil human rights violation to add to the docket in the Nuremberg 2.0 trials.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from GP

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

Since its beginnings, the space industry has used PR, Hollywood, and a parade of stars to carve itself into the public psyche, including targeting children. Aerospace costs have been largely ignored or hidden, but these costs are serious and accelerating.

The ozone layer in the sky continues to deteriorate despite international action such as the ban on CFCs. The Antarctic ozone hole is becoming permanent year-round, and the soothing green and blue on NASA’s maps actually signifies low ozone levels.1 The aerospace industry is a major factor in this problem. Dallas etal. (2020): [O]zone depletion is one of the largest environmental concerns surrounding rocket launches from Earth.”2 Why?

1. Rockets’ radical emissions cause immediate, almost total ozone destruction for hundreds of square miles and which lasts days.3

2. Rockets’ exhaust and pollutants introduced into the stratosphere persist there and react with and destroy ozone over the long term.4

3. The sun creates the ozone layer by changing oxygen into ozone in the stratosphere. But rockets put pollutants such as exhaust, water vapor, black carbon, and fuel components such as alumina into the stratosphere, blocking the sun’s rays. This reduces the sun’s creation of ozone, reducing ozone layer repair and replenishment. The long-lived rocket byproducts persist in the stratosphere for 3-5 years,5 and accumulate with every rocket launch, decreasing ozone regeneration with each launch.6

4. The shockwave of de-orbitting debris, satellites, and rockets creates nitric oxide which destroys ozone.7

There is no environmental oversight. Researchers including Martin Ross, Darin Toohey, and James Vedda have repeatedly warned the industry,8 but the industry and governments are escalating space funding and programs instead.

Prior to 2021, 2000 satellites were in orbit around the Earth. Then in 2021, 2800 satellites were launched — more than doubling the total in just one year.9 However, the FCC has approved 17,270 low-earth-orbit (LEO) satellites. 65,912 more LEO applications are pending. Governments and private companies plan an additional 30,947+. Rwanda has applied to the ITU for a staggering 327,320 satellites (Firstenberg, 2022). These numbers don’t include systems fewer than five satellites, geostationary, or medium earth orbit (MEO) satellites, or rockets into space.

These programs will acceleratingly destroy the ozone layer which is essential to protect the Earth and life.10 NASA discovered in 2007 that UV-C and UV-B were already reaching the Earth and failed to act.11 UV radiation is having lethal effects on species now.

LEO satellites are very short-lived, lasting 5-7 years; the U.S. military plans 3-year duration satellites. These LEOs need frequent replacement via rocket launch.

Aleksandr Dunayev of the Russian Space Agency said in 1991: “About 300 launches of the [space] shuttle each year would be a catastrophe, and the ozone layer would be completely destroyed.”12

Science author Arthur Firstenberg says: “In 2021, there were 146 orbital rocket launches to put 1,800 satellites into space. At that rate, to maintain and continually replace 100,000 low-earth-orbit satellites, which have a lifespan of five years, would require more than 1,600 rocket launches per year, or more than four every day, forever into the future.”13 That’s over five times the amount to totally destroy the ozone layer.

The long-lived rocket pollution in the stratosphere also traps Earth’s natural and human-made heat under a rapidly thickening blanket, preventing the heat from venting into space. This will increasingly raise Earth’s temperature.14 This has nothing to do with carbon or methane. However, the increased heat will release methane stored in permafrost and formerly ice-covered regions, and this methane will poison Earth.

These satellite systems are largely intended for 4G/5G global Wi-Fi, military warfighting, and the Internet of Things. They exponentially increase RF-EMF radiation levels in the atmosphere and on Earth. This radiation damages health and causes environmental damage. It damages neurology, DNA, cell membranes, the brain, cognition, learning, memory, immunity, reproduction and fertility, blood, and mitochondria, dysregulates hormones, the blood-brain barrier, and sleep cycles, and causes cancer, stroke, heart attacks, and oxidative stress.15

It disrupts wildlife’s ability to navigate and orient by Earth’s natural EMF fields. Bees, insects, and birds are particularly vulnerable.16 The U.S. Department of Interior warned in 2014 about the devastating impacts to birds from this radiation.17 In 2020, a 5G military/SpaceX “live fire” drill killed up to millions of birds in the Southwest.18 Western governments and the FCC ignore the substantial research showing devastating impacts.

What a disaster.

Another problem: dead spacecraft and debris are rapidly accumulating in the sky, creating collision hazards for other rockets, satellites, and the space stations.19 Every collision creates more debris, leading to more collisions. Unstoppable chain-reaction collisions – Kessler Syndrome — are inevitable. It is increasingly difficult to navigate through these debris fields.

High rates of satellite failure leave dead, unmaneuverable satellites in orbit. The new large constellations will dramatically worsen this problem.20

All of this debris, computers, electronic and chemical waste, radioactive elements, weapons, dead satellites, rocket parts, and dust come down. Aerospace officials and agencies, including the FCC,21 talk nonsense about “disposal” via “safe” de-orbitting and vaporization, as if the waste simply disappears.

The reality is that de-orbitting and vaporization create new problems — exploding burning debris, aerosolizing toxins, metals, paints, fuels, and other chemicals. They fall into the lower atmosphere to pollute the soil, ocean, waters, and air we breathe. “Vaporized” means it explodes into tiny particles and dust.

With these large constellations of short lifespan, increasing failures, and launch rocket debris, a barrage of debris and fall-out and increasing atmospheric dust are just beginning.

All of this debris burns at very hot temperatures as it re-enters the atmosphere, with big and little chunks landing everywhere.22 Exponential increases in fall-out increases the risk for fires, injuries, deaths, and property damage. A large chunk of space debris fell into a Michigan family’s yard and just missed hitting anyone.23 Hot debris fell in Chile last year causing fires.24 A Russian satellite that was supposed to stay in orbit for ten thousand years fell out of orbit this month and possibly landed in the Pacific Ocean.25

In 2020, the FCC proposed an “acceptable” casualty rate of 1 in 10,000 from falling satellites and rockets.26 The FCC also discussed liability and indemnity. However, any liability depends on debris being attributable to a company or government. Otherwise, injured parties would likely have limited or no recourse.

Direct land, air, and ocean pollution from dumping, rocket liftoffs, launch pad runoff and accidents, is another terrible problem.27

No one is discussing this.

The US also wants to put nuclear power into space 28 — reactors in the sky — and awarded a major contract to a team that includes GE, the company which engineered the flawed Fukushima reactors.29 Rockets can explode at launch, malfunction after launch, or fail to reach orbit. This last happened with SNAP 9-A in 1964. As a result, 2.1 pounds of plutonium-238 “vaporized in the atmosphere and spread worldwide… Dr. John Goffman …concluded that the dispersed deadly plutonium-238 was a leading cause of the increase in cancers around the world today.”30 There have been other space nuclear accidents. Officials don’t seem to care.

The militarization of the atmosphere, space, and the moon risk World War III — another problem. 5G in space will control weapons systems on Earth and in the ocean, 31 including military sonar already responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of dolphins, whales, and other marine animals.32 Elon Musk/SpaceX in partnership with the US government has endangered Chinese astronauts by getting too close to their space station.33 Musk is the same man who advocates nuking Mars and saying the U.S. can coup whatever country it wants for rare earth minerals such as lithium.34 The military and its contractors are not guided by responsible, calm leaders. The worst is already happening.

Add to that accelerating plans to exploit, extract, militarize, and privatize the sovereign moon which stabilizes Earth’s rotation and climates, creates the tides, and is essential to all life, as I detailed in my previous article.35 Who’s protecting the moon and the Earth?

Military conquest, profiteering through extraction, mining, tourism, and exploitation are the main goals driving the expenditure of public monies and private investment, not pretty space pictures or neutral, scientific “exploration”. The plutonium ecocide of Saturn by the space industry via the Cassini probe should have been a wakeup call to pull the plug on NASA and the aerospace industry before more planets are destroyed including the Earth.

Subsidizing this industry has caused a brain drain into its high-paying jobs, neglecting and hampering work on Earth’s urgent problems. And the aerospace industry has siphoned off billions in public funds that could fund solutions, while causing expensive environmental problems to be dealt with “later”. The $10 billion dollar Webb telescope is one recent example. Decisionmakers are dashing headlong toward the mirage of a new Gold Rush.

It’s time to strip back the curtain and reveal the protected astronauts, aerospace moguls, and rocket scientists. They are not heroes. They are destroying the Earth. The joy rides of William Shatner and Jeff Bezos were sickening.

Those who want to stop climate change and protect the ozone layer must halt the space programs including space tourism and military programs.

Those who would protect the environment must stop these programs and do it now.

This is common sense. This is about Earth protection. This is about growing up.

Stop the rockets. Defund the space programs. Protect the Earth now.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Nina Beety is an investigative writer and public speaker on foreign policy, the environment, and wireless radiation hazards. Her reports for public officials on Smart/AMI utility meters are on her website www.smartmeterharm.org. She lives in California.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Notes

1 https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/

https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/monthly/monthly_2022-01_SH.html

https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/monthly/monthly_2022-01_NH.html

NASA ozone watch

2 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620302560 (abstract)

The environmental impact of emissions from space launches: A comprehensive review, J.A. Dallas, S. Raval, J.P. Alvarez, Gaitan, S. Saydam, A.G. Dempster, Journal of Cleaner Production, May 10, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120209

3 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14777620902768867#abstract).

Martin Ross , Darin Toohey , Manfred Peinemann & Patrick Ross (2009) Limits on the Space Launch Market Related to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion, Astropolitics, 7:1, 50-82, DOI: 10.1080/14777620902768867

The emissions[Four Main Propellant Types] presented in Table 1 cause prompt and deep ozone loss (approaching 100%) in the immediate plume wake, caused by the radical emissions, over areas of hundreds of square miles lasting several days after launch. These stratospheric ‘‘ozone mini-holes’’ have been well observed in situ by high altitude aircraft plume sampling campaigns.

4 ibid.

Beyond the prompt plume wake ozone destruction, second order processing of rocket combustion products occurs during the weeks and months after launch. The plumes are transported and mixed into the global stratosphere and lose their identity as distinct air masses. This intermediate mesoscale phase would be characterized by complex plume-atmosphere interactions among radicals, reservoirs, and sinks. Significant influences from alumina or soot particles are expected, possibly involving the creation of new H2O related particles. The details of this processing will be highly variable according to altitude and even time of day of launch and certainly has a large influence on the steady-state global ozone loss. A few chance observations of aged plumes confirm the importance of the mesoscale processing. No studies have been done on this aspect of rocket emissions. [emphasis added]

https://www.space.com/38884-rocket-exhaust-space-junk-pollution.html

Leonard David (2017) Spaceflight Pollution: How Do Rocket Launches and Space Junk Affect Earth’s Atmosphere?

