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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It was decried as yet another one of Boris Johnson’s hairbrained schemes: a bridge connecting Scotland with Northern Ireland, therefore mainland Britain with the island of Ireland. ‘The world’s most stupid tunnel’ said Dominic Cummings; ‘nothing more than a vanity project’ scoffed the SNP Transport Minister.

Critics needn’t have worried: the Johnson government plans were shelved almost before they got off the ground. Sources cited financial concerns. Yet there are those who still think the project should have gone ahead.

Professor Alan Dunlop, the bridge’s architect, is one who believes in the scheme’s potential.  In an interview with The National newspaper, Dunlop says the UK government has missed out on an opportunity to boost the economy post-Brexit.  He states that ‘such a major transportation and infrastructure project would be an investment in the future after Brexit and also post-Covid.’ He compares it to former US President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal during the 1930s’ Great Depression which put so many people back to work, describing the plan as ‘transformative and a world first’.

There could have been other benefits as well for the Johnson government. At a time when the Union is arguably at its weakest, after Brexit, and Scottish independence and Irish reunification are on the table, the bridge project could have demonstrated London’s commitment to the devolved regions.  Symbolically, it would have permanently connected Northern Ireland to the UK mainland, emphasizing that it is very much a part of Great Britain, and will remain so.

But the idea of the bridge was immediately unpopular with politicians in Scotland and Northern Ireland alike. Fundamentally, they probably disliked the prospect of the UK government meddling in their regional infrastructure, but they also cited concerns about the cost and presence of dumped munitions in the Irish Sea. SDLP leader Colum Eastwood said ‘The Prime Minister’s fantasy bridge to Northern Ireland could cost £33 billion. This while our road and rail networks have been absolutely decimated from decades of underinvestment.’ Scottish Transport Secretary Michael Matheson reminded London that the Scottish government already had its own “robust process” for planning future transport infrastructure projects and that such a tunnel project simply wasn’t ‘a priority’ for Scotland or Northern Ireland.

The fact is that the devolved administrations of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, are so used to their autonomy that it will be very difficult now for London to start throwing its weight around again in these regions in future. Once freedom is given, it’s almost impossible to claw it back. Particularly after the 2016 Brexit result, when both Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU, the regions of the UK felt abandoned by Westminster and Boris Johnson’s determination to exit the EU ‘come what may’. There is no doubt a feeling that if such a project is going to go ahead between Scotland and Northern Ireland, it will be at the bidding of Edinburgh and Belfast, and not London.

Although the project has been temporarily shelved however, it doesn’t mean that it will stay there. It is likely that the UK government will come up with other schemes such as this in the near future to try to maintain the Union and dilute feelings of Irish and Scottish nationalism. It was reported in March this year that around 1000 British civil servants would be relocating from London to Glasgow to what is to be a second headquarters for the UK Cabinet Office. With Glasgow being something of a hub of Scottish nationalism in Scotland, there can be no doubt that this is part of a strategic move to plant pro-Union personnel in the city. Such ‘planting’ of the English has been done by the British government since time immemorial. In the 1600s English Protestants who had pledged allegiance to the King were ‘planted’ in Ulster in Northern Ireland, where their descendants remain to this day, still loyal to the British crown. Extraordinary to think such a technique is still in use today.

Therefore, bridge, or no bridge, Boris Johnson’s government will do what it takes to rally support for the Union in the devolved regions in the near future.  The question remains however, with nationalist sentiment higher than it has ever been (particularly in Scotland) is it now too little, too late?

*

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.

Johanna Ross is a journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland. You can follow the author on Twitter.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

In Syria’s north, in Tel Rifaat and Manbij, a new Turkish operation seems all but inevitable against the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

As of October 15^th, Turkey has been transferring additional special forces and armored vehicles to the border with Syria in the area of ​​the city of Kobani, which is under the control of the Kurds.

Turkey said its proxies in Syria’s Azaz region were hit in a guided missile attack on October 17^th, from Tel Rifaat by the YPG (the People’s Protection Units, the core of SDF).

Ankara has, more than once, said that if diplomacy fails, it would be time for a military operation. And justifications come a dime a dozen in Syria’s north.

Any casual observer could see that there hasn’t even been an attempt at actual diplomacy. Ankara has carried several military operations in Northern Syria targeted at the Kurdish, dubbing most of them terrorists and collaborators of the YPG, no negotiations have taken place, only artillery shells have spoken.

The operation against the Kurds was a foregone conclusion, simply waiting for the proper moment to happen.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said that Ankara was determined to eliminate threats originating in parts of Syria under Kurdish control and that the attack that killed two Turkish police officers was “the final straw”.

Meanwhile, the Kurds are saying that Turkey’s aggressive actions are making the entire Middle East unstable, and that if they begin their most recent operation, Ankara’s forces will be met with “heavy popular resistance”. They are “shocked” at Erdogan and Co.’s constant accusations and increasing assertiveness.e

Northern Syria is a sort of beehive, as it is filled with Iran-backed fighters, Turkish-supported insurgents, jihadists, US troops, Kurdish troops and Syrian Arab Army (SAA) forces operating across the patchwork of territories. Russian warplanes flying overhead add to the general sense of chaos.

Later on October 16^th, warplanes of the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) dropped leaflets over the Turkish-occupied Syrian towns of Marea and Azaz warning Turkish-backed militants against launching any attack in the northern Aleppo countryside.

The warning is unlikely to work, as Ankara has been itching for a fight for a while now, and it wants to make a show of force against any possible SAA offensive on Greater Idlib, where it mostly protects the interests of the al-Qaeda affiliated so-called “moderate opposition.”

Meanwhile, fourteen SAA servicemen were killed and three others were injured in a terrorist attack with two explosive devices that targeted a bus in Jisr al-Rais in Damascus. In total there were three explosive devices, but sappers managed to defuse one of them.

Occasional attacks such as this one are not entirely uncommon, as Bashar al-Assad’s government has many enemies attempting to impede its progress both towards Greater Idlib, and damage it’s recent success in the southern Dara’a province.

If Turkey begins an operation in northern Syria against the Kurdish groups, it would not be entirely unexpected if the SAA also begins its operation against the militants in Greater Idlib to take advantage of Ankara’s focus being elsewhere. In just a matter of days or weeks, all hell may break loose in Syria’s north.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Americans want to feel good about themselves by giving money to charities that claim to be helping the Syrian people.

But they are being duped into supporting terrorist forces that have brought misery and violence to the country—while crippling U.S. sanctions accentuate the humanitarian crisis.

Are major charitable organizations supporting terrorist organizations through tax-deductible donations while denying aid to those they claim to serve?

Doctors Without Borders, the Syrian Emergency Task Force, the International Rescue Committee, the Syrian American Medical Society, the White Helmets, Syrian Forum USA, Islamic Relief USA, CARE, the Syrian American Council, and other major tax-deductible charities all advertise that they are providing humanitarian aid to Syrians. Their ads appear in Facebook, Twitter and other social media on a regular basis. But their aid is not reaching 6.5 million displaced and needy Syrians in Syria.

Some of the international charities do excellent work in other countries, but in the small portion of Syria where they provide services and supplies through proxies, their work is under the control of al-Qaeda affiliates and their aid is directed primarily to the fighters and their families.

This is the case for both medical services like Doctors Without Borders, and for delivery of food, medical and other relief supplies, hoards of which have been discovered in massive quantities in terrorist headquarters after removal of the terrorists. The civilians in areas formerly held by the fighters report that they often had to pay extortionist sums to get services or supplies.

[Source: asavic.org.au]

The vast majority of displaced persons are in government-controlled Syria, where U.S. siege sanctions do not permit international organizations to distribute aid through Syrian charitable organizations such as the Syrian Red Crescent, the Syrian equivalent of the Red Cross.

The U.S. claims that humanitarian aid is exempt from the sanctions, but they permit aid to enter these areas only if the foreign charity distributes the aid through its own personnel(paid or volunteer). But very few organizations are prepared to create their own distribution system inside government-controlled Syria, and those who cooperate with terrorists fighting against Syria are not likely to be welcome in those areas.

In fact, only four U.S. charitable organizations can operate in most of Syria. The largest of these is the International Medical Corps, which provides medical aid throughout the world. In Syria it addresses psychosocial trauma, hygiene, malnutrition, and the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides personal protective equipment, and infection prevention and control, but not vaccines. Although it diagnoses malnutrition and reports that it is widespread, there is no indication that it provides actual food, perhaps for fear of violating U.S. sanctions.

The other three are tiny. One is the Adventist Development and Relief Agency, operated by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. It is authorized to operate in Syria, but there is no indication that it is currently doing so. Its website reports only that the organization offers aid to refugees through its office in Serbia.

Another is SAWA (“together” in Arabic) the Syrian-American Women’s Charitable Association, based in Washington, D.C. It is also authorized to operate in Syria, but serves mainly the refugee population outside. The only aid inside Syria reported on its website is to support another organization, al-Mubarra, to provide clean water to refugees returning to Syria.

The remaining U.S.-based 501(c)(3) tax exempt charitable organization is the Syria Solidarity Movement, a small California-based nonprofit that helps needy Syrians on an individual basis through volunteers.

Its aid includes shelter, medical procedures, economic self-sufficiency and similar measures for destitute Syrians. Separately, it also advocates for human rights, including respect for Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity, an end to U.S., Turkish and Israeli occupation of Syrian territory, and the lifting of all sanctions against Syria.

Paraplegic ambulance driver receives physiotherapy provided by Syria Solidarity Movement. [Source: syriasolidaritymovement.org]

More than 30 other international relief organizations, mostly from Europe, also operate in government-controlled areas of Syria. But most are small and not well known, despite the important work that many of them do with often scant means at their disposal.

The best known is probably Oxfam, based in the UK, but it is an exception in terms of size and effectiveness. United Nations agencies like UNHCR and UNICEF also provide relief under conditions limited by the sanctions.

Oxfam distributing aid in Syria. [Source: oxfamamerica.org]

If you have responded to appeals for donations to help Syrians, you have probably learned that almost half the entire Syrian population have fled their homes due to the fighting and destruction since March 2011. The appeals have described the suffering, malnutrition, homelessness, disease, exposure and desperation of the population.

Unfortunately, these appeals come primarily from organizations that have no intention of helping the majority of this needy population. Why? Because this majority fled to government-held areas, never left Syria and chose not to live under the “protection” of terrorist organizations and their Turkish allies in occupied Idlib province and small portions of Aleppo province.

This means that the Syrian government, Syrian civil and charitable groups and the exceptional international organizations operating in government areas had to take responsibility as best they could for these displaced and desperate persons even as major Syrian agricultural and petroleum resources were being confiscated by the U.S. military and draconian sanctions were destroying the Syrian economy. These organizations did their duty and distributed the increasingly meager resources as best they could, but they had no help from most of the organizations that appeal for your donations.

Syria is suffering like few other places on earth. Although in 2010 it was largely self-sufficient, with no debt and healthy exports, that now seems a distant memory. The war is a main factor, of course, but the U.S. is confiscating (stealing) most of Syria’s oil and much of its agricultural production. Worse than all of this, however, have been the crushing economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. and its allies.

Six-year-old Ghazzal Khudeir’s father died fighting terrorists and her home was destroyed. She and her mother and two brothers were homeless until the Syria Solidarity Movement got a small apartment for them. Millions more face similar circumstances. [Source: Syria Solidarity Movement]

Social and medical services and education, including university, are free to all Syrians, but the sanctions have severely affected Syria’s ability to deliver those services. Even its once strong pharmaceutical industry cannot import the necessary components to make medications, and its hospitals cannot get replacement parts for medical devices.

The U.S. theft of Syria’s oil is crippling both income and the transportation sector, and its currency has dropped to one-fifth of its former value because the sanctions forbid most banking transactions with Syria. Syria cannot even repair many of the homes destroyed in the fighting, due to a lack of building materials.

The economy is in shambles and the 9% unemployment rate would be much higher if not for the flight abroad of millions of Syrian citizens, many or most of whom would prefer to return home if their country were free of occupying forces and crippling sanctions.

Where are your donations going? Some become aid to Syrian refugees that have fled to other countries. But in many cases, they end up in occupied Idlib, where accountability for the funds is tenuous at best. Idlib has seen a transformation of its traditional population in the last decade.

As al-Qaeda affiliated fighters armed with vast quantities of sophisticated U.S. weaponry (e.g., TOW missiles) began to inflict unsustainable casualties on the Syrian defenders, most Idlib natives fled to other parts of Syria still under government control, emptying the area of its original inhabitants.

In their place came a new population from two sources. First, the large numbers of radical foreign mercenaries began to bring their families from the countries where they were recruited, with the encouragement of the Turkish government and the international alliance that is attempting to install a Salafi/Wahhabi government in Damascus.

Second, as the Syrian army began to turn the tide and retake its territory with the help of its Russian, Iranian, and Lebanese allies, the Syrian government offered the opposition fighters the option of a) amnesty and reintegration into Syrian society or b) safe passage to areas not yet under government control, mainly Idlib.

The first option was open only to Syrian nationals, so the second became the choice of many foreign mercenaries as well as some diehard Syrian opposition fighters. This is how Idlib came to be populated by a dizzying array of al-Qaeda affiliates speaking a diverse group of languages and dialects, only one of which is Syrian Arabic.

As the territories held by the non-Kurdish Syrian “opposition” shrunk to less than 3% of the total area of Syria—mostly Idlib province—so did the size of the population they served, probably less than a million, with a large percentage of non-Syrians.

Furthermore, the control of that territory was split among hundreds of al-Qaeda affiliates of different sizes, each of which usually refuses access to international aid agencies in their mini-realm. As a result, the charities came up with a protocol that paired them with local opposition partners (aka Civil Service Organizations) registered in Turkey, many of them organized into an umbrella organization called the Syria Relief Network.

These opposition CSOs act as proxies to deliver the aid through intermediaries that are trusted by the opposition groups. Baytna Syria is another organization that facilitates meetings in Turkey between the local proxies and the armed groups in order to arrange the protocols and logistics for the aid to be delivered to them at their camps within occupied Syria.

The protocol was described in early 2017 in “Localisation and cross-border assistance to deliver humanitarian health services in North-West Syria: a qualitative inquiry for The Lancet-AUB Commission on Syria,” which gives a good picture of the situation as it was in 2016. By 2021 the players had changed and much of the territory was back in government hands, but the description still quite accurately reflects the “remote monitoring” of aid administration, with two or more degrees of separation between the international charities and the recipients.

This leaves accountability opaque at best for aid distribution, and at worst significant skimming by the intermediaries and the governing councils of the recipient groups. As the report says, “some local charities that claim to focus their work on orphans or widows actually only cater to orphans and widows of opposition fighters.” And even when the aid goes to its intended population rather than to intermediaries, to what extent is it helping needy Syrians rather than immigrant populations from other parts of the world?

Aid is not always going to the neediest people. [Source: thenewhumanitarian.org]

In sum, the main international charity organizations are doing nothing to make things better for most Syrians, and their appeals for funds are misleading, since they fail to state that they do not operate in most of Syria. They do not transparently acknowledge in their appeals that they only serve small portions of Syria under the rule of al-Qaeda and its affiliates, or that some of its “local partners” have strong connections to the terrorists and that a significant portion of the population served is not even Syrian.

Sadly, this is what we have come to expect from “charitable” organizations that function at the behest of U.S. interests. Even when they provide needed aid, they do so only when it also serves U.S. hegemony in territories of interest to U.S. foreign policy. Furthermore, some get huge government grants but barely provide aid at all.

The White Helmets, for example, have received considerably more than $60 million. These funds are primarily for operations, liaison, legal counsel, administration, public relations and film production (propaganda), news feeds to networks and publications, and similar activities. Even their rescue work has been directed primarily to the fighters and their families.

Such organizations must therefore be considered allies of, or adjuncts to, the “rebel” fighters that the U.S. supports with lavish military aid that typically gets used by terrorist groups that the U.S. claims to be fighting but which the U.S. tacitly supports if they are against the Syrian government.

U.S.-funded White Helmets assist in public execution in rebel-held Syria. [Source: twitter.com]

Regrettably, the U.S. perceives the death, destruction and destitution of the Syrian people to be a desirable part of its campaign against Syria. The irony is that, by devoting billions of U.S. dollars of taxpayer money to create misery for Syrians, it also denies its own citizens the use of these funds for their benefit, bringing misery to them as well.

*

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 Larudee is a former Ford Foundation project supervisor and Fulbright-Hays lecturer in Lebanon, and US government advisor to Saudi Arabia. He co-founded the Global March to Jerusalem, the Free Palestine Movement and the Syria Solidarity Movement, and went to Syria with delegations led by Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire in 2013 and 2014. He was one of six US observers of the Syrian presidential elections in June, 2014.

He is treasurer of the Association for Investment in Popular Action Committees, EIN 20-5516191, which is the parent nonprofit corporation of human rights projects like the Northern California chapter of the International Solidarity Movement, the Free Palestine Movement, the Syria Solidarity Movement and others, and which is authorized to accept tax-exempt donations for human rights advocacy.

Paul can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image is from rescue.org

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The annual Valdai Club meeting has always been positioned as absolutely essential when it comes to understanding the non-stop movement of geopolitical tectonic plates across Eurasia. 

The ongoing 18th meeting in Sochi, Russia once again lived up to expectations. The overall theme was Global Shake-Up in the 21^st Century: The Individual, Values, and the State. It expands on the theme of a “crumbling world” that Valdai had been analyzing since 2018: as the organizers highlight, this “has ceased to be a metaphor and turned into a palpable reality before our own eyes.”

Framing the discussions in Sochi, Valdai released two intriguing reports capable of offering prime food for thought, especially for the Global South: The Age of the Pandemic: Year Two. The Future is Back, and History, to be Continued: The Utopia of a Diverse World.

The “Future is Back” concept essentially means that, after the Covid-19 shock, the notion of a linear one-sided future, complete with “progress” defined as globalized democracy enshrining the “end of history,” is dead and buried.

Globalization, as framed by neoliberalism, proved to be finite.

The slide towards medical totalitarianism and the trappings of a maximum-security penitentiary are self-evident. As some Valdai participants noted, Foucault’s concept of “biopower” is no longer abstract philosophy.

The first session in Sochi went a long way in terms of framing our current predicament, starting with how the current incandescent US-China clash is unfolding.

Thomas Graham, from the Council on Foreign Relations – the conceptual matrix of the US establishment – recited the proverbial “indispensable nation” platitudes and how it’s “prepared to defend Taiwan,” even as he admitted, “the Biden administration is still articulating its policy.”

It was up to Zhou Bo, from the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, to ask the hard questions: if the US and China are in competition, “how far are we from conflict?” He stressed “cooperation” instead of a slide into confrontation, yet China “will cooperate from a position of strength.”

Zhou Bo also clarified how Beijing is “not interested in bipolarity,” in terms of China “replacing the USSR during the Cold War”: after all, “China is not competing with the US elsewhere in the world.”

Yet even as “the center of gravity is moving irreversibly to the East,” he admitted the current situation “is more dangerous than during the Cold War.”

Surveying the global chessboard, former Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim stressed “the absurdity of the UN Security Council deciding even matters related to the pandemic.”

Amorim voiced one of the Global South’s key demands: the “need for a new institutional framework. The closer we get would be the G-20 – a little more African, a little less European.” This G-20 would command the authority the current UN Security Council lacks.

So Amorim had to tie it all to the centrality of inequality: his quip about “coming from a forgotten region,” Latin America, was very much on point. He also had to stress, “we didn’t want a Pax Americana.” A real, “concrete step” towards multipolarity would be “a big conference” that could be led by this “modified G-20.”

Togtbaatar Damdin, a Mongolian parliamentarian, evoked “my great, great, great grandfather,” Genghis Khan, and how he built “that huge empire and called it Pax Mongolica,” focused on what matters to the here and now: “peaceful trade and economic integration in Greater Eurasia.” Damdin stressed, “we [Mongolians] no longer believe in war. It’s much more profitable to be involved in trade.”

A constant theme in this and other Valdai sessions has been “Hybrid War” and “Shadow War”, the new imperial instruments deployed against parts of Latin America, the greater Middle East and Russia-China, in contrast to “a transparent system under the rule of law – and kept by international law,” as noted by Oksana Sinyavskaya from the Institute for Social Policy at the Higher School of Economics.

The discussions in Sochi essentially focused on the twilight of the current hegemonic socio-economic system – essentially neoliberalism; the crisis of alliance systems – as in the rot within NATO; and the toxic confluence of Hybrid War and the pandemic – impacting billions of people. An inevitable conclusion: the current dysfunctional international system is incapable of dealing with crisis management.

In the roundtable presenting the Valdai report on Year Two of the Age of Pandemic, Thomas Gomart, a director of the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), stressed how hard it still was to analyze the geopolitics of data.

With the Chinese privileging the concept of “ecological civilization,” questions of technological monitoring – as in how social credit is framed – are now on the forefront.

And as we delve deeper into “invisible wars” – Gomart’s own terminology – we face a toxic convergence of environmental degradation and hyper-concentration of digital platforms.

Gomart also made two crucial points that escape many analyses across the Global South: Washington has decided to remain the primus inter pares, and won’t abdicate from this position no matter what. This is happening even as global capital – heavily slanted towards the US – wants to find the new China.

That set the stage for Nelson Wong, the vice-chairman of the Shanghai Center for RimPac Strategic and International Studies, to diplomatically shatter divide and rule tactics and the US obsession with a zero-sum game. Wong stressed how China “does not hold a hostile attitude towards the US”; its aim, he claims, is a “peaceful rise.”

But most significantly, Wong made sure that “the post-pandemic world will not be determined by the outcome of the confrontation between the US and China, or by splitting the world into two competing camps.”

This hopeful perspective implies the Global South will eventually have its say – aligned with Amorim’s proposal of a tweaked G-20.

The Valdai discussions in Sochi significantly take place just as Moscow decided to suspend the work of its mission to NATO from November 1, and close the NATO information office in Moscow.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had already stressed that Moscow no longer pretends that changes in the relationship with NATO are possible in the near future: from now on, if they want to talk, they should contact the Russian ambassador to Belgium.

One of the questions at Sochi had to revolve on whether Moscow should expect NATO to take the first step to improve relations. Lavrov had, once again, to repeat the obvious: “Yes, we proceed from this. We have never started the deterioration of our relations with NATO, the European Union, or any other country in the West or any other region of the world.

“Everyone knows this story well. When Saakashvili in August 2008 gave the criminal order to bomb the city of Tskhinval and the positions of peacekeepers (including Russian ones), Russia insisted on convening the Russia-NATO Council to consider this situation.

“The then US secretary of state Condoleeza Rice categorically refused, although when creating the Russia-NATO Council, the founding act emphasized that it should act in any ‘weather,’ especially when crisis situations occur. This is one example that marked the beginning of the current state of affairs between the US and NATO.”

So Russia has established the new game in (Atlanticist) town: we only talk to the masters and ignore the lackeys. As for NATO now geared to create “capabilities” to be used against China, the Global South may collectively engage in rolls of laughter – considering the fresh NATO humiliation in Afghanistan.

With the inevitability of an EU more and more geo-economically intertwined with China, dysfunctional NATO at best may keep on prowling as a bunch of zombie rabid dogs. Now that’s a Utopia theme for Valdai 2022.

*

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 Asia Times.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: An aerial view of Sochi, Russia. Photo: Wikipedia / Евгений Лодянов

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

For several years now a common front in the relentless propaganda war by Western media and NGOs against Nicaragua’s Sandinista government has involved false accusations that the authorities damage or neglect the rights and well being of the country’s Indigenous peoples.

In fact, the opposite is the case. Nicaragua’s indigenous peoples enjoy the most progressive and advanced system of autonomous self-government in the hemisphere. But reporting by the Western human rights industry, in particular by US and European NGOs claiming to defend Indigenous peoples, consistently omits that fact to focus on sporadic incidents of violence, which they systematically misrepresent.

In general, North American and European anti-Sandinista propaganda published by corporate or billionaire funded organizations like Global Witness or the Oakland Institute and international news media advance three main false claims

• Nicaragua’s government permits and even encourages invasion by outsiders called “colonos” of Indigenous lands, in particular affecting the Biosphere Reserve of Bosawas
• the government fails to investigate or remedy incidents of violence against the country’s Indigenous peoples’ communities
• the Indigenous peoples concerned are invariably innocent victims whose interests are genuinely represented and defended by local foreign funded NGOs

First hand reporting over the last year has categorically demonstrated that every one of these propaganda claims is untrue.

Most recently, a team of reporters visited the site of a violent attack that took place in Kiwakumbai in the nucleus of the Bosawas Biosphere Reserve. Their reporting demonstrated that some members of local Indigenous communities themselves not only promoted illicit use of their people’s lands causing deforestation and contamination of water sources but also participated in murderous violence.

Download the complete report (PDF 1.4Mb)

The incident at Kiwakumbai and a subsequent incident involving a nearby community called Palan cast new light on similar events in the community of Alal in January 2020.

All these events demonstrate:

• land settlement in the area has a long history not infrequently involving members of local Indigenous communities engaged in irregular land transactions with outsiders, leading occasionally to violent disputes in which some members of Indigenous communities themselves have engaged in murderous attacks
• despite the area’s remoteness and difficult terrain, violent incidents invariably receive prompt and thorough investigation by the authorities
• government institutions including the police and the army coordinate with the regional autonomous government, the Indigenous territorial governments and the Indigenous community governments as well as the relevant local municipal authority both to remedy loss and damage to the victims, and also to resolve the immediate conflict while seeking to prevent future conflicts

None of this reality is ever reported by local opposition media, who uncritically cite information from local foreign funded NGOs like the Center for Justice and Human Rights of Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast (CEJUDHCAN), the Center for Legal Assistance to Indigenous Peoples (CALPI) or the Fundación del Río, all aligned with Nicaragua’s political opposition.

These NGOs falsely claim to represent the area’s Indigenous peoples, a claim rejected by Indigenous leaders themselves, for example by the leaders of the Mayangna Nation whose lands include the communities of Alal, Kiwakumbai and Palan. In an extensive interview from November 2020, those leaders acknowledge the positive role of the Nicaraguan government in conflict remediation and resolution. They also acknowlege the involvement of some members of their own Indigenous people’s communities in irregular land transactions.

This makes available reporting on conflicts affecting Indigenous peoples in Nicaragua very different to reporting on such conflicts in neighboring Honduras, for example. In Honduras, reporting on the situation of Indigenous peoples is often based on information from the Consejo Cívico de Organizaciones Populares e Indígenas de Honduras (COPINH) which is an organization authentically representing the Lenca people in western Honduras.

Likewise, the Organización Fraternal Negra Hondureña (OFRANEH), genuinely represents the Garífuna people living along the country’s Caribbean coast. Both organizations have mass support from their peoples at grass roots resisting corporate depredation abetted by the corrupt Honduran authorities.

So when international NGOs base their reports on information from these or similar organizations in Honduras, they can be regarded as generally trustworthy. This has been borne out, for example, in the cases of Bertha Cáceres or of the four garífuna activists forcibly disappeared in July 2020.

But in the case of Nicaragua, international NGOs posing as defenders of Indigenous rights base their reports on unrepresentative local foreign funded organizations all of whom are aligned with the country’s political opposition. Their version of events in Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast is directly contradicted by elected representatives of the region’s Indigenous people’s governments.

The material collected here includes a review by independent writer John Perry of reporting on the situation of Nicaragua’s Indigenous peoples, as well as interviews and reports about the violent incident at Kiwakumbai and its social and economic context. Practically everything emerging from those interviews and reports confirms the views expressed by the leaders of the Mayangna Nation in the interview they gave in November 2020. All told, this material demonstrates the utter falsity of reporting on Nicaragua by international NGOs and news media.

It is a mistake to dismiss this reality as some kind of unfortunate oversight or misunderstanding on the part of the international organizations concerned. The Western human rights industry depends on corporate and related funding whose objective is to advance the social, economic and political interests of the wealthy elite interests concerned. Self-evidently, a corollary of that objective is to attack any government prepared to defend its country’s national sovereignty against corporate and related elite interests.

To that end, Western human rights organizations and international institutions like those of the United Nations have been intensely coopted by sinister corporate and related power brokers like, for example, the influential Clinton network, among others. That is the underlying explanation for the relentless assault on Nicaragua’s Sandinista government by the Western human rights industry in general and its subsidiary Indigenous peoples’ rights branch in particular. These international organizations and the local NGOs they depend on are financed by Western elites who for centuries have plundered, enslaved and massacred Indigenous peoples around the world. For its part, Nicaragua’s revolutionary government has defended the rights of the country’s Indigenous peoples by promoting the most advanced model of autonomy in Latin America and the Caribbean.

*

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 Tortilla con Sal.

Stephen Sefton,  renowned authors and political analyst based in northern Nicaragua is actively involved in community development work focussing on education and health care.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Featured image: The mining camp, scene of the attack at  Kiwakumbai (Source: Tortilla con Sal)

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

According to all-cause mortality statistics adjusted for population growth, the number of Americans who have died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 14% higher than 2018, the pre-COVID year with the highest all-cause mortality, and 16% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019

Did COVID-19 raise the death toll despite mass vaccination, or are people dying at increased rates because of it?

The COVID jab killed an estimated 1,018 people per million doses administered during the first 30 days of the European vaccination campaign

When counting only deaths categorized as COVID-19 deaths, the death toll from the jabs is estimated to be between 200 and 500 deaths per million doses administered. With 4 billion doses having been administered around the world, that means 800,000 to 2 million so-called “COVID-19 deaths” may in fact be vaccine-induced deaths

Data from 23 countries reveal the number of new COVID cases (i.e., positive tests) after the start of the COVID jab campaign is 3.8 times higher than it was before the rollout of the shots, and the daily COVID death rate is 3.82 times higher

*

According to all-cause mortality statistics,¹ the number of Americans who have died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 16% higher than 2018, the pre-COVID year with the highest all-cause mortality, and 18% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019. Adjusted for population growth of about 0.6% annually, the mortality rate in 2021 is 16% above the average and 14% above the 2018 rate.

The obvious question is, why did more people die in 2021 (January through August) despite the rollout of COVID shots in December 2020? Did COVID-19 raise the death toll despite mass vaccination, or are people dying at increased rates because of the COVID jabs?

Vaccine-Induced Mortality

In a two-part series,² Matthew Crawford of the Rounding the Earth Newsletter, examined mortality statistics before and after the rollout of the COVID shots. In Part 1,³ he revealed the shots killed an estimated 1,018 people per million doses administered (note, this is doses, not the number of individuals vaccinated) during the first 30 days of the European vaccination campaign.

After adjusting for deaths categorized as COVID-19 deaths, he came up with an estimate of 200 to 500 deaths per million doses administered. With 4 billion doses having been administered around the world, that means 800,000 to 2 million so-called “COVID-19 deaths” may in fact be vaccine-induced deaths. As explained by Crawford:⁴

“This does not even include vaccine-induced deaths that have not been recorded as COVID cases, though I suspect that latter number is smaller since the only good way to hide the vaccine mortality signal is to smuggle deaths through the already-established COVID death toll.”

Corroborating Crawford’s calculations are data from Norway, where 23 deaths were reported following the COVID jab at a time when only 40,000 Norwegians had received the shot.

Not taking into account the possibility of underreporting in Norway, that gives us a mortality rate of 575 deaths per million doses administered. What’s more, after conducting autopsies on 13 of those deaths, all 13 were determined to be linked to the COVID jab. As reported by Norway Today back in January 2021:⁵

“‘The reports might indicate that common side effects from mRNA vaccines, such as fever and nausea, may have led to deaths in some frail patients,’ chief physician Sigurd Hortemo in the Norwegian Medicines Agency noted.

The Norwegian Medicines Agency and the National Institute of Public Health (FHI) jointly assess all side effects reports. As a result, the FHI has updated the corona vaccination guide with new advice on the vaccination of frail elderly people.

‘If you are very frail, you should probably not be vaccinated,’ Steinar Madsen at the Norwegian Medicines Agency said at a webinar on corona vaccine for journalists …”

Is the COVID Jab Responsible for Excess Deaths?

Crawford goes on to look at data from countries that have substantial vaccine uptake while simultaneously having very low rates of COVID-19. This way, you can get a better idea as to whether the COVID jabs might be responsible for the excess deaths, as opposed to the infection itself.

He identified 23 countries that fit this criteria, accounting for 1.88 billion individuals, roughly one-quarter of the global population. Before the COVID jabs rolled out, these nations reported a total of 103.2 COVID-related deaths per million residents. Five nations had more than 200 COVID deaths per million while seven had fewer than 10 deaths per million.

As of August 1, 2021, 25.35% of inhabitants in these 23 nations had received a COVID jab and 10.36% were considered fully vaccinated. In all, 673 million doses had been administered. Based on these data, Crawford estimates the excess death rate per million vaccine doses is 411, well within the window of the 200 to 500 range he calculated in Part 1.

Equally intriguing is the finding that the number of new COVID cases (i.e., positive tests) after the start of the COVID jab campaign is 3.8 times higher than it was before the rollout of the shots, and the daily COVID death rate is 3.82 times higher.

Morocco and Saudi Arabia were the only two nations in which the case rate and COVID death rates went down after the vaccination campaign started. “If deaths were scaled by 3.82 due to the vaccines, then there were 276,465 excess deaths during this time span,” Crawford writes.

He goes through a number of adjustments to remove outliers that might skew the data sets, so for a more detailed review, see the original article. But in summary, after removing nations with more than 100 COVID deaths per million before their vaccination program (to evaluate the impact of the shots alone), he came up with 13 countries with a combined population of 354 million.

The number of doses administered in these 13 countries is similar to the original cohort. The adjusted number of excess deaths per million is now 318, which is still within the 200 to 500 per million range.

Remarkably, though, the number of COVID deaths in these 13 countries is 11.61 times higher post-vaccination, compared to before the jabs were rolled out. In five of the 13 countries, a whopping 90% of their COVID-19 fatalities have been logged after their vaccination campaigns began! This obliterates any fantasy that the COVID injections are actually helping.

“On face, these results reinforce the case that the experimental vaccines are killing people,”Crawford writes. “At the very least, this is one more dramatic [lack of] safety signal that should spur authorities who care about our health to come to the table for a discussion about how to refine the data they’re not analyzing to anyone’s knowledge …

More concerning is that numerous of these nations — largely located in Asia — seemed to have no susceptibility at all to the pandemic prior to vaccination. There are a lot of theories as to why this might be aside from just vaccines triggering deaths.

Meanwhile, health authorities still seem to have no issue with the lack of risk report or risk-benefit analysis performed by any of the vaccine manufacturers or anyone else. This strikes me as one of the worst signs in my lifetime that corporations have taken over government on an essentially complete level.”

US Whistleblower Highlights Underreporting

In mid-July 2021, America’s Frontline Doctors, represented by Renz Law,⁶ filed a lawsuit⁷ against the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra. In that lawsuit, they cite whistleblower testimony by a computer programmer with expertise in health care data analytics and access to Medicare and Medicaid data maintained by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

According to this whistleblower, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) under-reports deaths caused by the COVID shots by a conservative factor of five or more. She claims the number of Americans killed by the shots was at least 45,000 as of July 9, 2021.

At that time, VAERS reported 9,048 deaths following COVID injection. That number is now 16,310 (as of October 1, 2021⁸). Using an under-reporting factor of five, that gives us an estimated death toll of 81,550.