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/NASA-commercial-companies-planning-more-rocket-14499074.php

As NASA and others launch more rockets, effects on Earth remain a mystery, Oct. 8, 2019

5 https://spacenews.com/op-ed-time-to-clear-the-air-about-launch-pollution/

Martin Ross and James Vedda, Time to clear the air about launch pollution, July 3, 2018

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17287062/rocket-emissions-black-carbon-alumina-particles-ozone-layer-stratosphere

Loren Grush, Why it’s time to study how rocket emissions change the atmosphere, May 31, 2018

6 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000160/abstract

Martin Ross and Patti Sheaffer (2014) Radiative forcing caused by rocket engine emissions, Earth’s Future. January 23, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013EF000160

7 https://www.space.com/6720-space-littering-impact-earths-atmosphere.html

Leonard David (2009) Space Littering Can Impact Earth’s Atmosphere

8 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14777620902768867#abstract).

Martin Ross , Darin Toohey , Manfred Peinemann & Patrick Ross (2009) Limits

on the Space Launch Market Related to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion, Astropolitics, 7:1, 50-82,DOI:10.1080/14777620902768867

https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2018-05/RocketEmissions_0.pdf

Martin Ross and James A. Vedda, The Policy and Science of Rocket Emissions, April 2018

9 https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/441449-Low-Earth-Orbit-Satellites.pdf

441,449 Low Earth Orbit Satellites Operating, Approved and Proposed, Arthur Firstenberg. January 2022

10 https://file.scirp.org/pdf/ACS_2016012714284145.pdf

Anwar, F., Chaudhry, F.N., Nazeer, S., Zaman, N. and Azam, S. (2016) Causes of Ozone Layer Depletion and Its Effects on Human: Review. Atmospheric and Climate Sciences, 6, 129-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/acs.2016.61011

11 www.globalresearch.ca/the-moment-of-truth-has-come-what-now-threat-to-life-on-planet-earth-ozone-dying-and-the-deadly-ultraviolet-cosmic-radiation/5637864

Claudia von Werlhof, The Moment of Truth Has Come! What Now? Threat to Life on Planet Earth; Ozone Dying and the Deadly Ultraviolet Cosmic Radiation, April 25, 2018

12 New York Times, May 14, 1991, cited in http://stopglobalwifi.org/OpenLettertoMedicalOrganizations.html

Global Union Against Radiation Deployment from Space (GUARDS) letter to World Medical Association, February 16, 2016

13 https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/441449-Low-Earth-Orbit-Satellites.pdf

Arthur Firstenberg, 441,449 Low Earth Orbit Satellites Operating, Approved and Proposed, January 2022

14 https://www.space.com/38884-rocket-exhaust-space-junk-pollution.html

Leonard David (2017) Spaceflight Pollution: How Do Rocket Launches and Space Junk Affect Earth’s Atmosphere?

15 ibid.

www.mdsafetech.org Physicians for Safe Technology

www.bioinitiative.org Bioinitiative Report

www.emfscientist.org EMF Scientist

www.saferemr.com Electromagnetic Health

www.magdahavas.com Dr. Magda Havas, includes archives of Dr. Zorach Glaser

http://stopglobalwifi.org/OpenLettertoMedicalOrganizations.html

Global Union Against Radiation Deployment from Space (GUARDS) letter to World Medical Association, February 16, 2016

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8425056

James C. Lin, Clear Evidence of Cell-Phone RF Radiation Cancer Risk. Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MMM.2018.2844058

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8866792?fbclid=IwAR3MWQz4T-jY38uLDEmwRotW2LAOr6PVlvo5YgG_aVvuSg2fIr2r5MFARF4

Lin JC. The Significance of Primary Tumors in the NTP Study of Chronic Rat Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation [Health Matters]. IEEE Microwave Magazine. 20(11):18-21. Nov 2019. DOI:10.1109/MMM.2019.2935361.

https://www.saferemr.com/2018/11/NTP-final-reports31.html

Joel Moskowitz, National Toxicology Program analysis

Robert C. Kane, Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette: A Historical and Scientific Perspective, 2001

16 https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ki_beesbirdsandmankind_screen.pdf

Birds, Bees and Mankind: Destroying Nature by Electrosmog, Ulrich Warnke

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56948-0.pdf

Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey Bees

17 http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf

Department of Interior, Comments on FirstNet to Department of Commerce, Feb. 7, 2014

18 https://www.investors.com/news/spacex-starlink-impressed-air-force-in-big-live-fire-exercise/

SpaceX Starlink Impresses Air Force Weapons Buyer In Big Live-Fire Exercise

https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/starlink-airforce

U.S. Air Force Acquisition Chief is impressed by SpaceX Starlink’s performance during Live-Fire exercise

https://emrabc.ca/?p=18023

https://smartmeterharm.org/2022/01/19/hundreds-of-thousands-if-not-millions-of-birds-died-during-2020-u-s-air-force-5g-exercise-new-mexico/

‘Unprecedented’: Birds mysteriously dropping dead across southwestern U.S.

“It’s just terrible,” NMSU biologist Martha Desmond told CNN. “The number is in the six figures. Just by looking at the scope of what we’re seeing, we know this is a very large event, hundreds of thousands and maybe even millions of dead birds, and we’re looking at the higher end of that.”

19 https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/gjicl/vol40/iss2/8/

Meghan R. Plantz, Orbital Debris: Out of Space, 40 Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 585 (2012).

https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/441449-Low-Earth-Orbit-Satellites.pdf

441,449 Low Earth Orbit Satellites Operating, Approved and Proposed, Arthur Firstenberg. January 2022

https://www.space.com/6720-space-littering-impact-earths-atmosphere.html

Leonard David (2009) Space Littering Can Impact Earth’s Atmosphere

www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risky-rush-for-mega-constellations/

Jonathan O’Callaghan, The risky rush for mega constellations, October 31, 2019

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/JD094iD01p01047

Zolensky, M.E., D.S. McKay and L.A. Kaczor (1989) A ten-fold increase in the abundance of large solid particles in the stratosphere, as measured over the period 1976-1984. The Journal of Geophysical Research, 94, D1, 1047-1056.

Representative chemical, structural, and morphological analyses of the large (>1 μm diameter) solid particles from three impaction collection surfaces have been performed. These collections sampled the stratosphere at approximately 17–19 km in altitude during 1976, 1981, and 1984…This rise in solid particle number density for the stratosphere over the collection period is likely due to the influx of solid rocket exhaust and rocket and satellite debris into the atmosphere in increasingly larger amounts with time. Some of this material is shed from spacecraft during ascent through the atmosphere, but the majority is probably provided during the descent of material from Earth’s growing belt of debris in low Earth orbit.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/17/space-junk-raise-concerns-as-more-and-more-satellites-are-launched.html

Arjun Kharpal, Space companies are racing to beam web access to the entire planet. But ‘space junk’ is a big worry, February 16, 2020

www.scientificamerican.com/article/relentless-rise-of-space-junk-threatens-satellites-and-earth/

Jonathan O’Callaghan, SpaceX’s Starlink could cause cascades of space junk, May 13, 2019

www.law360.com/technology/articles/1314044/satellite-cos-want-fcc-to-reconsider-space-junk-rules

Nadia Dreid, Satellite Cos. Want FCC to Reconsider Space Junk Rules, September 28, 2020

“Once in orbit, the debris can move seven times faster than a bullet, according to NASA.”

20 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/relentless-rise-of-space-junk-threatens-satellites-and-earth/

Jonathan O’Callaghan, The Risky Rush for Mega-Constellations, 2019

“My concern with these big constellations is the [overall] failure rates,” says Glenn Peterson, a senior engineering specialist at the Aerospace Corporation near Los Angeles. “If a satellite fails, they can’t bring it down any more.” In its own filing with the FCC, Amazon was asked to project the potential collision risk of its Project Kuiper constellation if up to 15 percent of its satellites failed, a high but not unfathomablenumber. U.S.-company Iridium Communications, which launched a constellation of 95 satellites into orbit in the 1990s, found that 30 percent of those satellites failed. If 15 percent of Amazon’s satellites failed in orbit, the company has estimated a 17 percent chance that one of them would collide with a piece of space debris—potentially breaking apart to create more space debris and raise overall collision risks.

21 Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 35 FCC Rcd 4156 (2020). 20-54

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-54A1.pdf

22 Meghan R. Plantz, Orbital Debris: Out of Space

Example: “…in 1997, parts of a U.S. launch vehicle, including a 450 pound stainless steel propellant tank, ruptured upon impact close to a farmer’s house in Georgetown, Texas. Other parts from the launch vehicle landed around Texas and Oklahoma, such as the titanium helium-pressurized sphere that

landed 100 miles away in Seguin, Texas.

23 https://web.archive.org/web/20201111231536/https://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-space-selfie-satellite-crash-lands-michigan-property-2019-10

Samsung’s ‘Space Selfie’ satellite made a crash landing on a Michigan couple’s property, 2019

24 https://www.space.com/fireballs-fall-on-chile.html

Falling Fireballs Crashed in Chile Last Week. They Weren’t Meteorites, Experts Say.

25 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/a-failed-russian-rocket-stage-crashed-to-earth-in-an-uncontrolled-reentry-into-the-atmosphere-over-the-pacific/ar-AASuKeM?ocid=msedgntp

26 https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-54A1.pdf

FCC Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 20-54, IV. Section E Casualty Risk Assessment, p. 81-82. including on cumulative risk for constellations of satellites:

“One approach could be a safe harbor similar to some of the concepts described above, wherein a system satisfying a 1 in 10,000, or other risk metric system-wide would satisfy the safe harbor threshold, such that no further analysis of risk would be required We seek comment on this safe harbor approach and a reasonable risk metric for a safe harbor.”

The following section on indemnification is very revealing about companies’ desire to avoid responsibility for damage.

27 https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/NASA-commercial-companies-planning-more-rocket-14499074.php

As NASA and others launch more rockets, effects on Earth remain a mystery, Oct. 8, 2019

28 http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2021/02/our-opposition-remains-dangers-of.html

Bruce Gagnon, Our opposition grows: Dangers of launching nukes into space, Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Feb. 15, 2021

29 https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/USNC_Tech_team_wins_contract_to_develop_nuclear_thermal_propulsion_system_for_NASA_999.html

USNC-Tech team wins contract to develop nuclear thermal propulsion system for NASA

30 http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2021/02/our-opposition-remains-dangers-of.html

31 See Global Network Against Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space www.space4peace.org

https://www.investors.com/news/spacex-starlink-impressed-air-force-in-big-live-fire-exercise/

32 https://stop5ginternational.org/smart-ocean-impacts-of-technology-on-marine-life/

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2021/12/rf-emf-5g-iout-internet-of-underwater-things-vs-whales-and-ocean-mammals-activist-artist-russell-wray.html

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2021/12/solstice-2021-a-whale-of-a-story-scientist-warns-of-5g-iout-damage-to-ocean-life.html

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2021/12/emf-rf-5g-internet-of-underwater-things-devastation-to-whales-is-warning-us.html

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2021/11/emf-rf-5g-thanksgiving-addressing-past-colonialization-our-militarized-present-and-the-future-underwater-internet-of-things-part-3-of-3.html

33 https://www.newser.com/story/314981/china-spacex-satellites-have-almost-collided-with-our-space-station.html

China Angry With Elon Musk Over Space Near-Misses

34 https://www.opednews.com/articles/We-will-coup-whoever-we-w-by-Rainer-Shea-CIA_Coup_Repression_Trump-200728-602.html

Rainer Shea, “We will coup whoever we want”: U.S. imperialism’s friendly mask slips off. Op-Ed News, July 27, 2020

35 https://www.globalresearch.ca/who-protecting-moon/5712564

Nina Beety, Who’s Protecting the Moon, Global Research. May 15, 2020

Featured image is from NASA Ozone Hole Watch

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Five years following a potentially catastrophic incident that could’ve inundated Islamic State’s former capital Raqqa and many towns downstream Euphrates River in eastern Syria and caused more deaths than the deployment of any weapon of mass destruction, the New York Times has finally mustered enough courage to report [1] that at the height of US-led international coalition’s war against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, US B-52 bombers struck Tabqa Dam with 2,000-pound bombs, including at least one bunker-busting bomb that fortunately didn’t explode.

In March 2017, alternative media was abuzz with reports that the dam was about to collapse and entire civilian population downstream Euphrates River needs to be urgently evacuated to prevent the inevitable catastrophe. But the US national security establishment had issued a gag order to mainstream media “not to sensationalize the issue.” The Times deserves a pat on the back for bringing the facts to the light, albeit five years too late.

The bombshell report notes that the dam was contested between US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and the Islamic State. A firefight broke out in which SDF incurred heavy casualties. It was then that a top secret US special operations unit called Task Force 9 called for airstrikes on the dam.

“The explosions on March 26, 2017, knocked dam workers to the ground. A fire spread and crucial equipment failed. The flow of the Euphrates River suddenly had no way through, the reservoir began to rise and authorities used loudspeakers to warn people downstream to flee.

“The Islamic State group, the Syrian government and Russia blamed the United States, but the dam was on the US military’s ‘no-strike list’ of protected civilian sites, and the commander of the US offensive at the time, then-Lt. Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, said allegations of US involvement were based on ‘crazy reporting.’”

It’s worth noting that it was the same rogue Pentagon General Stephen J. Townsend, currently the commander of US AFRICOM and then the commander of Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) – Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) responsible for leading the war against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, who was responsible for another reckless confrontation an year later that brought two global powers engaged in the Syrian conflict almost to the brink of full-scale war.

On February 7, 2018, US B-52 bombers and Apache helicopters struck a contingent of Syrian government troops and allied forces in Deir al-Zor province of eastern Syria that reportedly [2] killed and wounded scores of Russian military contractors working for the Russian private security firm, the Wagner Group.

The survivors described the bombing as an absolute massacre, and Moscow lost more Russian nationals in one day than it had lost during its entire military campaign in support of the Syrian government since September 2015.

Washington’s objective in striking Russian contractors was that the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – which is mainly comprised of Kurdish YPG militias – had reportedly handed over the control of some areas east of the Euphrates River to Deir al-Zor Military Council (DMC), which was the Arab-led component of SDF, and had relocated several battalions of Kurdish YPG militias to Afrin and along Syria’s northern border with Turkey in order to defend the Kurdish-held areas against the onslaught of the Turkish armed forces and allied Syrian militant proxies during Ankara’s “Operation Olive Branch” in Syria’s northwest that lasted from January to March 2018.

Syrian forces with the backing of Russian contractors took advantage of the opportunity and crossed the Euphrates River to capture an oil refinery located to the east of the Euphrates River in the Kurdish-held area of Deir al-Zor.

The US Air Force responded with full force, knowing well the ragtag Arab component of SDF – mainly comprised of local Arab tribesmen and mercenaries to make the Kurdish-led SDF appear more representative and inclusive in outlook – was simply not a match for the superior training and arms of the Syrian troops and Russian military contractors, consequently causing a carnage in which scores of Russian nationals lost their lives.

A month after the massacre of Russian military contractors in Syria, on March 4, 2018, Sergei Skripal, a Russian double agent working for the British foreign intelligence service, and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on a public bench outside a shopping center in Salisbury. A few months later, in July 2018, a British woman, Dawn Sturgess, died after touching the container of the nerve agent that allegedly poisoned the Skripals.

In the case of the Skripals, Theresa May, then the prime minister of the United Kingdom, promptly accused Russia of attempted assassinations and the British government concluded that Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a Moscow-made, military-grade nerve agent, novichok.

Sergei Skripal was recruited by the British MI6 in 1995, and before his arrest in Russia in December 2004, he was alleged to have blown the cover of scores of Russian secret agents. He was released in a spy swap deal in 2010 and was allowed to settle in Salisbury. Both Sergei Skripal and his daughter have since recovered and were discharged from hospital in May 2018.

In the aftermath of the Salisbury poisonings in March 2018, the US, UK and several European nations expelled scores of Russian diplomats and the Trump administration ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle.

In a retaliatory move, Russia also expelled a similar number of American, British and European diplomats, and ordered the closure of American consulate in Saint Petersburg. The number of American diplomatic personnel stationed in Russia drastically dropped from 1,200 before the escalation to 120 now, and the relations between Moscow and Western powers reached their lowest ebb since the break-up of the former Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in December 1991.

A month after the Salisbury poisonings in March 2018, an alleged chemical weapons attack took place in Douma, Syria, on April 7, 2018, and Donald Trump ordered a cruise missile strike in Syria on April 14, 2018, in collaboration with the Theresa May government in the UK and the Emmanuel Macron administration in France.

The strike took place little over a year after a similar cruise missile strike at al-Shayrat airfield on April 6, 2017, after an alleged chemical weapons attack in Khan Sheikhoun, though both the cruise missile strikes were nothing more than a show of force, and the alleged chemical weapons attacks were at best dubious, as subsequently reported by credible sources.

But the fact that out of 105 total cruise missiles deployed in the April 14, 2018, strike against a military research facility in the Barzeh district of Damascus and two alleged chemical weapons storage facilities in Homs, 85 were launched by the US, 12 by the French and 8 by the UK aircrafts demonstrated the unified resolve of the Western regimes against Russia that could’ve escalated into Third World War between two global powers, a doomsday scenario far more frightening than the collapse of Tabqa Dam on Euphrates River.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petro-imperialism.  He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. 

Notes

[1] A dam in Syria was on a ‘no-strike’ list. The US bombed it anyway: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/20/us/airstrike-us-isis-dam.html 

[2] Russian toll in Syria battle was 300 killed and wounded: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-crisis-syria-russia-casualtie/russian-toll-in-syria-battle-was-300-killed-and-wounded-sources-idUKKCN1FZ2EI

Featured image is from TruePublica

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Worldwide Walkouts Continue Across the Globe

European Parliament Members call on you: Join Protest for Freedom and Democracy in Brussels on January 23

Keep Showing Up Strong to Defeat the Mandates!

“Defeat the Mandates: An American Homecoming” on January 23 in Washington, D.C. aims to unite all citizens in reclaiming individual liberties and democratic principles

• Lyrics by: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
• Music Produced by: Dicky Barrett
• Performed by: Grant Ellman, Prezence Music
• Video Produced by: Children’s Health Defense, Brian Burrowes, Dicky Barrett, Aimee Villella McBride
• Footage Courtesy of: Oracle Films, Matt Veligdan, Souls of a Movement

Join Children’s Health Defense (CHD) this Sunday at 11:30 a.m. Eastern at the Washington Monument and march to the Lincoln memorial. Stand united to protest all government mandates. United we stand and in peace we march.

Participants from all walks of life will be attending, regardless of political affiliation, race, ideology or vaccination status. We will gather to peacefully protest and march together in unity to restore democracy, reclaim our civil liberties and say NO to mandates.

Speaker highlights include Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Del Bigtree, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Ryan Cole, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, Steve Kirsch, Dr. Christina Parks, Dr. Paul Alexander, Dr. Richard Urso, Attorney Tricia Lindsay, Kevin Jenkins, Rev. Aaron Lewis, Rabbi Epstein, Tramell Johnson, Jo Rose (Jo Speaks Truth), Lara Logan, Angela Stanton King, Chris Martenson, Kwame Brown, Trahern Crews and many more!

Comedian JP Sears will emcee the event.

Musical performances will also be a part of the event, featuring Jimmy Levy and Hi-Rez the rapper, Five Times August, and Matt Brevner.

Tens of thousands have already registered to be here on this historic day. Learn more and make your plans to stand together to Defeat the Mandates. Spread the word, share on social and encourage those in your community to make their plans to be in Washington DC. Buses are now available for same-day, roundtrip transportation to DC from multiple states. Check back often as more buses will be added.

The goal of the march is to peacefully protest vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, COVID vaccines for children, and censorship. Participants will be marching in support of informed consent, natural immunity, and the doctor/patient relationship which should exist independent of government interference.

In addition to objecting to COVID vaccine mandates on democratic principle, many are also expressing concern about the safety of these shots citing that as yet another reason to protest mandates. The latest data from the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) reveals 1,033,994 adverse events following COVID vaccination including 21,745 deaths.

“The rise of tyranny can only be stopped if Americans rise up against it while they still have enough freedom left to do so,” said CHD president and general counsel Mary Holland. “We encourage all who can be in Washington on January 23rd to stand in peace and unity with us. Once governments take away the rights of individuals, they are nearly impossible to regain.”

Defeat the Mandates: An American Homecoming. CHD will livestream the event on CHD.TV.

Help spread the word! Access our promotional assets for Defeat the Mandates — including the four images below and more — to share on your social media.

Listen to the message from our Chairman, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. above on why it’s critical to join us in Washington, D.C.

Keep Showing Up Strong in 2022!

Help others engage in the movement. Share information with compassion, empathy, and an open heart to bring others to the right side of history.

We at Children’s Health Defense are calling on advocates everywhere including our state and international chapters, coalition partners, affiliates and all of humanity to peacefully assemble and actively engage with your state elected representatives to stand against mandates.

Our elected officials need constant reminders that they work for the tax paying citizens of this country and that many of us, if not the majority, want choice when it comes to what goes on and in our bodies.

These representatives must see our faces, hear our voices and know that we demand choice when it comes to our healthcare decisions. Parents and individuals should make these decisions, not the government. The tyranny ends when We the People stand up!