COVID Shots May Have Killed More Than 200,000 in the US

Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, has come up with even more drastic numbers. In the video “Vaccine Secrets: COVID Crisis,”⁹ he argues that VAERS can be used to determine causality, and shows how the VAERS data indicate more than 212,000 Americans have already been killed by the COVID shots.¹⁰

Anywhere from 2 million to 5 million have also been injured by them in some way. Kirsch is so confident in his analyses, he’s offered a $1 million academic grant to anyone who can show his analysis is flawed by a factor of four or more. He’s even offered $1 million to any official willing to simply have a public debate with him about the data, and none has accepted the challenge.

Woman’s Obituary Blames COVID Vaccine for Her Death

While it may be challenging to determine exactly how many people have died as a direct result of the COVID shots, we can be certain that deaths are occurring.

One Oregon woman’s obituary¹¹ went viral after her family blamed side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on her death. The family minced no words, calling out state and local governments for their “heavy-handed vaccine mandates.” Jessica Berg Wilson left behind a husband and two young daughters, aged 5 and 3.

“Jessica Berg Wilson, 37, of Seattle, Washington, passed away unexpectedly September 7, 2021 from COVID-19 vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) surrounded by her loving family,” the obituary states.¹²

“Jessica was an exceptionally healthy and vibrant 37-year-old young mother with no underlying health conditions … Local and state governments were determined to strip away her right to consult her wisdom and enjoy her freedom.

She had been vehemently opposed to taking the vaccine, knowing she was in good health and of a young age and thus not at risk for serious illness. In her mind, the known and unknown risks of the unproven vaccine were more of a threat.

But, slowly, day by day, her freedom to choose was stripped away. Her passion to be actively involved in her children’s education — which included being a Room Mom — was, once again, blocked by government mandate.

Ultimately, those who closed doors and separated mothers from their children prevailed. It cost Jessica her life. It cost her children the loving embrace of their caring mother. And it cost her husband the sacred love of his devoted wife.”

Picture of Jessica (killed by COVID jab) with her family.

COVID Jab Effects Are Rapidly Waning

To add insult to injury, there’s ample evidence showing that whatever benefit you glean from the COVID jab is short-lived, requiring you to risk life and limb yet again with another booster shot (and probably more to come after that).

If you need a refresher on the potential mechanisms of harm, download and read Stephanie Seneff’s excellent paper,¹³ “Worse Than The Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research in collaboration with Dr. Greg Nigh.

Among those incriminating data sets is an analysis by Humetrix,¹⁴ which assessed the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against the delta variant among 5.6 million Medicare beneficiaries, aged 65 and older. Three key questions answered by the data analysis are:

1. Is vaccine effectiveness waning over time?
2. Is vaccine effectiveness reduced for the delta variant?
3. Does the need for a booster shot vary by sub-population?

The executive summary lays out the answers:

1. Yes, the effectiveness of both Moderna and Pfizer’s injections rapidly wane in this cohort.
2. As of mid-August 2021, the vaccine effectiveness against delta infection was only 41% and effectiveness against hospitalization due to the delta variant was 62%, both of which are “lower than previously reported.”
3. The shots were even less effective in those over the age of 75, and a breakthrough hospitalization risk model suggests prioritizing people over age 65 for boosters.

Breakthrough Infections Don’t Seem so Rare in the Elderly

According to Humetrix, between January 2021 and August 14, 2021, 5.6 million Medicare beneficiaries (out of 20 million) were fully vaccinated with either two doses of Pfizer or Moderna, or one dose of Janssen.

Of those, 148,000 experienced a breakthrough infection, 30,000 required hospitalization and 9,400 needed intensive care. That means breakthrough infections in this age group occur at a rate of about 1 in 38, which doesn’t strike me as being particularly rare.

As per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, patients were only considered fully vaccinated two weeks after the second dose. So, anyone who developed COVID-19 symptoms before then were not counted.

While the analysis reports success, saying the hospitalization rate for breakthrough infections was reduced by one-third compared to the hospitalization rate between March and December 2020, and the death rate in breakthrough infections was reduced six-fold, a central problem remains.

The shots don’t protect you for very long. As shown on Page 8 of the PowerPoint, the breakthrough infection rate at five and six months’ post-vaccination is double the rate at three and four months’ post-vaccination.

Considering the risk of lethal vaccine injury is elevated in the elderly — as noted by the Norwegian Medicines Agency — starting them on a treadmill of booster shots strikes me as an idea that can only end in heartbreak for families around 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.

Notes

¹ Twitter Jeremy Horpedahl October 7, 2021

^2, 4 Rounding the Earth Newsletter August 7, 2021

³ Rounding the Earth Newsletter August 5, 2021

⁵ Norway Today January 14, 2021

⁶ Renz-law.com

⁷ US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama Civil Action No: 2: 21-cv-00702-CLM (PDF)

⁸ OpenVAERS Data as of October 1, 2021

⁹ Lew Rockwell October 11, 2021

¹⁰ SKirsch.io/vaccine-resources

^11, 12 Obits.Oregonlive.com Jessica Berg Wilson

¹³ International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 38-79

¹⁴ Humetrix Powerpoint September 21, 2021

Featured image is from America’s Frontline Doctors

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

To support his claim, Powell produced a vial of white powder, allegedly anthrax from the Iraqi arsenal. He played a recording of a supposed discussion among Iraqi military officers about UN inspection teams, which had been doctored to make the proceedings appear sinister. Staking his reputation as a cautious, matter-of-fact soldier, four-star general, and former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who served four presidents, he produced photographs of alleged Iraqi WMD depots and other facilities. He also showed detailed drawings of what he claimed were Saddam Hussein’s mobile chemical weapons production facilities.

As we now know, and as some of us suspected at the time, every statement Powell made on that day was untrue. Every single assertion was backed by “sources” fabricated by the neocon cabal which had decided to push America into war against Iraq many years earlier. Powell never belonged to this group, which looked down on him and eagerly plotted to exploit him. They wanted to turn him into a useful idiot, to use him – broadly speaking – the way Stalin used Walter Duranty and Hitler used Lloyd George.

Colin Powell, to his eternal discredit, allowed some very bad people to use him. He failed to check the veracity of the material they prepared for him, even though his presentation was potentially a matter of life and death for thousands of people. He was told that his speech had been prepared by the National Security Council. In reality it was written by Vice President Dick Cheney’s team, which in the words of a summary of events published Monday by The Guardian,  “led the charge in browbeating CIA analysts into coming up with evidence and when that failed, going around the CIA altogether.”

Could Powell not smell a rat? Two years later, when he was no longer a senior official, Powell said the speech was “a blot” on his career. “It was painful,” Powell told Barbara Walters. “It’s painful now.”

His expression of remorse isn’t enough to exculpate him. Powell could not have been willfully oblivious to what was going on, as some of Stalin’s fellow travelers were. He made a deliberate moral choice, fully in accordance with his rank and station. “For Colin Powell, the situation put reputation and duty in conflict,” according to Sir Christopher Meyer, the UK ambassador in Washington at the time. “When the commander in chief of the United States of America says ‘Go to New York and deliver a presentation,’ a man like Powell doesn’t say no.”

Indeed, this is the crux of the matter. At a crucial juncture in his life Colin Powell decided that he would just follow orders, like countless officers before him, most notably German ones. He may have been a decent sort to start with, but the Superior Orders defense is unlikely to save him from the harsh judgment of history.

*

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. Srdja Trifkovic, foreign affairs editor of Chronicles, is the author of The Sword of the Prophet and Defeating Jihad.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Neoconservatives—like Michael Rubin at the American Enterprise Institute (“The One Foreign Base Biden Should Abandon”)—haven’t gotten over President Joe Biden’s withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.

But Rubin is also upset that “the Biden administration is determined to hold on to the one base that America should have abandoned a decade ago.” This is Incirlik Air Base in Turkey.

Rubin maintains that during the Cold War, Incirlik was crucial. But even though “the base supported U-2 surveillance flights, U.S. operations during the 1958 Lebanon crisis, the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, and, most recently, the fight against the Taliban,” Incirlik—which “also hosts approximately 50 nuclear weapons”—is “now a strategic liability” instead of “a strategic asset.”

Turkey “is as much an enemy as an ally.” President Erdogan cannot be trusted. “Every American serviceman, contractor, and family at Incirlik are potential hostages.” “Incirlik now risks a repeat of the 1979 Iran hostage crisis.” An American “departure from Incirlik” would not “affect U.S. operations.” The United States should use the “Mihail Kogalniceanu air base in Romania” or the “Souda Bay Naval Base” in Greece. It would not be “irresponsible” to leave “an obsolete base.”

Rubin is right. The United States needs to “end the U.S. military presence in Turkey.”

But here is a better idea: Why not abandon all foreign bases?

According to the Department of Defense’s (DOD) Base Structure Report: “The DoD manages a worldwide real property portfolio that spans all 50 states, 8 U.S. territories with outlying areas, and 45 foreign countries. The majority of these foreign sites are located in Germany (194 sites), Japan (121 sites), and South Korea (83 sites).” Incredibly, the DOD is “one of the Federal government’s larger holders of real estate managing a global real property portfolio that consists of over 585,000 facilities (buildings, structures, and linear structures), located on 4,775 sites worldwide and covering approximately 26.9 million acres.” The DOD has acknowledged the existence of about 800 U.S. military bases in 80 countries, but we know from the work of Nick Turse, David Vine, and the late Chalmers Johnson that that number could be over 1,000. The United States has about 95 percent of the world’s foreign military bases. “Red” China has just one.

There are also about 175,000 active duty U.S. troops overseas in over 170 countries and territories. World War II ended in 1945, and yet the United States still maintains tens of thousands of troops in Germany and Japan.

Why not abandon all foreign military bases, bring all of the troops home (not just the ones in Afghanistan), and stop policing the world? And while we’re at it, turn over all of the DOD golf courses in Japan to the Japanese.

The U.S. global empire of bases and troops is unnecessary to the defense of the United States, a global force for evil, and a drain on U.S. taxpayers. Its only purpose is to carry out an imperialistic, militaristic, reckless, belligerent, and meddling U.S. foreign policy that is not in the interest of the American people.

*

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.

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society.

Featured image is by max.ku via Shutterstock

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Over a hundred workers at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in Albuquerque, New Mexico, are suing the federal government due to mandates involving the experimental Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines. Specifically, the workers named the federal contractor Triad National Security LLC, which is paid by the Department of Energy to run the lab.

The plaintiffs in the case include scientists, nuclear engineers, project managers, research technicians and others with high-security clearances. Some employees say that many of those who risk losing their jobs are specialists in their fields and that it would be difficult to replace them immediately.

A state judge has the power to issue an injunction that prevents the workers from being fired as the case is being considered. The workers claim that the management has created a hostile work environment as it tried to induce employees into getting vaccinated.

Some employees have estimated that the lab could lose up to 10 percent of its workforce because of the mandate. The lab says more than 96 percent of its workers have had at least one COVID-19 vaccine shot. The lab employs around 14,000 and is among the largest employers in the state.

Attorney Jonathan Diener, who is representing the workers, says that the case includes scientific information that should be considered. He is hoping that the judge would make the decision soon as people’s lives stand to be upended in the process.

“The fact that the vaccines have only been shown to reduce symptoms of the recipient and not prevent infection or transmission is a fact extremely important to plaintiffs’ claims,” the workers state in the lawsuit.

Since the lab’s vaccination rate is high, forcing the few holdouts to get the vaccine will no longer make an epidemiological difference. “If LANL doesn’t have herd immunity at this point, there is no basis for the mandate. LANL is not being scientific,” the workers point out in the lawsuit.

Biden imposes stringent vaccine rules

Biden’s new vaccination requirements could apply to as many as 100 million Americans as he imposed stringent vaccine rules on federal workers, employers and healthcare staff in an attempt to contain COVID-19.

The president has criticized millions of Americans who remain unvaccinated despite the months of availability and incentives. “We’ve been patient. But our patience is wearing thin, and your refusal has cost all of us,” he says. He adds that the unvaccinated are “bringing a lot of damage” in the country’s recovery process.

Republican leaders and some union chiefs have threatened to sue the Biden administration over the vaccine mandates. (Related: Republicans vow to sue Biden over COVID-19 vaccine mandate.)

Governor Henry McMaster of South Carolina says that Biden has thumbed through the Constitution, and changes like vaccine mandates should be negotiated with bargaining units where appropriate.

Biden has required employers with over 100 workers to be vaccinated or get tested for the virus weekly, which can affect about 80 million Americans. Another 17 million workers at health facilities that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid will also have to be fully vaccinated.

Employees for the executive branch and contractors who do business with the federal government are also required to get vaccines, with no option to test out. Several federal agencies have already announced vaccine requirements for much of their staff, especially those in healthcare roles.

*

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 Pandemic.news

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The Biden administration on Wednesday unveiled its plan to ‘quickly’ vaccinate roughly 28 million children age 5-11, pending authorization from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The jab – which doesn’t prevent transmission of Covid-19 will be available at pediatricians, local pharmacies, and possibly even at schools, according to the White House, which expects FDA authorization of the Pfizer shot for children – the least likely to fall seriously ill or die from the virus, in a matter of weeks, according to the Associated Press.

Federal regulators will meet over the next two weeks to weigh the benefits of giving shots to kids, after lengthy studies meant to ensure the safety of the vaccines.

Within hours of formal approval, expected after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory meeting scheduled for Nov. 2-3, doses will begin shipping to providers across the country, along with smaller needles necessary for injecting young kids, and within days will be ready to go into the arms of kids on a wide scale. -AP

According to the announcement, the White House has secured enough to supply more than 25,000 doses for pediatricians and primary care physicians who have already signed up to deliver the vaccine, while the country now has enough Pfizer vaccine to jab roughly 28 million kids who will soon be eligible, meaning this won’t be a slow roll-out like we saw 10 months ago when doses and capacity issues meant adults had to wait.

Meanwhile, the White House is rolling out an ‘advertising’ campaign to convince parents and kids that the vaccine is safe and effective. According to the report, “the administration believes trusted messengers — educators, doctors, and community leaders — will be vital to encouraging vaccinations.”

“COVID has also disrupted our kids lives. It’s made school harder, it’s disrupted their ability to see friends and family, it’s made youth sports more challenging,” said surgeon general Dr. Vivek Murthy in a Wednesday statement to NBC. “Getting our kids vaccinated, we have the prospect of protecting them, but also getting all of those activities back that are so important to our children.”

According to Murthy, the administration is leaving the question of mandates for school, local and state officials.

“Those are decisions on, when it comes to school requirements, that are made by localities and by states,” said Murthy. “You’ve seen already some localities and states talk about vaccine requirements for kids. And I think it’s a reasonable thing to consider to get those vaccination rates high. And it’s also consistent with what we’ve done for other childhood vaccines, like measles, mumps, polio.”

The US government has purchased 65 million doses of the Pfizer pediatric shot – which is expected to contain one-third of the dosage for adults and adolescents. The FDA’s independent advisory committee will meet Oct. 26 to consider authorizing the Pfizer shot for children aged 5-11.

To top it all off, CDC Chief Rochelle Walensky says her agency will still recommend that children wear masks in schools even after the vaccine is approved for kids.

*

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 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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

“To obtain embryo cells, embryos from spontaneous abortions cannot be used, nor can those obtained by means of abortions performed via the vagina: in both cases, the embryo will be contaminated by micro-organisms.”

“The correct way consists in having recourse to Caesarian section or to the removal of the uterus. Only in this way can bacteriological sterility be guaranteed.”

“In either case, then, to obtain embryo cells for culture a programmed abortion must be adopted, choosing the age of the embryo and dissecting it while still alive, in order to remove tissues to be placed in culture media.”

“Given these premises, we face the dilemma of whether the deliberate systematic destruction of a human creature to obtain cell material can be justified, when it is recognized that this is of great interest to fundamental research and for the diagnosis of some human diseases. Are research and diagnosis of such great value that they justify the destruction of human beings?”

“The Geneva Declaration affirms that the doctor has the duty to take the greatest care to safeguard the life of a human being from its conception and will not, even under threat, use his knowledge to infringe humanitarian laws.” (1986-04-26; Herranz, Gonzalo; Il Sabato, no.15…Professor Herranz was, at the time, president of the Committee of Medical Ethics of Spanish Doctors and vice-president of the Permanent Committee of Medical Ethics of the European Community.)

What exactly happened in 1972 or 1973, in the Netherlands, where an infant girl was aborted, and her kidneys used to make a cell line that would be used, going forward, in the testing of vaccines?

That cell line is called HEK 293 (HEK stands for human embryonic kidney), and it has been used to test COVID vaccines.

I have already presented evidence for concluding the abortion involved removing the living infant from her mother’s womb, and taking her kidneys, which of course killed her.

This evidence rests on the realization that, in order to extract viable and useful kidney tissue, the baby had to have a functioning blood supply, which meant she was alive.

But the evidence ALSO comes from knowing many other abortions have been carried out, in order to harvest tissue for medical research, by murdering living babies.

I have found a very informative article (2/9/2021) at the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform UK, by Christian Hacking, titled, “What the HEK?!” by Christian Hacking. Quoting from the article:

“HEK 293 is a human cell line created using a kidney from a dissected unborn baby in the Netherlands between 1972 and 1973. It is the second most common cell line and is used extensively in ‘pharmaceutical and biomedical research’. It is also used in vaccine creation and cancer research.”

“It was used, along with other human cell lines, to develop a genetically engineered spike protein (that the mRNA vaccine codes for) in the original development stage of the vaccine. The ‘new technology’ Pfizer vaccine and the Moderna Vaccine were tested on HEK 293 before they began human trials. This testing is ongoing for all new batches. Finally the ‘old technology’ Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine grew a weakened viral strain in HEK 293 cell culture…”

“The kidney in question was dissected from a healthy Dutch baby girl of unknown origin by the team at Leiden University in the Netherlands in 1972. Despite the inclusion of the term ‘embryonic’ in the title, the baby in question was probably 12-13 weeks old when she was killed so as to secure functioning kidney cells. The man in charge of the research was named Alex Jan Van der Eb; he is still alive and still based in Holland.”

“When questioned on the matter by the FDA in 2001, Dr Van der Eb confirmed it was an intentional abortion of a ‘fetus’ but gave hazy details of the exact experiments.”

“’So the kidney material, the fetal kidney material was as follows: the kidney of the fetus was, with an unknown family history, obtained in 1972 probably. The precise date is not known anymore. The fetus, as far as I can remember, was completely normal. Nothing was wrong. The reasons for the abortion were unknown to me. I probably knew it at that time, but it got lost, all this information’.”

Author Hacking continues:

“…extracting and growing living cells is incredibly difficult. In order to give oneself the best chance of success you need to ensure the child is healthy, fresh, intact and sterile. As one embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy confirms:”

“’In order to sustain 95% of the cells, the live tissue would need to be preserved within 5 minutes of the abortion. Within an hour the cells would continue to deteriorate, rendering the specimens useless’.”

[That statement was made by “Dr C Ward Kischer, embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy; specialist in Human Embryology, University of Arizona College of Medicine…”]

[My comment: This suggests the abortion, in the Netherlands, in 1972, was planned and technicians were standing by. I would say that, to ensure the viability of the tissue, the infant had a functioning blood supply and was alive when her kidneys were removed, killing her.]

Hacking:

“In order for the organs to be at ‘optimal viability’, the child needs to be dissected and organs extracted within 5 minutes of delivery. Anaesthetic also cannot be used so as to not change the cellular activity of the organs the researcher wants to obtain.”

“Acclaimed Doctor, Ian Donald, the pioneer of the ultrasound scanner, also claims to have witnessed the WI-38 [another cell-line] dissections [1962], conducted at the Karolinska Institute; he described them such:

“’Experiments were being performed on near-term alive aborted babies who were not even afforded the mercy of anesthetic as they writhed and cried in agony, and when their usefulness had expired, they were executed and discarded as garbage’.”

“In his dense book ‘The Foetus As Transplant Donor the Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives’, immunologist Dr Peter McCullagh relays detailed descriptions of the methods used on dozens of ‘fetal tissue donors’ from the 1970’s onward, including the deaths of babies between 7 and 26 weeks gestation by decapitations, exposure, dissection and drug testing. Gynaecologist and ex-abortionist Dr Bernard Nathanson, relaying his own understanding of abortion, and citing McCullagh’s book claims the Swedish experiments took place thus:

“’…in Sweden they have been puncturing the sac of a pregnant woman at let us say 14 to 16 weeks, and then they put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head, and then put a suction machine into the brain and suck out the brain cells….. Healthy human fetuses from 7 to 21 weeks from legal abortions were used. This is in Sweden. The conception age was estimated from crown rump length and so on. Fetal liver and kidney were rapidly removed and weighed. Now at 21 weeks, what they were doing, or 18 weeks, or 16 weeks, was what is called prostaglandin abortions. They would inject a substance into the womb. The woman would then go into mini-labor and pass this baby. 50% of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would just simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.’”

“A research paper from the University of Toronto from June 1952 commenting on the method of their experiments suggests that these techniques were universal with researchers working in close proximity to the abortions.”

“’No macerated [softened after death] specimens were used and in many of the embryos the heart was still beating at the time of receipt in the virus laboratory.”

“According to Gonzalo Herranz, former head of the Committee of Medical Ethics of Spanish doctors, the best way to prevent ‘contamination by microorganisms’ is to deliver the child by caesarean section or the removal of the uterus.”

“A 1982 review of a history of tissue donation affirms this, and much of the above evidence:”

“’Fetal tissue for transplantation must be “harvested” within a few minutes of delivery. Ideally this is by hysterectomy, with the fetus delivered in utero. Drugs which reduce fetal physiological activity need to be avoided. The fetus is therefore in as alive and aware a state as possible when being opened’.”

From Hacking’s article, it’s quite clear how the standard procedure of infant-murder is carried out.

It’s entirely reasonable to assume fetal cell line HEK 293—used for COVID vaccine testing—was originally produced, in 1972, by the murder of an infant. Refusal to take a COVID vaccine on the basis of conscience and religion is more than justified.

Given the weight of the circumstantial case, I would say that for all people of faith, refusal is essential.

Lunatic medical murderers and their allies will say anything to avoid blame and the application of true justice to themselves. They will invent “science” at the drop of a hat and couch it in humanitarian terms. They will claim the ends justify the means. They will commit gross forgery to pretend those ends are vital.

But we don’t have to stand by and passively believe them.

Billions of people of faith can stand against them.

*

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 TrialSiteNews

This article pertaining to Colin Powell’s historical statement on February 5, 2003 was first published on August 3, 2018.

It should be noted that then Senator Joe Biden endorsed the misleading FAKE statement of Secretary of State Colin Powell, which was intended to provide the justification to wage war on Iraq.

The revelation of the “Copied and Pasted” from the Internet by Prof. Glen Rangwala was published by Global Research. It is also featured in my book entitled “America’s War on Terrorism”, Global Research, 2005

Michel Chossudovsky, October 21, 2021

 

***

Fake intelligence as well as plagiarized quotations had been slipped into an official intelligence report pertaining to Iraq’s WMD presented to the UN Security Council by Secretary of State Colin Powell on February 5, 2003.

This was the report used by the Bush Administration to justify the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

“I would call my colleagues’ attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed . . . which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.” (Colin Powell, UN Security Council, February 5, 2003) 

Powell was referring to “Iraq Its Infrastructure Of Concealment, Deception And Intimidation”, published on January 30, 2003.

Powerful and Irrefutable evidence presented by Secretary of State Colin Powell, said the Washington Post February 6, 2003:

AFTER SECRETARY OF STATE Colin L. Powell’s presentation to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Powell left no room to argue seriously that Iraq has accepted the Security Council’s offer of a “final opportunity” to disarm. And he offered a powerful new case that Saddam Hussein’s regime is cooperating with a branch of the al Qaeda organization that is trying to acquire chemical weapons and stage attacks in Europe. Mr. Powell’s evidence, including satellite photographs, audio recordings and reports from detainees and other informants, was overwhelming. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., the senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, called it “powerful and irrefutable.”

Revealing those tapes and photographs had a cost, as Iraq will surely take countermeasures. But the decision to make so much evidence public will prove invaluable if it sways public opinion here and abroad. At a minimum, it will stand as a worthy last effort to engage the United Nations in facing a threat that the United States could, if necessary, address alone or with an ad-hoc coalition.   (emphasis added)

The WP was explicitly pointing to the outcome ahead of the actual bombing and invasion of Iraq: “address alone or with an ad hoc coalition” with the U.K.

What Really Happened 

Damning evidence refuting Colin Powell’s official intelligence report was revealed by Cambridge Lecturer Dr. Glen Rangwala (image right) on  Britain’s Channel 4 TV following Secretary of State Colin Powell’s historic Iraq WMD presentation to the UN Security Council:

According to Rangwala, the  British intelligence document was fake. It had not been prepared by British intelligence. It was copied and pasted from the internet by members of Tony Blair’s staff:   

The Downing Street authors state they drew “upon a number of sources, including intelligence material” (p.1, first sentence). In fact, they copied material from at least three different authors and gave no credit to them. Indeed, they plagiarized, directly cutting and pasting or near quoting.

A close textual analysis suggests that the UK authors had little access to first-hand intelligence sources and instead based their work on academic papers, which they selectively distorted. Some of the papers used were considerably out of date. This leads the reader to wonder about the reliability and veracity of the Downing Street document.

It was a fake document prepared on the instructions of prime minister Blair with a view to building a “credible” justification to wage war on Iraq.  And the media failed to report the Big Lie.

Bastille 2.0: “Real Regime Change”: Building Protest and Resistance against the Covid-19 Agenda

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 21, 2021

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair.

There Has Been No Mandatory Vaccination Executive Order

By Renee Parsons, October 20, 2021

Let’s assume for the moment that the Biden EO had actually been promulgated.  The issue is whether a hypothetical Executive Order to the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)  has the constitutional authority to issue a regulation to determine Covid as a ‘grave health concern” to the nation.

The Noose is Tightening, the Clock is Ticking: Justin Trudeau’s “Covid Mandate” against Canadians, Both “Unvaccinated” and “Vaccinated”

By Marina Bulatović, October 20, 2021

Trudeau announced better days ahead for Canada after his victory, and he declared new COVID-19 measures already on October 6, with numerous private companies informing their employees by e-mail on the same day that they would lose their jobs if they failed to get vaccinated by December 31 of this year.

Forced Vaccination Was Always the End Game. America’s Move Towards Authoritarianism

By Barbara Loe Fisher, October 20, 2021

With the exception of Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, 2001, Americans have not been attacked by an enemy on our own soil. Unlike countries in Europe during World War II, America has never been occupied by a military force or locked down under martial law.

End the Covid Fraud and Global Genocide Now!

By Walter Gelles and The White Rose UK, October 20, 2021

Named after the famous German underground movement The White Rose (Die Weisse Rose) which distributed leaflets calling on people to resist the Nazi regime, The White Rose UK urges people everywhere to resist the medical/political tyranny being carried out under the guise of a fake pandemic.

Taiwan Deaths from COVID-19 Vaccination Exceed Deaths from COVID-19

By Medical Trend, October 20, 2021

On October 7th, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan reached 852, while the death toll after the COVID-19 was diagnosed [largely based on the flawed PCR test] was 844. The number of deaths after vaccination exceeded the number of confirmed deaths for the first time.

“The Killing of Gaddafi 10 Years Ago Has Resulted in the Death of the Nation of Libya and the Destruction of Its People”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, October 20, 2021

Few understand the evil intentions of their rulers and the way government is used to enrich the elite. British journalist Richard Medhurst explains how ten years ago US and French elites destroyed an entire country.

Nebraska Attorney General: Healthcare Providers can Legally Prescribe Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine for Treatment of COVID

By Informed Choice Washington, October 20, 2021

The Nebraska AG continues on to provide much evidence for the history of the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin, and to chastise the FDA for its clear attempt to undermine its use.

Testaments and Blood Samples to Establish a “Global DNA Data Bank”?

By Peter Koenig, October 20, 2021

To make sure that you have had your mRNA gene-modifying killer-shot, in the form of one of the multiple boosters that will soon become compulsory, there will be blood-sample spots around countries. So as to extend your covid-vaxx certificate, you will have to give a blood sample.

U.S. Billionaires Got 62 Percent Richer During Pandemic. They’re Now Up $1.8 Trillion.

By Chuck Collins, October 20, 2021

America’s billionaire bonanza demonstrates the flaws in our current economic and tax systems President Biden and Democrats in Congress are trying to remedy by advancing a $3.5 trillion budget package, which has already passed the U.S. Senate and is being considered in the U.S. House today.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

France for centuries had been involved in the Atlantic slave trade and colonialism making it one of the leading imperialist powers to emerge from the tumultuous conquering of large swaths of territory throughout the world.

It was against the rulers of France that the Africans on the island of Hispaniola won their national independence proclaiming the state of Haiti in 1804.

The enslaved Africans in Haiti waged a twelve-year revolutionary war that defeated France along with interventions by Spain and Britain. Haiti, the first Black Republic founded by former enslaved people, set the stage for the modern-day proliferation of neo-colonialism.

After independence under a world dominated by imperialism, the former colonial powers seek to dominate the oppressed peoples through economic and military means. Haiti was subjected to a blockade from both the United States and France during the early and middle decades of the 19th century. It was not until the Civil War in the U.S. that Haiti was recognized politically by Washington.

As early as 1825, France sent a flotilla of warships to the Caribbean to demand the payment of “indemnity” by Haiti to Paris for the loss of property and the profits which they would have accrued if the slave system had not been overthrown. Haiti had been the most prosperous of all the slave colonies during the 18th century.

Successive Haitian governments were forced to make payments to the former colonial power of France while its own economic development was stifled. France demanded from the people an arbitrary 150 million francs in unjustifiable claims over wealth which was stolen from the indigenous and African people victimized by European imperialism. The invented financial obligations to Paris were later reduced to 90 million francs in 1838. Today the value of these payments would exceed US$20 billion.

France refused to recognize Haiti if these payments were not made as the imperialist power collected the last indemnity payment in 1893. Subsequently, the government of the U.S. facilitated the acquisition of Haiti’s treasury in 1911. It would take until 1947 for Haiti to be released from the interest payments to the National City Bank of New York, now known as Citibank.

Today, Haiti is still impacted by the legacy of French and U.S. interference in its internal affairs which involved several military occupations along with the exploitation of the labor of the people. The kidnapping of 17 missionaries from the U.S. and Canada during mid-October must be viewed within the broader context of the recent assassination of President Jovenal Moise, the deployment of Pentagon military forces to the embassy in Port-au-Prince, the deportation without due process of thousands of Haitian migrants seeking refuge in the U.S. and the failure of the Haitian politicians to establish a stable successor administration.

Algeria Withdraws Ambassador and Bans France from Using Air Space

Another major historical struggle against French imperialism occurred in the North African state of Algeria between 1954-1962. France had colonized Algeria beginning in 1830 exploiting its natural resources and the labor of its people.

France’s tenure in colonial Algeria left a trail of massacres as people continued to demand their fundamental human and political rights. By 1954, the most advanced elements in Algerian society took up arms against the occupying military and political elites. During the course of the war, reports indicate that more than one million Algerians lost their lives.

In recent weeks, French President Emmanuel Macron made statements which attempted to deny the brutal colonial legacy of Paris in Algeria. France formerly controlled many colonies in Africa including the modern-day states of Senegal, Guinea, Mauritania, Ivory Coast, Central African Republic, Djibouti, Tunisia, Congo-Brazzaville, Madagascar, among others.

In response the Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune withdrew the country’s ambassador from France. Later it was announced that the French military would not be allowed to utilize Algerian airspace. The tensions between the two countries had worsened as well due to the hosting of a reception to honor those Algerians who fought against their own people on behalf of France during the revolutionary war of the 1950s and early 1960s.

Al Jazeera reported on the diplomatic row saying:

“The moves also come amid tension over a French decision to sharply reduce the number of visas it grants to citizens of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. ‘Following remarks that have not been denied, which several French sources have attributed by name to [Macron], Algeria expresses its categorical rejection of the inadmissible interference in its internal affairs,’ the statement said, adding the French comments were ‘an intolerable affront’ to Algerians who died fighting French colonialism. ‘The crimes of colonial France in Algeria are innumerable and fit the strictest definitions of genocide,’ it said. French daily Le Monde reported that Macron made critical remarks about Algeria during a meeting on Thursday (October 7) with French Algerian descendants of the Harkis, Algerians who fought on the French side during Algeria’s war of independence. According to Le Monde, Macron said Algeria was ruled by a ‘political-military system’ and described the country’s ‘official history’ as having been ‘totally re-written’ to something ‘not based on truths’ but ‘on a discourse of hatred towards France.’ The newspaper added the French president made clear he was not referring to Algerian society as a whole but to the ruling elite.”

On October 17, France recognized its role in a massacre of Algerians in Paris in 1961. The Algerians were demonstrating in alliance with the National Liberation Front (FLN) which led the mass and armed struggle against French colonialism. 60 years ago, the French police opened fire on thousands of demonstrators killing at least 120, injuring and arresting many more.

Algerian war of national liberation during the 1950s and early 1960s (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

A report published by the Associated Press stressed:

“’The repression was brutal, violent, bloody’ under the orders of Paris police chief Maurice Papon, Macron said in a statement released Saturday (Oct. 16). About 12,000 Algerians were arrested and dozens were killed, ‘their bodies thrown into the Seine River,’ the statement said…. Papon later became the highest-ranking Frenchman convicted of complicity in crimes against humanity for his role in deporting Jews during World War II…. The Movement against Fascism and for Friendship between People, or MRAP, deplored that Macron’s statement did not include ‘any word about the context of the Algeria war, any word on colonialism, nothing about archives… even less about reparations.’ Earlier this year, Macron announced a decision to speed up the declassification of secret documents related to Algeria’s 1954-62 war of independence from France. The new procedure was introduced in August, Macron’s office said.”

Rather than improving the post-colonial relationship between Paris and Algiers, Macron appears to be making it worse. Such a set of affairs in recent weeks indicates the unsustainability of French foreign policy in Africa going forward.

Other Attacks on French Neo-colonialism

The politico-military crises of governance in the West African states of Mali and Guinea are further indications of the inability of France to maintain a consistent diplomatic approach to its former colonies. Over the period since 2020, there have been two military coups in Mali and another one in Guinea.

Those involved in the military seizures of power from civilian governments had maintained close ties with the French and U.S. governments. The U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) has operations inside Guinea and Mali as well as several other countries in the West Africa region.

Pentagon defense colleges have provided training to the military coup makers in Mali and Guinea. The current military president of Guinea, Lt. Col. Mamady Doumbouya, was a former member of the French Foreign Legion and at the time of the coup in early September, he was involved as a special forces officer in maneuvers with AFRICOM forces. Although the U.S. and France claim that their governments had no involvement in the coup, their approach to the new military regime has been largely the same as before the putsch.

The regional Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), composed of 15 member-states, has been rebuked by both the Guinean and Malian military leaders. Business interests based in France and the U.S. conducting mining operations in Guinea, have not paused their economic activities.

Yet two interesting events have occurred in recent weeks that should be viewed alongside the diplomatic struggle between Algeria and France. An Africa-France Summit was held in early October in Montpellier where youth confronted Macron over his policies towards the continent.

Radio France International (RFI) reported on this event noting that:

“Kenyan civil society member Adele Onyango asked Macron to look at France’s troubled relationship with Africa, demanding an examination of inefficiencies, gaps in integrity, and unethical behavior. ‘We as Africans feel the pain of colonization every single day,’ Onyango said. ‘The air of denial that France chooses to sit in is uncomfortable not only for Africa but also for France… How can you trust the source of your pain when the source doesn’t acknowledge it?’ she added. Onyango evoked what she considered France’s double standard—claiming to stand for human rights, while collaborating with agencies, leaders and individuals whose position on a wide range of societal issues in Africa is less than clear.”