Here’s how you can keep Showing up Strong in 2022:

1. Find the date for the start of your state’s 2022 legislative session. If your state hasn’t commenced the new session yet, be prepared to be at your statehouse on day one and bring your friends.
2. Organize and invite local groups and community members to show up at your statehouse and to meet with your elected representatives. Collaborate with as many groups as possible within your community who are concerned with health freedom. We have strength in numbers!
3. Create promotional graphics for Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram with our free design templates to promote your event and get the word out!
4. If you are planning a rally, be sure to share the information with CHD to be featured on this Worldwide Walkouts page and our Community Calendar.
5. Visit our Advocacy Hub to download, print and share educational handouts and postcards with your community and elected officials. Here is some helpful guidance for interacting successfully with legislators.
6. Engage in polite dialogue with your local board of education members, school administrators, county executives, department of health officials, mayors and other local elected officials on this critical cause. Request meetings and attend in small groups, be prepared to share information and educational materials and advocate for health choice in your community. Review your school district’s approved Health & Safety plan. These are public reports that you can check to see whether the American Rescue Plan Act and COVID grants your school may be receiving are driving mandates in your district.
7. Download, print and share our new stickers and join the “Stick to the Truth” campaign. Post them in high traffic, high-exposure public areas such as community bulletin boards and utility poles to share important truth-based messages to counter the propaganda.

Never has there been a more important time to fight back and protect our rights to stop this tyranny and government overreach.

Be a defender of truth, freedom and health. Let’s keep SHOWING UP STRONG in 2022!

Find Your State’s Legislative Session Start Date

We know many states are battling mandates for masks and the COVID vaccine. And the legislative session will be upon us in just a few weeks where states like New York, California, Louisiana, Washington, DC and others will attempt to pass bills making the COVID vaccine mandatory for school-aged children. New York and California are crucial states so we ask that if you are in or around those areas that you show up to support in addition to the rallies in your home state.

States shown in red are key battleground states!

These states are not in regular session in even-numbered years

Get full session information from MultiState.us.

Join Us for Upcoming Worldwide Walkouts!

Worldwide Walkouts are demanding a return to freedom and democratic principles. Citizens around the globe are protesting illegal mandates and tyrannical government overreach. Every man, woman and child is important to this movement.

This grassroots initiative is ongoing as we organize and connect activists around the globe to execute coordinated acts of peaceful non-compliance and civil disobedience. Check back often for dates and events near you.

“No government in history has ever surrendered power in the absence of a demand. We need to tell these governments and their friends in the technocracy, the Silicon Valley billionaire boys club, the mainstream media, and the pharmaceutical industry that we will no longer tolerate their trampling of citizens’ rights.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD Board Chair and Lead Counsel

All times are local to each event. Follow the links for more information.

January 22

• CANADA: Freedom Rally in Vancouver, BC, 12:00pm- graphic
• CA: Freedom Rally in Oakland, 1:00pm – graphic
• NC: Worldwide Walkout in Hayesville, 2:00pm, Herbert & Main

January 23

• DC: Defeat the Mandates – An American Homecoming, 11:30am – website
• CA: Defeat the Mandates Rally in Sacramento, 11:00am – graphic
• CO: Defeat the Mandates Rally in Denver, 1:00pm – website
• FL: Defeat the Mandates Rally in Ft. Lauderdale, 11:00am – Facebook event
• MT: Defeat the Mandates Rally in Bozeman, 9:30am – Gallatin County Court House
• OH: Defeat the Mandates Rally, 12:00pm in Defiance, Ohio

February 1

• OR: Salem Rally for Medical Freedom, 11:00am – web page

Recently Past Events

January 15

• MA: March – Massachusetts Says NO, 11:00am – event web page

January 10

• IA: Freedom Rally 3.0 on the First Day of the Legislative Session, 8:30am–5:00pm – graphic – RSVP on the Facebook event page

January 5

• NY: Albany March for Freedom on the First Day of the Legislative Session, 10am – graphic – RSVP on the Facebook event page
• MA: Show Up Strong, Stop the Mandates, 12pm – graphic

January 3

• CA: Our Children, Our Choice Rally at the Capitol, 1pm – graphic
• IL: Rally to Stop V-Passports, 11:30am – graphic

December 4

• WORLDWIDE: SOS from Australia, 12pm everywhere – learn more (with video)
• GERMANY: Frankfurt Protest Against Green Pass and Forced Vaccination, 3–5pm – more info
• CA: Los Angeles Rally to Support Australian Resistance to Medical Tyranny, 12–2pm – graphic
• CA: San Francisco Rally to Support Australian Resistance to Medical Tyranny, 12–2pm – more info, graphic
• NC: Hayesville Walkout, 10–11am – map, flyer
• NH: Concord Weekly Freedom Fest, 10–11:30am – map, graphic
• NJ/NY: Bergen & Rockland Counties Stand for Vaccine Choice, 3–5pm – map, graphic
• NY: NYC Rally at Australian Consulate, 4pm – graphic
• VA: Stafford Worldwide Walkout & Rally for Freedom, 11am–1pm – map, graphic
• WA: Seattle March for Freedom, 1:30–2:30pm – map, graphic

Done-for-You Graphics for December 4

Create your free Canva account to access customizable social media graphics:

• FB customizable graphic
• FB customizable cover page
• IG customizable graphic
• IG customizable story
• Twitter customizable graphic

November 26

• IL: CHD-IL Schaumberg Walkout for Health Freedom, 11am–1:30pm – map, graphic
• NC: Hayesville Walkout, 10–11am – map, flyer
• WA: Bellevue March for Freedom, 1:30–3:30pm – map, graphic

Customizeable flyer for the November 19th – 20th Worldwide Walkout

November 20

• IL: Glen Ellyn Worldwide Rally for Freedom 5.0, 9:30–11:30am – map, graphic
• NC: Hayesville Walkout, 10–11am – map, flyer
• NE: Omaha Rally for Medical Rights, 2–4pm – map
• NH: Concord Weekly Freedom Fest, 10–11:30am – map, graphic
• NJ/NY: Bergen & Rockland Counties Stand for Vaccine Choice, 3–5pm – map, graphic
• NM: Alamagordo Walkout, 1–3pm – map, graphic
• NY: New York Light for Liberty, 12pm–6pm – map, graphic, livestream
• OR: Portland Protest Against Vaccine Mandates, 11am–2pm – map, graphics & resources
• VA: Worldwide Walkout + Rally for Freedom,  11am–1pm – map, graphic
• WA: Seattle March for Freedom, 1:30–2:30pm – map, graphic

November 19

• NE: Omaha Rally for Medical Rights, 5–6pm – map, graphic
• WA: Seattle Rally in the Rain, 1–3pm – map, graphic

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is a screenshot from the first video above

This article first published in April 2015 is of relevance to the current situation in Ukraine.

The influx of US and NATO Special Forces involved in the training of the Neo-Nazi Azov battalion has not been discontinued.

According to the Ottawa Citizen (December 2021)  the U.S. Congress in 2018 “banned the use of U.S. funds to provide arms, training and other assistance to the Azov Battalion because of its links to the far-right and neo-Nazis”.

But this decision is pro-forma. Why? The neo-Nazi Azov Battalion is firmly embedded in the formal structures of the Ukrainian military and National Guard.

According to the Atlantic Council, in an article entitled Why Azov should not be designated a foreign terrorist organization, The Azov Battalion is categorized as:

“a Special Operations Detachment “Azov”—a regiment of the Ukrainian National Guard that is part of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. This means that Azov is neither a paramilitary unit nor has any independence from the state, but that it is an integral part of official structures and that it follows orders given by the Interior Ministry.

What this means is that US support continues to be channelled to Neo-Nazi elements within the National Guard via its multimillion dollar military aid package to the Kiev regime.

And Canada has taken the decision (January 2022) to extend its “training mission” with Ukraine’s National Guard.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 24, 2022

****

The US military has announced [2015] that it is training Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi National Guard including its infamous Azov battalion, responsible for countless atrocities directed against civilians in Donbass.

America’s training initiative is implemented in the context of a process of military escalation.

The training program  is coupled with the influx of  military equipment under a program of so-called “non-lethal” military aid.

The US contingent of instructors includes 290 specialists which will be working with the National Guard. Britain has dispatched 75 military personnel responsible for training “in command procedures and tactical intelligence”. (Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2015).

In turn, Canada announced that it would send 200 specialists to train Ukrainians “in explosives and de-mining operations, medical aid, military police operations and logistics.” (Ibid).

While the Canadian goverment has acknowledged that the National Guard is integrated by Nazi elements, Defence Minister Jason Kenney has ensured public opinion that “We’re not going to be in the business of training ad hoc militias… We will only be training units of the Ukrainian National Guard and army recognized by the government of Ukraine.”

The fact of the matter, however, is that the Nazi National Guard militia are directly under the command of Ukraine’s military. Moreover  both the US and Canada are in close liaison at a diplomatic level with the leaders of the Neo-Nazi parties in Ukraine, who occupy key positions in the US sponsored Kiev regime. In February, the founder of the Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU) [renamed Svoboda] Andriy Paruiby was received by the Harper government and the House of Commons in Ottawa.

Military Escalation

What is unfolding is the piecemeal dispatch of US and allied special forces to Russia’s doorstep.

While Western Special Forces are not (officially) involved in combat operations in Donbass, US  officials are actively participating in military planning and training operations.

Meanwhile, mercenary forces integrated by Academi (former Blackwater) are involved in combat operations in Donbass.

In recent developments, Eduard Basurin, Defense Minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic has pointed to the presence of Academi mercenaries in Volnovakha, an area controlled by Kiev forces. (see video below)

US military support to the Neo-Nazi brigades is acknowledged by the US media, The National Guard militia which operates under the Command of the Ukraine Armed Forces have Nazi insignia on their uniforms.

 “The United States plans to send soldiers to Ukraine in April for training exercises with units of the country’s national guard… the units to be trained include the Azov Battalion, a volunteer force that has attracted criticism for its far-right sentiments including brandishing an emblem widely used in Nazi Germany.” Of course, first and foremost is the fact that US military will be on the ground in Ukraine providing direct support for the Ukrainian military. Isn’t that precisely what Washington accuses Russia of doing (while failing to provide evidence), namely providing direct military support on the ground? (Associated Press, March 31, 2015, emphasis added)

The Nazi insignia are not limited to the Azov battalion.

U.S. and Ukrainian troops rang in the start of a new training mission here Monday, an effort to beef up the capabilities of Ukrainian forces fighting Russian-backed militants in the country’s east.

The Fearless Guardian exercises are expected to run at least through the end of summer and turn out thousands of newly trained personnel to take on separatists trying to splinter off from the former Soviet republic.

The first batch of about 900 trainees have already fought on the front lines of the year-old conflict, said Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who addressed the U.S. and Ukrainian troops in a mid-day downpour.

But the country’s armed forces, he said, need to be rebuilt.

…

Capt. Nicholas Salimbene, the 31-year-old commander of Company B, 1st Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, said he hesitates to say the program is similar to basic training “because these guys are coming right from the east. They have real-life combat experience.”

His company was also the first to deploy to Lithuania last year as part of the U.S.-led Atlantic Resolve mission to reassure Baltic and Polish allies after Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine near the start of the conflict.

Salimbene said the situation here is different because Lithuania has an established Army, “whereas these guys, the national guard, is relatively new to Ukraine.”

Ukraine’s national guard forces have been converted from volunteer militias that sprang up less than a year ago to fight Russian-backed separatists into units under the command and control of Ukraine’s armed forces.

Moscow has described the effort to train Ukrainian forces — in which Britain and Canada are also participating — as “counterproductive,” saying it will not help resolve the “fratricidal” conflict in Ukraine.

Ukraine has repeatedly accused Russia of sending its troops to help and arm the separatists — a claim Moscow denies.

Poroshenko said it was a Ukrainian government decision to have the guardsmen receive the U.S.-led training first, but hopes that regular army units will be able to get the training as well.

The deployment is a homecoming of sorts for a handful of 173rd paratroops, who were born in or have close ties to Ukraine.

Sgt. Anton Kovalchuk, who will work as an interpreter, was born and raised in a city about an hour east of the training center, which sits near the Polish border.

Since leaving Ukraine at the age of 15 in 1999, Kovalchuk said it’s strange to be back as an American soldier, but also interesting. “I don’t know how much things changed.”

The training kickoff drew more than 180 reporters, mostly representing Ukrainian media outlets, who swarmed the Americans for photos and video.

“It’s very overwhelming,” said Staff Sgt. Ashley McLeod, who will manage training schedules and ammunition for the two months her unit runs the training.

“It really does bring it into focus because I didn’t really understand how big of a deal this was, how important it was until this,” McLeod, of Anchorage, Alaska, said. “And I see it now. I see how excited a lot of people are and eager to learn.” (Matthew Millham, Stars and Stripes, April 17 2015, emphasis added) 

 

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

On January 10, Daniel Ortega was inaugurated President and Rosario Murillo was inaugurated as Vice President. The central event in the Plaza of the Revolution was accompanied by Sandinistas celebrating in almost every town with big-screen displays of the inauguration.

Once he had been sworn in, with the presidential sash across his chest, Daniel repeated his action from 2007, 2012 and 2017: He took off his sash and then symbolically handed it to the people: El Pueblo Presidente—the People are President. The crowd broke out in wild cheers. He asked tens of thousands of Sandinistas gathered in the 153 municipalities of the country to swear to fight with all their strength to eliminate hunger, poverty, and backwardness.

Image on the right: Moment when President Ortega offers his sash to the People. [Photo by Jairo Cajina]

“Let’s go forward…building peace to fight poverty, building peace so that there can be roads and highways. building peace so that families can feel secure; their children can feel secure in their work; they can feel secure in having a dignified life. That is our commitment, dear Nicaraguan brothers and sisters, we are all in this and that is why we say the people are president,” he exclaimed emotionally.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel attended the inauguration to the obvious delight of the crowd, who cheered ecstatically when each arrived. President Ortega actually left the area and went out to greet them.

Along with official representatives of dozens of countries, including Honduras, Mexico, China, India and Iran—countries that represent 2.5 billion people, there were also more than 300 journalists and solidarity activists from 21 nations accompanying the inauguration.

“Here are delegates from many governments that have been mentioned, peoples, brothers, friendly peoples and where the European governments or the Yankee government do not send delegates… what greater pride than to have here as representatives of the North American people, of the European peoples, citizens, dignified men and women who fight in their homelands for true dignity, for the true independence of their own countries and for a true democracy to be installed in their own countries,” said Ortega.

North Americans hold press conference about Nicaragua after the inauguration. [Photo by Jairo Cajina]

“What better and more worthy representative can the American people have than Brian Willson. They [the U.S.] threw the military train at him and it was filmed, and they destroyed his legs and where were the human rights [organizations]… and who condemned that crime… if it is the same Yankee government that promoted those crimes,” he emphasized. Willson wrote: “President Ortega spoke for more than an hour about the new silk road agreements with China, the continued history of U.S. imperialism, and the continued advances of the Sandinista Nicaragua revolution. He needed no notes, no teleprompters—such a contrast with U.S. presidents. He spoke straight from his heart and experiences without any pauses.”

S. Brian Willson and his partner Ulda Garcia with President Ortega. [Photo by Jairo Cajina].

President Ortega indicated that Nicaragua and the People’s Republic of China had a historic meeting where they signed four cooperation treaties, highlighting the Memorandum of Understanding on cooperation in the framework of the Silk Road Economic Belt. “The Chinese Revolution and the Sandinista Revolution have the same path, the same destiny, which is to end poverty,” Ortega stressed.

President Ortega and Vice President Murillo at the signing of agreements for cooperation with China. [Photo by Jairo Cajina]

On January 12 China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Wang Wenbin, said,

“China firmly supports the government and people of Nicaragua in choosing independently a development path that suits their national realities. We urge the U.S. side to face squarely its own ‘democratic deficit,’ renounce the misguided old practice of arbitrary sanctions and pressure, stop engaging in hegemonic and bullying acts, adhere to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, lift unilateral sanctions on Nicaragua and stop interfering in Nicaragua’s domestic affairs.”

This was in response to a question about more U.S. sanctions on six Nicaraguan officials including the Defense Minister as well as visa restrictions on 116 individuals on inauguration day.

These sanctions were on top of the internationally illegal U.S. unilateral coercive actions including the 2018 NICA Act, and the RENACER Act passed by Congress just a week before Nicaragua’s November 7 elections.

Black Agenda Report Executive Editor Margaret Kimberley says that RENACER is a classic example of hybrid warfare as it calls for “supporting independent news media and freedom of information.” Such language is a declaration of interference in the rights of a sovereign nation, in short, a blueprint for war propaganda and regime change.

President Ortega also demanded an end to the U.S. blockade and sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela:

“And if there is any respect for democracy when the immense majority of the peoples of the world are saying that the blockade should cease, then the Yankee government should comply if it has a shred of respect for international law and cease the blockade against Cuba, and cease the blockade against the sister Republic of Venezuela. A criminal blockade where they persecute them, prosecute them, invent crimes against them, simply because they seek to guarantee food for Venezuelan families.”

Earning the highest percentage of confidence from the population on November 7 of any elected president in the Americas in recent times, the Sandinista government was endorsed to continue carving out new paths to reduce poverty and continue extraordinary advances, like 90% food sovereignty, 99% electricity coverage with 75% green energy, and one of the top positions in social infrastructure in the Americas; and that they will do this specifically because they are no longer willing to be a colony of the United States.

“We will continue to fight with dignity, always defending the homeland, always defending sovereignty,” said Ortega, “because only with sovereignty, with dignity, with conscience, is it possible to achieve the great victories.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Nan McCurdy works for the United Methodist Church of the U.S., currently in the state of Puebla, Mexico. She lived in Nicaragua more than thirty years. Nan can be reached at [email protected].

Featured image: Family in Bismarck Martinez Housing neighborhood watch the inauguration and swear to fight with all their strength to eliminate hunger, poverty and backwardness. [Photo by Jairo Cajina]

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

During the past week, the world has looked on as the now two-year long COVID-19 mainstream media narrative collapsed almost instantaneously.

In timing that cannot be described as anything less than suspect, in the same week that the World Economic Forum held its virtual Davos Agenda event, Ireland and Britain announced the sudden and immediate ending of virtually all Covid measures and the World Health Organisation called for the end of Covid-related travel restrictions, with the organisation also stating that the end of the ‘Pandemic’ may be in sight, in stark contrast to a recent announcement that such a prediction was premature.

With the theme of the World Economic Forum’s 2022 annual summit meeting, due to be held in May and the first in-person meeting of the forum since 2019, being ‘Working Together, Restoring Trust’ the optimistic among us may say that there has been an acceptance amongst the global elite that the growing awareness worldwide of the corporate power-grab over public life that the past two years has entailed, as well as the steady march towards a digital ID system as envisaged in Klaus Schwab’s concept of the fourth industrial revolution via the use of vaccine passports, has become so widespread that it is no longer feasible to continue the current COVID-19 media narrative.

However, the sudden dropping of COVID-19 by the corporate media also presents the opportune moment to immediately switch its focus to something else – a possibly imminent false flag attack in Ukraine, used as a pretext for the Western-backed Kiev government to launch an attack on the breakaway pro-Russian republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in the east of the country, thus triggering an armed conflict between Ukraine and Moscow, one that has the strong possibility for worldwide ramifications.

Since the end of November, the Western media, in lockstep, has promoted the narrative that Russia is planning an ‘imminent’ military invasion of its smaller Western neighbour – with Kiev having come under control of the US and EU backed governments of Petro Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelensky since the 2014 CIA and MI6-orchestrated Euromaidan colour revolution was launched in response to then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s November 2013 to suspend an EU trade deal in favour of pursuing closer ties with Moscow.

Despite the only ‘evidence’ offered so far over the past two months of such an incursion being the legitimate movement of Russian troops within Russia’s own borders, the Neocon-influenced Western media still determinedly vows that a Russian invasion of Ukraine is only a matter of days away from taking place – in a manner not dissimilar to their previous assertions that Saddam Hussein had the capability to launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes in the run-up to the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq.

The claims of a Russian invasion of Ukraine also come at a time of wider tensions in Eastern Europe with Russian President Vladimir Putin, alongside his Belarusian counterpart and sole European ally Alexander Lukashenko, being accused of attempting to destabilise the European Union via a build-up of African and Middle Eastern migrants on the Belarus-Poland border – the fact that many of said migrants are fleeing the wars and colour revolutions imposed on both regions by the US-NATO hegemony being conveniently ignored by the Western media.

Should a false flag attack be launched soon in order to trigger a conflict between Moscow and Kiev however, it would be a tactic with recent previous usage by the regime change lobby which, like a theoretical war between Russia and Ukraine, also almost resulted in a wider armed confrontation between Moscow and NATO – In 2017 and 2018, two chemical attacks where launched against the Syrian town and Khan Shaykhun and the city of Douma respectively, both attacks being blamed by the West on the Moscow-allied government of Bashar al-Assad and both resulting in the US launching cruise missile and air strikes against Syrian government targets – just stopping short of a full-scale military intervention.

Indeed the use of a chemical weapons provocation was outlined as such by Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu only last month – a false flag attack that the Western mainstream media, with its sudden dropping of the COVID-19 narrative, may soon be focusing its attention on instead.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

1. The High Court has today certified a question of law of general public importance, arising from the recent appeal by the US against the decision of the District Judge in this case;

“In what circumstances can an appellate court receive assurances from a requesting state which were not before the court of first instance in extradition proceedings?”.