Finally, a military-appointed prime minister in Mali on October 8 accused France of training a terrorist organization inside its territory. This grouping was said to have been instrumental in the post-2011 destabilization of neighboring Libya, where a Pentagon-NATO bombing campaign resulted in the destruction of the government of the late leader Col. Muammar Gaddafi who was killed at the aegis of Washington a decade ago on October 20.

Pars Today reported on the allegation emphasizing:

“Mali’s Prime Minister Choguel Kokalla Maiga told Sputnik on Friday (Oct. 8) that French troops had created an enclave in Kidal, a town in the desert region of northern Mali, and handed it over to a terrorist group known as Ansar al-Din. ‘Mali has no access to Kidal, this is an enclave controlled by France,’ he said, adding that the Malian military was banned from entering the territory. ‘They have armed groups trained by French officers. We have evidence… We do not understand this situation and do not want to tolerate it,’ the Malian prime minister said. Maiga further said that the alleged terrorists that are operating in the country ‘came from Libya, and who destroyed the state of Libya? It was France with allies.’”

Therefore, from the youth to those aligned with the African military juntas see the contradictions within French foreign policy. It will be up to the masses of people around the world to unite against this colonial and neo-colonial project bringing it to a resounding conclusion.

*

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.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of Pan-African News Wire. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: France massacre of Algerians in Paris 60 years ago commemorated (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee told Yahoo! News that the committee has asked Langley to explain reports of plans to kill or kidnap the WikiLeaks publisher. 

Adam Schiff, the chairman of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday the committee has requested information from the CIA about reported plans to assassinate or abduct Julian Assange, the imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher.

Schiff told Yahoo! News that the request has already been made to the agency but refused to comment on whether the CIA has yet replied, the news site reported.

Schiff acted after reading a Yahoo! story last month that confirmed and expanded upon earlier reports from a Spanish court case that the CIA was seriously discussing killing or renditioning Assange.

Assange is next week to face a U.S. appeal of a January decision by lower court Judge Vanessa Baraitser not to extradite him because of a high-risk of suicide. The U.S. is seeking to overturn the ruling that Assange is too sick to be sent to a U.S. prison. U.S. prosecutors allege that Assange is a malingerer.

Assange’s lawyers intend to bring up the CIA’s plans. Yahoo! reported Tuesday that “lawyers for Assange intend to raise the issue of what they view as the CIA’s misconduct, arguing that returning him to a country where some top officials once plotted to kidnap him strengthens the judge’s conclusions about the risk of suicide and should be an additional basis for turning down the U.S. extradition request.”

Baraitser, who heard testimony in Assange’s extradition hearing about the CIA plot against him, showed little concern, even sympathy with the agency, writing in her judgement that “if the allegations are true, they demonstrate a high level of concern by the US authorities regarding Mr. Assange’s ongoing activities.”

The CIA plot against Assange was discussed at senior levels of the Trump administration and was instigated by Trump’s CIA chief Mike Pompeo, Yahoo! reported. Schiff was a bitter foe of Donald Trump. The Yahoo! reporting mentions that discussions about covert action against Assange had already been discussed in the Obama administration, presumably by Obama’s CIA director John Brennan.

Fears that he could be assassinated go back to at least October 2010, when the Obama CIA refused to say if there were such plans after a Freedom of Information Act request.  This tweet is from eleven years ago:

CIA refuses to confirm or deny plot to assassinate WikiLeaks editor; open government-Obama style http://is.gd/gLvcn

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 6, 2010

*

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.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former UN correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe,  and numerous other newspapers. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London and began his professional work as a stringer for The New York Times.  He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe.

Featured image: Adam Schiff (Gage Skidmore/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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Here are the latest COVID trends, following on from 10 COVID trends in August 2021 and 10 COVID trends September 2021. The situation is escalating as the NWO (New World Order) agenda plays itself out in a predictable fashion, step by step. Governments around the world, especially those of the English-speaking nations of the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, are suspiciously desperate to get every single citizen vaxxed – including the vulnerable such as children – no matter what it takes and no matter how much they have to bribe, blackmail, cajole and coerce the public. It is a time where the surreal has become real, where long-established legal and cultural traditions are being trampled underfoot. It is a time of out-of-control governments and disempowered people. It is a time where every single person must decide whether he or she prefers conformity, social approval and (in some cases) a paycheck, or whether he or she prefers freedom regardless of the price. Here are the latest scamdemic patterns and COVID trends.

COVID Trend #1: Implementation of Control Infrastructure Continues

To those with open eyes, it has long been patently obvious that the COVID scamdemic was an elaborate and clever ruse to usher in a control infrastructure that is intended to be permanent. Why would ruling bodies, from Canada to Israel to France, from California to New York, invest so much in vaccine certificates or passports with digital QR codes, if this were temporary? Why would Australia invest so much in building COVID quarantine camps for “ongoing operations” if this were temporary? Why would Canada invest so much in COVID isolating centers if this were temporary? Why would Victorian premier ‘Dictator Dan’ Andrews let slip he’s very happy for the Mickleham quarantine center for the “next pandemic”?

This is designed to permanent!

The structure of a future Orwellian surveillance state is being assembled. It is incredible that some people are still so asleep that they literally cannot see the architecture of control that is being rapidly constructed right here, right now, under their noses.

COVID Trend #2: Unvaccinated People Banned from Supermarkets and Grocery Shopping

Arch NWO insider and war criminal Henry Kissinger once said, “who controls the food supply controls the people.” The agenda of control is advancing methodically. First the carrot, then the stick, then the whip. The NWO controllers know that the idea is to eventually target people’s ability to obtain and/or grow their own food. They know that people may ignore their unlawful edicts and mandates, but only if they can remain independent. If they make people dependent on them for money and food, then compliance becomes far more widespread. A key goal in the ultimate agenda is to make it impossible for the unvaccinated to live a normal life, including getting food, so that then they cave in and get the shot. It was only a matter of time before they introduced this, however as with many things, they are trying it out in a few places first to test the public reaction. Earlier this year a mayor in the Philippines tried to stop the unvaccinated from getting food (and recently their tyrannical leader Duterte threatened to arrest those refusing the vax, as well as suggested vaxxing people in their sleep).

However, this is the first time to my knowledge that a rich Western nation has tried this. There is now a law in Hesse (a state in Germany) that allows all businesses, even supermarkets, to ban unvaxxed customers, even for groceries and other essentials.

Numerous COVID vax contents have been discovered which resemble synthetic substances or lifeforms.

COVID Trend #3: Numerous Independent Doctors Find Nanotech & Synthetic Lifeforms in COVID Fake-Vaccines

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It is frightening how oligarchically-minded figures of a Great Resetting nature wish to use the structures of social credit to modify group behaviour under a post-Truth, depopulated/de-carbonized world order.

Ever since COVID-19 made a crazy world even crazier, many good people have become absorbed into anti-Chinese hysterics all across the Five Eyes-managed parts of the rules-based liberal west.

Every day, new accusations that China is running spy rings, honey pots, Trump’s overthrow, and even the Great Reset itself as part of a larger plot to undermine western democracy are repeated across the conservative press landscape. The two biggest “proofs” of China’s evil heart are:

1) China’s use of social credit that deprives people of freedom (and broader state regulation of the internet and video games), followed by

2) China’s regulation of religious organizations within their borders which somehow translates into “atheist commie state illegalizing religion”.

Frankly, these fears are impotent, unfounded and devoid of any understanding of either basic history or the actual power structures managing the world we all live in.

As I’ve written in countless locations (such as here, here, here, here and here), those same imperial forces that have driven the worst downshifts of human history via wars, assassinations, coups and economic terrorism, are very much alive today and are in fact attempting to steer humanity into a feudal slave model of society (with some technocratic 21^st century modifications).

This power structure is not Chinese, nor is it Russian. It isn’t even American, although it demands that all three nations be wiped out, their historic cultures reset and turned into fragmented, depopulated regions of a post-nation state global order.

Thankfully, genuinely nationalist leaders have arisen in this moment of global crisis and have created an alternative pathway into a very different future from the one which misanthropic globalists like George Soros or Klaus Schwab demand exist. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres complained of this alternative block in a recent speech saying:

 “I fear our world is creeping towards two different sets of economic, trade, financial, and technology rules, two divergent approaches in the development of artificial intelligence—and ultimately two different military and geo-political strategies. This is a recipe for trouble. It would be far less predictable and far more dangerous than the Cold War.”

In the course of the following series, I am going to nip some of the virulent anti-China mythologies in the bud by first focusing on synthetic cult creation past and present, the problem of Jesuits, the nature of China’s deep state, color revolutions, and the Chinese debt trap myth.

Social Credit: Not my Cup of Tea but Still a Necessity

Let me just state that on a personal level, speaking as someone who is shaped by democratic western values, all forms of surveillance, and social credit offend me.

I believe that people should cherish freedom and live in a cooperative world of love, trust and democracy.

That said, that world which I hope future generations get to experience bears little resemblance to the world of supranational oligarchism which has taken control of nations dumb enough to step into the globalist cage over the past decades and tie their fate to the Wall Street- City of London run bubble world order.

As I laid out in my recent article ‘Guterres and the Great Reset: How our Economy Became a Time Bomb’, those figures preparing to pull the plug on the bubble known as the western financial system tend to orbit one particular organization called the World Economic Forum, with names such as Klaus Schwab, Henry Kissinger and George Soros.

And while consumers of anti-Chinese propaganda might here exclaim that these individuals have all spoken well of China at different times, the only thing which Schwab, Soros or Kissinger admire is China’s centralized power structures and social credit systems. Everything that China is actually doing as far as building the New Silk Road, unleashing long term credit for development, empowering sovereign nation states to stand on their two feet and ending global poverty are despised.

Power hungry imperialists very much enjoy centralized national controls for the simple reason that these controls would give them the power to make their grandiose visions for a dystopic techno-feudal dictatorship happen fast without pesky democratic mechanisms getting in the way. The difference between China’s leadership when contrasted with the Schwabs of the Great Reset crowd is a matter of intention and governing ideology.

Where one is devoted to closed system depopulation and unipolarism, the other is devoted to open system long term growth and multipolarism.

A Lack of Humility

As hard as it is for some to admit, we who live here among the western trans-Atlantic states have a much more virulent form of social credit and surveillance state now in place under the Five Eyes and the multiheaded hydra which former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has called MICIMATT (Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex). This is easy to see from a top-down perspective, but for those whose minds are conditioned to make sense of the world “from the bottom up”, it is difficult to see beyond the thick veneer of propaganda (i.e.: just being at a rally on January 6, 2021 has countless people on do not fly lists, un-hirable or in jail).

Bankruptcy (either COVID-lockdown induced or other) results in poisoned credit penalties for many years which is nearly impossible to break out of for most people. In China, on the other hand, you can indeed find your wallet take a hit or job options limited by bad social credit, but inversely you can also recover your standing relatively easily.

Admittedly it frightens me to think how oligarchically-minded figures of a Great Resetting nature wish to use the structures of social credit tied to some form of Universal Basic Income in order to modify group behaviour under a post-Truth, depopulated/de-carbonized world order. But the thing to hold in mind is that mechanisms, like most tools, are generally morally neutral. It is how we use them that imbues them with evil or goodness.

Additionally, China is NOT forcing vaccines on their people while we here in the free west are making life unlivable if you don’t get the jab.

Recently, Canadians have lost the right to fly, sit on a train or cross a border to the USA without (at least) two mRNA jabs. Millions are threatened with a loss of livelihood if they don’t subject themselves as guinea pigs in a vast gene therapy experiment which is still in clinical stages and carrying a remarkably high rate of adverse events including death.

Chinese and Russian federal governments on the other hand have intervened on municipal/provincial administrators who have tried making the jab mandatory at different times and both nations have resisted pressure to use mRNA gene therapy relying instead on conventional viral vector technology.

Contrast this with the western nations, where our federal governments have demonstrated themselves to be little more than active appendages of the Great Reseting sociopaths with the only serious efforts at resistance coming from various state or provincial representatives.

In case this exercise in humility is still meeting resistance, it is worth being reminded that here in the freedom-loving liberal democracies of Canada, the USA and UK, jailed whistleblowers deprived of trial, or even basic civil liberties has become a normalized fact of life. When former CIA analyst John Kiriakou spoke out against his government’s use of illegal torture, he was put in prison. When Chelsea Manning exposed murderous drone assassinations of civilians committed by the US military, she found herself quickly jailed. When US Air force analyst Daniel Hale leaked information about the murder of innocent civilians, he paid the price with a 4 year prison sentence. Meanwhile Julian Assange rots in jail and Snowden would be in jail if he hadn’t found sanctuary in Russia.

In the next installments, we will tackle the important issue of asymmetrical warfare which has been deployed to divide and conquer China from within over the past 200 years. This will include an exposition of deep state operations within China, the use of religious organizations as fronts for color revolutionary tactics, and Soros-affiliated NGOs promoting regime change across Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang.

*

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.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation . Consider helping this process by making a donation to the RTF or becoming a Patreon supporter to the Canadian Patriot Review

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Pressenza

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Yemen’s Ansar Allah is on the warpath and it seems that the Saudi-led coalition is incapable of stopping its advance.

As of October 18^th, the Houthis (Ansar Allah) have taken control of large swathes of Ma’rib province, and are priming to, once again, try to take the strategic city.

Ansar Allah announced that their fighters had captured an area of 3,200 square kilometers in the central Yemeni provinces of Shabwah and Ma’rib, during an operation dubbed “Spring of Victory”.

The operation resulted in the killing, wounding and capture of hundreds of mercenaries involved in the aggression. The Houthi spokesman, Brigadier General Yahya Sari claimed that among those were al-Qaeda and ISIS members.

Detailed information on the operation was promised in the upcoming days, with numbers of casualties and destroyed equipment. The Houthis usually boast greatly with all of their successes.

On the same day, the Saudi-led coalition boasted of its defensive capabilities. It claimed that it had intercepted and shot down two suicide drones which were launched from Yemen.

The two drones were most likely shot down within Yemeni airspace by fighter jets of the Royal Saudi Air Force with air-to-air missiles.

Additionally, the Saudi-led coalition said that its warplanes carried out 41 airstrikes on Houthi forces in the district of al-Abdiyah in the central Yemeni province of Ma’rib.

The coalition claimed that 165 Houthi fighters were killed and ten military vehicles were destroyed in the airstrikes. These numbers were not verified by any independent side.

Just days earlier, on October 12^th, the Houthis announced another successful operation dubbed “Dawn of Victory”.

According to the accompanying statement, throughout the operation, 1,300 Saudi-backed fighters were killed, 4,320 were wounded and 30 were captured by Houthi fighters.

During the operation, the Houthis’ air-defenses opened fire at Saudi-led coalition and US drones and warplanes 518 times and managed to shoot down a total of 17 drones.

The Yemeni group’s missile force carried out 49 attacks on targets inside Yemen and on 19 targets outside the country’s border. From its side, the drone force carried out 170 attacks on targets outside Yemen and 75 attacks on targets within the country.

The Saudi-led coalition carried out nearly 1,000 airstrikes in an attempt to impede the operation, but it failed. It is likely that numbers of the most recent operations are comparable, and it stands to show that Riyadh’s forces are incapable of mounting any form of adequate offense and defense.

The Houthis have been advancing towards Ma’rib city for more than seven months now. These two most recent operations are some of the most significant successes, as it isn’t a short-term gain that could potentially be quickly be lost if the Saudi-led coalition pushes back.

It appears that these two operations are the result of steady advances and tactical battlefield successes that could potentially be lasting and allow for Ansar Allah to push for Ma’rib city in the coming weeks.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

In a highly applauded, common sense legal opinion on October 15, 2021, the Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson stated that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe off-label medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID.

After citing numerous statutes and court decisions regarding the off-label use of prescription drugs, the AG opinion states:

“We conclude that governing law allows physicians to use FDA-approved medicines that are unproven for a particular off-label use so long as (1) reasonable medical evidence supports that use and (2) a patient’s written informed consent is obtained. In the context of this ever-changing global pandemic, we note that it is appropriate to consider medical evidence outside of Nebraska and to give physicians who obtained informed consent an added measure of deference on their assessment of the available medical evidence.”

The Nebraska AG continues on to provide much evidence for the history of the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin, and to chastise the FDA for its clear attempt to undermine its use, writing:

“The FDA’s most controversial statement on ivermectin came on August 21, 2021, when it posted a link on Twitter to its ‘Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin” webpage with this message: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.’ This message is troubling not only because it makes light of a serious matter but also because it inaccurately implies that ivermectin is only for horses or cows.”

Informed Choice Washington strongly agrees with the Nebraska AG and disagrees with the Washington Medical Commission for harassing Dr. Miller, a physician’s assistant in Clark County, WA, for prescribing something that is his legal right to prescribe and that many doctors around the world are using to save lives during the pandemic. Community members stand with Dr. Miller.

The inventors of ivermectin won a 2015 Nobel Prize for saving human lives, not animals.

And the body of science on the safety and effectiveness for ivermectin’s use with COVID-19 is indisputable. There have been 63 trials; 625 scientists; 47,437 patients; 30 randomized controlled trials showing positive results for ivermectin preventing infection and/or preventing severe disease, hospitalization, and death.

Countries that have adopted ivermectin in their response to COVID (or portions of their country have adopted, or practitioners are independently prescribing with success for their patients)  include Argentina, Bangladesh, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Columbia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Slovakia, South Africa, Thailand, and even the USA.

The U.S. National Institute of Health addresses ivermectin usage for COVD saying it is “generally well tolerated” and they are tracking some of the many studies underway. Tragically, they appear to be ignoring the existing completed studies and the massive success experienced by populations around the world. Still. There it is. Ivermectin acknowledged as a treatment protocol under consideration and usage.

So why did the Washington State Medical Commission suspend the license of Physician Assistant Scott Miller, and include in the charges that Miller had been promoting ivermectin and prescribing it for his patients?

While ICWA is not privy to all the details of the WMC’s charges, we are familiar with the unethical war on ivermectin being waged. We are highly concerned that the WMC is being fed misinformation by certain public health entities and are being used to put fear in doctors prescribing and promoting ivermectin. This fear-based suppression of the inexpensive lifesaving drug is being perpetrated to protect the profits of the drug industry that has anti-viral drugs in the pipeline that they hope to profit highly from.

Charge 1.12 against Dr. Miller quotes a false statement from Merck: “…ivermectin has no scientific basis for the potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19, no meaningful evidence of clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with with COVID-19, and a lack of safety data in the clinical studies that have been conducted with patients with COVID-19.” Ample studies, cited above, have proven otherwise. Ivermectin has been shown to be antiviral, antibacterial, and anti-inflammatory. It’s also “anti-big profit” since it is off-patent. Merck is just one of the makers of the generic, 40-year old medicine. Merck has no interest in supporting ivermectin since it makes them virtually nothing; they are pushing the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization on their new oral, anti-viral drug against COVID, Molnupiravir, with only interim data from a highly questionable clinical trial.

Some in the scientific community are very concerned that Molnupiravir’s mechanism of action—mutagenesis—“threatens to accelerate the evolution of the coronavirus” and the results could be catastrophic. The drug has also been shown to be “mutagenic in mammalian cells.” 

So while billions of doses of ivermectin have been taken safely over decades, Merck is seeking EUA for what they hope to be a highly profitable mutagenic drug with the potential to cause much harm. 

People are dying every day from COVID-19, both the vaccinated and the non-vaccinated, in hospitals and at home. Ivermectin, along with other drug and nutrient protocols, has proven globally to save lives. It is criminal — a crime against humanity — to punish doctors who weigh the evidence and prescribe ivermectin to their patients.

ICWA respectfully asks the WMC to take the time to fully explore the full body of science as well as the politics of ivermectin and to reconsider not only their charges against Scott Miller who is obviously passionate and frustrated trying to save patients, but also to reconsider their stance on ivermectin for all physicians in Washington State. One of the leading sources of ivermectin science and politics is the Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance. This is a group of highly respected and credentialed pulmonary care specialists working in critical care units with COVID patients.

It is no exaggeration to say that the future of the practice of medicine is at stake. After all, if doctors are to be nothing more than marketers for the pharmaceutical industry, unable to truly practice medicine based on the full body of evidence and their own experienced judgement, then why bother with licensing doctors at all?

*

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 ICWA

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

More sanctions seem to be coming Belarus’ way, if European Foreign Ministers agree to them.

The most significant limitation is prohibiting EU companies from leasing jets to the Belarusian airline Belavia. This means that Minsk’s national airline would have no airplanes to fly passengers, it is a significant step.

The EU has accused the government of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko of facilitating migration into the bloc in retaliation for EU sanctions.

According to the accusations, thousands of migrants have been lured to Belarus on tourist visas and encouraged to cross into Poland, Lithuania and to a lesser extent Latvia — all three of which are EU nations that border Belarus.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko denied all of this and instead blamed the West for what he says is a looming humanitarian catastrophe this winter after migrants were left stranded on the Belarusian-Polish border.

In Poland, thousands took to the streets in Warsaw, protesting against migrant pushbacks.

Demonstrators marched through the Polish capital holding signs with messages such as, “Stop torture at the border,” “Nobody is illegal,” and “How many bodies lie in the forest?”

At least seven people have died at the EU’s eastern border since the uptick in migrant arrivals that began in summer, according to Polish, Lithuanian and Belarusian officials.

The United Nations refugee agency and the International Organization for Migration said they were “shocked and dismayed” by migrant deaths at the border, adding that groups of people have become stranded for weeks, unable to access any form of assistance or asylum.

Meanwhile, officials in Minsk, Warsaw, Vilnius and Riga have continued exchanging accusations while the deaths slowly pile up.

In response to the most recent sanctions, France’s ambassador was ordered out of Belarus.

France’s foreign minister said that Ambassador Nicolas de Lacoste’s departure was due to the “unilateral decision” of Belarusian authorities.

The Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the departure was connected to de Lacoste’s unwillingness to present his credentials to Lukashenko. Additionally, Minsk said it was recalling Belarus’ ambassador to France, Igor Fisenko, for consultations over the developments.

The French foreign ministry explained that the ambassador did not present his credentials to the 67-year-old leader because it was “in line with the common European position of not recognising the legitimacy of the outcome of the August 2020 presidential election.”

This diplomatic standoff between Belarus and the EU will continue, especially in view of the deepening integration between Minsk and Moscow, which Brussels also attempts to “prohibit”.

It is unlikely that these attempts to stop the integration will prove fruitful and result in anything significant. The migrant crisis, however, is a “ticking time bomb” that needs to be dealt with sooner, rather than later, as people dying along the borders is a worrisome development.

This is all taking place against the concerning backdrop of Russia closing its permanent mission to NATO. The Alliance’s representative office in Moscow was also shuttered. This means that all official communication mechanisms have been stopped, and the only way NATO can communicate with Moscow is through its Ambassador in Brussels.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

U.S. billionaires have seen their wealth surge $1.8 trillion during the pandemic, their collective fortune skyrocketing by nearly two-thirds (62 percent) from just short of $3 trillion at the start of the COVID crisis on March 18, 2020, to $4.8 trillion on August 17, 2021, according to a report from Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality (IPS). A table of the top 15 billionaires is below and the full data set is here.

Elon Musk has seen his wealth increase by an eye-popping $150 billion during the pandemic, a gain of over 600 percent.

America’s billionaire bonanza demonstrates the flaws in our current economic and tax systems President Biden and Democrats in Congress are trying to remedy by advancing a $3.5 trillion budget package, which has already passed the U.S. Senate and is being considered in the U.S. House today. If it becomes law through the budget reconciliation process this fall, it will aid communities and working families by making healthcare, eldercare, childcare, housing and education more affordable, investing in clean energy, expanding the Child Tax Credit and providing 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave. It will be paid for by making the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share of taxes, and it will not raise taxes on anyone making under $400,000 a year.

Not only did the wealth of billionaires grow, but so did their numbers: in March of last year, there were 614 Americans with 10-figure bank accounts; this August, there are 708. Their $1.8 trillion of increased wealth alone over 17 months, which will not be taxed unless they sell their assets, would pay for more than half of Biden’s 10-year $3.5 trillion investment package.

Sources: March 18, 2020 data: Forbes, “Forbes Publishes 34th Annual List Of Global Billionaires,” accessed March 18, 2020. August 17, 2021 data: Forbes, “The World’s Real-Time Billionaires, Today’s Winners and Losers,” accessed August 17, 2021.

The great good fortune of these billionaires over the past 17 months is all the more appalling when contrasted with the devastating impact of coronavirus on working people. Over 86 million Americans have lost jobs, almost 38 million have been sickened by the virus, and over 625,000 have died from it.

President Biden’s investment proposals contained in the Senate-passed budget resolution would significantly improve Americans health by making private insurance in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges more affordable; closing the Medicaid coverage gap in 12 states that refuse to expand coverage under the ACA; expanding Medicare to cover dental, vision and hearing benefits; increasing long-term care benefits to help people afford home and community-based services; and lowering the cost of prescription drugs by giving Medicare the authority to negotiate lower drug prices with drug corporations.

Biden’s proposed investments would reduce health insurance premiums for 9 million people, according to the White House, saving an average 60-year-old making $55,000 a year hundreds of dollars a month on their ACA insurance policy premium, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The cost of extending these subsidies is $163 billion over 10 years, per the Treasury Department. That means the $1.8 trillion increase in American billionaire wealth over the last 17 months could pay the entire 10-year cost of making healthcare more affordable for 9 million people more than 10 times over.

While these investments in healthcare would benefit millions of Americans and save money in the long run, the ballooning wealth of billionaires benefits no one but the super-rich. That’s because the current tax code is riddled with loopholes and special breaks that allow the super wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Due to one of the code’s biggest loopholes, increased wealth enjoyed by billionaires and other members of the richest 1 percent—for whom such wealth growth is the primary source of income—can go untaxed forever. The virtual tax-free status of billionaire wealth growth was highlighted recently by a report from ProPublica. It estimated that 25 top billionaires paid on average just 3.4 percent of their wealth-growth in federal income taxes and that several, including Jeff Bezos (worth $188 billion on August 17, 2021) and Elon Musk (worth $175 billion on August 17, 2021), went multiple recent years paying zero federal income tax.

Even when taxed, the top tax rate on wealth-growth income is only about half that of wage income—20 percent vs. 37 percent. President Biden would end those special breaks on the wealth-growth income of millionaires and billionaires as part of his tax-reform package. Following are Biden’s tax reforms that are expected to be a part of budget reconciliation legislation to be voted on in the fall, many of which will ensure billionaires start paying closer to their fair share of taxes:

• Tax wealth like work. People with more than $1 million a year in income will have to pay a top tax rate on the sale of stock and other assets that is the same as the top rate workers pay on wages. Biden also will close a loophole that often allows the wealthy to avoid paying taxes on investment gains for their entire lives. These reforms will raise $325 billion.
• Restore the top individual tax rate to 39.6 percent and stop avoidance of taxes by wealthy business owners that are used to fund healthcare. These two reforms will together raise $370 billion.
• Crack down on tax evasion by the wealthy, which will raise $700 billion. 
• Raise the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent, leaving it still far below the 35 percent rate in 2017. Corporate taxes are largely paid by the owners of corporations, which means the stockholders. Billionaires are among the wealthiest 1 percent that own over half of all corporate stock. This reform will raise nearly $900 billion.
• Curb offshore corporate tax dodging by eliminating incentives to outsource jobs and shift profits to tax havens. This reform will raise more than $1 trillion.

A more direct way to tax billionaire wealth is to tax the wealth itself instead of just its growth. If the wealth tax proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren had been in effect in 2020, the nation’s billionaires alone would have paid $114 billion for that year—and would pay an estimated combined total of $1.4 trillion over 10 years.

Poll after poll shows that Americans of all political persuasions and by large majorities believe that the wealthy and big corporations need to start paying their fair share of taxes. A June poll by ALG Research and Hart Research shows 62 percent of voters support Biden’s proposed $4 trillion (at the time) investments in healthcare, childcare, education, clean energy and more—paid for by higher taxes on the rich and corporations.

March 18, 2020 is used as the unofficial beginning of the coronavirus crisis because by then most federal and state economic restrictions responding to the virus were in place. March 18 was also the date that Forbes picked to measure billionaire wealth for the 2020 edition of its annual billionaires’ report, which provided a baseline that ATF and HCAN compare periodically with real-time data from the Forbes website. PolitiFact has favorably reviewed this methodology. 

*

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 Twitter

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

On October 7th, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan reached 852, while the death toll after the COVID-19 was diagnosed [largely based on the flawed PCR test] was 844. The number of deaths after vaccination exceeded the number of confirmed deaths for the first time.

According to a “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” issued by Taiwan’s health department, on March 22 this year, Taiwan began vaccination. From that day to October 6, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan has reached 849.

Among them, the death toll after vaccination with AZ was the largest, reaching 643; the death toll after vaccination with Moderna was 183, and the death toll after vaccination with Taiwan’s self-produced “Medigen” vaccine was 22.

Another news from Taiwan Chinatimes: 

Chinatimes reported that Taiwan’s “DCD” updated the “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” on the 8th. According to data, as of 16:00 on the 7th, the “Suspected Serious Adverse Events after Vaccination” The number of deaths was 850, and as of the 8th, the number of deaths from COVID-19 pneumonia was 845.

Notification of adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination (Source: “Taiwan Chinatimes”)

As of the 6th, since the epidemic, the number of deaths due to the confirmed COVID-19 in Taiwan was 844. This is the first time that the number of deaths after vaccination has exceeded the number of confirmed deaths.

According to data released by the Taiwan Epidemic Command Center, on the 7th, there were 4 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 pneumonia in Taiwan, all of which were imported from abroad, and there were no new deaths among the confirmed cases. However, there were 3 new deaths after vaccination. The number of deaths after vaccination still exceeds the number of deaths after diagnosis.

On October 6, the Kuomintang “legislator” Yeh,Yu-Lan bluntly stated in a Facebook post that the vaccine given to save lives has also nearly doubled the number of deaths due to the COVID-19, which is indeed very ironic and confusing.

She mentioned that recently, some hospitals in Taiwan have reported that 25 people were vaccinated with undiluted vaccine stock solution, or the vaccination dose was insufficient. It should have been given 0.5cc, but only 0.1cc was given.

Netizens mentioned that the original appointment to go to the National Taiwan University Hospital for the second dose of Moderna was changed to a “high-end” vaccine. This series of vaccine problems can be clearly felt. The number of vaccination deaths has caught up with the COVID-19 diagnosis. The death toll is not accidental, nor is it accidental.

She said that many people would actively vaccinate to survive, and relevant departments should not turn life-saving vaccines into life-threatening vaccines because of negligence in control. People who are vaccinated in accordance with the island’s policies have become inexplicable victims under the epidemic.

In fact, as early as two weeks ago, the Kuomintang “legislator” Wu I-ding had questioned that the mortality rate after vaccination in Taiwan was higher than that in other regions. At that time, Chen Shih-chung said that “the judgment has not been completed” and death may not be related to vaccination.

Wu I-ding had no choice but to say that she could not get any information from Chen Shih-chung, so she went to the health department and the legal department. Unexpectedly, all parties have been “playing the ball” all the time.

The statement “not necessarily related” is a consistent statement that Chen Shih-chung has always used in the face of all doubts about vaccines, such as adverse reactions and deaths after vaccination.

As mentioned earlier, in the “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” issued by the Taiwan authorities yesterday, the authorities have also been emphasizing that “(this document) itself cannot explain or be used to derive the existence or seriousness of vaccine-related problems. Conclusion of degree, frequency or incidence.”

*

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.

Sources

https://www.ettoday.net/news/20211009/2097484.htm

https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-10-08/doc-iktzqtyu0213782.shtml

https://www.guancha.cn/politics/2021_10_08_609960.shtml

Featured image is from Medical Trend

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The United States regretted its inability to take part in the talks on Afghanistan in Moscow this week. The Russian side was pinning hopes on a meeting of the exclusive Troika Plus (US, China, Russia and Pakistan) followed by a gathering in an expanded format known as the ‘Moscow format’ on Wednesday. 

The US State Department spokesman Ned Price said during a briefing on Monday,

“We will not participate in the Moscow talks. The Troika Plus has been an effective, a constructive forum. We look forward to engaging in that forum going forward, but we’re not in a position to take part this week.” 

Conceivably, he alluded to the dramatic developments at the state department over the weekend  — the Oct. 15 memo to Secretary of State Blinken by the the acting inspector general at State Diana Shaw that she is launching a series of investigations into the Biden administration’s last diplomatic moves in Afghanistan and the resignation three days later by the special representative on Afghan reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad. read more 

Nonetheless, the meeting under the ‘Moscow format’ is going ahead on Wednesday attended by 10 regional countries and a high ranking Taliban delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Salam Hanafi. A Russian Foreign Ministry statement in Moscow today said the meeting will focus on the developing political and military situation in Afghanistan and highlighted that the establishment of an inclusive government and efforts for a global response to prevent a humanitarian crisis will also be on the agenda. 

The MFA disclosed that a joint statement by the participants will be issued after the meeting, which is symbolic insofar as it will also include will also include Afghanistan’s de facto ruler, Taliban. Incidentally, Taliban was not invited to last week’s G20 talks on Afghanistan. This is the first time that a structured meeting of regional states will be including the Taliban officials since their seizure of power in August, although no government has so far recognised the group as the country’s legitimate rulers. It is a significant step. 

A CGTN commentary titled What may China and other countries do at the Moscow meeting on Afghanistan? has underscored that Chinese officials will harp on “a zero-tolerance approach toward terrorism” on the part of the. Taliban who “will be subject to its neighbours’ demands of stating its commitment to not allowing Afghanistan to be a base for terrorist groups and also working actively to prevent it from happening.” 

The commentary took note cautiously,

“However, despite the assurances to their neighbours, the Taliban will have to prioritise their concerns. Although they control Afghanistan, the rule is not yet fully consolidated. There are still many who oppose the rule and have protested against it. Some, like the Islamic State which is based in the country, have even targeted the Taliban for it.

“Because of this, the Taliban may well focus on those they deem a direct threat. That may mean that the Taliban invest less time and effort on behalf of their neighbours.” 

Nonetheless, the Moscow meeting can be expected to make a call for humanitarian assistance and urge the US and other rich countries to free up the money that has been frozen to ease help alleviate the current crisis. The Chinese commentary hinted that notwithstanding the challenging situation in Afghanistan, the Moscow meeting’s participants “might also explore more practical measures to help boost resources and revenues for the Afghan government. That could mean looking at ways to make trade easier between Afghanistan and its neighbours, whether it is reducing paperwork on imports and exports or providing alternative financial mechanisms and channels to enable investment.” 

In the backdrop of the Moscow meeting, reports have appeared that Delhi has sounded Islamabad about the logistics and feasibility of transporting 50,000 metric tonnes of wheat and medical aid to Afghanistan. Clearly, on the sidelines of the Moscow meeting on Wednesday, opportunities may arise for Indian and Pakistani officials to exchange views informally.

Delhi has extended an invitation to the Pakistani National Security Advisor Moeed Yusuf to participate in a conference on Afghanistan next month, which will be chaired by India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. 

Indeed, if the looming crisis in Afghanistan gives impetus to Delhi and Islamabad to reach some degree of pragmatic understanding to reset their tense relationship, that will be a hugely consequential outcome of the Moscow meeting. Perhaps, it is too much to hope for. The odds may appear to be heavily stacked against it as the mutual antipathies run deep. There is no dearth of interest groups (on both sides) who strive to keep tensions alive. 