2. We have been asked to provide a condensed explanation of the relevant history of this case before the courts and the position reached at this stage. (Attached in addition is the original defence application for three points of law of general public importance to be certified by the High Court which amplifies the legal bases on which they were premised).

3. The defence has 14 days in which to make an application to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal on the certified point.

4. In declining to give leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, the High Court is understood to be following its general practice of leaving that decision to the Supreme Court itself.

5. The background circumstances leading to the certification of the point of law above are these; a court in the UK on receipt of an extradition request has first to consider in a hearing before a District Judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, whether any one of a number of legal bars to extradition raised by the defence are applicable and made out in the case. If so, the Court will direct that extradition cannot take place.

6. The decision of District Judge Baraitser on January 4th 2021 came after a four-week complex evidential hearing, at the culmination of a process which had lasted a year and half, in which the testimony of a significant number of witnesses, expert and factual, was thoroughly tested. After the evidential hearing the defence and the US provided the District Judge further with extended analyses of the evidence that had been given, together with legal submissions.

7. The decision of the District Judge, based on all of the evidence explored in person and in depth before her, was that Section 91 of the Extradition Act 2003 had been made out by the defence, whereby the mental condition of Mr Assange was such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States. The decision rested upon two interlinking aspects – Mr Assange’s particular mental condition combined with the prospect of the severity of the regimes he would be most likely to face on extradition. The combination of the two raised a real likelihood that faced with extradition to the US, he would take his own life.

8. After this decision in January last year, the US applied for leave to appeal, requesting the High Court to belatedly receive a number of assurances contained in a diplomatic note; these related in particular to assurances regarding the most severe categories of US custodial regimes – that they would not be imposed, unless deemed justified by some “conduct” which could include speech or unspecified behaviour. The assessment of a number of US departments or agencies could trigger their imposition.

9. The offering of the assurances, accepted by the High Court as sufficient to lift the Section 91 bar to extradition, was contested by the defence, including, it was argued, that they were inherently questionable, were caveated and/or conditional and that the history of assurances by the US showed they might be easily avoided (yet not directly breached). Further, the defence argued, when the severity of the regimes in question presented the potential of a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition on torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment), an aspect of the Section 91 bar, prohibition could never be avoided or justified by the suggestion inherent in the assurances offered that the imposition of prohibited treatment on an individual in the custody of the state, in particular one with a vulnerable mental condition.

10. The High Court found against Mr Assange in its ruling, and relied upon the late assurances, but has certified a point of law of general public importance on the question of the courts’ reception of assurances (frequently relied upon by requesting states in extradition proceedings to overcome defence evidence after it has established a bar to extradition) for the first time on appeal.

11. The identification by the High Court of the question above for the potential consideration of the Supreme Court, involves concepts of procedural fairness and natural justice. There has long been a general approach by the courts that requires that all relevant matters are raised before the District Judge appointed to consider the case in the Magistrates’ Court. What has underpinned a departure from those principles in practice is the categorisation of an assurance as an “issue” as opposed to “evidence” and the developing practice, potentially now consolidated in the decision in this case, whereby an assurance can be freely introduced by the requesting state and considered separately and later. The defence argument is that despite being as demanding of close evidential scrutiny as the evidence already heard, and despite the content of the assurances being applicable to the testimony of witnesses already heard but not to be heard again, assurances have been afforded a different procedural position. This issue has become of considerable importance in the predictability and progression of extradition cases.

12. It is therefore welcome both for Mr Assange’s case and generally that the Supreme Court might now have the opportunity of considering how and when and in what circumstances assurances may be received in extradition proceedings in the UK.

13. (The formal articulation by the defence in its application for the certified question. and the two questions on which certification had been refused, is attached). In brief, the second and third questions raised by Mr Assange, not certified as matters of general importance by the High Court, focussed upon the close relationship between the protection afforded by Section 91 of the Extradition Act 2003 and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The defence concern remains however that the potential for treatment that is prima facie contrary to Article 3 can be triggered by any form of perceived speech and behaviour in US custody (it was accepted throughout hearings in this case that the imposition of Special Administrative Measures – the most severe categorisation of the regimes – could be triggered on the recommendation of US intelligence agencies. The overtly expressed hostility of one of these agencies in particular towards Mr Assange is a matter of record). Further, that the imposition of those regimes if judged by the US authorities to be justified, could be imposed with virtually no further explanation. The concern articulated by the defence was that this flagged up a departure from established ECHR principles.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Don’t Extradite Assange

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The New York Times reports that Biden is going to forestall Russian aggression against Ukraine by deploying between 1,000 and 5,000 US troops on Russia’s border and is prepared to increase the number of troops tenfold to 10,000 to 50,000 soldiers. A Russian army would eat this small number for a snack in 5 minutes. Clearly the purpose of the deployment is not military. The purpose is to heighten the “Russian threat” in the minds of the people in advance of a false flag event that will be blamed on the Kremlin.

If Biden wants to deter Russia all he needs to do is to give Russia the security guarantee she says she needs. Why does Biden want Russia to be insecure?

The cause of the problem is obvious. In 2014 the US in an attempt to deprive Russia of her Black Sea naval base overthrew a Russian-friendly and democratically elected Ukrainian government and installed a neo-Nazi regime that began war against the Russian inhabitants of the Donbass region of Eastern Ukraine, formerly parts of Russia that had been transferred during the Soviet era into the the Soviet Union’s Ukrainian province.

To stabilize the situation, Russia hammered out the Minsk Agreement but neither Ukraine nor the Western signatories kept the agreement.

Russia does not want the broke and troublesome Ukraine. Russia just wants Ukraine not to become a place for US missile bases.

It is a simple demand easy to accept in the interest of peace.

But peace is unprofitable and is the last thing the US military/security complex wants. Therefore Washington is responding to the Russian/US/NATO security talks by deploying troops on Russia’s borders. The stupid British are stirring the pot of “Russian aggression” by withdrawing the embassy staff from Kiev. See this.

We have been hearing from US/NATO about the “growing Russian threat” for a long time. What happens to credibility that is already damaged if there is no Russian invasion? It seems that Washington and its NATO puppets are so far out on the limb that they simply must provoke a Russian invasion.

The Russians are waiting in vain for Washington’s written response to their proposal for mutual security. Washington has answered with more accusations, more provocations.

Is the Kremlin having difficulty understanding: (1) that Trump was removed from office because he said he wanted to normalize relations with Russia, (2) that Russia is the necessary enemy for the power and profit of the US military/security complex, and (3) Russia is regarded as the obstacle to US hegemony? How can it be that in the face of all evidence to the contrary the Kremlin has the delusion that Washington is interested in Russians feeling secure.

While the Kremlin wastes time, weapons pour into Ukraine and the Western media prepare their people for “Russian aggression.” Russian protests of intentions attributed to her are pointless. The Western media knows the required narrative and is not interested in any facts.

The question really is whether Russia can accept that she has an enemy.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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: NATO soldiers during a parade to mark Independence Day in Kiev © Sputnik / Mykhailo Markiv

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Whether the US continues with its ‘Pivot to Asia’ to more aggressively ‘contain’ China or begins ‘rebalancing’ towards Europe in order to do the same to Russia, the centrally positioned South Asian region of the Eastern Hemisphere in which India and Pakistan are located will remain pivotal in shaping the global balance of power.

The grand strategic calculations of the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) vis-à-vis China and Russia are presently in flux pending the outcome of the undeclared US-provoked missile crisis in Europe. Its further escalation would see the US prioritizing the “containment” of Russia while its potential de-escalation would see it continuing to do the same to China. Either way, the US will inevitably choose to prioritize “containing” one of these two.

No matter the outcome, however, India and Pakistan will play pivotal roles as pressure valves in balancing these New Cold War tensions. That’s because they’re South Asia’s most important states, and their home region sits in the center of the Eastern Hemisphere within which this intensified Great Power competition is taking place. Both Russia and China will come to rely more on those two if they’re prioritized for “containment” by the US.

In the event that the US continues prioritizing China, then Pakistan’s CPEC will become more important than ever for facilitating the People’s Republic’s geo-economic engagement with the rest of the Eurasian supercontinent as well as serving as a shortcut for doing the same with Africa. India’s role would be different since New Delhi could leverage the US-West’s intensified pressure to propose what it could describe as fairer border de-escalation, economic, financial, investment, and tech deals with Beijing.

It would be more difficult for China to sustain its border standoff with India, not to mention the overall distrust in bilateral relations, under the circumstances of intensified “containment” pressure. So long as India retains its recently recalibrated multi-alignment policy that was unofficially unveiled during President Putin’s game-changing visit last month and thus remains seen as a reliable balancing force in Eurasia, China might trust it enough due to New Delhi’s ties with Moscow to consider such deals.

Should the US prioritize Russia, however, then Pakistan’s role would be to concentrate on fulfilling last February’s agreement to build a Pakistan-Afghanistan-Uzbekistan (PAKAFUZ) railway. That would enhance Moscow’s “Ummah Pivot”, enable it to achieve greater overland connectivity with South Asia (and potentially eventually India in the event that Indo-Pak relations improve), and thus preemptively avert any potentially disproportionate dependence on China.

India’s role would be similar in that connectivity sense by concentrating on the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) with Russia, Azerbaijan, and Iran as well as the Vladivostok-Chennai Maritime Corridor (VCMC) for the same grand strategic reasons. Furthermore, those two Great Powers could also prioritize their unofficial efforts to assemble a new Non-Aligned Movement (“Neo-NAM”), which would also help Russia preemptively avert any potentially disproportionate dependence on China in that scenario.

This insight suggests that not only will these two South Asian states become more geostrategically significant in terms of shaping the global balance of power in a complementary way, but they might even consider either indirectly coordinating their efforts for maximum benefit or possibly also discretely explore an improvement of bilateral ties. This second-mentioned scenario could see them secretly restart discussions on reviving SAARC in order to bolster South Asia’s global status in the New Cold War.

In any case, observers should start paying more attention to South Asia. Whether the US continues with its “Pivot to Asia” to more aggressively “contain” China or begins “rebalancing” towards Europe in order to do the same to Russia, this centrally positioned region of the Eastern Hemisphere will remain pivotal. As South Asia’s two most important states, each with their own unique relationships with China and Russia, India and Pakistan are expected to play more prominent roles in reshaping the balance of power.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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 regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Note: All Global Research articles are now accessible in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website Drop Down Menu on the top banner of our home page.

If you want to become Member of Global Research click here

The following text is the (January 2022) updated and revised version of Chapter III of my E-Book entitled

The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

 

 

 

 

***

“The PCR is a Process. It does not tell you that you are sick”.

Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Laureate and Inventor of the RT-PCR, passed away in August 2019.

“…All or a substantial part of these positives could be due to what’s called false positives tests.”

Dr. Michael Yeadon: former Vice President and Chief Science Officer for Pfizer

This misuse of the RT-PCR technique is applied as a relentless and intentional strategy by some governments to justify excessive measuressuch as the violation of a large number of constitutional rights, … under the pretext of a pandemic based on a number of positive RT-PCR tests, and not on a real number of patients.

.Dr. Pascal Sacré, Belgian physician specialized in critical care and renowned public health analyst.

Introduction

Media lies coupled with a systemic and carefully engineered fear campaign have sustained the image of a killer virus which is relentlessly spreading to all major regions of the World. 

Several billion people in more than 190 countries have been tested (as well as retested) for Covid-19.  

At the time of writing, approximately 340 million people Worldwide have been categorized as “Covid-19 confirmed  cases”.

 

The alleged pandemic is said to have resulted in more than 5 million Covid-19 related deaths.

Both sets of figures: morbidity and mortality are invalid. A highly organized Covid testing apparatus (part of which is funded by the billionaire foundations) has been established with a view to driving up the numbers of  “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases”, which are then used as a justification to impose the “vaccine” passport coupled with the repeal of fundamental human rights. 

From the outset of this crisis in January 2020, all far-reaching policy decisions upheld and presented to the public as a “means to saving lives” were based on  flawed and invalid RT-PCR case positives. 

These invalid Covid-19 “estimates” have been used to justify confinement, social distancing, the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, as well as the enforcement of the mRNA “vaccine” launched in November 2020. 

There is no such thing as a “Covid-19 confirmed case”. Firmly acknowledged both by scientific opinion and the World Health Organization, the RT-PCR test used to “detect” the spread of the virus (as well as its variants) is not only flawed but TOTALLY INVALID. 

The fear campaign is relentlessly spearheaded by political statements and media disinformation. A closer examination of  official reports from national health authorities as well as peer reviewed articles provides a totally different picture. 

In this chapter we will be focussing on the following issues:

1.  The features of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as outlined by the WHO, the CDC and peer reviewed reports. Is it a dangerous virus?

2. The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Test (RT-PCR) used to “detect / identify” SARS-CoV-2

3. the reliability of the estimates of mortality and morbidity pertaining to the alleged Covid-19 infection.

The Features of SARS-CoV-2

Lies through omission: the media has failed to reassure the broader public.

Below is the official WHO definition of Covid-19 followed by that of the CDC:

Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans.  In humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus causes coronavirus disease COVID-19.

“The most common symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, dry cough, and tiredness. … These symptoms are usually mild and begin gradually. Some people become infected but only have very mild symptoms. Most people (about 80%) recover from the disease without needing hospital treatment. Around 1 out of every 5 people who gets COVID-19 becomes seriously ill and develops difficulty breathing.”

Screenshot The Hill, March 19, 2020

Similar to Influenza according to the CDC

Covid-19 versus Influenza (Flu) Virus A and Virus B (and subtypes) 

Rarely mentioned by the media or by politicians: The CDC (which is an agency of the US government) confirms that Covid-19 is similar to Influenza

If the public had been informed and reassured that Covid is “similar to Influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat.

The lockdown and closure of the national economy would have been rejected outright.

According to  Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, pneumonia is “regularly caused or accompanied by corona viruses”.

Immunologists broadly confirm the CDC definition. COVID-19 has similar features to a seasonal influenza coupled with pneumonia.

According to Anthony Fauci (Head of NIAID), H. Clifford Lane and Robert R. Redfield (Head of CDC) in the New England Journal of Medicine 

“…the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci  is lying to himself. In his public statements he says that Covid is “Ten Times Worse than Seasonal Flu”.

He refutes his peer reviewed report quoted above. From the outset, Fauci has been instrumental in waging a fear and panic campaign across America:

Screenshot The Hill, March 19, 2020

The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Test (RT-PCR)

The slanted methodology applied under WHO guidance for detecting the alleged spread of the virus is the Polymerase Chain Reaction Test (RT-PCR), which has been routinely applied all over the World since February 2020.

The RT-PCR Test has been used Worldwide to generate millions of erroneous “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases”, which are then used to sustain the illusion that the alleged pandemic is  Real.

This assessment based on erroneous numbers has been used in the course of the last two years to spearhead and sustain the fear campaign.

And people are now led to believe that the Covid-19 “vaccine” is the “solution”. And that “normality” will  be restored once the entire population of Planet Earth has been vaccinated.

“Confirmed” is a misnomer: A “Confirmed RT-PCR Positive Case” does not imply a “Covid-19 Confirmed Case”.

Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with the COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability] (Dr. Pascal Sacré)

The procedure used by the national health authorities is to categorize all RT-PCR positive cases, as “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases” (with or without a medical diagnosis). Ironically, this routine process of identifying “confirmed cases” . is in derogation of the CDC’s own guidelines:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.” (emphasis added)

The methodology used to detect and estimate the spread of the virus is flawed and invalid.

False Positives

The PCR-Test Does Not Detect the Identity of the Virus

The RT-PCR test does not identify/ detect the virus. What the PCR test identifies are genetic fragments of numerous viruses (including influenza viruses types A and B, and coronaviruses which trigger common colds).

The results of the RT-PCR test cannot “confirm” whether an individual who undertakes the test is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

According to Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR technique: “The PCR detects a very small segment of the nucleic acid which is part of a virus itself.”

According to renowned Swiss immunologist Dr B. Stadler

So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Even if the infectious viri are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected].

 Dr. Pascal Sacré concurs: “These tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.”

The WHO’s “Customized” RT-PCR Covid-19 “Test” 

We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.

Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. (emphasis added)

The above study (quotation above as well as other documents consulted ) suggest that China’s health authorities did not undertake an isolation / purification of  a patient’s specimen. Using “laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR” (as quoted in their study) is an obvious misnomer, i.e. the RT-PCR test cannot under any circumstances be used to identify the virus.  The isolate of the virus by the Chinese authorities is unconfirmed.

Freedom of Information Pertaining to the Isolate of SARS-CoV-2

A detailed investigative project by Christine Massey, entitled: Freedom of Information Requests: Health/ Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification provides documentation concerning the identity of the virus. The responses to these requests from 127 entities in 25 countries confirm that there is no record of isolation / purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”

The Threshold Amplification Cycles. The WHO Admits that The Results of the RT-PCR “Test” are Totally Invalid

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)

The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), genetic segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases” tabulated Worldwide in the course of the last two years are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al, the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “Retraction”.

“WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”

“Invalid Positives” is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of  “Weak Positives” and “Risk of False Positive Increases”. What is at stake is a “Flawed Methodology” which leads to invalid estimates of “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases”.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting:  “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”.

The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to saying “We Screwed Up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Several billion people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020.

From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied Worldwide has in the course of  the last two years led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid-19 estimates, which according to the WHO (January 20, 2021) are based on an invalid methodology.  

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect fragments of the virus. Therefore,  the official “covid numbers” ( Covid-19 Confirmed Cases) are meaningless.

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic.

Which in turn means that the lockdown / economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever. According to scientific opinion:

“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%  (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al, Critique of Drosten Study)

As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”: It follows that using  the >35 cycles detection will indelibly  contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.

The WHO’ Mea Culpa confirms that the Covid-19 PCR test procedure as applied is meaningless.

The CDC Orders the Withdrawal of the PCR Test

The WHO’s historic retraction is followed  six months later by a Mea Culpa on the part of the CDC. On July 21, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) calls for the withdrawal of the PCR test as a valid method for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2: 

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only.”

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.

CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.  (emphasis added)

Read carefully, what this CDC directive tacitly admits is that the PCR test does not effectively differentiate between “SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”. We have known this from the outset.

As of  January 1, 2022, the CDC has withdrawn it’s endorsement of the RT-PCR test in  the U.S.

If the PCR test is invalid as intimated both by the CDC and the WHO, more than 260 Million so-called “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases” as well as more than 5 million Covid related deaths collected and tabulated Worldwide since the outset of the alleged pandemic are totally meaningless.

The Falsification of Death Certificates 

Inasmuch as the PCR test is invalid, it follows that the estimates of “Covid-19 Confirmed Cases” including the detection of variants of SARS-CoV-2 are totally invalid. This in turn means that the methodology pertaining to establishing Covid-19 related deaths Worldwide is also invalid.

It is worth noting that in a December 2020 report, the CDC reported that 94% of the deaths attributed to Covid have “comorbidities”,(i.e. deaths dues other causes).

For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups.

Moreover, had the CDC used the criteria in its Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003: 

” … the COVID-19 fatality count would have been approximately 90.2% lower” (See H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, and et al., August 09, 2020)

COVID-19: The “Underlying Cause of Death” and the CDC’s “More Often Than Not” Clause 

While the CDC acknowledged the issue of comorbidities, it nonetheless enacted totally invalid instructions with regard to the Death Certificates.

Barely a week following the historic March 11, 2020 lockdown, specific guidelines were introduced by the CDC pertaining to  Death Certificates (and their tabulation in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS).

1. The “underlying cause of death”
2. The “More Often than Not” Clause which falsifies the Cause of Death 

And these criteria are imposed despite the fact that the RT-PCR test used to corroborate the “cause of death” provides misleading results as acknowledged by both the WHO and the CDC.

In practice, as outlined above: “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19,” will be considered as the “underlying cause of death” without the conduct of a PCR test and without performing an autopsy. 

 

Video: Graphene Hydroxide in the mRNA Vaccine Vial: Assassination of Dr. Andreas Noack

By Andreas Noack, January 23, 2022

Graphene has electromagnetic properties which have been detected in people who have been vaccinated. These effects have been amply documented and confirmed. See the study conducted by the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance.

Nostalgia at the AUKMIN Talks: Britain’s Forces Eye Australia

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, January 24, 2022

With the AUKUS arrangements being firmed up, US and UK sailors, personnel and miscellaneous staff are being readied for more time Down Under, ensuring that Australia becomes a staging ground for future forward military operations.  Canberra has relinquished much say in this; the song sheets and blueprints are coming from elsewhere.

Video: The CIA’s War on Democracy: Edward Curtin in Conversation with Robert F Kennedy Jr

By Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Edward Curtin, January 23, 2022

Buckminster Fuller called the CIA Capitalism’s Invisible Army. Since its creation, it has been doing coups d’état and assassinations as part of its work. It has been deeply involved in creating war game scenarios, weaponizing diseases, conducting mind control operations such as that with Covid, creating havoc at home and abroad, etc.

Washington Pumping Up War Fever. The Western Media: “War with Russia is Coming”

By Bruce Gagnon, January 23, 2022

An American friend of mine, now living in Russia, has two sons in the US Army. One of them said to him today, “your two sons are going to be fighting your beloved Russia.” So the troops are obviously being told to prepare for war.