In geopolitical terms too, there are contradictions. Pakistan prioritises its close, fraternal relations with China while the Indian policy has steadily gravitated toward aligning with the US’ ‘strategic competition’ with China (and Russia). Pakistan has worked hard in the recent years to diversify its external relationships whereas India is seemingly acquiring a ‘bloc mentality’.

The point is, while the United States maintains that it has a ‘de-hyphenated’ regional policy toward India and Pakistan, in effect Washington is far from a passive onlooker. The US has high stakes in thwarting any regional processes vis-a-vis the Taliban government in Kabul. The Russian officials are not far off the mark when they question the US’ intentions in Afghanistan.

A senior columnist at the Kremlin-funded RT Finian Cunningham noted today that the geopolitical significance of the spate of terrorist attacks by the ISIS-Khorasan lately “seems clear.” Cunningham went to assess:

“The surge in violence in Afghanistan is aimed at preventing the country from creating a stable government and to stifle a postwar reconstruction from cooperation with regional partners, in particular China.

“In contrast to the overtures from Beijing, Moscow, Iran, Pakistan and others, the United States has sought to throw obstacles in the way of Afghanistan’s new Taliban government.” read more

Yesterday, the state department spokesman Ned Price had vaguely cited logistical reasons why the US has to stay away from the Moscow conference. Let us give him the benefit of the doubt for now. To be sure, Khalilzad is leaving as an embittered man. According to New York Times, in his resignation letter to Blinken, Khalilzad wrote that the “reasons for this (resignation) are too complex and I will share my thoughts in the coming days and weeks, after leaving government service.” 

Meanwhile, ‘Troika Plus’ went ahead and held their scheduled meeting alright in Moscow — minus the US, of course.

*

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: A batch of emergency humanitarian aid donated by China arrived at Kabul International Airport, Afghanistan, September 29, 202 (Source: Indian Punchline)

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

In country after country around the world, people are rising up to challenge entrenched, failing neoliberal political and economic systems, with mixed but sometimes promising results.

Progressive leaders in the U.S. Congress are refusing to back down on the Democrats’ promises to American voters to reduce poverty, expand rights to healthcare, education and clean energy, and repair a shredded social safety net. After decades of tax cuts for the rich, they are also committed to raising taxes on wealthy Americans and corporations to pay for this popular agenda.

Germany has elected a ruling coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Free Democrats that excludes the conservative Christian Democrats for the first time since 2000. The new government promises a $14 minimum wage, solar panels on all suitable roof space, 2% of land for wind farms and the closure of Germany’s last coal-fired power plants by 2030.

Iraqis voted in an election that was called in response to a popular protest movement launched in October 2019 to challenge the endemic corruption of the post-2003 political class and its subservience to U.S. and Iranian interests. The protest movement was split between taking part in the election and boycotting it, but its candidates still won about 35 seats and will have a voice in parliament. The party of long-time Iraqi nationalist leader Muqtada al-Sadr won 73 seats, the largest of any single party, while Iranian-backed parties whose armed militias killed hundreds of protesters in 2019 lost popular support and many of their seats.

Chile’s billionaire president, Sebastian Piñera, is being impeached after the Pandora Papers revealed details of bribery and tax evasion in his sale of a mining company, and he could face up to 5 years in prison. Mass street protests in 2019 forced Piñera to agree to a new constitution to replace the one written under the Pinochet military dictatorship, and a convention that includes representatives of indigenous and other marginalized communities has been elected to draft the constitution. Progressive parties and candidates are expected to do well in the general election in November.

Maybe the greatest success of people power has come in Bolivia. In 2020, only a year after a U.S.-backed right-wing military coup, a mass mobilization of mostly indigenous working people forced a new election, and the socialist MAS Party of Evo Morales was returned to power. Since then it has already introduced a new wealth tax and welfare payments to four million people to help eliminate hunger in Bolivia.

The Ideological Context

Since the 1970s, Western political and corporate leaders have peddled a quasi-religious belief in the power of “free” markets and unbridled capitalism to solve all the world’s problems. This new “neoliberal” orthodoxy is a thinly disguised reversion to the systematic injustice of 19th century laissez-faire capitalism, which led to gross inequality and poverty even in wealthy countries, famines that killed tens of millions of people in India and China, and horrific exploitation of the poor and vulnerable worldwide.

For most of the 20th century, Western countries gradually responded to the excesses and injustices of capitalism by using the power of government to redistribute wealth through progressive taxation and a growing public sector, and ensure broad access to public goods like education and healthcare. This led to a gradual expansion of broadly shared prosperity in the United States and Western Europe through a strong public sector that balanced the power of private corporations and their owners.

The steadily growing shared prosperity of the post-WWII years in the West was derailed by a  combination of factors, including the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, Nixon’s freeze on prices and wages, runaway inflation caused by dropping the gold standard, and then a second oil crisis after the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Right-wing politicians led by Ronald Reagan in the United States and Margaret Thatcher in the U.K. blamed the power of organized labor and the public sector for the economic crisis. They launched a “neoliberal” counter-revolution to bust unions, shrink and privatize the public sector, cut taxes, deregulate industries and supposedly unleash “the magic of the market.” Then they took credit for a return to economic growth that really owed more to the end of the oil crises.

The United States and United Kingdom used their economic, military and media power to spread their neoliberal gospel across the world. Chile’s experiment in neoliberalism under Pinochet’s military dictatorship became a model for U.S. efforts to roll back the “pink tide” in Latin America. When the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe opened to the West at the end of the Cold War, it was the extreme, neoliberal brand of capitalism that Western economists imposed as “shock therapy” to privatize state-owned enterprises and open countries to Western corporations.

In the United States, the mass media shy away from the word “neoliberalism” to describe the changes in society since the 1980s. They describe its effects in less systemic terms, as globalization, privatization, deregulation, consumerism and so on, without calling attention to their common ideological roots. This allows them to treat its impacts as separate, unconnected problems: poverty and inequality, mass incarceration, environmental degradation, ballooning debt, money in politics, disinvestment in public services, declines in public health, permanent war, and record military spending.

After a generation of systematic neoliberal control, it is now obvious to people all over the world that neoliberalism has utterly failed to solve the world’s problems. As many predicted all along, it has just enabled the rich to get much, much richer, while structural and even existential problems remain unsolved.

Even once people have grasped the self-serving, predatory nature of this system that has overtaken their political and economic life, many still fall victim to the demoralization and powerlessness that are among its most insidious products, as they are brainwashed to see themselves only as individuals and consumers, instead of as active and collectively powerful citizens.

In effect, confronting neoliberalism—whether as individuals, groups, communities or countries—requires a two-step process. First, we must understand the nature of the beast that has us and the world in its grip, whatever we choose to call it. Second, we must overcome our own demoralization and powerlessness, and rekindle our collective power as political and economic actors to build the better world we know is possible.

We will see that collective power in the streets and the suites at COP26 in Glasgow, when the world’s leaders will gather to confront the reality that neoliberalism has allowed corporate profits to trump a rational response to the devastating impact of fossil fuels on the Earth’s climate. Extinction Rebellion and other groups will be in the streets in Glasgow, demanding the long-delayed action that is required to solve the problem, including an end to net carbon emissions by 2025.

While scientists warned us for decades what the result would be, political and business leaders have peddled their neoliberal snake oil to keep filling their coffers at the expense of the future of life on Earth. If we fail to stop them now, living conditions will keep deteriorating for people everywhere, as the natural world our lives depend on is washed out from under our feet, goes up in smoke and, species by species, dies and disappears forever.

The Covid pandemic is another real world case study on the impact of neoliberalism. As the official death toll reaches 5 million and many more deaths go unreported, rich countries are still hoarding vaccines, drug companies are reaping a bonanza of profits from vaccines and new drugs, and the lethal, devastating injustice of the entire neoliberal “market” system is laid bare for the whole world to see. Calls for a “people’s vaccine” and “vaccine justice” have been challenging what has now been termed “vaccine apartheid.”

Conclusion

In the 1980s, U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher often told the world, “There is no alternative” to the neoliberal order she and President Reagan were unleashing. After only one or two generations, the self-serving insanity they prescribed and the crises it has caused have made it a question of survival for humanity to find alternatives.

Around the world, ordinary people are rising up to demand real change. The people of Iraq, Chile and Bolivia have overcome the incredible traumas inflicted on them to take to the streets in the thousands and demand better government. Americans should likewise demand that our government stop wasting trillions of dollars to militarize the world and destroy countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, and start solving our real problems, here and abroad.

People around the world understand the nature of the problems we face better than we did a generation or even a decade ago. Now we must overcome demoralization and powerlessness in order to act. It helps to understand that the demoralization and powerlessness we may feel are themselves products of this neoliberal system, and that simply overcoming them is a victory in itself.

As we reject the inevitability of neoliberalism and Thatcher’s lie that there is no alternative, we must also reject the lie that we are just passive, powerless consumers. As human beings, we have the same collective power that human beings have always had to build a better world for ourselves and our children – and now is the time to harness that 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.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

Both authors are frequent contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is by Tom Pennington

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

American billionaires’ wallets have had a good year, with their fortunes growing by 70%.

That’s according to a new report from the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and Americans for Tax Fairness, which tracks gains from March 18, 2020 to October 15, 2021. The groups analyzed real time data from Forbes on gains by the ten-figure club to find that billionaires in the US added a cumulative $2.1 trillion to their net worths during the pandemic.

It’s the latest data point showing that the world’s richest grew both in ranks and in fortune. In April, IPS released a report that found the world’s billionaires added $4 trillion to their wealth from March 18, 2020 to March 18, 2021. Research firm Wealth-X found that the number of billionaires in the world rose to over 3,000 in 2020 – a new record. The US alone rose from 614 billionaires in March 2020 to 745 this month.

Here’s how much America’s wealthiest added to their collective fortunes, and how their net worths stack up.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk saw the biggest gains by far. He again surpassed former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos as the richest person in the world in March, a fact he hasn’t been shy about touting. Just this month he tweeted a silver medal at Bezos in response to a tweet from Bezos heralding Amazon’s success.

The gains come as America reckons with pandemic-exacerbated inequality. Across the country, thousands of workers are striking for better conditions and higher pay; millions of Americans are also quitting their roles en masse, driving up wages as the workforce contends with record months of quits.

Meanwhile, the top 1% of Americans just surpassed the entire middle class in how much wealth they hold. That unevenness – alongside continued revelations into how the world’s ultrawealthy weasel out of paying taxes through intricate loopholes and financial structures – have prompted calls for higher taxes on the highest-earners, alongside increased enforcement.

President Joe Biden has proposed tax measures targeted at America’s wealthiest to offset the costs of his party-line infrastructure package. His original plan included an increase in the top individual tax rate, along with a nearly doubled rate for capital gains – the profits from assets like bonds and stacks – although that rate eventually shrunk in Democrats’ proposal. The package would also pour money into the IRS to increase enforcement

A recent study from IRS researchers and academics found that the top 1% of Americans fail to report about a quarter of their income to the IRS. Income underreporting is nearly twice as high for the top 0.1%, which could account for billions in unreported taxes.

The gap between taxes owed and taxes paid could only grow if left without intervention, according to the Department of Treasury. Treasury estimates that Biden’s proposed $80 billion investment in the IRS could bring in an additional $700 billion over 10 years. That’s still with hundreds of billions in taxes going uncollected each year, as Insider’s Ayelet Sheffey reports.

Biden has also backed a proposal from Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden that would tax unrealized gains from billionaires. Essentially, it would tax the profits that billionaires rake in from those capital gains, even if they’re not selling them off. A report from White House economists – which figured in those gains as income – found that America’s 400 wealthiest families pay just 8.2% in income taxes annually.

However, the fate of tax hikes is currently imperiled. Key moderate senator Kyrsten Sinema opposes raising taxes for both individuals and large corporations, Insider’s Joseph Zeballos-Roig reported. Her support is pivotal in getting a party-line package passed.

*

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.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

With the exception of Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, 2001, Americans have not been attacked by an enemy on our own soil. Unlike countries in Europe during World War II, America has never been occupied by a military force or locked down under martial law.

We have never seen soldiers in armored vehicles patrolling the streets, warning us to stay in our homes or face arrest – or worse.

Beginning in 1776, when our freedom seeking founders wrote the Declaration of Independence¹ and stood their ground from Lexington and Concord to Saratoga and Valley Forge,² and then came together to create a constitutional Republic dedicated to protecting individual and minority rights, ³ the United States of America has defined and served as a beacon for liberty for people around the world. ⁴

This summer, we watched soldiers patrolling the streets of Sydney, Australia with helicopters overhead blaring warnings to a stunned, locked down people to stay in their homes in the name of the public health.^{5 6 7}

We have watched hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, gather together again and again in the streets of Paris, London, Rome, Athens, and Berlin.^{8 9 1011 12} They are marching against authoritarianism, the kind of Orwellian authoritarianism embodied in government issued vaccine passports that punish citizens for simply defending the right to make a voluntary medical decision for themselves and their minor children,¹³ a decision about whether to be injected with a biological pharmaceutical product that can cause serious reactions,^{14 15 16 17}  injure,^{18 19 20 21} kill^{22 23 24} or fail to work.^{25 26 27 28}

The signs they carry say:

“No forced testing, no forced vaccines”

“Stop the dictatorship”

“Hands off our children:

“My body is mine”

“Big Pharma shackles freedom”

“No to the Pass of shame”

“Better to die free than live as a slave”

In what has become a prophetic primal scream for liberty, governments are ordering the police to break up the largely peaceful demonstrators^{29 30} flooding the big cities and small villages of western Europe, the first populations to organize massive public protests against old fashioned tyranny dressed up in 21^st century clothes.

The people of Europe were the first to stand up for freedom during this government declared public health emergency because they know how tyranny begins. They know what it looks like and they remember what it feels like. They remember and are declaring, “Never again.”

In America, We Have Taken Our Freedom for Granted

Most Americans living today do not remember World War II or, if they do, it is through what their parents or grandparents told them about it. World War II was not fought on American soil. Americans went to war in Europe to stop the slaughter of millions at the hands of an authoritarian fascist government commanding the Army of the Third Reich that killed in the name of the public health and safety,^{31 32} even an authoritarian communist government slaughtered many more millions during a “Reign of Terror” in the Soviet Union. ³³ Most American children today are not taught what happened in China after World War II, when the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) implemented the Great Leap Forward and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Those militant ideological cleansing campaigns imprisoned and killed tens of millions of citizens because they criticized or opposed authoritarian government policies.^{34 35}

In America, we have taken our freedom for granted because, while we have been willing to fight to defend the freedom of others, we have never been called upon to defend it in our own backyard. Most Americans have never imagined we would experience a serious threat to autonomy and freedom of thought, ^{36 37} speech,^{38 39}conscience^{40 41}  and assembly.⁴² So deep has been our trust in the laws and cultural values which have, for the most part, ensured fundamental freedoms in our country, that we never believed it could happen here.⁴³⁴⁴

But the last 20 months have changed everything. Many Americans have begun to understand that tyranny can be disguised to look like safety, even as many others still cannot bring themselves to believe it.

America’s Move Toward Authoritarianism

Striking fear into the hearts and minds of the people, the move toward authoritarianism in America began with government officials suddenly telling us – even children as young as two years old – that we could not breathe fresh air or enter public spaces without a mask covering our face.^{45 46 47 48 49}  Millions of American workers judged to be “non-essential” lost the ability to earn a living so they could eat and pay rent during “flatten the curve” lockdowns we were told would only last a few weeks but, instead, went on for months.^{50 51 52} Anyone who criticized government narratives about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 virus^{53 54} or questioned social distancing restrictions was immediately publicly shamed and censored.^{55 56 57} Any doctor, who tried to provide early treatment to COVID-19 patients by repurposing safe and effective licensed drugs and nutritional supplements to help their patients survive the infection, ⁵⁸ were also publicly shamed and censored.^{59 60}

After the FDA granted Pfizer and Moderna an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) ⁶¹ in December 2020 to distribute their liability free experimental mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S.,^{62 63 64 65}  public health officials enlisted big corporations to launch a hard-sell national vaccine advertising campaign targeting all Americans over the age of 12. ^{66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73} Anyone who asked questions or challenged the hard sell was immediately censored on social media.^{74  75 76  77}  State governments and employers were encouraged to threaten workers,⁷⁸ especially health care workers and emergency responders, with loss of their jobs for refusing the vaccine.^{79 8081 82} Private businesses were encouraged to deny unvaccinated citizens entry to restaurants, stores and other public venues.⁸³

By the end of July 2021, the Department of Veteran Affairs directed all VA health care workers to be fully vaccinated or lose their jobs. ⁸⁴ In early August, the Department of Defense announced that all military service members must be fully vaccinated when the FDA officially licenses a COVID-19 vaccine or lose their jobs. ⁸⁵ Suddenly, on Aug. 23, the Pfizer mRNA vaccine was licensed without a public meeting of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRPBAC) and full disclosure of the scientific data supporting licensure.⁸⁶

By the end of August, about 176 million Americans had been “fully” vaccinated, representing 53.6 percent of our population of 333 million people,⁸⁷ which is the third largest in the world. And studies had confirmed that the SARS-CoV-2 infection mortality ratio (IFR) in the U.S. remains at less than one percent.⁸⁸

Federal Government Declares War on Unvaccinated Americans

But the Executive Branch of the US government was not happy. Federal health officials had publicly set the goal of persuading 90 percent of Americans to get the COVID vaccine,⁸⁹ although it is clear now that the real goal all along was a 100 percent vaccination rate: no exceptions and no questions asked.

At the beginning of September, the politics of persuasion gave way to an iron fisted approach using the heel of the boot of the State to try to club 100 million unvaccinated Americans into submission.

On Sept. 9, 2021, the President of the United States followed the advice of top public health officials and, in effect, declared war on unvaccinated Americans.^{90 91} He scapegoated and placed all the blame for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on the unvaccinated, even though federal health officials admit that fully vaccinated people can still get infected and transmit the virus to others;^{92 93 94 95} and even though breakthrough COVID infections, hospitalizations and deaths in fully vaccinated people are on the rise; ^{96 97} and even though evidence shows individuals who have recovered from the infection have stronger natural immunity than those who have been vaccinated; ⁹⁸ and even though officials at the World Health Organization now say that the SARS-COV-2 virus is mutating like influenza and is likely to become prevalent in every county – no matter how high the vaccination rate.^{99 100}

The President told 100 million unvaccinated Americans that “our patience is running thin” and issued an Executive Order that every person working for the Executive Branch of the federal government – more than two million people – must get fully vaccinated or lose their jobs.¹⁰¹  That order also applied to about 17 million health care professionals working in medical facilities that accept Medicare and Medicaid.¹⁰²

There is no option for Executive Branch employees to get tested – the rule is get vaccinated or be fired. It is interesting that the order does not apply to workers in the Judicial Branch or Legislative Branch, which includes members and staffers in Congress.

The President also ordered the Department of Labor to issue a rule that carries penalties of $14,000 per violation to force private companies with more than 100 employees to get their workers fully vaccinated or be tested weekly. He also called for all teachers and school staff in all schools to be fully vaccinated.^{103 104}

The next day, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, criticized the President for not going far enough.¹⁰⁵ Fauci said the government should give Americans no option but to get injected with the biological product that some describe as a vaccine, others characterize as a genetic therapy or cell disrupter biological, and others allege is a bioweapon made in a lab in China with U.S. funding.^{106 107 108} Then Fauci said all children must be vaccinated or denied a school education¹⁰⁹ and all unvaccinated people must be banned from getting on an airplane.¹¹⁰ At the same time, a Virginia congressman introduced the Safety Travel Act that would require travelers getting on a plane or Amtrak train in the U.S. to show proof of COVID vaccination or a negative COVID test within 72 hours of boarding.¹¹¹

Destroying the Lives of Those Who Dissent

Today, people in some cities are being denied entrance to restaurants and stores if they can’t prove they have been “fully” vaccinated.¹¹² Doctors are refusing to provide medical care to the unvaccinated.¹¹³ Hollywood entertainers are celebrating the deaths of unvaccinated people, saying they deserved to die, and are calling for the unvaccinated who get COVID to be denied admission to hospitals for treatment. ^{114 115} Judges are separating children from mothers who have not gotten a COVID shot. ¹¹⁶ Influential scientists are insisting lawmakers make it a hate crime for anyone to publicly criticize scientists and government health officials. ¹¹⁷

Dissenters are told they are “selfish”¹¹⁸ and characterized as an enemy of the state¹¹⁹ for simply defending the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking.¹²⁰ The normalizing of the ritualistic persecution of Americans who are refusing to give up the right to autonomy – which is the first and most fundamental human right – is underway. The Orwellian message is: the life of any person who dissents from government policy must be systematically destroyed.

Demanding obedience, government health officials characterize public health policies that segregate, discriminate and turn people against each other as “the good.” Yet, a lot of Americans instinctively know segregation and discrimination is not good. They know that persuading a majority of citizens to scapegoat a minority of citizens to cover up the failures of government is allowing evil to triumph.

Dissenting Americans, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, fill the ranks of every socio-economic class, every political party and every faith-based community. They understand the meaning of the warning that, “The only thing necessary for triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,” and they are not going to stand by and do nothing.

When government threatens to take away an individual’s right to employment, education, health care and the ability to enter a store to buy food, enter a hospital or travel on public transportation, there is no other word for it but tyranny.

Weaponizing a Virus and A Vaccine Against the People

This virus, which has a 99 percent survival rate, and this leaky vaccine, which fails to reliably prevent infection and transmission in the fully vaccinated, has racked up a record breaking more than half a million vaccine adverse event reports in the U.S. alone.¹²¹ It will not be the last virus and vaccine to be weaponized against the people in the name of the greater good.

That is because forced vaccination is the tip of the spear in a culture war that has been going on for much longer than the 40 years that I have been a vaccine safety and human rights activist publicly warning that this day would come.^{122 123 124} It is a war that will cause more suffering until enough of us refuse to be siloed and, instead, join together to change dangerous laws that abuse the trust and good will of the people.

Every single American, whether you have been vaccinated or not, should stop to reflect upon what is happening in our country. Think about what liberty means.

Imagine What Life Will Be Like in the Future

Imagine what life will be like in the future if you cannot leave your home without being harnessed to a government issued digital ID, which contains personal information about your body and your life, and is hooked up to an electronic surveillance system that records and controls every move you make.

Imagine if you are a health care worker and your medical license is taken from you for refusing to get a government mandated vaccine, which is a public health policy being implemented in Washington, DC,¹²⁵ a city where doctors can now vaccinate children as young as 11 years old without the knowledge or consent of their parents.¹²⁶

Imagine if you cannot hold any type of job or enter a grocery store to buy food to feed your family, or enter a drug store, cafe, gym, school,¹²⁷ cinema, museum, park or beach without showing proof you’ve been vaccinated.

Imagine if you are denied entrance to a doctor’s office or lose your Medicare and social security benefits because you don’t have the vaccine passport, a suggestion made recently on national television.¹²⁸

Imagine if you cannot get on a plane or bus to visit your children or elderly parents because federal government officials have exercised authority over inter-state commerce and banned the unvaccinated from crossing state borders, an action that some proponents of forced vaccination are urging the current administration to invoke.^{129 130}

Imagine if you cannot get a driver’s license, file your taxes, open or access your bank account or use a credit card to make a purchase if you fail to produce the required vaccine paperwork stamped by the government.

Imagine if you or your child have already suffered a previous serious vaccine reaction or have an underlying inflammatory immune disorder that increases your risk for being harmed by vaccination,^{131 132 133} but doctors refuse to see you because you are unvaccinated – which is already happening in America – and you are denied admission to a hospital for a life saving operation.

Forced Vaccination Was Always the End Game Before and During this Pandemic

If you think that that the vaccine passport is only about this virus and this vaccine, think again. Forced vaccination was always the end game both before and during this pandemic and the proof of that lies in the decades of federal legislation and federal agency rule making paving the way for what we are experiencing today.^{134 135 136 137 138} Right now, forced vaccination is the quickest means to what the World Economic Forum transparently describes on its website as “The Great Reset.”¹³⁹ You, your children and grandchildren are the commodity, and in the name of the greater good, you are expected to obediently allow others to “reset” your lives in all kinds of ways without making a sound.

The government issued passport allowing you to function in society, is just the first step on the slippery slope to what will be many more requirements and restrictions on your freedom in the days, months and years to come. The question is, will you allow yourself to be used and abused by those currently holding the power to do what they want to do to you, or will you defend your God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

This pandemic of deception and incompetence has stolen from our daily lives the peace and joy we deserve to have, leaving too many of us confused and paralyzed by fear, divided from our family and friends, crippled with anxiety and despair, allowing hopelessness to rule our days.

We Can Refuse to Live in Fear and Push Back Against Authoritarianism

It doesn’t have to be like this. We can refuse to be psychologically manipulated so we are unable to engage in rational thinking and are crippled by fear.  We can push back against the authoritarians taking away our freedom and trying to divide us. We can do it the way that all successful social reform movements before us have done it: through actively participating in local, state and federal government and by engaging in non-violent civil disobedience,¹⁴⁰ if that becomes necessary.

Instead of allowing ourselves to be separated from one another, we can stay connected and meet together in small groups in our homes and neighborhoods.  We can develop personal relationships with our elected officials at every level of government – from our local sheriff and elected members of local school boards and city and county councils, to our elected state and federal legislators. If we don’t like the way the people we have elected are governing, we can vote them out, or run for office ourselves and help change the laws.

We can talk to the young men and women serving in our community police departments and the U.S. military to remind them of how important it is to value and protect human rights and civil liberties, so that if they are ever called upon to implement authoritarian rule, they will make the right choice.

Above all, we can be self-disciplined and make rational decisions that do not lead to violent confrontations, because that kind of behavior only plays into the hands of those, whose ultimate goal is to take away autonomy and more individual freedoms in the United States. During the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s, the most profound statements were made by those who sat down in the front of the bus, or in a chair at a segregated restaurant or other public place, and simply refused to move.¹⁴¹

Standing Our Ground During This Time of Oppression and Suffering

There are restaurant owners in New York City, who are refusing to follow orders directing them to discriminate against and deny service to the unvaccinated. ^{142 143}

There are veteran health care workers on the frontlines caring for patients during the pandemic, who are being fired for supporting informed consent rights, ^{144 145} and giving up their careers to stand on principle. Many of them suspect that the next cruel order they will be told to obey is to deny life saving medical treatment to unvaccinated patients.

There are corporate CEO’s and union leaders, who are refusing to bow to political pressure to require rank and file workers to get the vaccine or risk losing their jobs.^{146 147}

There are courageous doctors and scientists, who have never spoken out publicly before, who are risking their careers by demanding that mass vaccination policies be backed up by good science;^{148 149} who are challenging the government’s narrative that natural immunity is not as good as vaccine acquired immunity; ¹⁵⁰who are criticizing the long term safety of mRNA vaccines,¹⁵¹ and providing convincing evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus did not spontaneously jump out of a bat but was genetically engineered by scientists in biohazard labs. ¹⁵²

There are state lawmakers, who are listening to the people and refusing to vote for the passage of forced vaccination laws that perpetuate the illusion that vaccine passports are the only solution to ending the pandemic.^{153 154}

These Americans are rejecting authoritarianism. They are heroes, and they are on the right side of history.

They and many other brave Americans are helping us make our way through this time of fear, oppression and suffering when the cultural values and beliefs that have guaranteed freedom in this great country of ours are being tested.

Restoring the Spirit of Freedom to the Center of Our Culture

I believe we will come together and pass this test. We will act responsibly to protect our liberty. We will restore the spirit of freedom to its rightful place at the center of our culture.

We will do it because we know that if the state can tag, track down and force individuals against their will to be injected with biologicals of known and unknown toxicity today, then there will be no limit on which individual freedoms the state can take away in the name of the greater good tomorrow.

You can choose to be a hero wherever you live. You can choose to reject the ugly call to shame and punish your friends, family members, neighbors, colleagues and fellow citizens for defending the human right to autonomy and protection of bodily integrity, which is the essence of the informed consent ethic. You can choose freedom over fear.

Be the one who never has to say you did not do today what you could have done to change tomorrow. Do it for yourself, your children and grandchildren, and for all the generations to come.

It’s your health, your family, your choice. And our mission continues:

No forced vaccination. Not in America.

*

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 America’s Founding Documents: Declaration of Independence, U. S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. U.S. Archives.

2 John Jay College of Criminal Justice. American History: The Revolutionary War: Major Battles and Campaigns. Lloyd Sealy Library July 15, 2021.

3 Jefferson T. First Inaugural Address of President Thomas Jefferson, Mar. 4, 1801. National Archives. “All too will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”

4 Ortega I. America, the Great Beacon of Liberty. The Heritage Foundation July 5, 2011.

5 Pyman T. Australia uses helicopters and the ARMY to enforce its “Zero Covid” lockdown as thousands of police flood Sydney to enforce the rules and hand out $500 no-mask fines – with just 17% of adults vaccinated. Daily Mail July 31, 2021.

6 News Australia. Lockdown protestors clash with police in Sydney and Melbourne. Aug. 21, 2021. (VIDEO)

7 Alam HA. Hundreds of anti-lockdown protesters clash with police in Australia. CNN Sept. 18, 2021.

8 Fisher BL. Protests Against COVID Lockdowns Flare Up in 2021 Around the World. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 29, 2021.

9 Fisher BL. Hundreds of thousands march in London Protesting Pandemic Restrictions, Vaccine Passports. The Vaccine Reaction May 31, 2021.

10 Fisher BL. Mass Protests in Greece and France Opposing COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates and Health Passports. The Vaccine Reaction July 18, 2021.

11 Fisher BL. COVID Vaccine Mandates Strongly Opposed in Europe, US as Vaccine Failures Increase; Australia: The Lockdown is killing us, not COVID.” The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 2, 2020.

12 Lewis L, Conner N. Non! Hundreds of thousands of protestors take to the streets of Paris in opposition to controversial vaccine passport after it was launched amid backlash. Daily Mail Aug. 14, 2021.

13 Ellyatt H. ‘Breaking society apart’: Unvaccinated people are angry as they face more Covid restrictions. CNBC Aug. 13, 2021.

14 Higgins-Dunn N. FDA staff recommends watching for Bell’s palsy in Moderna and Pfizer vaccine recipients. CNBC Dec. 15, 2020.

15 CDC. Allergic Reactions Inducing Anaphylaxis After Receipt of the First Dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine – United States, December 14-23, 2020. MMWR Jan. 15, 2021; 70(2): 46-51.

16 Rutkowski K, Mirakian R et al. Adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines: a practical approach. Clin Exp Allergy 2021; 51(6): 770-777.

17 Kania K, Ambrosius W, Kupczyk ET, Kozubski W. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis in a patient vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology Sept. 4, 2021.

18 CDC. Myocarditis and Pericarditis After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination. Sept. 8, 2021.

19 The Rio Times. NCAA Golfer has severe adverse heart condition due to Covid vaccine, speaks out against vaccine mandates. Sept. 17, 2021.

20 Bussel JB, Connors JM, Cines DB et al. Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (also termed Vaccine-induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia). American Society of Hematology Aug. 12, 2021.

21 Classen JB. US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint,
“All Cause Severe Morbidity.” Trend Int Med 2021; 1(1): 1-6.

22 Fisher BL. Healthy Mom, 39, in Utah Dies of Organ Failure Four Days After Moderna COVID Vaccination. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 15, 2021.

23 Fisher BL. More Deaths Reported to VAERS Following COVID-19 Vaccinations Than for Any Other Vaccine. The Vaccine Reaction July 11, 2021.

24 Menon P. New Zealand reports first death linked to Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Reuters Aug. 30, 2021.

25 Hains T. CDC Director: Vaccines No Longer Prevent You From Spreading COVID. RealClearPolitics Aug. 6, 2021.

26 Yahi N, Chahinian H, Fantini J. Infection-enhancing antiSARSCoV2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan-D614G strain and Delta variants – A potential risk for mass vaccination? J Infect Aug. 9, 2021.

27 Van Beusekom M. Studies: COVID vaccine protection waning against infection but not hospitalization. CIDRAP Aug. 18, 2021.

28 Chemaitely H, Tang P, Hasan MR et al. Waning of BNT162b2 vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in Qatar.MedRxiv Aug. 27, 2021.

29 McLaughlin K, Ardrey T. Video Shows French police using tear gas to break up anti-vaccine protests. Business Insider July 14, 2021.

30 Mang C. Thousands march in Berlin in second day of anti-vaccination protests. Reuters Aug. 29, 2021.

31 Biddiss M. Disease and dictatorship: the case of Hitler’s Reich. J R Soc Med 1997; 90: 342-346.

32 Bachrach S. In the Name of Public Health – Nazi Racial Hygiene. N Eng J Med 2004; 351(5): 417-420.

33 Starks TA. Propagandizing the Healthy, Bolshevik Life in the Early USSR. AJPH 2017; 107(11): 1718-1724.

34 Effer DB. Medicine in Red China. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 1974; 67(2): 167-174.

35 Strauss V, Southeri D. How Many Died? New Evidence Suggests Far Higher Numbers for the Victims of Mao Zedong’s Era. Washington Post July 17, 1994.

36 Alwine J, Goodrum F. Personal freedoms should not trump public health. The Hill Dec. 5, 2020.

37 Sgaier S, Saldanha N. Biden’s Covid-19 Task Force Needs Behavioral Scientists. Harvard Business Review Dec. 8, 2020.

38 Thompson A, Otterbeing H, Ollstein AM. Anti-vaxx politicians under fire as coronavirus spreads. Politico Mar. 21, 2020.

39 Magness PW, Yang E. Who Fact Checks the Fact Checkers? A Report on Media Censorship. American Enterprise Economic Institute Aug. 11, 2021.

40 Chermerinsky E. Op-Ed: Don’t exempt religious objectors from vaccine mandates. Los Angeles Times July 23, 2021.

41 Low D. Remove religious exemption from childhood vaccines. Seattle Times Sept. 7, 2021.

42 Napolitano AP. Coronavirus fear lets government assault our freedom in violation of Constitution. Fox News  Mar. 19, 2020.

43 Kramer J. COVID-19 vaccines could become mandatory. Here’s how it might work. National Geographic Aug. 19, 2020.

44 CDC. Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings. July 26, 2020.

45 Shepardson D. CDC orders sweeping U.S. transportation mask mandate as COVID-19 rages. Reuters Jan. 29, 2021.

46 Alexander PE. Masking Children: Tragic, Unscientific and Damaging. American Institute for Economic Research Mar. 10, 2021.

47 Zweig D. Experts: CDC’s Summer-Camp Rules Are ‘Cruel’ and ‘Irrational.’ New York Magazine May 4, 2021.

48 Walach H, Weikl R, Prentice J et al. Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr June 30, 2021.

49 Markowitz A. State-by-State Guide to Face Mask Requirements. AARP July 28, 2021.

50 NPR. Public Health Experts Encourage Social Distancing to “Flatten the Curve” of Infection. Mar. 11, 2020.

51 Fisher BL. Unprecedented Response to COVID-19 by Governments Prohibits Physical Contact and Cripples World Economy. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 29, 2020.

53 Young a. Could an accident have caused COVID-19? Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory shouldn’t be dismissed. USA Today Mar. 22, 2021.

54 Henderson DR, Hooper CL. The Origin of SARS-CoV-2. American Institute for Economic Research June 18, 2021.

55 International Press Institute. Emergency COVID-19 measures must. not be used to roll back media freedom. Mar. 17, 2020.