Simulation of a Cyber Attack against the Global Financial System. Israel’s Operation “Collective Strength”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 23, 2022

The exercise entitled “Collective Strength” was attended by representatives from ten countries including Israel (the host country), the US, the UK, the UAE, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Thailand. Senior staff members from the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) were also present.

Is Perfidious Erdoğan Destroying Russia for the Great Turan Turkic Region of Influence?

By F. William Engdahl, January 23, 2022

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is notorious for slippery dealings with supposed allies whether NATO or the EU. However his greatest perfidy seems now to be directed against Turkey’s relationship with Putin’s Russia.

Countdown to Apocalypse: A Dark Future for Ukraine?

By Michael Welch, Scott Ritter, Dmitriy Kovalevich, and Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, January 23, 2022

The plot of this build-up of interest in demonizing the foreign foe-of-the-moment bears a familiar resemblance to past wars, in particular, the War on Iraq. Then, the enemy, the nefarious Saddam Hussein was stocking “weapons of mass destruction” in spite of thorough weapons inspectors during the 1990s.

The 2014 Neoliberal Neo-Nazi Coup in Ukraine. The World is at a Dangerous Crossroads

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and James Corbett, January 22, 2022

Violence and bloodshed continues to rock Ukraine as factions compete in the power vacuum of last month’s coup in Kiev. As the country struggles to find its way forward, however, it finds itself in the crosshairs of a US-NATO war agenda that has been unfolding for years.

If You Take the COVID Vax, You Can Never Achieve Full Immunity Again – Government Stats Unveil the Horrifying Truth

By Ethan Huff, January 22, 2022

The British government has spilled the beans about that fact that once you get “vaccinated” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19), you will never again be able to acquire full natural immunity.

The COVID-Omicron Crisis: The Roadmap Towards a Worldwide Financial Crash, Inflation, Digitization

By Peter Koenig, January 22, 2022

People may die from multiple other causes, like from the mRNA-vaxxes that ain’t vaccines but gene altering, immune system killing injections – and the bought medical establishment, mainly but not exclusively in the west, attributes their death, for almost two years now, to covid, and its so-called “variants”; killer variants that is – mind you, and it can never be repeated enough, variants that have never isolated and never been identified.

Dangerous and Deadly: Over 1000 Scientific Studies Referencing Injuries and Deaths from COVID Vaccines

By Vasko Kohlmayer, January 22, 2022

All of the studies have been authored by scientists and medical professionals. All of them have appeared in scientific and medical journals and publications. Most of them have been peer-reviewed. All of them present serious work by serious researchers.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In a recent interview with Geopolitics & Empire — Hrvoje Moric asked me if there was an explanation for the uniformity of countries’ Covid policies with even the “free world” shutting down civil liberties with tyrannical lockdowns, mask, vaccine, and passport mandates, and falsified pandemic and death data.

I said it looked very much like a conspiracy but that I did not understand how such a far-flung conspiracy could have been organized and wondered if it was simply stupidity and lemmings following lemmings over the cliff. If I had read prior to the interview Kees Van Der Pijl’s new book, States of Emergency (Clarity Press, 2022), I would have had a better answer.

Kees Van Der Pijl, an author of distinction, writes that the global ruling class or oligarchy used Covid-19 to seize power by declaring a state of global emergency. He explains that the Information Technology revolution by creating a global information and communication system was ushering in a social transformation inimical to the oligarchy’s hegemony over society. In order to stop this transformation, the global elite used lockdowns, mandates, censorship and controlled narratives to seize control over populations.

Van Der Pijl makes a cogent argument. He shows that the “pandemic” is a political emergency, not a medical one. Its purpose was to suppress populations and transition to an authoritarian state and social structure.

The elites’ abandonment of class compromise resulted in populist movements against elite control. To prevent a revolutionary force from emerging, a “Covid crisis” was used to advance authoritarianism and override objections from the people and from independent medical scientists. The orchestrated “pandemic” provided perfect cover for establishing a surveillance society on the basis of medical emergency without having to use overt violence.

The “Covid Pandemic” emerges as the most threatening example to date of Disaster Capitalism in which catastrophes are orchestrated in order to advance economic and political agendas.

Van Der Pijl believes that the global elite’s power seizure will fail. It is too counterfactual and affects elite interests differently, giving rise to conflicts within the global oligarchy. He says that as it becomes clear that we have been deceived, the elite and their institutions will lose authority, and the path will be clear for a better and more open democratic society.

Van Der Pijl has provided us with a very interesting and eye-opening book. If his book is widely read, people will gain immunity to the self-serving narratives of the global elite.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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 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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Buckminster Fuller called the CIA Capitalism’s Invisible Army. Since its creation, it has been doing coups d’état and assassinations as part of its work. It has been deeply involved in creating war game scenarios, weaponizing diseases, conducting mind control operations such as that with Covid, creating havoc at home and abroad, etc. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., through his family’s longstanding battle with the agency, knows all this, and in the video above he and I discuss it.

Following the video there is the word “More” in red, which if you click, will bring you to many valuable sources on the people and issues we discuss.  All of these and more are due to the extraordinary work of my dear friend Dave Ratcliffe, a genius not only with technology, but with presenting and preserving at his site – an unmatched repository of crucial historical materials.  He is not responsible for my poor video recording of my side of the conversation with Bobby, where I am too close to the camera etc., for I am a technological amateur at best.  That comedic aspect aside, I hope you will find our conversation illuminating.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

Sources

by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (2021)
American Values: Lessons I Learned from My Family (2018)

Edward Curtin – Behind the Curtain

Patrice Lumumba

James Douglass – Hope Comes From Our Confronting The Unspeakable

JFK and the Unspeakable – Why He Died and Why It Matters (2008)

Jacques Ellul and Others – In The Absence of The Sacred

by Vincent Salandria
False Mystery: Essays on the Assassination of JFK (2017)

by Dick Russell, December 2021
Part 1: CIA’s Extraordinary Role Influencing Liberal Media Outlets Daily Kos, The Daily Beast, Rolling Stone
Part 2: The Belly of The Daily Beast and Its Perceptible Ties to the CIA

Senator John F. Kennedy Speech: [Imperialism – The Enemy of Freedom, 2 July 1957]

by David Talbot, reviewed by Edward Curtin
The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government) (2016)

Featured image is from Behind the Curtain

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

It’s nonstop in the western media. The message – war with Russia is coming. 

An American friend of mine, now living in Russia, has two sons in the US Army. One of them said to him today, “your two sons are going to be fighting your beloved Russia.” So the troops are obviously being told to prepare for war. One of those sons, an Army Special Forces soldier has been sent to western Ukraine several times to train the Nazi death squads that have been brought into the Ukrainian Army since the US orchestrated coup d’état in 2014.

Russia has repeatedly stated that they have no intention of invading Ukraine – unless Ukraine first strikes Crimea or the Donbass (eastern Ukraine that borders Russia where two Russian-ethnic republics are located that have continually been targets of the right-wing Kiev government since 2014).

Russia constantly says they have no desire to take over the failed Ukrainian state – in fact Moscow says that the US-NATO have driven that country into the ground since the 2014 coup and they should help it recover. But the Washington agenda is chaos – just like Iraq, Syria, Libya and other places US-NATO have destroyed with their ‘freedom war machine’.

Let’s take a moment and look at possible reasons for the US-NATO daily agitation for war.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

In 2020-2021, the World Economic Forum (WEF) sponsored a strategic simulation of a global cyber attack entitled exercise Concept 2021.  The WEF simulation consisted in:

 “An international capacity building initiative aimed at raising the global cyber resilience”. The participants included high tech companies, numerous banks and financial institutions, internet companies, cyber security agencies, corporate and government media, think tanks, law enforcement agencies including Interpol with representatives from 48 countries including Russia and countries of the former Soviet Union.

Israel’s “Collective Strength” Simulation

On December 9, 2021, a similar exercise was conducted in Jerusalem under the auspices of Israel’s Ministry of Finance. With the exception of Reuters, this event was not reported by the international media, nor was it formally acknowledged by the Israel’s Ministry of Finance.

The Israeli sponsored simulation focussed on the dangers of “a major cyberattack on the global financial system in an attempt to increase cooperation that could help to minimise any potential damage to financial markets and banks”. (See Steven Sheer, Reuters, December 9, 2021)

The objective of this exercise remains unclear.

The exercise entitled “Collective Strength” was attended by representatives from ten countries including Israel (the host country), the US, the UK, the UAE, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Thailand. Senior staff members from the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) were also present.

The Finance Ministry’s chief economist, Shira Greenberg, headed the Israeli team. The exercise was “further evidence of Israel’s global leadership” in the field of financial cyber defense, she said.

“The unique and groundbreaking exercise held today showed the importance of coordinated global action by governments together with central banks in the face of financial cyber threats,” Greenberg said. (Times of Israel, December 9, 2021)

 

Image: Reuters

According to Reuters

The simulated “war game”, as Israel’s Finance Ministry called it and planned over the past year, evolved over 10 days, with sensitive data emerging on the Dark Web. The simulation also used fake news reports that in the scenario caused chaos in global markets and a run on banks.

The simulation — likely caused by what officials called “sophisticated” players — featured several types of attacks that impacted global foreign exchange and bond markets, liquidity, integrity of data and transactions between importers and exporters.  …

The participants discussed multilateral policies to respond to the crisis, including a coordinated bank holiday, debt repayment grace periods, SWAP/REPO agreements and coordinated delinking from major currencies.

Rahav Shalom-Revivo, head of Israel’s financial cyber engagements, said international collaboration between finance ministries and international organizations “is key for the resilience of the financial eco-system.”  (Steven Sheer, Reuters, December 9, 2021, emphasis added)

What was contemplated by Israel was very similar to the WEF’s  Cyber Polygon 2021 exercise which consisted in:  “…A scenario of economic and social chaos involving the disruption of communications systems, the internet, financial and money transactions (including SWIFT), the power grid, global transportation, commodity trade, etc.”

It is worth noting that Klaus Schwab, founder and Executive Director of the WEF and architect of the “Great Reset” had intimated that :

“The frightening scenario of a comprehensive cyber attack could bring a complete halt to the power supply, transportation, hospital services, our society as a whole. The COVID-19 crisis would be seen in this respect as a small disturbance in comparison to a major cyberattack.” (emphasis added)

There was a definite geopolitical dimension to Israel’s Cyber Attack scenario. There were no representatives from several major economic powers including Russia, China and  Japan.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) which had sponsored the earlier cyber attack simulations in 2020-2021 involving the participation of 48 countries was not present at the event sponsored by Israel’s Ministry of Finance.

To read the complete Reuters Report click here

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.