56 Griffith K. Critics blast YouTube for ‘censorship’ for removing video of doctors urging an end to coronavirus shutdowns because they disputed ‘local health authorities.’ Daily Mail Apr. 29, 2020.

57 Richard L. ‘Single most qualified’ mRNA expert speaks about vaccine risks after he says YouTube banned his video. Yahoo June 24, 2021.

58 One America News Network. Veronica Wolski: A Medical Freedom Horror Story. Sept. 15, 2021.

59 Klecker M. State Sen. Scott Jensen says he’s being investigated by the state medical board for COVID-19 comments. Star-Tribune July 8, 2020.

60 Henderson DR, Hooper CL. Why Is the FDA Attacking a Safe and Effective Drug? Wall Street Journal July 28, 2021.

61 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Dec. 18, 2020.

62 FDA. FDA Takes Key Action in Fight Against COVID-19 By Issuing An Emergency Use Authorization for First COVID-19 Vaccine. FDA Press Release Dec. 11, 2020.

63 FDA. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 11, 2020.

64 FDA. FDA Takes Additional Action in Fight Against COVID-19 by Issuing an Emergency Use Authorization for Second COVID-19 Vaccine. FDA Press Release Dec. 17, 2020.

65 FDA. Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 18, 2020.

66 Welsh B. LAFD Officials Offering Vaccine Incentives. Los Angeles Times Jan. 6, 2021.

67 Sharma A. Roughly Half of Caregivers At Long Term Care Facilities Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine. KPBS Jan. 15, 2021.

68 Parpia R. Amazon, Google, Walmart and Starbucks Partnering with Local Governments to Distribute COVID-19 Vaccines. The Vaccine Reaction Jan. 31, 2021.

69 Megan Garnett Coyle. Ad Tech Leaders Unite to Measure the Ad Council & COVID Collaborative’s COVID-19 Vaccine Education Initiative – the Largest PSA Campaign in US History. Businesswire Mar. 30. 2021.

70 Fisher BL. Seeing through the COVID-19 Spin. NVIC Newsletter Apr. 26, 2021.

71 Raines K. State and Local Governments and Companies Offer Incentives to Get Vaccinated for COVID-19. The Vaccine Reaction July 4, 2021.

72 Solomon L. Vaccine Skepticism is Soaring Amid Heightened Government Hype and Steps to Hide Unwelcome Data. The Epoch Times May 12, 2021.

73 Durkee A. Biden’s ‘Door to Door’ Vaccine Plan Could Fizzle with Unvaccinated Republicans, Poll Suggests. Forbes July 14, 2021.

74 Fisher BL. Vaccination and Censorship: The Truth Will Set Us Free. NVIC Newsletter Jan. 26, 2021.

75 Attkisson S. CENSORED: National Vaccine Information Center. Mar. 8, 2021.

76 Attkisson S. Vaccine Info Site: CENSORED. May 4, 2021.

77 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Suspended from Twitter. May 24, 2021.

78 Emanuel EJ, Guido M, Diana A. Private companies must require vaccines for workers It’s the only way to get past COVID.USA Today July 26, 2021.

79  Fisher BL. Texas Bill Still Pending After Historic Hearing to Prohibit Vaccine Mandates and COVID Vaccine Passports. NVIC Newsletter May 21, 2021.

80 Stengle J. Houston hospital workers fired, resign over COVID-19 vaccine. Associated Press June 22, 2021.

81 Silvarole G. NY approves COVID mandate for health care workers, removes religious exemption. Democrat & Chronicle Aug. 26, 2021.

82 Wynter K, Kang G. LA city firefighters suing over COVID vaccine mandate. KTLA Sept. 16, 2021.

83 Ortiz JL, Aspegren E, Vargas S. New York Gov. Cuomo urges businesses to adopt ‘vaccine-only admission.’ USA Today Aug. 2, 2021.

84 Federal News Network. VA Mandates COVID-19 Vaccine for Health Care Workers. July 26, 2021.

85 Baldor CC. COVID vaccines to be required for military under new US plan. Associated Press Aug. 9, 2021.

86 Hendler C, Wrangham T, Caceres M. FDA Approves BioNTech’s Comirnaty. Pfizer COVID Shot Remains Experimental. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 4, 2021.

87 World O Meter. US Population.

88 Irons NJ, Raftery AE. Estimating SARS-CoV-2 infections from deaths, confirmed cases, tests, and random surveys. Proc Natl Acad Sci Aug. 3, 2021.

89 Weixel N. Fauci Herd immunity could require 90 percent of the country to be vaccinated. The Hill Dec. 24, 2020.

90 Miller Z. Sweeping new vaccine mandates for 100 million Americans. Associated Press Sept. 9, 2021.

91 Stolberg SK, Rogers K. Biden’s New Vaccine Requirements Draw Praise, Condemnation and Caution. New York Times Sept. 9, 2021.

92 Bleier BS, Ramanthan M, Lane AP. COVID-19 Vaccines May Not Prevent Nasal SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Asymptomatic Transmission. Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery Dec. 15, 2020.

93 Plan Healthcare. New CDC Mask Guidelines Rest on Data Showing the Vaccinated May Transmit Virus – The New York Times. July 30, 2021.

94 Becker K. CDC Director Admits to CNN That COVID Vaccines Don’t Prevent Transmission of Virus. Becker News Aug. 6, 2021.

95 Ledger J. You’ve Had a COVID ‘Breakthrough Infection’ – Can You Really Spread It to Others? Yale Medicine Aug. 11, 2021.

96 Caceres M. More Breakthrough Cases of COVID Ending in Hospitalization or Death. The Vaccine Reaction Sept. 5, 2021.

97 Shastri J, Parikh S, Aggarwahl V et al. Severe SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infection by Alpha Variant in a Fully Vaccinated Health Care Worker. Frontiers in Medicine Aug. 20, 2021.

98 Wadman M. Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine – but vaccination remains vital. ScienceAug. 26, 2021.

99 Mendez R. WHO says Covid will mutate like the flu and is likely here to stay. CNBC Sept. 7, 2021.

100 Phillips N. The coronavirus is here to stay – here’s what that means. Nature Feb. 16, 2021.

101 The White House. Path out of the Pandemic: President Biden’s COVID-19 Plan. Sept. 9, 2019.

102 Rosenthal J, Gee E, Calsyn M. Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations for Health Care Workers As a Condition for Medicare and Medicaid Participation. American Progress Institute Aug. 6, 2021.

103 O’Kane C. All New York City public school teachers and staff must be vaccinated, Mayor Bill de Blasio announces. CBS News Aug. 23, 2021.

104 Zilber A, Associated Press. Furious teachers protesting mandatory vaccinations march across Brooklyn Bridge chanting ‘F*** Joe Biden’: Businesses reel against new NYC indoor vaccine rule crackdown amid Delta infections flattening. Mail Online Sept. 14, 2021.

105 Alexander H. Fauci tells Biden to go FURTHER: CDC chief says president’s sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandate is a ‘MODERATE’ plan and he would not give Americans the option of testing instead. Daily Mail Sept. 10, 2021.

106 Gertz B. Coronavirus link to China biowarfare program possible, analyst says. The Washington Times Jan. 26, 2020.

107 Shepherd I. mRNA Vaccines: The Silent Weapon. Lew Rockwell Aug. 28, 2021.

108 Browne E. Fauci Was “Untruthful” to Congress About Wuhan Lab Research, New Documents Appear To Show. NewsweekSept. 9, 2021.

109 So L. Fauci backs COVID-19 vaccine mandate for US children. Reuters Aug. 29, 2021.

110 Blanco A. ‘If you travel on a plane you should be vaccinated’: Fauci demands vaccine mandate for air travel and public schools in bid to reach herd immunity. Daily Mail Sept. 13, 2021. 

111  Beyer D. Beyer Introduces Legislation Requiring Vaccination or Testing for Airport, Amtrak Travelers and Workers. Press Release Sept. 9, 2021.

112 Milligan S. No Shot, No Shoes, No Service. US News & World Reports July 30, 2021.

113 Parpia R. US Doctors Refuse to Provide Care for Unvaccinated COVID Patients. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 30, 2021.

114 Garvey M. Howard Stern to anti-vaxxers: ‘You had the cure and you wouldn’t take it.’ CNN Sept. 10, 2021.

115 Cohen K, Torres L. Jimmy Kimmel says unvaccinated. people shouldn’t get ICU beds in hospitals. Yahoo News Sept. 8, 2021.

116 Fox32. “Exceeds his jurisdiction:’ Chicago judge strips child custody from unvaccinated mother. Aug. 27, 2021.

117 Hotez PJ. Mounting antiscience aggression in the United States. PLOS Biology July 28, 2021.

118 Beam C. Why refusing the COVID-19 vaccine isn’t just immoral – it’s un-American.’ The Conversation Aug. 9, 2021.

119 Wilson J. US was warned of threat from anti-vaxxers in event of pandemic. The Guardian Apr. 27, 2020.

120 Fisher BL. Why Is Informed Consent to Vaccination A Human Right? NVIC Newsletter June 28, 2017.

121 MedAlerts. Search the VAERS Database: COVID-19 Vaccine.

122 Fisher BL. The Moral Right to Conscientious, Philosophical and Personal Belief Exemption to Vaccination. National Vaccine Advisory Committee May 2, 1997.

123 Fisher BL. The Vaccine Culture War in America: Are You Ready? NVIC Newsletter Mar. 8, 2015.

124 Fisher BL. Taking No Prisoners in the Vaccine Culture War. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 13, 2019.

125 Segraves M. DC Health Care Workers Could Lose Licenses if Unvaccinated. NBC Sept. 7, 2021.

126 Fisher BL. Doctors Given Power to Vaccinate Young Children Without Knowledge of Parents. NVIC Newsletter June 28, 2021.

127 Zwicker H. Is GMU Coercing students and staff to get experimental COVID-19 vaccine? Fairfax Times July 2, 2021.

128 Miller M. Vaccine should be mandatory for those receiving government healthcare, ABD News’s Margaret Hoover says. Yahoo July 26, 2021.

129 Gersen JS. Should the Government Impose a National Vaccination Mandate? The New Yorker Aug. 26, 2021.

130 Bomboy S. Current constitutional issues related to vaccine mandates. Constitution Daily Aug. 6, 2021.

131 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Evaluating Biological Mechanisms of Adverse Events: Increased Susceptibility. Chapter 3 (p. 82). Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality; Washington, DC: The National Academies Press 2012.

132 Fisher BL.  Do You Know How to Identify a Vaccine Reaction? NVIC Newsletter  Aug. 27, 2018.

133  Fisher BL. Witnessing the Vaccine Injury Epidemic. Nov. 14, 2019; National Mall, Washington, DC.

134 Fisher BL. The National Electronic Vaccine Tracking Registry: History of Forced Vaccination: How The Plan To Force Vaccination Gave Birth To The National ID, A Government Health Records Database, and the End of Medical Privacy. National Vaccine Information Center July 1999.

135 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Cites “Betrayal” of Consumers by U.S. Supreme Court Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma. Businesswire Feb. 23, 2011.

136 Fisher BL. CDC Wants to Expand Power to Eliminate Measles: What You Need to Know. NVIC Newsletter Sept. 12, 2016.

137 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Calls 21^st Century Cures Act “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” and Urges Presidential Veto to Protect Public Health. Businesswire Dec. 8, 2016.

138 Fisher BL. The National Plan to Vaccinate Every American. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 21, 2020.

139 World Economic Forum. The Great Reset.

140 The King Center. Glossary of Nonviolence.

141 Encyclopedia Britannica. Sit-In Social Protest.

142 Fitzsimmons EG. Restaurant owners sue New York City, hoping to block its ‘ridiculous’ vaccine mandate. New York TimesAug. 18, 2021.

143 Trigoso E. Thousands Gather at ‘Freedom Rally’ in New York City to Oppose Vaccine Passport. The Epoch Times Sept. 18, 2021.

144 Mentzer R, Peek J. Health Workers Protest Hospital Systems’ COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements. Wisconsin Public RadioAug. 11, 2021.

145 Koons E, Court E. Nurses Who Won’t Vax Threaten Staffing Shortages. Bloomberg News Aug. 26, 2021.

146 Pavlich K. The Country’s Largest Healthcare Union is Protesting Against Vaccine Mandates. Townhall July 26, 2021.

147 Trujillo D. Labor Unions Push Back Against COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates. NBC Universal Aug. 3, 2021.

148 Bell R, Butler-Jones D, Clinton J et al. A Balanced Response: Open Letter to Government of Canada. July 6, 2020.

149 Kulldorff M, Gupta S, Bhattacharya J. The Great Barrington Declaration. Oct. 20, 2020.

150 Makary M. Natural immunity to covid is powerful. Policymakers seem afraid to say so. The Washington Post Sept. 15, 2021.

151 Richard L. ‘Single most qualified’ mRNA expert speaks about vaccine risks after he says YouTube banned his video. Yahoo June 24, 2021.

152 Murray S. How NIH-funded research in China could have led to the COVID-19 pandemic. US Right to Know Sept. 17, 2021.

153 Howard J. Some states move to block Covid-19 vaccine requirements in public schools. CNN July 13, 2021.

154 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Advocacy Portal.

All images in this article are from NVIC

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

On October 16, Colombian businessman and Venezuelan Special Envoy Alex Saab was in practical terms kidnapped for the second time, first by Cabo Verde under pressure from Washington, and now by the U.S., in flagrant violation of international law.

For nearly a year and a half, Saab had been imprisoned on the island nation of Cabo Verde, 400 miles off the northwestern coast of Africa in the Atlantic. As a Bloomberg article explains, “Saab was detained June 12 [2020] when the private plane he was traveling on from Venezuela to Iran made a fuel stop on the Cape Verdean island of Sal.”¹ What Bloomberg does not mention is that Saab’s plane was forced to land in Cabo Verde because two other nearby nations in mainland Africa, apparently under pressure from the U.S., refused to let him land.²

There is no extradition treaty and there was no Interpol order

The capture of Saab was made without any proper legal basis. While Washington prevailed upon Cabo Verde to seize Saab based upon the pretext that the U.S. wanted to extradite him for alleged crimes, the United States has no extradition treaty with Cabo Verde.³ Moreover, while Cabo Verde authorities claimed that Saab was detained pursuant to a valid Interpol notice, a regional court in Nigeria found that the detention took place before the Interpol notice was issued, raising huge concerns about the legal validity of Saab’s detention and imprisonment.⁴

The U.N. also demanded the extradition to be suspended

Indeed, this regional court, The Economic Community of West African States Court of Justice (ECOWAS), explicitly “ruled that Saab should be freed because he was detained before the Red Notice was issued.”⁵ As Reuters explains, “decisions by that court are final and binding under a 1991 protocol.”

And then, on June 8, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Committee issued a decision for preliminary measures demanding that the extradition of Saab be suspended and that Saab, who is suffering from cancer, be given the necessary medical attention which he has been denied in Cabo Verde.⁶

On September 28, 2021, the African Bar Association issued a statement demanding “the immediate and unconditional release of Ambassador Alex Saab, respect for the ECOWAS Court and the Rule of Law in Africa by Cape Verde and all Governments and Institutions in Africa as the African Bar Association will continue to demand for the respect of treaty obligations and the independence of Judiciary in Africa.”⁷

In spite of the foregoing and the overwhelming opposition to Saab’s extradition amongst the citizenry of Cabo Verde, the Constitutional Court of Cabo Verde approved the extradition of Saab to the U.S. in September of this year.⁸ To put it simply, Saab was kidnapped in Cabo Verde nearly a year and a half ago, and there he was detained, until his “extradition” to the U.S. on October 16th, despite the lack of any valid extradition treaty and any valid arrest warrant at the time of capture.

While the allegations against him are hotly disputed, what is not in doubt is that Washington is behind his persecution. And it is also clear that the U.S. is interested in Saab, not because of any alleged crimes but because he may hold the key to Venezuela’s ability to circumnavigate Washington’s deadly illegal unilateral sanctions. First and foremost, the allegations against Saab involve alleged embezzlement from food and housing programs in Venezuela. Given that the U.S. is sanctioning Venezuela in an attempt, inter alia, to undermine the ability of Venezuela to maintain such programs, it is patently obvious that Washington has no real, bona fide concerns about someone allegedly taking kickbacks from such programs. And moreover, under established U.S. judicial doctrines of comity and forum non conveniens, it is Venezuela which, in the first instance, has the right to try to prosecute such crimes committed within its own domestic jurisdiction.

Sanctions against Iran: U.S. real reasons to harass Ambassador Saab

Bloomberg explains that Alex Saab was on his way to Iran to negotiate the exchange of Venezuelan gold for much needed gasoline supplies.⁹ Due to U.S. sanctions, the oil-rich nation of Venezuela is unable to obtain the necessary chemicals and supplies to refine its oil into gasoline which is needed to generate electricity and to transport goods throughout the country. In addition to gasoline, Saab was also attempting to negotiate the purchase of food, medicines and other critical supplies which have also been made scarce in Venezuela due to U.S. sanctions.¹⁰

As explained by Alena Douma, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the unilateral use of coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights:

The hardening of sanctions faced by the country since 2015 undermines… the state’s capacity to maintain infrastructure and implement social projects. Today, Venezuela faces a lack of necessary machinery, spare parts, electricity, water, fuel, gas, food and medicine. Venezuelan assets frozen in United States, United Kingdom and Portuguese banks amount to U.S. $6 bln. The purchase of goods and payments by public companies are reportedly blocked or frozen. . .

It has been reported that electricity lines are able to work at less than 20 per cent of their capacity today. . . .

An estimated 90% of households are connected to the national water distribution system. Numerous households, however, report frequent cuts because of electricity outages affecting water pumps and the maintenance of infrastructure, and because of the shortage of qualified maintenance staff.¹¹

It appears that Alex Saab’s very adeptness in helping Venezuela to get around these sanctions–sanctions which Alena Douma notes are illegal under international law–is the real reason for Washington’s interest in having him detained and extradited.¹²

As the New York Times explains, while the U.S. has brought vague “money-laundering” charges against Saab, “hard-liners at the Justice and State Departments, including Elliot Abrams, the State Department’s special envoy for Iran and Venezuela,” want to ensure Saab’s continued detention in Cabo Verde lest they “lose an opportunity to punish Mr. [Nicolás] Maduro.” As the Times continues, the “months long detention of Mr. Saab has stripped Mr. Maduro of an important ally and a major financial fixer at a time when fewer countries are willing or able to come to Venezuela’s aid. If Mr. Saab cooperates with American officials, he could help untangle Mr. Maduro’s economic web of support and assist the authorities in bringing charges against other allies of the Venezuelan government.”¹³

And how did the U.S. ensure Cabo Verde’s compliance in all this? It has used a carrot and a stick approach. The carrot is significant: U.S. economic development assistance to the island nation. In September of 2020, the U.S. embassy in Cabo Verde announced “the U.S. government would invest $1.5 million in Cabo Verde to support the country’s efforts to mitigate the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”¹⁴ And in June, 2021, the embassy announced a plan to build a new U.S. embassy adjacent to the government palace:

This year, July 4 will mark a new chapter in Cabo Verde-U.S. history as representatives of both countries dedicate 4.5-hectares of land adjacent to the Government Palace in Praia as the site for a new U.S. embassy. This exciting, long-anticipated project represents a more than $400 million investment by the U.S. government in the bilateral relationship, with fully $100 million of that total going directly into Cabo Verde’s economy, benefitting local businesses and contractors and creating scores of construction jobs.¹⁵

The stick is the deployment of old-fashioned “gun-boat diplomacy”–a term coined by President Teddy Roosevelt. Thus, as the New York Times explains, the U.S. has anchored the Navy Cruiser San Jacinto off the coast of Cabo Verde to make sure that Saab did not escape somehow. While U.S. officials claimed that they were doing this in response to “threats” by Venezuela to take all measures to protect Saab’s human rights, the presence of the gun ship appeared calculated as much to ensure no second thoughts by the government of  Cabo Verde as it was to prevent some rescue attempt by Venezuela or its ally Iran.¹⁶

Saab’s extradition case is currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11^th Circuit which is to decide whether the U.S. has proper cause to extradite Mr. Saab under U.S. and international law. Quite tellingly, the U.S. prosecution has twice postponed the initial hearing in which it was to present evidence and arguments in favor of extradition. And, it has asked for a third postponement.¹⁷

The U.S. extracted Saab from Cabo Verde without court sanction

And, so, U.S. authorities, on October 16th, instead of waiting for the 11^th Circuit to decide the merits of the case–a case which they will surely lose–have kidnapped Saab a second time, flying him out of Cabo Verde to the U.S. without court sanction. It is no coincidence that this kidnapping took place, moreover, the day before Presidential elections in Cabo Verde which brought to power a new leader opposed to Washington’s mistreatment of Saab.

Alex Saab is now sitting in a federal prison in Miami. This is a flagrant violation of both international and U.S. domestic law. In addition, this has already had huge international repercussions, with the government of Venezuela suspending scheduled talks with the opposition in response.

The actions of the U.S. and Cabo Verde against Alex Saab have dealt a serious blow to international law and the security of diplomats worldwide. It sets the dangerous precedent that an individual, and especially a foreign diplomat, can be captured and detained without warrant and then “extradited” to the U.S. without a valid extradition treaty and without an U.S. court authorization. This type of action undermines the rule of law, and indeed establishes “the rule of the jungle” wherein powerful countries like the U.S. can simply ignore rights of individuals to due process and to freedom from arbitrary detention to bully developing countries such as Venezuela.

*

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.

Dan Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and he is one of COHA’s Senior Research Fellows.

Notes

1. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. www.bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.file:///C:\Users\Owner\Documents\3953-2021-c-adocx.pdf
2. “Deal Maker for Venezuela’s Maduro Can Be Extradited to U.S., Court Rules.” Wall Street Journal. Jan 25, 2021. www.wsj.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
3. “U.S.-Indicted Dealmaker For Venezuela’s Maduro Detained On Way To Iran.” June 14, 2020. www.rferl.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
4. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. www.bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.
5. Ibid.
6. “UN Committee Rules on Detention of Venezuelan Diplomat Saab.” June 8, 2021.
   www.telesurenglish.net Accessed October 17, 2021
7. “African Bar Association Statement on Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab.” Oct 22, 2021.
   orinocotribune.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
8. “Cape Verde Poll Shows Alex Saab Extradition Case will Harm Government in October Elections.” AllAfrica Info Wire. Sep. 20, 2021. allafrica.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
9. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.
10. Griffith, B. “Extradition of Alex Saab: U.S. takes effort to starve Venezuelans to new lows.” People’s Dispatch. July 7, 2021. peoplesdispatch.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
11. Preliminary findings of the visit to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela by the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. Feb. 12, 2021. www.ohchr.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
12. Ibid.
13. Schmitt, E., and Turkewitz, J. New York Times. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” Dec 22, 2020. www.nytimes.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
14. “The United States Provides Over $1.5 million to Help Cabo Verde Respond to COVID-19.” Press Release–September 3, 2020. U.S. Embassy, Cabo Verde. cv.usembassy.govAccessed October 17, 2021.
15. “Article by U.S. Ambassador to Cabo Verde, Jeff Daigle–Land Dedication.” June 30, 2021. U.S. Embassy, Cabo Verde. cv.usembassy.gov Accessed October 17, 2021.
16. Schmitt, E. and Turkewitz, J. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” New York Times. www.nytimes.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
17. “Defense of Alex Saab Rejects Request for New Extension by U.S.” Oct 6, 2021.
    www.telesurenglish.net Accessed October 17, 2021.

Featured image is from COHA/MR Online

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

Named after the famous German underground movement The White Rose (Die Weisse Rose) which distributed leaflets calling on people to resist the Nazi regime, The White Rose UK urges people everywhere to resist the medical/political tyranny being carried out under the guise of a fake pandemic.

Several members of the German White Rose were caught by the Nazis and sentenced to death or imprisonment.  Today, the Biden-Harris regime is attempting to inject harmful, ineffective, and often lethal genetic-modification agents (“vaccines”) into every man, woman, and child in America.  These so-called vaccines have already killed, disabled, and severely injured millions of people in the US and around the world, according to the governments’ official statistics.  Unvaccinated, sensible people who refuse this grotesque experimental treatment are demonized, vilified, and falsely accused of spreading illness.

Backed by the presstitute news media, Big Tech censorship, and wholly corrupt government health agencies which are fronts for Big Pharma, the US government’s ultimate goal is to remove the unvaxxed from society—get them fired from their jobs, make them unable to go shopping or travel, and isolate them in FEMA-style concentration camps which have already been built. 

Distributing truth-telling leaflets, as do members of The White Rose UK, is one way to fight this insanity.  Another method is a freely distributed print newspaper. 

Druthers is a free newspaper widely distributed across Canada—350,000 copies of the November issue reportedly on the way, also available as a free pdf download (Druthers.net).  Druthers has announced that it has launched into the United States this month (DruthersUSA.com).  The newspaper has featured hard-hitting articles that tell the truth about the injurious COVID-19 “vaccines”, the fraudulent PCR test, the mountains of junk data, the mountains of corpses from those who got the jab, and grassroots resistance to the suicidal course that Canada, USA, and most other nations are pursuing.

Challenging the Narrative

The following statement, from The White Rose UK website, needs to reverberate far and wide across America, from sea to shining sea, or the USA will not survive physically as a nation:

The disproportionate and dehumanising covid restrictions are a disgrace to humanity.

Masks, social distancing and the so-called covid vaccines are causing great harm. People protesting against lockdowns have been arrested and treated like criminals for gathering and exercising their right of free speech. At the same time, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter have been censoring videos and posts that do not match the current trend of the mainstream media. Schools have now turned into social engineering sites. Forcing children to wear masks and keeping children constantly at a distance in class and on school grounds is deeply dehumanising, and will have a damaging effect on children’s mental development. Parents should stand up against these guinea-pig methods. It’s not the way we grew up, and we should make sure our children grow up with the same freedoms we enjoyed!

Many experts have warned that the so-called covid vaccines will do a lot of harm and now with over a million adverse reactions – many of them severe – and over a thousand six hundred deaths reported in the UK alone, there is proof that the covid jab is causing great harm. But those reported adverse reactions and deaths only make up 1-10% of all covid injection injuries. In fact, it has become clear that the covid jab is causing far more injuries and deaths than the alleged covid virus.

Bit by bit, we have given up our freedom and our rights out of fear of a virus. After the first lockdown it was evident that more people died from the lockdown than from the virus. Our economy will suffer severely and poverty will increase. How many people have lost their job and how many businesses are ruined due to the lockdowns?

The so-called ‘new normal’ is not normal, it’s entirely abnormal, and we should never get used to it! It’s time to take over responsibility and to make decisions for ourselves, or else, the next generation of grown-ups will not experience the same freedom we’ve had before this manufactured covid crisis.

Like the White Rose in Germany, that resisted the Nazi regime, we encourage people to resist the covid tyranny. We do not want anymore lockdowns and demand an end to all restrictions. Visit your friends and family, the lonely, the vulnerable and the dying. We are humans and not controllable robots. We need to socially interact, without anti-social distancing and without face masks.

Journalists, teachers, doctors, lawyers, politicians should stand up for the truth and speak out publicly. If the majority of people rid themselves of fear and panic and make use of common sense, those who want to control us will eventually have to give up, and we will be able to guarantee a future of peace and freedom for our children and grandchildren.

***

Here is The White Rose UK manifesto which sends a powerful message that needs to be absorbed and understood by every global citizen:

End the Covid Fraud and Global Genocide Now!

People are experiencing serious adverse reactions after receiving the covid jab, or are dying.

Many more will die in the coming months and years. The covid fraud is causing a global genocide. This needs to end now. Crimes being committed or supported by governments, government advisory groups, members of the World Economic Forum, the mainstream media, social media platforms and other agencies in positions of authority:

• Extreme fear mongering via press releases, media announcements and nation-wide advertisement, using taxpayers’ money
• Inducing unnecessary fear and terror of a virus less lethal than a strong seasonal flu
• Cynical use of new variants to promote fear and justify continued restrictions
• Falsifying death records by stating covid as the primary cause of death when not applicable
• Mask mandates on public transport, in shops, schools, work places and other public places – in many cases for hours a day – exposing the wearer to potential and actual damage to their mental and physical well-being
• Forcing children and adults to take covid tests, often regularly, that are not fit for purpose, produce mainly false positives, and can cause damage to health
• Using covid “cases”, which are based on false test results, for prolonging covid restrictions and lockdowns
• Coercing people into taking an experimental “vaccine”, which is in fact a gene-modifying injection, can induce infertility, and is causing more adverse reactions and deaths than all other vaccines together
• Promoting the use of an unlicensed therapy as though it were fully approved and safe
• Suppressing or underplaying the data regarding adverse reactions and deaths of the covid jabs
• Ignoring the Nuremberg Code by not enabling people to give informed consent before vaccination or testing
• Disruption of education
• Suppression of religious freedom, prevention of worship
• Restricting freedom of movement across borders, and during lockdowns, within the country
• Causing job losses, business failures and loss of opportunities
• Delaying diagnosis and treatment of conditions far more serious than covid resulting in unnecessary loss of life
• Forced quarantine of healthy people at their own expense
• Suppression of the right to protest, freedom of association and freedom of speech
• Suppression of scientific debate, giving voice only to “approved” agencies

Find out more: thewhiterose.uk

*

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 State of the Nation.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

According to a report from Israel’s Channel 12, the Israeli government approved a $1.5 billion budget to prepare for a potential attack on Iran.

The extra funds would be used to purchase additional aircraft, surveillance drones, and the munitions needed to strike Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. The report said about $620 million would come from the 2022 military budget, and the rest of the funds would come from this year’s budget.

For years, Israel has been seeking bunker-busting bombs that could penetrate Iran’s underground facilities. If they did acquire the munitions, Israel would also need bombers capable of carrying them, something it currently doesn’t have. The US tested a new 5,000-pound bunker buster earlier this month, which Israeli media interpreted as a possible message to Iran.

In July, it was reported that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) requested additional funds for next year’s budget to prepare for operations against Iran. Throughout the year, IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kohavi has repeatedly said the IDF is “accelerating” plans to strike Iran, and Israeli politicians have constantly been threatening the Islamic Republic.

Israel frequently carries out covert attacks against Iran’s civilian nuclear program, but the IDF planning suggests an overt operation could happen in the future. The US has joined Israel in issuing threats against Iran. Last week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken hinted at military action against Iran alongside Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid. Blinken said if diplomacy with Iran fails, the US will turn to “other options.”

Lapid made clear that one of Blinken’s “options” was military action. “I would like to start by repeating what the Secretary of State just said.  Yes, other options are going to be on the table if diplomacy fails.  And by saying other options, I think everybody understands here … what is it that we mean,” Lapid said.

*

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.

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

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

“It’s not necessary to censor the news, it’s sufficient to delay the news until it no longer matters,” Napoleon Bonaparte reportedly said. The same standard helps explain why Washington politicians and federal agencies usually get away with covering up their lies and abuses.

Many people assume that unless the government actively censors, people will learn what the government has done. But most government cover-ups succeed. Daniel Ellsberg, who risked life in prison to leak the Pentagon Papers, related in his 2002 memoirs:

“It is a commonplace that ‘you can’t keep secrets in Washington’ or ‘in a democracy’…. These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public.”

Cover-ups succeed because people defer to promises by government officials to investigate themselves. This was how the Nixon-era Pentagon buried scores of Vietnam atrocities even after confirming the carnage. After the My Lai controversy exploded, many U.S. soldiers reported other atrocities to the Pentagon. Nine thousand pages of documents were compiled confirming more than 300 war crimes, including seven other massacres of civilians by U.S. troops. David Hackworth, a retired colonel and the most decorated officer in the Army, later commented, ‘’Vietnam was an atrocity from the get-go…. There were hundreds of My Lais. You got your card punched by the numbers of bodies you counted.’’ American soldiers faced more legal perils for reporting than for committing atrocities.

Nixon a mastermind of cover-ups

Nixon gave the order: “Get the Army off the front page.” Col. Jared Schopper, in charge of the war crimes files at the Pentagon in the early 1970s, later explained: “The only way to get them [articles on atrocities] off the front page is to say they are founded and appropriate action was taken, or that they are unfounded and propaganda tools.” But the “appropriate action” usually meant simply burying the case regardless of how much evidence existed of war crimes. As long as the government claimed to be investigating an alleged atrocity, the media downplayed the story.

While the media deferred, the Nixon administration aggressively slandered critics. In early 1971, former Navy officer John Kerry electrified the media with testimony that American soldiers in Vietnam had committed a wide array of grisly atrocities. Even though the Pentagon quickly provided confidential information to the White House confirming Kerry’s charges, “the Nixon administration went ahead with an aggressive backroom campaign to discredit as fabricators and traitors Kerry and other veterans who spoke out about war crimes,” as Deborah Nelson, the author of The War Behind Me, noted in 2008.

The Nixon cover-up of Vietnam atrocities played a role in the 2004 presidential election. After the Democrats nominated Sen. Kerry, a group known as “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” sprang up to, in its own words, “counter the false ‘war crimes’ charges John Kerry repeatedly made against Vietnam veterans.” The group savagely attacked Kerry in a series of ads. Kerry suffered far more political damage than he would have if the Pentagon had not succeeded in burying the evidence of the vast majority of Vietnam war crimes.

Bush’s cover-ups

The George W. Bush administration used similar charades to stifle the scandal over its worldwide torture regime. The only thing necessary for a successful cover-up was for the president first to continually proclaim that everything will be investigated, and then, months later, to proclaim that everything has already been investigated. A year after the first photos from Abu Ghraib leaked out, Bush declared: “There have been over, I think, nine investigations, eight or nine investigations by independent investigators that have made the reports very public.”

In reality, none of the investigations had been independent, and none of the reports were available in full to the public. Most of the investigations were based on the prior reports, which themselves did little or no honest digging. Yet, the Bush administration created the impression that anyone who refused to accept the good faith of the government’s self-investigations was acting in bad faith.

George Orwell made the official fabrication and rewriting of history the occupation of the main character in 1984. But nowadays, there is no need for a bureaucracy to rewrite history. Newspaper stories are “the first draft of history,” and the U.S. government routinely dictates the copy. If worse comes to worse, the military can simply delete photographs revealing too many victims.

The media as handmaiden to the state

The media elite happily plays lap dogs to the war machine. CNN chief Walter Isaacson explained: “Especially right after 9/11…. There was a real sense that you don’t get that critical of a government that’s leading us in war time.” Elisabeth Bumiller, the New York Times correspondent for the White House, explained why reporters did not ask tough questions at a Bush press conference just before he attacked Iraq: “It’s frightening to stand up there. Nobody wanted to get into an argument with the president at this very serious time.” The Washington Post blocked or buried pre-war articles exposing the holes in the Bush team’s assertions on Iraq. PostPentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks explained: “There was an attitude among editors: ‘Look, we’re going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?’” Jim Lehrer, the host of government-subsidized PBS’s Newshour, explained his timidity in 2004: “It would have been difficult to have had debates [about invading Iraq] … you’d have had to have gone against the grain.” The illusion that the media is independent makes its groveling more subversive to citizens’ understanding.

After he launched an invasion of Iraq in 2003, Bush perennially proclaimed that the United States had given freedom to 25 million Iraqis. Thus, any Iraqi civilians killed by U.S. forces were both statistically and morally inconsequential. And the vast majority of the news coverage left out the asterisks.

A 2005 American University survey of hundreds of journalists who covered Iraq concluded: “Many media outlets have self-censored their reporting on the conflict in Iraq because of concern about public reaction to graphic images and details about the war.” Individual journalists commented:

• “In general, coverage downplayed civilian casualties and promoted a pro-US viewpoint. No U.S. media show abuses by US military carried out on regular basis.”
• “Friendly fire incidents were to show only injured Americans, and no reference made to possible mistakes involving civilians.”
• “The real damage of the war on the civilian population was uniformly omitted.”

A 2008 New York Times article noted that “After five years and more than 4,000 U.S. combat deaths, searches and interviews turned up fewer than a half-dozen graphic photographs of dead U.S. soldiers.” Veteran photographers who posted shots of wounded or dead U.S. soldiers were quickly booted out of Iraq. The Times noted that Iraqi “detainees were widely photographed in the early years of the war, but the U.S. Defense Department, citing prisoners’ rights, has recently stopped that practice as well.” Privacy was the only “right” the Pentagon pretended to respect — since the vast majority of detainees received little or no due process.

Cover-ups succeed because it is easier to recite official denials than to unearth official crimes. The Washington media takes its reality from the government. The Washington media’s idea of “factual reporting” is telling people what the government told them. Quoting a government official carries its own absolution. For the media, the official exonerates the falsehood almost every time. Controversial news that lacks a government seal of approval is often treated as scurrilous — or at least unfit for family newspapers. Pulitzer Prize–winning Associated Press correspondent Charles Hanley wrote about the U.S. use of torture in Iraq six months before the Abu Ghraib story broke. Hanley later explained why his expose was almost completely ignored: “It was not an officially sanctioned story that begins with a handout from an official source.”

How craven was the media during the Iraq war? In 2008, the New York Times revealed how the Pentagon created a cadre of 75 retired officers who, in return for confidential briefings and flattery from top officials, would appear on TV and repeat Pentagon talking points — without admitting the source. The result was “a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated.” Former Green Beret officer Robert Bevelacqua described the process: “It was [the Bush administration] saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you.”’ Another retired officer described the whole process as “psy-ops on steroids.”

The Times noted: “Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.” Some of the commentators received lavish government contracts after gushing praise over the Pentagon’s policies. Even though the networks made no effort to screen their “experts” for brazen conflicts of interest, they denied they had done anything wrong.

Truth awards no licenses or regulatory exemptions. As former CBS news anchor Dan Rather explained in 2007: “Fear is in every newsroom in the country … fear … if you don’t go along to get along, you’re going to get the reputation of being a troublemaker. There’s also the fear that, particularly in [television] networks, they’ve become huge, international conglomerates. They have big needs, legislative needs, repertory needs in Washington. Nobody has to send you a memo to tell you that’s the case.” The networks became wealthy because of government preferences — they received scores of billions of dollars’ worth of scarce broadcast spectrum gratis. The fact that the airwaves were a gift leaves the recipient dependent on government. Rather’s CBS colleague Eric Sevareid made the same point years earlier: “The bigger the information media, the less courage and information they allow. Bigness means weakness.”

A government cover-up succeeds if it dissipates the outrage. Politicians routinely use controlled leaks of damaging information to blunt the impact of a government abuse or debacle. They choose a friendly media source who will frame the issue to their liking. A few embarrassing details leaking out is no substitute for the smoking gun. Coverups often aim to focus wrath on specific tidbits or people — and avoid or stifle fundamental questions about government powers. After the Hurricane Katrina debacle, the firing of the head of FEMA chief Michael Brown (“Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job!” President George W. Bush publicly declared) ensured that the heat would be greatly decreased on FEMA itself.

As long as the media uses a government-provided template, politicians have little to fear from the press. Information on government abuses is not self-propelled. If it were, political history would be radically different. The same people who wield power usually also determine what information is released. Politicians and pundits talk as if there is some divine law of democracy assuring that “truth will out.” In reality, the issue of whether truth will out is no different than any other political conflict.

Government lying is not simply a result of character defects in politicians, political appointees, and bureaucrats. Instead, it is often the result of a systemic bias against admitting systemic failures. The larger government becomes, the more the deck is stacked against honesty in public affairs. People in government and in power have far more tools and stronger incentives to deceive than the average citizen’s incentive and ability to discover the truth. This is not a problem that can be solved by finger-wagging or moralistic lectures calling for politicians to repent. As philosopher Hannah Arendt noted, “the lie did not creep into politics by some accident of human sinfulness; moral outrage, for this reason alone, is not likely to make it disappear.”

But things will be different now that Joe Biden is president, right? Unfortunately, the media continues celebrating his election victory by ignoring almost all his falsehoods and failures. The mere fact that Biden is not Donald Trump will likely continue to give him a free pass from the media for at least another six months. Or maybe cold, hard reality will never catch up with the most media-beloved president since Barack Obama.

*

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.

James Bovard is a policy adviser to The Future of Freedom Foundation. He is a USA Todaycolumnist and has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, New Republic, Reader’s Digest, Playboy, American Spectator, Investors Business Daily, and many other publications. He is the author of Freedom Frauds: Hard Lessons in American Liberty (2017, published by FFF); Public Policy Hooligan (2012); Attention Deficit Democracy (2006); The Bush Betrayal (2004); Terrorism and Tyranny (2003); Feeling Your Pain (2000); Freedom in Chains(1999); Shakedown (1995); Lost Rights (1994); The Fair Trade Fraud (1991); and The Farm Fiasco(1989). He was the 1995 co-recipient of the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought, and the recipient of the 1996 Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. His book Lost Rights received the Mencken Award as Book of the Year from the Free Press Association. His Terrorism and Tyranny won Laissez Faire Book’s Lysander Spooner award for the Best Book on Liberty in 2003. Read his blog. Send him email.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

As a follow up to the July 11-12 protests, the same opposition figures and groups that participated in them, requested permission for marches to be simultaneously held in several cities across Cuba on November 15. In response, the local municipal authorities, for example Old Havana, responded by pointing out that “Article 56 of the [Cuban] Constitution, which is mentioned as a legal basis [for the march permit], provides among its requirements for the exercise of the right to demonstrate legally and “in respect for public order and in compliance with the rules established by law.” (Note: This unofficial English version of the decision was translated by Water Lippmann and edited by the author.)

In other words, while the signatories invoke Article 56, they only recognize the portion concerning the “right to demonstrate peacefully” in the abstract as the request published in the FaceBook page Archipiélago reveals, the main platform spear heading the second phase of “colour revolution.” They are ignoring that section of the same article that stipulates limits: “Respect for public order and compliance with the rules established by law.” Which Cuban law are the signatories avoiding? The municipal decision goes on to explain: “Article 4 of the Constitution defines that the socialist system endorsed by this Constitution is irrevocable, therefore any action exercised against it is illicit.”

Contrasting US and Cuban Constitutional Rights

The mainstream media in the US and those in Cuba who have been denied permission then invoke self-righteous statements protesting that the safeguard of socialism should not be a precondition to demonstrate. They are outraged that any limitation may be imposed on these rights? What is their reasoning? Is it possible that they are so imbued with the US-centric notions of “freedom of expression” and “right to assemble” in the abstract, as found in the US Constitution? Let us explore. The First Amendment of the US Constitution stipulates:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Unlike the Cuban constitution, there is no explicit reference in the US Constitution to protection of the capitalist system. One might respond by arguing that there is indeed some kind of reference, as in for example, the notorious Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility…” Does the latter mean that nothing can upset or challenge the capitalist status quo? We can only surmise that this is the case, as the entire history of the United States is based on the suppression of uprisings by the Indigenous Nations, African-Americans, the working class and youth against capitalism and imperialism. Whether one can extrapolate from “domestic tranquility” to mean the right of capitalism to operate in peace or not, it nevertheless remains a foregone conclusion: in practice, for the white supremist US elite, freedom of speech and right to assembly is tolerated unless it challenges the capitalist-imperialist status quo.

In contrast, the Cuban constitution and political system is frank and honest: Do not cross the red line we have established to defend our socialist system. Where does this limitation on freedom of expression and assembly come from?

The local authorities elaborate on their decision: “The Constitution of the Republic was widely debated and approved in a referendum by 86.85 percent of the voters, an overwhelming majority that sovereignly and freely chose the socialist system, its irrevocability and the right to fight by all means against anyone who tries to overthrow the established political, social and economic order.”

Communism: They Missed the Train

The process involved at arriving at this constitutional conclusion has been lengthy and complex, but also characterized by considerable public engagement and contribution. The first draft was made available to the entire Cuban population in 2018. Over many months, Cubans read the document and made a total of 780 suggestions and 9,600 proposals. Many of these were incorporated in the final draft, which was presented to the public.

One of the main sponsors of this month’s march request (and also involved in the July 11-12 protests), La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU), called for a “massive and resounding ‘No’” on the February 24, 2019 Constitutional referendum vote.

However, how did it play out?

“Voter turnout: 84.4% of eligible voters.

Yes: 86.85%.

No: 9.0%.

Blank or spoiled: 4.5%.”

Not only did this mean a clear rejection of the No vote, but the voter turn-out increased in comparison to the previous vote in the last general elections in 2018, which registered an 82.9% voter turn-out. Furthermore, this thirst to fully participate in the referendum translated into an expressed desire to further enshrine socialism in the new Constitution and even expand on that goal. In the initial draft sent to the citizens for discussion, the ultimate goal of communism was not present. However, revolutionary blogs and journalists challenged this omission. The author was in Havana at the time and witness to the lively debate in the neighbourhoods and on television on the issue to exclude or include communism. We recall that La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU) and the rallying call of other opposition groups on July 11-12 was then and is now in October 2021, “Down with Communism.” However, in the course of the debates at the grass roots level, this was the opportunity for the La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU) to sway the electorate against communism being enshrined in the Constitution. It must be pointed out as clearly as possible that they did, indeed, miss the train.

In its futile appeal for a No vote, and perhaps reading the writing on the wall, UPAC asserted that the referendum and elections are “rigged.”

However, the author participated in all stages of the Cuban electoral system in 1997-98 and there is no evidence at all of fraud. In 2010, another study in Cuba confirmed this.

The Proof of the Pudding is in the Eating

In its decision, the local municipal assembly in Havana writes that:

“The promoters and their public projections, as well as the links of some with subversive organizations or agencies financed by the US government, have the manifest intention of promoting a change of political system in Cuba. This reaffirms that the announced march, whose organizational scheme is conceived simultaneously for other territories of the country, constitutes a provocation as part of the strategy of ‘regime change’ for Cuba, rehearsed in other countries…Furthermore, as soon as it was announced, the march received public support from US legislators, political operators and media that encourage actions against the Cuban people, attempting to destabilize the country and urging military intervention.”

Is this at all far-fetched? Hardly, the CNN reporter in Havana for example, in his enthusiasm to put a peaceful face on the efforts of protest organizers, had no difficulty violating his journalistic integrity by challenging the veracity of the Cuban government’s decision based on facts. He asserted that “Cuban government officials are making it clear that a request to hold a peaceful protest next month will not be authorized.” Inadvertently, he proves the point, namely that foreign “media encourage actions against the Cuban people.”

Nor is he alone in exhibiting the old adage about the “proof of the pudding.”

The municipal authority wrote: “As soon as it was announced, the march received public support from US legislators, political operators.” Indeed, after showing support for the march, once the decision came down on October 12, here are the words of US State Department spokesperson Ned Price, at a press conference later that day:

“QUESTION: Yeah. I wanted to ask you about the Cuba’s Government decision to ban a protest that was planned for November 15th, claiming that the organizers are backed by the US to overthrow the regime. Do you have any comment on that, any response?

MR PRICE: Well, let me make one thing very clear at the outset. What happened in July, what transpired in the days and the weeks after that, was not about the United States. It was about the conduct of the Cuban regime, the unmet aspirations of the Cuban people for freedom, for dignity, for prosperity, the elements that they have been denied by this regime for far too long, since 1959.”

Then with poker-faced elaboration, after denying US involvement, Ned Price volunteered the State Department as the megaphone for the subversive elements. “We call for the government in Havana to respect the fundamental freedoms and the fundamental rights of the Cuban people.”

On October 12, the Miami Herald reports on a Telegram messaging system press conference from Cuba leading up to the request for a march permit and featuring the Havana individual who filed the request. It is very revealing.

Firstly, the Miami Herald fondly recalls that “on July 11, hundreds of Cubans took to the streets to ask for regime change,” which is the main reason that the Municipal officials refused the permit.

Secondly, the Miami-based outlet quotes the signatory for the permit, “they always complain about the ‘blockade,’ he said, referring to the US embargo. ‘There is no worse blockade than the internal blockade on every Cuban citizen in this country.’” This is a dead give away about the intentions of these individuals, who do not seem to have a country.

Thirdly, we have to admire the political acumen of the signatories. They seem to be very aware that they have opened a beachhead among sections of the “left” in the US and Canada and want to go further. The Miami Herald quotes him:

“I am calling on the left worldwide, which is usually complicit and unfortunately usually behaves in a hypocritical way, to tell them that there are no left or right dictatorships, good or bad, there are dictatorships, and we must oppose them all, whatever their political sign.”

In contrast, for example, an independent watchdog journalism organization MintPress News in the US and the anti-imperialist socialist The Canada Files in Canada countered those sections of the sold out “left” in their respective countries, who were cheerleading the attempted July 11 “colour revolution” in Cuba.

Will they learn their lesson as we head into another one?

*

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 Canada Files.

Arnold August is a Montreal-based author and journalist whose articles are published in web sites across North America, Latin America, Europe and the Middle East in English, Spanish and French. He is a Fellow at the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute.

Featured image: Cubans take part in a mass rally in defence of the Cuban Revolution and calling for an end to US sanctions, July 2021. Photo: Helen Yaffe

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

History is strewn with the broken branches of twisted irony.  An individual who found himself entangled in it was the late Colin Powell, who, as a military man, gave a doctrine his name only to forgo it as a diplomat.

The Powell Doctrine was one of certitude and caution: do not engage in conflict except in conditions whereby you could bring overwhelming and decisive force to bear.  Political goals had to be clear; hostilities would be brief.  There would be no more quagmires, no more Vietnam Wars for the US imperium.  The model for this was his first engagement with Saddam Hussein’s forces in 1991.  The other manifestation of this approach was opposing military intervention in Bosnia.

Such ruminations were reached after service in Vietnam, where he made his mark as a major who questioned the account of the My Lai massacre.  Tasked with providing the first response to the Pentagon’s queries spurred on by Ron Ridenhour, he showed an all-establishment view to the butchering of over four hundred villagers, questioning the complaint against Charlie Company as vicious rumour mongering.

This approach served him well, enabling him to get a White House Fellowship, receive patronage from Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, assume the role of President Ronald Reagan’s Deputy National Security Advisor, then National Security Advisor.  The Chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs was only logical in the scheme of this alignment, granting him an almost panoptical view of military-intelligence operations.  He directly supervised the teachers of torture from the School of the Americas and learned the importance of keeping the death-squads in the service of US power at arm’s length.  Ridenhour conveys this point with gruesome precision.  “Just keep those big, burly, white American advisers far enough away from the actual mayhem so that they will never be seen splattered with blood on the evening news.”

His briefings during the 1991 Gulf War were famed for being direct and free of jargon.  It stood to reason.  The Vietnam War, for the likes of Powell, had been lost not only because of unclear goals but because of a failure to control army-media relations.

Through the 1990s, he had a certain pop allure that drew him towards a possible tilt at the White House.  He had mastered military greatness and could now be readied as an Ike-redux.  Under heavy spousal pressure, he gave up his bid for office.  Alma Powell had threatened to leave him in the event of him running, fearing potential assassination from a racist’s bullet.  At the time, Christopher Hitchens recalled those “dinner-parties that turned into unspeakable cafard; the TV and radio chat-shows that went null at the mention of his name.”

Slotting into the role of US Secretary of State in the first administration of George W. Bush, he was billed the voice of sane moderation in a cabinet of hawks, the wounds of September 11, 2001 still bleeding.  The military man could still make his mark, despite pretending to prefer ploughshare to sword.

Prior to him taking the reins at the State Department, he had been mocked by his predecessor, Madeline Albright, who always had a touch of the war monger about her.  “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about,” she chided him with a bloody craving, “if we can’t use it?”  Albright had been a critic of the qualifications suggested by the Powell doctrine, calling it archaic before it even came into practice.  “You know, Gen. Powell wrote a book and one of the problems with writing a book is that it takes a while to get it published.”  She found it “probably ironic that just at the time that this [book] came out, in fact, the limited application of limited force in Bosnia was working.”

Powell would have done his critics proud in abandoning his own doctrine, demonstrating that ideas are there to be vanquished and burned, even by their own creators.  The moment he did so remains dark folklore, a poison of statecraft.  With the Bush administration enthralled by the prospect of war in the Middle East, having marshalled themselves against evidence more counterfeit and conspiratorial than Donald Trump ever could be, Powell played along with gusto. This heralded a conversion from remarks made in February 2001 that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein “has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of destruction.  He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”

His infamous February 2003 address to the UN Security Council accusing Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction was another effort at public relations but of a very different quality.  It proved to be free of accuracy and unburdened by reality, despite Powell’s own vetting efforts of the evidence.  This was a man fully enrolled in the service of regime change and making the case for it.

Every statement, claimed Powell, was “backed up by sources, solid sources”.  They were “not assertions.  What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”  The theatrics were ample.  “Let me remind you how ricin works.  Less than a pinch – imagine a pinch of salt – less than a pinch of ricin, eating just this amount in your food, could cause shock followed by respiratory failure.  Death comes within 72 hours and there is no antidote.  There is no cure.  It is fatal.”  To the US Senate, he could say that these were “real weapons.  We’re talking about anthrax.  We’re talking about botulinum toxin.  We’re talking about nuclear weapons programmes.”

This was heavy going, given that such solid intelligence had been gathered from the quicksand sources of the Iraqi National Congress, a notorious outfit of exile led by the oleaginous Ahmed Chalabi.  Powell’s chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, noted how many “of these sources sort of tinged and merged back into a single source, and that inevitably that single source seems to be either recommended by, set up by, orchestrated by, introduced by, or whatever, by somebody in the INC.”

The Secretary of State also ran with the al-Qaida-Iraqi connection, another spurious link manufactured in the aftermath of 9/11 linking the terrorist attacks to Baghdad.  “Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with al-Qaida.  These denials are simply not credible.”  His UN speech makes special reference to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that al-Qaida “affiliates based in Baghdad now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies throughout Iraq for his network”.

Powell spent subsequent years calling his presentation “painful”, a “blot” that would “always be part of my record.”  But ever mindful of public relations, he could find other more worthy alibis for his conduct.  Blame could be saddled and pinned down elsewhere – for instance, upon the more nefarious Donald Rumsfeld.  Or the devious Vice President Dick Cheney, whose office authored the speech.

For those keen to confine the scope of Powell’s errors and assessments, it is also worth remembering that the taste for regime change did not stop with the placing of boots in Mesopotamia.  As chair for the Bush’s Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, Powell oversaw the production of a 2004 report advocating various ways the Cuban government might be overthrown.  These were familiar: insinuating market capitalism into the state; introducing multi-party elections; giving Cuban Americans living in the US restitution for losses suffered under the Castro regime.  Accordingly, Washington should “support the Cuban people as they … work to transform themselves” and enable them “to develop a democratic and civic culture … and the values and habits essential to both.”  Such mindful benevolence.

With the imperium in respectful lockstep and sighing deferentially to a departed soldier, Powell’s blemishes can be overlooked by glowing reference to his “service” and patriotism.  But in performing that service, Powell’s legacy will be associated with the murderous, not infrequently incompetent adventurism of US foreign policy and its messianic bent.

*

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. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

While we must always hold on to hope, true change can only be achieved through awareness and action. As opposed to the mainstream media’s lies and half-truths, it is the focus and objective of Global Research to ask real questions, seek honest answers, and help people take this knowledge to empower themselves to change the world for the better.

We have already hosted two Global Research Webinars, one in April and another in September. Both were a success, thanks to our authors, contributors and readers for the support. We plan to hold more webinars in the future, while continuing to produce Global Research TV videos, Global Research News Hour radio shows/podcasts, and Global Research Publishers E-books.

In order to support the development of initiatives such as these, with no external corporate or political sponsorship, we rely on financial contributions from our readers. Please help us spread the word far and wide by making a donation or becoming a member today!

Click to donate:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation

---

Click to become a member (receive free books!):

Click to view our membership plans

---

Thank you for supporting independent media.

The Global Research Team

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Americans are the most propagandized people on earth. In place of a news media they have a propaganda ministry that is a lie machine. Americans live in a spun narrative of lies.

Few understand the evil intentions of their rulers and the way government is used to enrich the elite. British journalist Richard Medhurst explains how ten years ago US and French elites destroyed an entire country. See this.

The crudely evil Obama and the white bitch Hillary, together with French President Sarkozy, currently a jailbird, destroyed a highly successful country and murdered its leader for their own profit.

The destruction of Libya is one of the many crimes of Western colonialism that has undermined the confidence of Western intellectuals in Western civilization. It is crimes such as the murder of Libya that have resulted in the destruction or removal of statues and monuments and the teaching now institutionalized in schools that white people are racist.

When you think of the destruction of Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, and Palestine, and the attempted destruction of Syria and Iran, just to mention some of the atrocities of our current era, it is possible to comprehend why the West has lost its moral gloss and is increasingly despised by growing numbers of its own citizens in addition to Arabs, Africans, Latin Americans, Russians, and Asians.

Corrupt and evil Western “leaders” have succeeded in marginalizing the West. Every western country now consists of refugees from countries that the West has destroyed and citizens who have lost confidence in their leaders and culture. We ourselves are experiencing the fall of Rome.

*

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 frequent contributor to Global Research.

There Has Been No Mandatory Vaccination Executive Order

By Renee Parsons, October 20, 2021

With civic guidance and political leadership absent on the heels of multiple national crises, the entire country is now roiled in an era of massive civilian disobedience campaigns as thousands of American workers seek protection from President Biden’s flawed vaccine dictates.

Study by Harvard Researcher Finds Countries with Lowest COVID-19 Vaccination Rates Have Fewer Cases of COVID than Fully Vaccinated Countries

By Brian Shilhavy, October 19, 2021

A new study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology proves what we “conspiracy theorists” have been saying all along about the COVID-19 shots: They cause symptoms leading to COVID-19 diagnoses rather than prevent them.

2 Navy SEALS, 4 Marines, Air Force Major All Sue Biden

By Bob Unruh, October 19, 2021

Liberty Counsel on Friday announced a class action lawsuit on behalf of members of all five branches of the U.S. military – the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard – against President Joe Biden over his orders they take the experimental COVID shots or face dishonorable discharge.

Groundbreaking: Nebraska AG Says Doctors Can Legally Prescribe Ivermectin, HCQ for COVID, Calls Out FDA, CDC, Fauci, Media for ‘Fueling Confusion and Misinformation’

By Megan Redshaw, October 19, 2021

At the request of the Nebraska Department of Health, on Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

Businesses: $700,000 Fine for Not Complying with Vax Mandate

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, October 19, 2021

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill is an unconstitutional vaccine enforcement mechanism that threatens to bankrupt businesses unless they force their employees to get a COVID-19 injection.

Colin Powell: Iraqis Will ‘Not Shed Tears’ for 2003 Invasion Architect

By Alex McDonald, October 19, 2021

For millions of Iraqis, Powell will be remembered as the man who presented false intelligence before the United Nations as to the existence and threat of former ruler Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Narrative Traps in India’s Decision-making

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, October 19, 2021

The problem with contrived narratives such as on Doklam in 2017 is that they can lead to situational blindness, whereby you are so focused on one aspect that you fail to notice the bigger picture.

The WHO Recommends Genetic Manipulation and Gene Editing of Humans “To Promote Public Health”

By Jens Bernert, October 19, 2021

Those who warned that Corona “vaccinations“ were the first step towards the genetic manipulation of humans faced harsh attacks from quality media, politicians and activists who denied this and ridiculed the corresponding fears.

The Canadian Government Must Protect Hassan Diab!

By Hassan Diab Support Committee, October 19, 2021

118 members of the legal profession and legal scholars in Canada recently signed an open letter to Justice Minister David Lametti calling on the Minister to take immediate action to protect the rights of Dr. Hassan Diab by (1) giving immediate assurances that Canada will not accept nor accede to a second request for Hassan’s extradition; (2) urging France to put an immediate end to this continuing miscarriage of justice; and (3) suspending the extradition treaty with France.

Free Alex Saab Delegation Attends Meeting of African Bar Association

By John Philpot and Roger D. Harris, October 19, 2021

An international Free Alex Saab delegation attended the annual meeting of the African Bar Association in Niamey, Niger, on Oct. 3-7. Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab, who has been under arrest in Cabo Verde since June 2020 by orders of the U.S., is fighting extradition to Miami.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

With civic guidance and political leadership absent on the heels of multiple national crises, the entire country is now roiled in an era of massive civilian disobedience campaigns as thousands of American workers seek protection from President Biden’s flawed vaccine dictates.

If you listen to Biden’s recent incoherent statement on vaccine mandates or you are an incurable aficionado of what used to be called mainstream media, you may think there is reason to believe that a formal Presidential Executive Order mandating national Covid vaccinations had been issued.  As with many Democratic initiatives, the truth and reality of Biden’s September 9th announcement are frequently at odds.

There was no mention of an Executive Order despite the widespread public message that a mandatory national vaccination decree was being applied to American businesses and the non-vaccinated public. Leave it to the Democrats to exaggerate their authority as they retain utter control over the lives of Americans; not unlike committed authoritarian gangsters intent on mugging what remains of our Constitutional republic.

Soon after the alleged ‘mandate’ was announced, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered further proof of how little the Democrats care about the American people or its economy when she announced that enforcement of the ‘mandate’ was included in the $3.5 trillion “reconciliation’ bill with a serious infraction costing employers up to $70,000 per violation and up to $700,000 for repeat offenders who dare question vaccine mandates as Un-American.

However, a visit to the White House website on Executive Orders (Federal Register) reveals that the Biden Administration has not, to date, filed any such EO.   It was reported that the object of the EO was to direct the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) to issue a rule mandating vaccinations for employees in America’s top one hundred companies or submit to weekly tests or be fired.

In addition, there appears to be no such EO action at the White House Office of Management and Budget as well as no evidence of OSHA preparation of an in-the-works standard to apply to the aforementioned unvaccinated.

So, while there is great media fanfare as if there is a bona fide national mandatory mandate to take the jab, currently no such legal foundation exists for any American business to force that mandate on its employees – nor is there any foundation, at this point, for any State to initiate a legal challenge against the Federal government.   In fact, there is simply no basis for a legal challenge to a mandated vaccination policy since the entire kerfuffle may be little more than a figment of Biden’s feeble brain and has never been adopted as a formal policy.

One possible explanation is that the actual issuance of an EO would have opened a writhing can of bogus worms which would negatively affect Biden’s sinking poll numbers. On the other hand, announcing a mandate without any actual executive order would provide American companies with the façade of a legal requirement while removing any possible legal action against The State.  In other words, while employees may be forced to get the jab, the government would remain immune from charges of acting in an unconstitutional manner and from exposure to a legitimate legal Court challenge.  Let’s say the State would put itself in a situation of having their cake and eat it too.

Let’s assume for the moment that the Biden EO had actually been promulgated.  The issue is whether a hypothetical Executive Order to the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)  has the constitutional authority to issue a regulation to determine Covid as a ‘grave health concern” to the nation.  A major hurdle to Biden’s agenda is that such an ill-conceived EO would sabotage the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution which clearly allows Federal statute precedence over State law. However, the Biden Administration in its euphoria of Building Back Better has failed to grasp that an EO would not be comparable to Federal legislation; and therefore, would lack sufficient force of authority to supersede a state ban on a Federal mandate.   In addition, it can be expected that Red State Attorneys General will vigorously defend their states’ rights under the Tenth Amendment; Blue States not so much.

In other words, an EO is not on a par with Federal statute in that it does not carry the same legislative authority as a Congressional act.  That has not stopped the Biden regime from thoughtlessly abusing its power by unnecessarily manipulating thousands of Americans into an emotionally stressful life and family crisis, fearful of a loss of employment and into a legally untenable situation; all under the guise of a deceptive legal mandate.

Surely, companies that have since announced their compliance with the mandate, such as 3M, Boeing, United, and Southwest Airlines must have legal counsel who advised them that the mandate is not a legal requirement and perhaps only the wishful thinking of a demented President. And yet, Southwest suffered massive turmoil the weekend before last, with thousands of cancellations and delays, and proved how little they care about their own employees when it opposed its own pilots who sought injunctive relief from faux mandatory vaccinations.  To date, Walmart and JP Morgan Chase have not mandated vaccinations.

In direct response to Biden’s chimera,  Florida had already stepped in to protect its citizens from an arbitrary Federal mandatory vaccination requirement as in direct response to Biden. Texas Governor Abbott issued his own Executive Order prohibiting a Federal vaccination mandate.

So here we are left with a fraudulent Democratic Administration who dare to skew public policy, claiming to have been overwhelmingly elected as if the American public supports their Marxist views.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The resultant response to Biden’s mandatory vaccination announcement continues to fail as Americans in all walks of life join together and draw their line as they message  Biden that he is not their President.

*

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 American Thinker.

Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found at [email protected].

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is a screenshot from a 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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

A new study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology proves what we “conspiracy theorists” have been saying all along about the COVID-19 shots: They cause symptoms leading to COVID-19 diagnoses rather than prevent them.

The study, Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States, was conducted by S. V. Subramanian, who is affiliated with Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, and also the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The study looked at data from 68 countries and 2947 counties in the U.S.

Vaccines currently are the primary mitigation strategy to combat COVID-19 around the world. For instance, the narrative related to the ongoing surge of new cases in the United States (US) is argued to be driven by areas with low vaccination rates.

A similar narrative also has been observed in countries, such as Germany and the United Kingdom. At the same time, Israel that was hailed for its swift and high rates of vaccination has also seen a substantial resurgence in COVID-19 cases.

We investigate the relationship between the percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries and across 2947 counties in the US.

They used COVID-19 data provided by the Our World in Data for cross-country analysis, available as of September 3, 2021.

For the county-level analysis in the US, they utilized the White House COVID-19 Team data, available as of September 2, 2021.

Comparing countries with various rates of percentages of their population fully vaccinated for COVID-19, they found that “countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1).

In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.

Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days.

The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.

Likewise, in the U.S. the counties with the highest vaccination rates have the highest incidents of COVID-19 cases.

Across the US counties too, the median new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days is largely similar across the categories of percent population fully vaccinated (Fig. 2).

Notably there is also substantial county variation in new COVID-19 cases within categories of percentage population fully vaccinated. There also appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated (Fig. 3).

Of the top 5 counties that have the highest percentage of population fully vaccinated (99.9–84.3%), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identifies 4 of them as “High” Transmission counties.

Chattahoochee (Georgia), McKinley (New Mexico), and Arecibo (Puerto Rico) counties have above 90% of their population fully vaccinated with all three being classified as “High” transmission.

Conversely, of the 57 counties that have been classified as “low” transmission counties by the CDC, 26.3% (15) have percentage of population fully vaccinated below 20%.

Read the full study here. You might want to download the .pdf version, as these kind of studies proving Big Pharma and Government health agencies such as the FDA and CDC are lying to people, tend to be “retracted” once they are published.

COVID-19 vaccines not only offer no benefits, they are killing and injuring people, which is why so many dissenting doctors and scientists today call them “bioweapons.”

*

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 HIN

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Open Letter from Legal Professionals in Canada Supporting Dr. Hassan Diab

118 members of the legal profession and legal scholars in Canada recently signed an open letter to Justice Minister David Lametti calling on the Minister to take immediate action to protect the rights of Dr. Hassan Diab by (1) giving immediate assurances that Canada will not accept nor accede to a second request for Hassan’s extradition; (2) urging France to put an immediate end to this continuing miscarriage of justice; and (3) suspending the extradition treaty with France.

Read the open letter and view the list of signatories here.

Neve, Aiken and Champ: Canada’s Next Justice Minister Must Defend Hassan Diab’s Rights

“Will France have the audacity to seek Diab’s extradition a second time? Will it instead opt to try him in absentia, itself a flagrant violation of fair trial rights? Either way, Diab and his family, who have been trapped in a Kafkaesque world of injustice for 14 years, currently face the prospect of several more years of the same. It is intolerable and it must end. That is why we recently joined more than 100 lawyers and legal academics in an open letter to Minister Lametti during the recent election, urging him to convey to French authorities that Canada will not in any way continue to participate in this profound miscarriage of justice.”

Read the full opinion piece by Alex Neve, Sharry Aiken, and Paul Champ in the Ottawa Citizen here.

Should We Really be Handing Them Over?

“Under the current law, a state requesting extradition need only shows up with a summary of the evidence it claims to have. But that summary cannot be challenged or tested, says Robert Currie, a Schulich School of Law professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax. ‘It’s an unfair process.’… Currie says that the Diab case is an egregious example of how the Supreme Court’s intention in Ferras has failed. ‘If Hassan Diab could be committed for extradition, then there’s no meaningful way to challenge it at all,’ he says. ‘The judge just becomes a rubber stamp on the whole thing.’”

Read the full article by Dale Smith in the Canadian Bar Association’s National Magazine here.

Please Send a Letter to Prime Minister Justice Trudeau

We need to keep the pressure on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Canadian government to protect Hassan and end the Kafkaesque injustice he is facing.

Please send a letter to PM Trudeau and the Canadian government. You may write your own letter, or send the online letter at:

If you live in Canada: https://iclmg.ca/diab-letter
(a copy of the letter will be sent to your Member of Parliament)

If you live outside Canada: https://iclmg.ca/diab-letter-intl

Thank you for your continued support!

*

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: Hassan Diab, the Ottawa professor who was extradited to France by the Canadian government as a suspect in a decades-old terror bombing.  (THE CANADIAN PRESS)  

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Liberty Counsel on Friday announced a class action lawsuit on behalf of members of all five branches of the U.S. military – the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard – against President Joe Biden over his orders they take the experimental COVID shots or face dishonorable discharge.

“The Biden administration has no authority to require the COVID shots for the military or for federal employees or civilian contractors,” explained Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel chairman.

“Nor can the Biden administration pretend that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment do not apply to its unlawful mandates. The commander-in-chief must end this shameful treatment and abuse of our brave military heroes. Forcing the COVID shots without consent or consideration for their sincere religious beliefs is illegal.”

The action in U.S. District Court in Florida is on behalf of two Navy SEALs, a Navy EOD Officer, a Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer, a Navy Chaplain, two Marine Lt. Colonels, two Marine Lance Corporals, an Air Force Major, an Air Force Technical Sergeant, an Army National Guardsman, an Army Colonel, and a Coast Guard Lieutenant.

It seeks a temporary restraining order preventing Biden and his appointees from “enforcing, threatening to enforce, attempting to enforce, or otherwise requiring compliance with the Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate…”

Other defendants are Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas.

Liberty Counsel said the non-military plaintiffs include a Department of Defense contractor who has conducted Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance quantitative and qualitative assessments and studies, whose assessments are briefed to DOD senior leadership to inform decisions on future employment, allocation, and procurement; a federal civilian engineer employed by a large military defense contractor that provides LCD screens used in United States Armed Forces aircraft; a federal civilian contractor employer whose company develops and supports military weapons systems, including current and next generation land vehicles for the Army and next generation Navy vessels; a federal nuclear contractor employee who is a young woman opposed to abortion and who desires to have children of her own one day; and a Department of Energy Civilian Nuclear Tech who works at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The individuals for whom the case was filed are not named, but in a sworn statement on Navy chaplain explained, “I personally observed (and the Sailors told me in the course of counseling about) tremendous amounts of coercion, bullying, censorship, and intimidation being brought forth by the command to bear against the personnel who expressed objections of any kind to the COVID shot mandates, including religious objections…And clearly, the military has lost more lives to the increase in suicide from 2020-2021 (at least 1,012) than to all of COVID in 2 years (~52), but suicide has not been a focus.”

It was Austin who dispatched on August 24 the “Mandatory Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination of Department of Defense Service Members.”

But Matthew Oster, who is on Biden’s COVID task force, admitted the shots are “causing myocarditis” in “young men,” and the Journal of the American Medical Association Cardiology confirmed, “Myocarditis Following Immunization with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Members of the U.S. Military.”

Then on Sept. 9 Biden issued a similar order for federal workers.

The case charges that under the federal Emergency Use Authorization law none of the vaccines has gotten full Food and Drug Administration Approval, so they cannot be mandated.

“Under the above statute, there is no legal basis on which the president may waive the EUA in order to mandate the COVID-19 vaccines for the military. Indeed, he has not done so because he has no statutory authority under the law,” Liberty Counsel explained.

Further, the mandates violate the constitutionally protected right to religion.

“The plaintiffs all hold sincere religious beliefs against the COVID shots on the basis that their body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and to defile it is a sin against God. In addition, the plaintiffs do not want to participate directly or indirectly or otherwise be associated with the destruction of human life through abortion by injecting a product that contains or was tested or developed with aborted fetal cell lines,” Liberty Counsel said.

But the military is telling the plaintiffs “there are NO RELIGIOUS exemptions, and merely submitting such a request will subject them to dishonorable discharge.”

Liberty Counsel said it also is representing clients on behalf of the 3.7 million employees under federal government contracts and two million federal employees who are under the Biden administration’s COVID shot 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.

Featured image: Hospital Corpsman 2nd Caine Collins instructs recruits on the importance of their COVID vaccination card before receiving their COVID-19 vaccine in Pacific Fleet Drill Hall at Recruit Training Command at Great Lakes, Illinois, May 26, 2021. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Spencer Fling)

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

At the request of the Nebraska Department of Health, on Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

Few subjects have been more controversial than ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine — two long-established, inexpensive medications widely and successfully used in many parts of the world for the prevention and treatment of COVID.

By contrast, the use of both medications against COVID has been largely suppressed in the U.S, where doctors have been threatened and punished for prescribing them.

On Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General (AG) Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe off-label medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

However, if they did neglect to obtain consent, deceive, prescribe excessively high doses or other misconduct, they could be subject to discipline, Peterson wrote.

The AG’s office emphasized it was not recommending any specific treatment for COVID.

“That is not our role,” Peterson wrote. “Rather, we address only the off-label early treatment options discussed in this opinion and conclude that the available evidence suggests they might work for some people.”

Peterson said allowing physicians to consider early treatments will free them to evaluate additional tools that could save lives, keep patients out of the hospital and provide relief for our already strained healthcare system.

The opinion, based on an assessment of relevant scientific literature, was rendered in response to a request by Dannette Smith, CEO of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.

Smith asked the AG’s office to look into whether doctors could face discipline or legal action under Nebraska’s Uniform Credential Act (UCA) — meant to protect public health, safety and welfare — if they prescribed ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine.

“After receiving your question and conducting our investigation, we have found significant controversy and suspect information about potential COVID-19 treatments,” Peterson wrote.

For example, a paper published in the Lancet — one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world — denounced hydroxychloroquine as dangerous, yet the statistics were flawed and the authors refused to provide analyzed data.

The paper was retracted, but not before countries stopped using the drug and trials were cancelled or interrupted.

“The Lancet’s own editor-in-chief admitted that the paper was a ‘fabrication,’ a ‘monumental fraud’ and a ‘shocking example of research misconduct’ in the middle of a global health emergency,” Peterson wrote in the opinion.

A recently published paper on COVID recognized that “for reasons that are yet to be clarified,” early treatment has not been emphasized despite numerous U.S. healthcare providers advocating for early treatment and “scores of treating and academic physicians” — who have published papers in well respected journals — urging early interventions.

Peterson cited numerous studies showing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine reduced mortality by up to 75% or more when used as a preventative or prophylaxis for COVID, suggesting hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved had the drugs been widely used in America.

“Every citizen — Democrat or Republican — should be grateful for Doug Peterson’s thoughtful and courageous counteroffensive against the efforts of Big Pharma, its captive federal regulators, and its media and social media allies to silence doctors and deny Americans life-saving treatments,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender via email.

“We finally have a leader who puts constitutional rights, peer-reviewed science and human health above industry profits. Doug Peterson is uncowed and unbowed — a genuine hero on horseback for all Americans.” Kennedy said.

Children’s Health Defense President Mary Holland agreed.

“This Nebraska AG opinion lets doctors get back to being doctors — without being second-guessed by government, pharmacists and others interfering in the crucial doctor-patient relationship,” Holland said.

Although the AG’s office did not rule out the possibility that other off-label drugs might show promise — either now or in the future — as a prophylaxis or treatment against COVID, it confined its opinion to ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the sake of brevity.

Nebraska AG highlights science on ivermectin

In his legal opinion, Peterson concluded evidence showed ivermectin demonstrated striking effectiveness in preventing and treating COVID, and any side effects were primarily minor and transient.

“Thus, the UCA does not preclude physicians from considering ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID,” Peterson wrote.

In the decade leading up to the COVID pandemic, Peterson found numerous studies showing ivermectin’s antiviral acti­vity against several RNA viruses by blocking the nuclear trafficking of viral proteins, adding to 50 years of research confirming ivermectin’s antiviral effects.

In addition, safety data for ivermectin showed side effects were “vanishingly small.” The latest statistics available through VigiAccess reported only 5,674 adverse drug reac­tions to ivermectin between 1992 and October 13, 2021, an “incredibly low” number given that 3.7 billion doses have been administered since the 1980s, Peterson wrote.

Peterson cited several studies showing ivermectin led to improvement of COVID outcomes when used in early treatment or as a prophylaxis, while noting many studies with negative findings about ivermectin “excluded most available evidence,” cherry picked data within studies, misreported data, made unsupported assertions of adverse reactions to ivermectin and had “conclusions that did follow from evidence.”

Peterson also found that epidemiological evidence for ivermectin’s effectiveness, derived by analyzing COVID-related data from various states, countries or regions is instructive in the context of a global pandemic.

In one instance, a group of scholars analyzed data comparing COVID rates of countries that routinely administer ivermectin as a prophylaxis and countries that did not. The research showed “countries with routine mass drug administration of pro­phylactic … ivermectin have a significantly lower incidence of COVID-19.”

“This ‘highly significant’ correlation manifests itself not only ‘in a worldwide context’ but also when comparing African countries that regularly administer prophylactic ‘ivermectin against parasitic infections’ and African countries that do not,” Peterson wrote. “Based on these results, the researchers surmised that these results may be connected to ivermectin’s ability to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication, which likely leads to lower infection rates.”

Nebraska AG calls out FDA, Fauci on hypocrisy on ivermectin

Many U.S. health agencies have now addressed the use of ivermectin for COVID. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has adopted a neutral position, choosing not to recommend for or against the use of ivermectin — a change from its position in January 2021 where it discouraged use of the drug for treatment of COVID.

Peterson wrote:

“The reason for the change is the NIH recognized several randomized trials and retrospective cohort studies of ivermectin use in patients with COVID-19 have been published in peer-reviewed journals. And some of those studies reported positive outcomes, including shorter time to resolution of disease manifestations that were attributed to COVID-19, greater reduction in inflammatory marker levels, shorter time to viral clearance, [and] lower mortality rates in patients who received ivermectin than in patients who received comparator drugs or placebo.”

Yet, on Aug. 29, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases within the NIH, went on CNN and announced “there is no clinical evidence” that ivermectin works for the prevention or treatment of COVID. Fauci went on to reiterate that “there is no evidence whatsoever” that it works.

“This definitive claim directly contradicts the NIH’s recognition that ‘several randomized trials … published in peer-reviewed journals’ have reported data indicating that ivermectin is effective as a COVI D-19 treatment,” Peterson wrote.

In March 2021, the FDA posted a webpage, “Why You Should Not Use lvermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”

“Although the FDA’s concern was stories of some people using the animal form of ivermectin or excessive doses of the human form, the title broadly condemned any use of ivermectin in connection with COVID-19,” Peterson wrote. “Yet, there was no basis for its sweeping condemnation.”

Peterson wrote:

“Indeed, the FDA itself acknowledged on that very webpage (and continued to do so until the page changed on September 3, 2021) that the agency had not even ‘reviewed data to support use of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients to treat or to prevent COVID-19.’ But without reviewing the available data, which had long since been available and accumulating, it is unclear what basis the FDA had for denouncing ivermectin as a treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19.

“On that same webpage, the FDA also declared that ‘[i]vermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses).’ It did so while another one of its webpages simultaneously cited a study in Antiviral Research that identified ivermectin as a medicine ‘previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity.’”

“It is telling that the FDA deleted the line about ivermectin not being ‘anti-viral’ when it amended the first webpage on September 3, 2021,” Peterson noted.

Peterson said the FDA’s most controversial statement on ivermectin was made on Aug. 21, when it posted a link on Twitter to its “Why You Should Not Use lvermectin” webpage with this statement: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

“This message is troubling not only because it makes light of a serious matter but also because it inaccurately implies that ivermectin is only for horses or cows,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson said the FDA has assailed ivermectin’s safety while ignoring the fact that physicians routinely prescribe medications for off-label use and that ivermectin is a “particularly well-tolerated medicine with an established safety record.”

Peterson added the FDA is ignoring several randomized controlled trials and at least one meta­analysis suggesting ivermectin is effective against COVID. He pointed out the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention has adopted a similar stance — unsupported by scientific evidence — and the media has fueled confusion and misinformation on the drug.

Peterson questions professional associations’ stance on ivermectin

Professional associations in the U.S. and internationally have adopted conflicting positions on ivermectin and COVID. The American Medical Association (AMA), American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) issued a statement in September strongly opposing the ordering, prescribing or dispensing of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID outside of a clinical trial.

But their statement relied solely on the FDA’s and CDC’s suspect positions.

The AMA, APhA and ASHP also mentioned a statement by Merck — the original patent-holder — opposing the use of ivermectin for COVID because of a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”

“But Merck, of all sources, knows that ivermectin is exceedingly safe, so the absence of safety data in recent studies should not be concerning to the company,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson called into question the objectivity of Merck in providing an opinion on ivermectin that U.S. health agencies are relying upon. “Why would ivermectin’s original patent holder go out of its way to question this medicine by creating the impression that it might not be safe?” Peterson asked. “There are at least two plausible reasons.”

Peterson explained:

“First, ivermectin is no longer under patent, so Merck does not profit from it anymore. That likely explains why Merck declined to ‘conduct clinical trials’ on ivermectin and COVID-19 when given the chance.

“Second, Merck has a significant financial interest in the medical profession rejecting ivermectin as an early treatment for COVID-19. [T]he U.S. government has agreed to pay [Merck] about $1.2 billion for 1.7 million courses of its experimental COVID-19 treatment, if it is proven to work in an ongoing large trial and authorized by U.S. regulators.”

Merck’s treatment is known as “molnupiravir,” and aims to stop COVID from progressing when given early in the course of disease. When Merck announced Oct. 1, that preliminary studies indicated molnupiravir reduced hospitalizations and deaths by half, the drug maker’s stock price immediately jumped to 12.3%.

“Thus, if low-cost ivermectin works better than, or even the same as molnupiravir, that could cost Merck billions of dollars,” Peterson wrote.

Pharma giant Merck is facing accusations of price gouging after it charged the U.S. more than $700 per patient for a taxpayer-funded coronavirus treatment that, according to research, costs just $17.74 to produce.https://t.co/BSYYnPmRBl

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) October 8, 2021

Peterson takes on science of hydroxychloroquine

Peterson said based on his review of the evidence, his office did not find clear and convin­cing evidence that would warrant disciplining physicians who prescribe hydroxychloroquine for the prevention or early treatment of COVID after first obtaining informed patient consent.

Peterson pointed to similar findings with hydroxychloroquine — a less toxic derivative of a medicine named chloroquine — widely used since it was approved by the FDA in 1955 for treatment of malaria.

Peterson noted that as early as 2004, a lab study revealed chloroquine was “an effective inhibitor of the replication of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in vitro” and should “be considered for immediate use in the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV infections.”

In 2005, another study showed chloroquine had strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection and was effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell cultures.

Other studies showed hydroxychloroquine exhibited antiviral properties that can inhibit SARS-CoV-2 virus entry, transmission and replication, and contains anti-inflammatory properties that help regulate pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Peterson wrote,

“many large observational studies suggest that hydroxychloroquine significantly reduces the risk of hospitalization and death when administered to ­particularly high-risk outpatients as part of early COVID-19 treatment.”

Peterson said the drug is considered to be so safe it can be prescribed for pregnant women, yet during the pandemic, the FDA raised questions about hydroxychloroquine and adverse cardiac events.

These concerns prompted one group of researchers to conduct a systematic review of the hydroxychloroquine safety literature pre-COVID. Their review indicated people taking hydroxychloroquine in appropriate doses “are at very low risk of experiencing cardiac [adverse events], particularly with short-term administration” of the drug.

Researchers noted COVID itself can cause cardiac problems, and there was no reason “to think the medication itself had changed after 70 years of widespread use,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson said one piece of key flawed data had substantially contributed to safety concerns surrounding the drug — the admittedly fraudulent Lancet study that falsely claimed hydroxychloroquine increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID.

The findings were so startling that major drug trials involving hydroxychloroquine “were immediately halted” and the World Health Organization pressured countries like Indonesia that were widely using hydroxychloroquine to ban it. Some countries, including France, Italy and Belgium, stopped using it for COVID altogether.

Peterson wrote:

“The problem, however, is that the study was based on false data from a company named Surgisphere, whose founder and CEO Sapan Desai was a co-author on the published paper.

“The data were so obviously flawed that journalists and outside researchers began raising concerns within days of the paper’s publication. Even the Lancet’s editor in chief, Dr. Richard Horton, admitted that the paper was a fabrication, a monumental fraud and a shocking example of research misconduct in the middle of a global health emergency.”

Despite calls for the Lancet to provide a full expansion of what happened, the publication declined to provide details for the retraction.

As with ivermectin, the FDA and NIH adopted positions against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID — making assertions that were unsupported by data. The AMA, APhA and ASHP, which opposed ivermectin, also resisted hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID.

By contrast, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and other physician groups, support the use of both ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as an early treatment option for COVID. Peterson cited an article co-authored by more than 50 doctors in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine who advocated an early treatment protocol that includes hydroxychloroquine as a key component.

Governing law allows physicians to prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, AG says

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 38-179 generally defines unprofessional conduct as a “departure from or failure to conform to the standards of acceptable and prevailing practice of a profession or the ethics of the profession, regardless of whether a person, consumer or entity is injured, or conduct that is likely to deceive or defraud the public or is detrimental to the public interest.”

The regulation governing physicians states that unprofessional conduct includes:

“[c]onduct or practice outside the normal standard of care in the State of Nebraska which is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient or the public, not to include a single act of ordinary negligence.”

Peterson said healthcare providers do not violate the standard of care when they choose between two reasonable approaches to medicine.

“Regulations also indicate that physicians may utilize reasonable investigative or unproven therapies that reflect a reasonable approach to medicine so long as physicians obtain written informed patient consent,” Peterson wrote.

“Informed consent concerns a doctor’s duty to inform his or her patient, and it includes telling patients about the nature of the pertinent ailment or condition, the risks of the proposed treatment or procedure and the risks of any alternative methods of treatment, including the risks of failing to undergo any treatment at all.”

Peterson said this applies to prescribing medicine for purposes other than uses approved by the FDA, and that doing so falls within the standard of care repeatedly recognized by the courts.

Peterson said the U.S. Supreme Court has also affirmed that “off-label usage of medical devices” is an “accepted and necessary” practice, and the FDA has held the position for decades that “a physician may prescribe [a drug] for uses or in treatment regimens or patient populations that are not included in approved labeling.”

Peterson said the FDA has stated “healthcare providers generally may prescribe [a] drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient, and nothing in the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) limit[s] the manner in which a physician may use an approved drug.”

In a statement to KETV NewsWatch 7, Nebraska’s Department of Health and Human Services said:

“The Department of Health and Human Services appreciates the AG’s office delivering an opinion on this matter. The document is posted and available to medical providers as they determine appropriate course of treatment for their patients.”

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Latest UK PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report figures on Covid cases show that doubly vaccinated 40-70 year olds have lost 40% of their immune system capability compared to unvaccinated people. Their immune systems are deteriorating at around 5% per week (between 2.7% and 8.7%). If this continues then 30-50 year olds will have 100% immune system degradation, zero viral defence by Christmas and all doubly vaccinated people over 30 will have lost their immune systems by March next year.

The 5 PHE tables below from their excellent Vaccine Surveillance Report, separated by 4 weeks, clearly show the progressive damage that the vaccines are doing to the immune system’s response.

People aged 40-69 have already lost 40% of their immune system capability and are losing it progressively at 3.3% to 6.4% per week.

Weekly Decline in doubly vaccinated immune system performance compared to unvaccinated people…

Everybody over 30 will have lost 100% of their entire immune capability (for viruses and certain cancers) within 6 months.
30-50 year olds will have lost it by Christmas. These people will then effectively have full blown acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and destroy the NHS.

The vaccine booster shots have to be the same as the vaccines themselves, because it takes forever to do clinical trials and get approval for something different. So if you take a booster shot, these figures show that you are giving yourself an even faster progressive form of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (after a couple of months of effectiveness).

Table 2. COVID-19 cases by vaccination status…

Cases reported by specimen date between week 32 and week 35 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 33 and week 36 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 34 and week 37 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 35 and week 38 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 36 and week 39 2021 – see this.

Pfizer originally claimed a 95% efficiency for their vaccine (calculated as in the last column above). The figures above indicate that their figures may well have been correct immediately after vaccination (the younger age groups have had the vaccine for the shortest time).

But the figures above also show that the vaccines do NOT merely lose efficiency over time down to zero efficiency, they progressively damage the immune system until a negative efficiency is realised. They presently leave anybody over 30 in a worse position than they were before vaccination  For more see 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.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill are unconstitutional fines for employers who don’t mandate COVID-19 jabs or regular COVID-19 testing of their employees

Fines on employers could run as high as $70,000 for serious infractions and $700,000 for each “willful” or repeated violation

The unconstitutional fines as a mechanism for vaccine enforcement would bankrupt all but the largest businesses

Calling the vaccine mandate for businesses “tyrannical,” the No Taxation Without Congressional Consent Act, introduced September 30, 2021, would prohibit the federal government from imposing a fine, fee or tax on individuals or businesses for violating a COVID-19 vaccine mandate

*

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill is an unconstitutional vaccine enforcement mechanism that threatens to bankrupt businesses unless they force their employees to get a COVID-19 injection. If the measure is enacted into law, even employers that respect their employees’ rights to health freedom and informed consent would be left with an impossible decision — mandate COVID-19 jabs or essentially go out of business due to unbearable fines.

The White House announced in September 2021 that companies with 100 or more employees would have to ensure staff have gotten a COVID-19 injection or were tested regularly for COVID-19. The Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is to be in charge of enforcing the rule, which will affect more than 80 million U.S. workers.¹

In order to carry out this draconian measure, OSHA plans to use an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) — a drastic measure used to accelerate new orders that has only been attempted 10 times in the agency’s 50-year history. OSHA would also be able to enforce fines of up to $13,600 per violation of the rules — but the new measure tucked into the reconciliation bill raises the fines for noncompliance astronomically.

Before we get any further, it should be noted that the mandate doesn’t actually exist yet, in that it hasn’t been sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for approval, and it’s not yet a legally enforceable mandate. Still, by announcing it as though it’s an inevitable rule, it may have the same effect of triggering workers to get vaccinated — or allowing companies to enact mandates under the veil of the government “mandate.”²

$700,000 Fines for Businesses That Don’t Force Injections

On page 168 of the 2,465-page bill³ is wording that should send an authoritarian chill down the back of anyone who believes in health freedom. It outlines fines for employers that “willfully,” “repeatedly” or seriously violate the labor law, including by not requiring COVID-19 jabs or regular COVID-19 testing. As Forbes reported:⁴

“The increased fines on employers could run as high as $70,000 for serious infractions, and $700,000 for willful or repeated violations — almost three-quarters of a million dollars for each fine. If enacted into law, vax enforcement could bankrupt non-compliant companies even more quickly than the $14,000 OSHA fine anticipated under Biden’s announced mandate.”

In case you missed it, that $700,000 fine is for each violation, meaning it would bankrupt all but the very largest corporations if they don’t fully comply with COVID-19 jab mandates or take on the cost of weekly COVID-19 testing of their employees.

Currently, the fines only apply to businesses with 100 or more employees, but there’s nothing stopping them from changing it to 50 employees — or one employee. Anything could happen at this point. Some, such as Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, have called on businesses to “openly rebel” against the OSHA rule. But as Forbes put it:⁵

“It’s one thing to defy a $14,000 fine. It’s quite another to risk incurring hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. One or two disgruntled employees, for example, could bring an employer $70,000-$140,000 in OSHA fines. If considered ‘willful,’ as per Rep. Roy’s tweet — just three ‘violations’ could quickly become a $2.1 million OSHA fine.”

As mentioned, the mandate that President Biden announced is currently a “mirage.”⁶ Speaking with The Federalist, a spokeswoman for the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration explained, “There is nothing there yet that gives employers any mandate. The president made an announcement on this asking OSHA to do it, but we’ve not yet seen anything come from it yet.”⁷

An ETS may take six months to go into effect even after the mandate is put in the Federal Register — which hasn’t happened yet. OSHA’s COVID-19 Healthcare ETS also makes no mention of vaccine mandates at this time.⁸ ETS rules are also often overturned in court. In the last five decades, courts have challenged six of the 10 ETS standards that have been suggested, with five of the six getting overturned.⁹

However, using the ETS for the “mandate,” the Federalist pointed out, “allows the Biden administration to push its demands faster and without any public input or requirement of responding to public input, which is normally required of even legally laughable federal rule making like this one would be.”¹⁰

This may be why more lawsuits haven’t been filed to challenge the mandate — there’s nothing to challenge just yet. It’s also worth mentioning that less than 2% of U.S. businesses will be affected by the mandate, as more than 98% of U.S. businesses have fewer than 100 employees, exempting them from the mandate. Still, those 2% account for about two-thirds of U.S. employees, so they’re a sizeable minority.¹¹

Many of these large corporations have already put injection mandates into place or were planning to. The “mandate” announcement allows these mega-corporations to mandate the jabs without having to be the bad guy.

Congressmen Try to Block ‘Tyrannical Vaccine Mandate’

Roy and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced a bill — the No Taxation Without Congressional Consent Act — September 30, 2021, that would prohibit the federal government from imposing a fine, fee or tax on individuals or businesses for violating a COVID-19 vaccine mandate issued by OSHA or other agencies. If it passes, it would prevent the outrageous fines threatening to bankrupt small businesses under the reconciliation bill. Roy said:¹²

“Your decision about whether or not to get a COVID vaccine should be yours and yours alone … [the] proposed mandate is unconstitutional, and flat-out tyrannical. No freedom-loving American should comply. This country needs, and her people deserve, healthcare freedom.

That means taking control over our care back from politicians and bureaucrats. I am proud to introduce this legislation with my good friend Senator Mike Lee to gut the federal government’s ability to enforce this unconstitutional mandate.”

Further, being unvaxxed is not a crime. Allowing for these exorbitant fines only further attempts to segregate society into one of vaxxed versus unvaxxed. But, as Lee added:¹³

“Unvaccinated Americans aren’t the enemy. We should not be forcing employers to fire some of their valuable, and now hard to find, workers. We shouldn’t be threatening business owners with closure who do not wish to police their workforce’s decisions. Many simply cannot incur the cost of this enforcement in this economy.”

Jab Mandates Are Spreading

Vaccine mandates are targeting every angle, from places of employment to restaurants, gyms and sports arenas. Los Angeles recently approved one of the strictest mandates in the U.S. and will require a vaccine passport to enter indoor public spaces like shopping malls, museums, restaurants, spas and other locations.¹⁴

California also became the first U.S. state to require students in kindergarten through grade 12 to receive COVID-19 shots following full FDA approval.¹⁵ Council president Nury Martinez called the move “a necessary step towards returning to normalcy,” but there’s nothing “normal” about presenting proof of an injection to go about your daily life.¹⁶

This, however, is what the “new normal” is all about — increasing surveillance and authoritarian control while removing personal liberties, and vaccine passports have always been part of the plan.

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2030 agenda is part and parcel of what is now advertised as The Great Reset,¹⁷ a plan that originated in something called the Global Redesign Initiative, drafted by the WEF in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis. The Transnational Institute’s website describes the initiative as “multi-stakeholderism,” a “corporate push for a new form of global governance.”¹⁸

Vaccine Passports as Part of the ‘New Normal’

WEF and the Commons Project created the Common Trust Network, which developed the CommonPass app that’s acting as a health passport. The app allows users to upload medical data such as a COVID-19 test result or proof of injection, which then generates a QR code that you show to authorities as your health passport.¹⁹

Eventually, the CommonPass framework will be integrated with already existing personal health apps such as Apple Health and CommonHealth. If you want to travel, your personal health record will be evaluated and compared to a country’s entry requirements, and if you don’t meet them, you’ll be directed to an approved testing and vaccination location. WEF is pushing for the World Health Organization’s collaboration, stating:²⁰

“Rather than building a set of rules that would be left to the interpretation of member states or private-sector operators like cruises, airlines or conveners of gatherings, we support the WHO’s effort to create a standard for member states for requesting vaccinations and how it would permit the various kinds of use cases.

It is important that we rely on the normative body (the WHO) to create the vaccine credential requirements. The Forum is involved in the WHO taskforce to reflect on those standards and think about how they would be used.”

This, too, is disturbing, since WHO’s history clearly illustrates its allegiance to Big Pharma and other industries. A review in the Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy went so far as to say the corruption of WHO is the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time,” particularly as it relates to WHO’s drug recommendations — including its “list of essential medicines” — which it believes is biased and not reliable.²¹

Given the strong and ongoing evidence that WHO is heavily conflicted and controlled by industry, its usefulness as a guardian of public health — and an arbiter of vaccine passports — needs to be seriously reevaluated.

Obey or You’ll Get Fined

Threats of punishment like fines have become increasingly common and accepted during the pandemic. Both Roy and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green, R-Ga., were fined for not wearing face masks on the House floor, for instance. The initial fine for such an offense is $500, but since this was Greene’s second “offense,” she was fined $2,500.²²

In the U.K., meanwhile, there’s the NHS COVID app, which notifies you if you’ve been in close contact (defined as within 6 feet for 15 minutes or more) with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. If you don’t self-isolate after being notified, you can be fined £1,000 ($1,390) or more.²³

Other penalties are also being rolled out for those who choose not to get the injection. On August 25, 2021, Delta Air Lines announced that unvaccinated employees who are on the company health plan will have a $200 monthly surcharge added, beginning November 1, 2021.²⁴

It’s yet another example of the injection-only mindset that has proliferated since the start of the pandemic. Meanwhile, in the U.S. and much of the world, COVID-19 is still being regarded as a disease that should only be treated once a person is hospitalized. At that point, the person is already seriously ill and has missed the opportunity for inexpensive, early treatment options that have shown significant success in reducing rates of hospitalization and death.²⁵

The penalties and punishments also reek of coercion. One of the principles of the Nuremberg Code is that humans must give voluntary consent when participating in medical experiments, and that consent must be given, among other things, “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion.”²⁶

Given the emergency use authorization, not approval, the mass jab administration constituted a research trial. While the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 jab received FDA approval August 23, 2021, the injection’s approval represents the fastest approval in history,²⁷ granted less than four months after Pfizer filed for licensing May 7, 2021.²⁸ So, for all intents and purposes, it’s still in the research phase.

It’s quite possible that the decision to penalize people for choosing to avoid a COVID-19 injection could be seen as a form of coercion.

What About Natural Immunity?

The other glaring issue is there’s no mention of natural immunity. It’s the elephant in the room that the mainstream COVID-19 narrative refuses to acknowledge. A sizable number of Americans already have natural immunity from a prior COVID-19 infection.

How can you threaten a person with fines or loss of employment to get an injection for a disease to which they’re already immune? This is likely to prompt more than a few lawsuits, especially since it’s been shown that natural immunity may protect you significantly better than an injection.

Data presented July 17, 2021, to the Israeli Health Ministry revealed that, of the more than 7,700 COVID-19 cases reported since May 2021, only 72 occurred in people who had previously had COVID-19 — a rate of less than 1%. In contrast, more than 3,000 cases — or approximately 40% — occurred in people who had received a COVID-19 vaccine.²⁹

It’s important to keep your eyes open at this point in history and resist the insidious removal of freedoms from society that’s currently occurring. In their place are empty promises to give you your freedom back if you submit to an injection, a mask, a lockdown.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, for example, recently stated that vaccine passports are “all about” letting you know that “if you’ve done the right things, you get to be safe” wherever you go.³⁰ And those who refuse to do “the right thing,” well, they simply aren’t entitled to those same “freedoms.”

The disease countermeasures we currently see for COVID-19 won’t end with COVID-19, and fines for business owners who choose not to force their employees to make a certain medical decision are only the beginning. We must not continue down this rabbit hole. Now is the time to speak out in peaceful protest in order to compel positive changes in support of health and overall freedom.

*

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 Reuters September 13, 2021

^{2, 7, 9, 10} The Federalist October 7, 2021

³ Reconciliation Bill September 25, 2021

^4, 5 Forbes September 28, 2021

^6, 11 Time September 21, 2021

⁸ OSHA, COVID-19 Healthcare ETS

^12, 13 Chip Roy, Texas September 30, 2021

^14, 16 AP October 7, 2021

¹⁵ Office of Governor Gavin Newsom October 1, 2021

¹⁷ World Economic Forum 2030Vision

¹⁸ Transnational Institute Global Redesign Initiative (Archived)

¹⁹ CNN December 27, 2020

²⁰ World Economic Forum May 5, 2021

²¹ Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy January 2015 Vol. 2, Issue 1

²² Upolitics September 12, 2021

²³ BBC News July 23, 2021

²⁴ CBS News August 25, 2021

²⁵ European Journal of Medical & Health Sciences 2020; 2(6)

²⁶ U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, Nuremberg Code

²⁷ The Defender August 23, 2021

²⁸ Pfizer May 7, 2021

²⁹ Israel National News July 13, 2021

³⁰ Twitter Rebel News September 19, 2021

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

The death of former US Secretary of State Colin Powell has, as is usual with the death of a major political figure, provoked a discussion about his legacy and what his time in office meant to the world.

For millions of Iraqis, Powell will be remembered as the man who presented false intelligence before the United Nations as to the existence and threat of former ruler Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Powell’s claims that Saddam had links to al-Qaeda and was hiding WMDs helped push forward the momentum for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the resulting years of chaos and bloodshed that have continued to plague the country to this day.

Kamal Jabir, a politician with the Civil Democratic Alliance and former freedom fighter against Saddam in the 80s and 90s, saw many killed by Saddam’s administration and gave up much of his life to fighting and to exile because of him.

However, he still regards the Iraq war as having been a catastrophe.

“Since 2003, Iraqis suffered a greater deal because American administrations – Republicans and Democrats – insisted on supporting the most corrupt, most dishonest, and most disloyal officials and Islamic extremists to rise to power and ruin Iraq and slaughter Iraqis,” he told Middle East Eye.

He noted that while Powell had a reputation for decency as a politician, he failed to either object to the 2003 war or the “countless deliberate mistakes” made by Coalition Provisional Authority leader Paul Bremer during his rule over the occupied country.

“[Powell] chose to watch the massacres against Iraq and innocent Iraqis and do nothing about it. Iraqis today are busy trying to rescue their country and save tears for their young peaceful protesters, sons and daughters who got killed by the pro-Iranian militias and gangs,” he said.

“Iraqis will not shed tears for Colin Powell.”

A ‘reluctant warrior’

Powell died at the age of 84 on Monday from complications linked to a Covid-19 infection.

Much has been made of his status as the first black secretary of state and his reputation for caution and level-headedness in former president George W Bush’s administration, which was otherwise known for its hawkishness.

Obituaries have described him as a “pathbreaker” and branded him a “reluctant warrior” in the Iraq war. He would later disavow his famous 2003 speech at the UN, describing it as a “blot” on his career.

Salam Ali, a member of the central committee of the Iraqi Communist Party, said Powell’s speech at the UN helped influence people both inside and outside the US who were “reticent about launching the war on Iraq”.

“Colin Powell is among top officials in the US administration responsible for waging that criminal war, and misleading the world with fabricated information, who should have been held accountable for what they did.”

His relationship with Iraq began in 1991 when as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he helped drive Saddam’s forces out of Kuwait.

“Our strategy in going after this army is very simple,” he told reporters at the time.

“First, we’re going to cut it off, and then we’re going to kill it.”

Even though the US did not end up going that far in 1991, in 2003 Saddam’s forces were finally defeated, with Bremer disbanding the army and soon taking control – a move that would have disastrous consequences as waves of unemployed and disgruntled former soldiers joined the armed resistance against the US occupation.

Ahmed Habib, an editor at the Baghdad-based publication ShakoMako.net, said that Powell’s role in Iraq was irredeemable and pushed back at attempts to paint him like a dove whose role in the war was as an unwilling participant.

“Colin Powell’s legacy lives on in the millions of lives destroyed, either dead or exiled, in the prehistoric infrastructure that everyday Iraqis are forced to [endure] today, one that his actions are almost entirely responsible for,” he told MEE.

A violent legacy?

October 2019 saw Iraq swamped by anti-government protests that sought to unseat the political class the invasion had brought to power, and tackle the mass unemployment, poverty, corruption and foreign interference that has become a fact of life in the country.

The response from the government, security officials and armed groups has been to violently suppress and threaten the people calling for an improvement to their standard of living. In particular, Iran-backed groups have become a daily threat for many activists.

Ali Khyail, a democracy activist who grew up during the turmoil of the post-invasion era, said that the ultimate effect of Powell’s actions had been to “hand Iraq over to Iran”, while at the same time removing a threat to Israel.

“If it was about saving Iraq, Iraq would not have been handed over to a country with which there was a war that lasted eight years,” he told MEE.

“The United States was interested in saving Israel from Saddam’s threat and was not interested in liberating Iraq. Colin was seeking to save Israel from those who threaten it.”

Even though Iraq is no longer as soaked in blood as it was in the mid-2000s, violence and instability are still daily facts of life for many of its inhabitants.

Parliamentary elections on 10 October saw the lowest-ever voter turnout, with the political class – largely composed of exiles who returned to Iraq following the 2003 invasion – widely despised, and hope for a better future through the ballot box steadily diminishing.

As a crucial figure in the Bush administration that is largely responsible for this state of affairs, Powell’s legacy in Iraq will not be as a liberator of ordinary people from Saddam’s tyranny, but as someone who oversaw the country’s decline.

“We are terrified now and we will never forgive him,” said Khyail.

*

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.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Eight and one-half years ago on April 15, 2013, there was a bombing claiming three victims at the Boston Marathon that had elements of a false flag event, such as crisis actors with pretend injuries. Two brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were blamed for the bombing. Tamerlan apparently died while in police custody. Dzhokhar, shot by police, somehow managed to escape and was later found hiding under an overturned boat in someone’s back yard where he allegedly had written a confession in the dark on the side of the boat he was hiding under.

There were many anomalies about the bombing event, the getaway crimes allegedly associated with the brothers, and the capture of Tamerlan. The entire city of Boston, including airport, was shut down while police went house to house searching for Dzhokhar, a wounded 19 year old. Troops with tanks occupied the city. There was unethical intervention by US prosecutors with the Tsarnaev family. Media did not investigate and simply repeated the prepared narrative.

Image on the right: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Many experts raised questions. The crisis actors were exposed. The unprecedented closing of an entire city while police ordered families out of their homes while their homes were searched were shown to be extreme measures just to capture a wounded teenager.

In other words, a thriller terrorist story was orchestrated to make certain the public saw the brothers as dangerous terrorists.

I covered the story at length on my website (see for example August 17, 2015). John Remington Graham saw that the brothers were being quickly convicted in the media, which raised the question whether media conviction was substituting for the lack of evidence.

After 8.5 years the case has reached the U.S. Supreme Court. John Remington Graham, an experienced prosecutor and defense attorney filed an argument for friends of the court before the U. S. Supreme Court, pointing out that the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ignored the exculpatory evidence that was never heard and proved him not guilty. Here is a statement from Graham’s argument:

“In sum, during the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in Boston, decisive exculpatory evidence of record or subject to judicial notice, and showing the actual innocence of Mr. Tsarnaev, was never called to the attention of the jury at trial, was left unmentioned by counsel on both sides, and was ignored by the presiding judge when the sentence of death was imposed. The same decisive exculpatory evidence was called to the attention of the circuit court by these friends of the court on motion granted, then again ignored.”

In November 2017, attorney Graham intervened with the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit pointing out that exculpatory evidence had been ignored in Dzhokhar’s trial. The appeals court set aside the death penalty, not, however, on the basis of the ignored exculpatory evidence, but on the basis that Dzhokhar was under the influence of his older brother, Tamerlan, who was primarily responsible, and for the failure of the trial judge to question jurors whether they were influenced by extensive pre-trial news coverage.

Despite Biden’s opposition to the death penalty, the Biden justice (sic) department has asked the US Supreme Court to overrule the appeals court and to reinstate the death penalty. With the Boston Marathon Bombing narrative set in stone, the actual innocence of the accused has become irrelevant. The orchestrated narrative is likely to conclude with an act of judicial murder.

*

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 frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

An international Free Alex Saab delegation attended the annual meeting of the African Bar Association in Niamey, Niger, on Oct. 3-7. Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab, who has been under arrest in Cabo Verde since June 2020 by orders of the U.S., is fighting extradition to Miami. 

His “crime” is organizing humanitarian missions to procure food and medicine for Venezuela – in violation of the illegal U.S. blockade.

The Free Alex Saab delegation was composed of Canadian John Philpot, a lawyer specializing in international law who represented the American Association of Jurists and regularly attends AFBAR conferences; Cabo Verdean-American Bishop Filipe Teixeira, who traveled to Cabo Verde in June in support of Alex Saab; Venezuelan Laila Taj El Dine, a diplomat to the United Nations, lawyer, university professor, and international analyst; and Venezuelan Pedro Carvajalino, media specialist.

African Bar Association welcomes Free Alex Saab delegation

The Free Alex Saab delegation was well received by the conference, which was attended by many honored African leaders, including Niger President Mohamed Bazoum, along with former presidents of Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Some conferees were already familiar with the egregious U.S. judicial over-reach that had resulted in Saab being seized from his airplane when it made a fuel stop in Cabo Verde on its way from Caracas to Tehran.

The fifty-year-old AFBAR is a professional body uniting individual lawyers and national legal associations in Africa. The association brings together the five African sub-regional associations spread over the continent. AFBAR seeks to foster policies to better the continent’s socio-economic and political development.

AFBAR President Hannibal Uwaifo delivered the opening address on respecting the rule of law in strong opposition to military coups. A theme running through the conference was the importance of resolving African problems in Africa, free from Western interference.

For example, AFBAR will not support cooperation with the International Criminal Court investigation of the Nigerian military and Boko Haram unless the investigation includes how Boko Haram is financed.

One participant, a young lawyer, explained that independence requires full national economic and military control. In his opinion, with a French and especially U.S. military presence in many countries, politicians may take their orders from outside powers.

Some African countries are independent, such as Algeria, which rigorously controls its own borders and its economy without neo-colonial control. However, Cabo Verde, one of the smallest and poorest countries in the world, evidently finds it difficult to resist U.S. pressure regarding Alex Saab.

Conference upholds ECOWAS Court decision to free Alex Saab

The regional Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) Court had ordered Cabo Verde to not only release Saab but also pay him $200,000 in damages. That was on March 15 of this year, but Cabo Verde has still not complied with the court order. Nevertheless, Cabo Verde had signed and ratified the treaty creating the court, attended the hearings, is a full member of ECOWAS, and has at least one judge on the court.

As the AFBAR conference reaffirmed, it is the duty of the bar associations to advocate for the ECOWAS Court. The conference session on the ECOWAS Court explained clearly that it was not an appeals court but an international court of primary jurisdiction created by treaty. The Saab delegation was afforded full status at the session, where delegates Felipe Teixeira and Laila El Dine spoke with AFBAR President Uwaifo in attendance.

Free Alex Saab press conference and Sanctions Kill report

The international Free Alex Saab delegation held a press conference at which it presented the case for freeing the Venezuelan diplomat to local media.

John Philpot presented and distributed copies of a report on “We don’t deserve this —  the impact and consequences of U.S. sanctions,” which more broadly addresses the unilateral coercive measures imposed on some three dozen countries, 15 of which are in Africa, that comprise a third of humanity.

Philpot, along with Rick Sterling and David Paul, authored the comprehensive report for the Sanctions Kill Coalition. A free PDF of the report is available online at tinyurl.com/f52h67ze.

At a session on contemporary legal problems and the rule of law, Laila El Dine and John Philpot presented the Alex Saab case, raising issues which go to the substance of his illegal detention. President Uwaifo once again spoke of the need to take positive action to ensure respect for the March 15 ECOWAS Court decision.

John Philpot stressed that these critical cases can be won, citing the recent release of Meng Wanzhou. She had been illegally detained by Canada for more than a thousand days in an attempt to extradite her over a transaction between a Chinese bank and Iran that allegedly was in violation of U.S. sanctions on Iran. U.S. judicial overreach can threaten diplomats and businesspersons worldwide if this tendency is not terminated.

The closing session included resolutions, followed by two press conferences, where the Free Alex Saab issue was further discussed and supported. The AFBAR press conferences, presided over by President Uwaifo, presented the Alex Saab defense issues, including respect for the ECOWAS Court decision. International delegates El Dine, Philpot, and Teixeira spoke at the second press conference.

AFBAR has taken the issue of the ECOWAS Court seriously, although the vice president of the court lamented the lack of enforcement mechanisms. Proposals were offered such as imposing sanctions against Cabo Verde officials, which would be legally constructed as a function of the regional ECOWAS community and not illegally, as with the unilateral U.S. sanctions.

Other measures, such as expelling Cabo Verde from ECOWAS and special legal procedures, were considered. A committee was formed to take this issue on actively, presided over by Chief Prosecutor of Liberia Sayma Syrenius Cephis.

*

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.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

In this era of police violence, pandemic worries, and economic crisis, it is no surprise that U.S. (and local) government agencies have a poor track record of sharing information honestly and directly—especially information about their own complicity in actions and policies that are undemocratic, militaristic, racist, sexist or otherwise oppressive.

Basic truths about the society we live in are actively suppressed and denied—including truths about the imprisonment of those whose political views and actions challenge the powers that be.

Though the growth of the prison industry has been well documented, there is virtually no documentation and even less news about the imprisonment of many who would be considered political prisoners by any international human rights standards. This is due to a joint coverup effort by both the government and corporate media.

But that coverup may no longer be sustainable

An historic International Tribunal on U.S. Human Rights Abuses Against Black, Brown and Indigenous Peoples will take place in New York City on October 22-25, 2021. It is designed to propel this and related issues into the forefront of public consciousness.

See More Details on the Event At The End Of This Article

The Tribunal coalesces an unprecedented alliance of attorneys, academics, and organizers ranging from Black Lives Matter activists, former Black Panthers, civil rights advocates and the Puerto Rican decolonization movement, to immigrant rights survivors of the detention centers, and Indigenous peoples fighting for their sovereignty against land theft, fracking, and neglect.

This coalition could not have come together—nor can it remain united and organize for effective future change—without fully understanding the historic context for this work. December 2021 will be the 70th anniversary of a similar campaign for human rights launched a few years after the United Nations was formed. At that time prominent African American leaders and their allies brought a petition to the U.N. that boldly stated: “We Charge Genocide!”^[1] The 2021 Tribunal will reassert this charge and relate it to more recent efforts oriented towards 21st Century conclusions.

A 1991 article by one of us (Bob Lederer) [see below] reported on the previous year’s International Tribunal on the Human Rights Violations of Political Prisoners and Prisoners of War in the United States,^[2] as well as earlier efforts to internationalize these issues.

Citing past successes from grassroots worldwide organizing, it noted “[A]ctivists believe that even those facing life sentences may yet see the light of day.” Indeed, over the past three decades, that has come to pass for perhaps half of the then-100+ U.S. political prisoners. While some were released on parole with strong legal work and minimal mobilizations, most only got out after sustained grassroots pressure campaigns, often carried out for many years and including strong international components.

Among the many successes:

• In 1997, after 27 years behind bars and a massive international campaign, Black Panther veteran Geronimo Ji-Jaga Pratt was released from prison. After years of effort, Pratt had uncovered indisputable evidence that FBI wiretaps showed he was 400 miles away from the crime for which he was convicted.^[3] With official recognition that prosecutors had concealed evidence and that Pratt was a survivor of the U.S.’s illegal Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO), he was able to win a federal civil rights lawsuit demonstrating that he was framed and $4.5 million in damages.^[4]
• In 1999, following a coordinated, years-long effort which included a global petition signed by a dozen Nobel Peace Prize laureates and calls for release from across the fiercely divided Puerto Rican political spectrum, 14 militant activists for the independence of Puerto Rico (a U.S. colony since 1898) were granted clemency by President Bill Clinton. Many had been incarcerated for as long as 19 years. Convicted in many cases of the thought crime of “seditious conspiracy,” they were met by large cheering crowds that greeted them as heroes.^[5]
• In 2007, another repressive and vindictive U.S. government attempt saw six elder former Black Panthers arrested and charged in San Francisco with conspiracy for crimes that took place decades earlier. (In 1975 a federal court had dismissed related charges against two of them based on a court ruling that they had been illegally tortured by local police.)^[6] This was an obvious attempt to spread fear among a new generation of resisters inspired by the Panthers. A year later, substantial educational efforts from coast to coast not only exonerated the six and dropped all charges against them, but also spotlighted the two additional Panthers indicted in the same case (collectively known as “the San Francisco 8”^[7]) who were already serving long prison sentences, and whose efforts for parole were both ultimately successful in the years that followed.

Source: Graypantherssf.igc.org

• The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, once described by The New York Times as the world’s “best known death row inmate,” has caused protests, letter-writing, and massive campaigns in every corner of the planet over the past three decades. An award-winning journalist and still-active author and radio commentator whose 1982 trial has been found by numerous human rights organizations to have been plagued by massive police and judicial bias and perjured testimony, Abu-Jamal’s death sentence was overturned in 2001 by the Federal District Court of Pennsylvania.^[8] Though still fighting for full release, Mumia’s release from death row was widely celebrated, and the broad international campaign to free him has intensified as he has faced life-threatening illnesses (see below).

• Russell Maroon Shoatz, a former Black Panther and Pennsylvania Black Liberation organizer pursued by the FBI’s COINTELPRO and unjustly sentenced in 1970 to life in prison, has been described by supporters as “implacable,” the word used in the title of an anthology of his writings. He has been known not only for his political militancy, but also as a mentor to his incarcerated colleagues wherever he landed in prison. With two successful escapes, Shoatz was placed in solitary confinement in 1992 and held there for a torturous 22 consecutive years! With United Nations experts designating as torture any solitary confinement lasting more than 14 consecutive days, Shoatz’s case attracted international attention for its obviously punitive intent and heinous content.^[9] Returned to general population in 2014, Shoatz still suffers the effects of those decades and fights for release from prison under still-draconian conditions (see below).
• Released on parole after more than 33 years as a political prisoner/prisoner of war (and initial police torture, including with a burning cigar, that left him with serious long-term damage), the success of the case of Sekou Odinga, a founder of the International Chapter of the Black Panther Party, was a product of grassroots, long-term organizing, legal agitation, and legislative reform of parole. With growing consciousness about and admiration of the Panthers from hip-hop artists and cultural workers in the community, and pressure on lawmakers and politicians to release aging prisoners whose rate of recidivism and return to crime after decades behind bars is extremely low, Odinga returned to the community in 2014 and today sits on the International Tribunal’s Coordinating Committee.^[10] Other New York State prisoners, including former Panthers Robert Seth Hayes (who died in 2019)^[11] and Jalil Muntaqim,^[12] won similar parole releases after years of struggle to shift incarceration policies in New York State and elsewhere.

• Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera was held for 36 years of his original 55-year sentence for “seditious conspiracy,” including long stints in maximum-security conditions described by human rights lawyers as tantamount to torture. During President Obama’s second term, as the global campaign for his release reached a fevered pitch, the heads of state of Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba declared López Rivera to be “the Mandela of the Americas.”

With life-size cardboard cutouts of Oscar seen in small towns, mountain communities, and every major city throughout the island archipelago, an unprecedented array of pro-statehood advocates, status quo “commonwealth” supporters, and independentistas joined forces to demand his unconditional release. After the annual United Nations Decolonization Committee hearing on Puerto Rico in 2016, the Committee—in addition to joining the global outcry to “bring Oscar home”—vowed to form an official U.N. delegation to visit him in prison if he were not released in the coming year. In 2017, just days before leaving office, Obama announced the plans for López Rivera’s freedom; he returned to his country a celebrated national hero.^[13]

• Despite the constitutionally questionable “felony murder doctrine” and a scandalous exit from office, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo commuted the life sentence of white anti-imperialist David Gilbert during his last twelve hours in office this year. Gilbert’s history as a peaceful anti-war activist, his work in prison as a mentor of young men and co-developer of a trail-blazing AIDS peer counseling program, and his consistent statements of remorse about the deaths which resulted from a 1981 action for which he was an unarmed driver earned him the support of the heads of the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, Friends (Quakers), and Unitarian Universalists, as well as the daughter of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., granddaughter of Mohandas Gandhi, and children of some of those killed in the original crime.^[14] Gilbert, who was previously serving 75 years to life, will have a parole hearing this month (October 2021).

Nonetheless, three dozen U.S. political prisoners still remain incarcerated, the majority of them in their senior years and ailing, in some cases with terminal illnesses. Prison medical care is substandard at best for all incarcerated people, but political prisoners have also faced the wrath of a vengeful police apparatus. All are now the focus of urgent pressure campaigns by their supporters demanding (depending on the case) immediate parole, clemency, or court-ordered release.^[15] Some examples include:

• Russell Maroon Shoatz, incredibly called “a risk to escape and a threat to society” at a 2021 parole hearing despite being diagnosed with terminal stage-4 pancreatic cancer and having barely survived COVID-19, being partially blind, dependent on a urinary catheter bag, and wholly confined to a wheelchair! Shoatz’s supporters, including Nobel Peace Prize laureates, consider him a prime candidate for immediate compassionate release.^[16]
• Dr. Mutulu Shakur, New Afrikan (Black) liberation activist heavily targeted by COINTELPRO and a leader of Chinese medicine clinics under Black and Latinx community control in New York City, had been scheduled for mandatory release from a 60-year sentence in 2016, but was held back for punitive and vengeful reasons. Today at age 71, he struggles with bone-marrow cancer and is in constant pain. Various legal channels seeking his compassionate release have so far proved fruitless.^[17]

• Sundiata Acoli was a noted mathematician employed by the NASA space program who became a famed member of New York’s “Panther 21” manufactured conspiracy case (in which a jury acquitted everyone) and later co-defendant of Assata Shakur, arrested in 1973 and unjustly convicted along with her to life in prison (see below). At age 84, after 49 years in prison, Acoli has been eligible for and denied parole for almost three decades.^[18] He recently survived COVID-19 but has numerous other ailments, some life-threatening. An urgent campaign for his release continues with widespread community admiration and the support of even some law enforcement groups.^[19]
• Leonard Peltier, an American Indian Movement elder (now 77) who has been in prison since 1977, has enjoyed widespread support from members of Congress, international Parliaments, Nobel Prize laureates, and countless human rights experts.^[20] Despite the fact that all his co-defendants are free, Peltier’s deteriorating health and the prosecutorial misconduct of his original case make him one of the most famous U.S. political prisoners still behind bars.^[21]

• Mumia Abu-Jamal, though well known and widely supported, has had—after nearly 40 years of incarceration, including lengthy solitary confinement—a multitude of life-threatening health crises in recent years for which he suffered blatant medical neglect and maltreatment. These include a dangerous and painful cirrhosis of the liver, congestive heart failure, hepatitis C, diabetes, and recently diagnosed COVID-19. When Abu-Jamal was faced with emergency heart surgery in early 2021 (and the threat to remain shackled during the procedure), a group of ten U.N. experts from the Human Rights Council declared, “This ongoing and continuing cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, including deliberate disregard of his dignity and inhumane conditions of confinement, is a clear violation of Mr. Abu-Jamal’s most fundamental rights.”^[22]Meanwhile, Abu-Jamal’s supporters proclaimed: The only appropriate treatment for these ailments is FREEDOM!^[23]

These campaigns are especially urgent in the wake of the deaths in prison or shortly after release of 21 U.S. political prisoners over the past 35 years.^[24] In many cases, family members and doctors are convinced that, had the prisoners been freed as they got sicker, they might have had a chance to survive longer by escaping high stress prison conditions and having access to better quality medical care.

Meanwhile, several former political prisoners and activists targeted by the state but not arrested have been living in exile for many years. The most renowned, former Black Panther Assata Shakur, was arrested and shot in the back by police in 1973. She then overcame seven separate COINTELPRO-orchestrated charges but was ultimately railroaded to a life sentence on the eighth (along with Sundiata Acoli, see above)—in a trial her lawyer called “a legal lynching and a kangaroo court.” (See Rosemari Mealy, ed., “Assata Shakur: The Life of a Revolutionary,” CovertAction Quarterly, Fall 1998 (No. 65), pp. 34-44.)^[25]

After surviving an oppressive all-men’s prison in New Jersey, Shakur escaped in 1979 with the help of clandestine Black and white radical comrades.^[26] She was later granted political asylum by Cuba, where she has been active in community life. Successive U.S. and New Jersey governments have boosted the bounty for her forced return to $2 million, requiring her to be especially cautious to prevent kidnapping by the CIA or a vigilante.^[27]

Meanwhile the past three decades have seen a whole new generation of political prisoners incarcerated, mostly from the newer movements that have blossomed, though some 1960s activists have also been framed years later by an FBI determined to punish their longtime adversaries. Some examples:

• Longtime Black Liberation leaders: Two leading Black Liberation activists and religious leaders, Imam Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin and Rev. Joy Powell, were framed for crimes they didn’t commit and given long sentences in 2000 and 2006, respectively. Imam Al-Amin (aka H. Rap Brown) was a famed civil rights and Black Panther leader in the 1960s. He was harassed and arrested at FBI direction, later became a religious leader, and was convicted of a murder in Atlanta, Georgia, without clear evidence, for which another man confessed. Now 78, he is serving a life sentence and has been denied needed medical care in prison.^[28] Rev. Powell worked against police brutality and corruption for years in Rochester, New York, and is now serving two sentences totaling 25-years-to-life in trials rife with prosecutorial misconduct.^[29]

• Black Lives Matter: Since racist police and vigilante murders sparked this movement and related justice struggles in 2014, numerous street protesters and organizational leaders, almost all Black, have served prison time for felony charges. Possibly the longest sentence (10 years) is being served by a white solidarity activist, Eric King, who has been isolated and assaulted in prison.^[30] More than 350 are now facing federal felony charges, and many more have received state charges, flowing from the nationwide street uprisings against genocidal police terror provoked by the May 2020 videoed lynching of George Floyd in Minneapolis.^[31] The National Lawyers Guild and a grassroots coalition in six cities are leading campaigns, backed by more than 90 organizations, to have those charges dropped.^[32]

• Indigenous-led environmental/sovereignty defense: Four water and environmental protecters from the movement to stop the highly polluting Dakota Access (oil) pipeline on Lakota land in Standing Rock, North Dakota, in 2016-17 have served prison time of several months each.^[33] Red Fawn Fallis, an Oglala Lakota Sioux citizen and supporter of the American Indian Movement, received the harshest sentence—nearly five years for charges related to a gun given to her by her then-boyfriend, an undercover FBI informant.^[34]

Also, Jessica Reznicek, a North American Catholic Worker ally, is serving eight years for related civil disobedience actions against the same pipeline in Iowa.^[35] Since 2020, a similar, Indigenous-led movement against Line 3 (another oil pipeline encroaching on Native land) in Minnesota has led so far to several people being charged with felonies. Those cases are pending.^[36]

• Arab and Muslims accused of “terrorism”: Hundreds of Arab and Muslim immigrants and U.S. citizens have been swept up in the post-September-11^th, years-long manipulated fury against the Arabs and Muslims living in the United States. Several were convicted on “terrorism” charges, often manufactured or based on entrapment.^[37] Most notorious is the case of Dr. Afia Siddiqui, a Pakistani, U.S.-educated neuroscientist who was rendered from her homeland to the U.S. by the CIA in 2008 and sentenced to life in prison, where she was seriously injured in an assault this year.^[38]
• “Green Scare” activists: As new movements have targeted corporate destruction of the natural environment and clear-cutting logging operations, factory farms, fur manufacturers, agribusiness-related labs researching eco-harmful GMOs (genetically modified organisms), and animal-abusing medical testers, the U.S. government has charged dozens with felonies, often using new laws criminalizing eco/animal protests and heightening penalties.^[39] Since the early 1990s, more than 50 activists have done lengthy prison time on such charges. Three remain imprisoned today. One of those, a transgender man named Marius Mason serving 22 years in federal prison since 2009, was first held in a restrictive control unit based on his politics and then struggled for many years before he obtained a medical diagnosis that finally allowed him to seek hormone therapy and transfer to a male prison.^[40]

• Plowshares protesters: More than 200 activists from the largely religious “Plowshares” movement, led by the Catholic Workers, have been imprisoned since 1980 – two were sentenced to 18 years – for 100+ civil disobedience actions symbolically damaging and pouring blood on nuclear weapons, war jets, and military bases to demand nuclear disarmament and an end to U.S. militarism.^[41]

• Military resisters and whistleblowers: Many U.S. military personnel have served prison time since 1991 for resisting or disclosing war crimes (whistleblowers) in the Gulf War (1991), Afghan invasion/occupation (2001-2021), Iraq invasion/occupation (2003-date), and other illegal U.S. attacks against nations in the Global South.^[42]

Most notably, army soldier Chelsea Manning spent seven years in military prisons, during which a U.N. Rapporteur found her to have been tortured. After many grassroots campaigns, protests and honors in LGBT Pride marches, President Obama granted clemency in 2017.^[43] Later that year, under Trump, she was reincarcerated for 12 months for refusing to collaborate with a grand jury investigation.^[44] During her initial incarceration, she came out as trans and had to sue to obtain gender-affirming care.^[45]

In a related case, WikiLeaks publisher and Australian citizen Julian Assange is now facing extradition to the U.S. from the U.K. and possible life in prison for publishing data on war crimes, repression and corruption released by whistleblowers. (See CovertAction Magazine, Sept. 7, 2020.) A British judge has denied extradition on grounds that U.S. prisons could not adequately protect him from the risk of suicide (following his years of U.S. and British persecution).^[46] Yahoo News reported in September 2021 that, in 2017, the CIA discussed possible plans to kidnap or assassinate the journalist in London.^[47]

Kevin “Rashid” Johnson, political prisoner. [Source: rashidmod.com]

Pursuing freedom or at least less life-threatening conditions for all of these prisoners, the various support organizations have used a variety of techniques (in addition to the people’s tribunals described below): petitions, mass email campaigns, demonstrations at courts and prisons, packing court proceedings, civil disobedience actions, lobbying, and more.

Importantly, efforts have continued to bring some of these cases, and the larger movements against genocide and eco-cide from which they developed, to international bodies. In 2001, the National Black United Front, December 12th Movement, and others brought charges of genocide against Black people to the U.N. World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.^[48] For years, the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva has heard consistent testimony from the U.S. Human Rights Network (USHRN) and others, who have filed documents at the Universal Periodic Review sessions conducted for all nation-states.^[49] The USHRN has utilized other U.N. mechanisms to bring U.S. human rights abuses before United Nations-affiliated bodies.

In addition, between 1992 and 2001, a variety of coalitions led by Black, Brown and Indigenous freedom organizations built on the successes of previous efforts to convene international tribunals on U.S. human rights violations and genocide:

• 1992 – The International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationswas held in San Francisco. The Tribunal challenged the 500^th anniversary of the “discovery of America” by Christopher Columbus and discussed the massive, systematic violations of human rights and international law against people of color. It included perspectives from Black people, Puerto Ricans, Native Americans, Mexicans/Chicanos, and white anti-imperialists.^[50]

• 1993 – The Ka Ho’okolokolonui Kanaka Maoli Tribunal marked the centennial of the U.S. overthrow of Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani and visited each island illegally seized and annexed by the U.S. It centered the Indigenous Kanaka Maoli claim for sovereignty on an international stage.^[51]

• 1998 – Based on a call by Black Liberation political prisoner Jalil Muntaqim (who also called for a “Spirit of Mandela” coalition in 2018),^[52] a successful Jericho March to the White House, attended by over 5,000 and organized by the newly formed and now ongoing National Jericho Movement, demanded recognition and amnesty for all U.S. political prisoners across lines of race and nationality.^[53]

• 2001 – The International Commission on Inquiry in San Juan, Puerto Rico, found repeated U.S. government violations of human rights in suppressing protests and civil disobedience actions against the U.S. Navy’s 60-year occupation and frequent life-threatening and environment-destroying bombing practice on the island of Vieques.^[54] The strong verdict was one of many sparks that forced the Navy’s withdrawal and return of the island to full Puerto Rican sovereignty in 2003.

*

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.

Bob Lederer is a progressive print and radio journalist, longtime queer anti-racist and anti-imperialist activist, and member of the grassroots collective Resistance in Brooklyn. He has extensively covered and supported U.S. political prisoners for over 35 years and contributed to the book Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners. In 1985 he was a grand jury resister and political prisoner himself, and was a cofounder of the 1990s group Queers United in Support of Political Prisoners. Bob can be reached at: [email protected].

Matt Meyer is an internationally noted author, historian, and organizer, re-elected in 2021 as Secretary-General of the International Peace Research Association. Meyer is the Senior Research Scholar of the University of Massachusetts/Amherst’s Resistance Studies Initiative, working primarily in solidarity with the still-occupied peoples of Puerto Rico, Palestine, West Papua, Western Sahara, Kashmir, and Ambazonia in Central Africa. Matt is the editor of the book Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners. His local work with Resistance in Brooklyn, the Northeast Political Prisoner Coalition, and the Spirit of Mandela Coalition focuses on freeing all political prisoners. Matt can be reached at: [email protected].

Notes

1. https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/primary-documents-global-african-history/we-charge-genocide-historic-petition-united-nations-relief-crime-united-states-government-against/; 

2. https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjll/vol2/iss1/7/ 
3. https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3549https://escholarship.org/content/qt9q53f87c/qt9q53f87c.pdfhttps://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/112/795.html 
4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/04/27/ex-panther-settles-lawsuit-over-false-imprisonment/8efad425-1259-4363-bb92-15f953a32ef0/ 
5. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/keyraces2000/stories/faln091199.htmhttps://prcc-chgo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Campaign-to-release-FALN-prisoners-by-Margaret-Power.pdf 
6. http://publici.ucimc.org/2007/08/the-return-to-torture-the-case-of-the-san-francisco-8/
7. https://www.freethesf8.org/ 
8. https://campaigns.organizefor.org/petitions/to-da-krasner-stop-defending-mumia-abu-jamal-s-convictionhttps://jamaljournal-movement.blogspot.com/2021/02/colin-kaepernicks-nov-16-2020-statement.html 
9. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/jul/12/solitary-confinement-russell-shoatz-pennsylvania-black-panthershttps://russellmaroonshoats.wordpress.com/about/https://www.pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=541 
10. https://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/28/sekou_odinga_on_15_black_panthers
11. https://www.democracynow.org/2019/12/24/headlines/former_black_panther_robert_seth_hayes_dies_at_age_of_72 
12. https://prismreports.org/2021/01/27/for-black-radicals-released-after-decades-in-prison-the-carceral-system-is-still-a-threat/ 
13. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/17/barack-obama-commutes-sentence-oscar-lopez-rivera-puerto-rico-activist, https://blog.pmpress.org/2019/05/21/oscar-lopez-riveras-32-years-of-resistance-to-torture-will-president-obama-pardon-the-longest-held-independentista/https://www.mic.com/articles/165766/who-is-oscar-l-pez-rivera-the-story-behind-the-man-who-received-barack-obama-s-clemency 
14. https://friendsofdavidgilbert.org/https://www.democracynow.org/2021/8/24/andrew_cuomo_clemency_david_gilbert 
15. https://newrepublic.com/article/162144/black-panther-party-never-popular-actual-black-panthers-forgotten 
16. https://russellmaroonshoats.wordpress.com/ 
17. https://mutulushakur.com/https://campaigns.organizefor.org/petitions/support-parole-and-compassionate-release-for-dr-mutulu-shakur 
18. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/sundiata-acoli-black-panther-parole/2021/03/12/68254ace-81c2-11eb-ac37-4383f7709abe_story.htmlhttps://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.33/n1u.e88.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/About-Sundiata-Acoli-and-His-Case.pdf 
19. https://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.33/n1u.e88.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Sundiata-Press-Release-2.pdf 
20. https://www.amnestyusa.org/cases/leonard-peltier/ 
21. https://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info/transfer-leonard-peltier-now/ 
22. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=27011&LangID=E 
23. https://jamaljournal.blogspot.com/2021/06/elder-abuse-incarceration-remains.html 
24. https://thejerichomovement.com/prisoners/ancestors 
25. See also https://www.akpress.org/assata.html 
26. https://www.essence.com/culture/assata-shakur-facts-call-return-from-cuba/ 
27. https://www.democracynow.org/2013/5/3/angela_davis_and_assata_shakurs_lawyerhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10999949.2018.1434351?journalCode=usou20 
28. https://www.thejerichomovement.com/profile/al-amin-jamil-abdullah 
29. https://www.freejoypowell.org/ 
30. https://cldc.org/cases/other-cases 
31. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/27/americas-protest-crackdown-five-months-after-george-floyd-hundreds-face-trials-and-prisonhttps://theintercept.com/2020/08/27/black-lives-matter-protesters-terrorism-felony-charges/ 
32. https://www.nlg.org/90-organizations-and-4600-individuals-tell-biden-administration-to-dropthecharges-against-blm-protesters/https://www.dropthecharges2020.org/drop-the-federal-charges 
33. https://cldc.org/standing-rock/ ↑
34. https://nativenewsonline.net/currents/standing-rock-water-protector-red-fawn-fallis-released-from-federal-prisonhttps://theintercept.com/2018/07/13/standing-rock-red-fawn-fallis-sentencing/ 
35. https://www.democracynow.org/2021/7/6/headlines/jessica_reznicek_sentenced_to_8_years_in_prison_for_eco_sabotage_on_dakota_access_pipelinehttps://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/rekha-basu/2021/07/22/dakota-access-pipeline-dapl-iowa-climate-activist-jessica-reznicek-prison-sentence-not-terrorist/7955826002/ 
36. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/10/protesters-line-3-minnesota-oil-gas-pipelinehttps://www.vogue.com/article/letter-from-a-jailed-line-3-water-protector 
37. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/9/11/the-war-on-terror-and-the-disciplining-of-american-muslimshttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/magazine/fbi-terrorism-terry-albury.html 
38. https://www.cage.ngo/aafia-siddiqui-calls-for-public-support-after-enduring-serious-assault-in-texas-prison 
39.  https://theintercept.com/2019/03/23/ecoterrorism-fbi-animal-rights/ 
40. https://supportmariusmason.org/about-marius/ 
41. https://kingsbayplowshares7.org/plowshares-history/
    https://theintercept.com/2020/11/16/nonviolent-protest-plowshares-nuclear/ 
42. https://couragetoresist.org/category/gi-resisters/
43. https://sparrowmedia.net/2016/12/100000-supporters-urge-president-obama-to-exercise-his-clemency-powers-to-commute-chelsea-mannings-sentence-to-time-served/https://sparrowmedia.net/2017/05/statement-from-chelsea-manning-and-legal-team-on-her-upcoming-release-from-military-prison/ 
44. https://sparrowmedia.net/2020/02/legal-team-files-motion-to-release-chelsea-manning/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/03/chelsea-manning-is-out-of-jail-after-almost-a-year/https://couragetoresist.org/chelsea-manning-free-fines-nearly-paid/ 
45. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/14/493877895/chelsea-manning-ends-hunger-strike-army-agrees-to-gender-affirming-surgery 
46. https://www.democracynow.org/2021/6/28/julian_assange_extradition_case 
47. https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london-shoot-out-inside-the-ci-as-secret-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html 
48.  https://chicagocrusader.com/local-news/december-12th-movement-nbuf-and-the-reparations-movement/ 
49. https://www.upr2020.org/ 
50. https://search.freedomarchives.org/search.php?view_collection=17 
51. https://www.hawaiianvoice.com/products-page/history-transcript/ka-hookolokolonui-kanaka-maoli-peoples-international-tribunal-hawaii-1993-transcript-of-proceedings-island-of-oahu/ 
52. https://sfbayview.com/2021/10/jalil-muntaqim-why-its-time-for-the-international-tribunal/ 
53. https://www.thejerichomovement.com/about 
54. http://unescopaz.rrp.upr.edu/documentos/Inquiry.html 
55. https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/we_charge_genocide_petition 

56. https://www.nytimes.com/1964/08/13/archives/malcolm-x-seeks-un-negro-debate-he-asks-african-states-to-cite-us.html

    https://www.passblue.com/2020/06/16/the-human-rights-council-confronts-racism-in-the-usa/

    https://time.com/5850623/malcolm-x-human-rights/ 

Featured image: Kevin “Rashid” Johnson, political prisoner. [Source: rashidmod.com]

---

Appendix

The 2021 International Tribunal: In the Spirit of Nelson Mandela

Oct. 22-25, 2021

Livestreaming at tribunal2021.com and on Facebook and online via Zoom

Register here.

Schedule of Events

The 2021 International Tribunal itself derives from a historic legacy and trajectory, initiated by a U.S.-based coalition, In the Spirit of Mandela. Created in 2018, the coalition recognizes and affirms the rich history of diverse global activists, including Nelson Mandela, Winnie Mandela, Graca Machel Mandela, Ella Baker, Dennis Banks, Cesar Chavez, Fannie Lou Hamer, Fred Korematsu, Lolita Lebron, Rosa Parks, Ingrid Washinawatok, and many more in the resistance traditions of Black, Brown and Indigenous Peoples. Though separate and independent from the In the Spirit of Mandela coalition that called for the Tribunal, the Panel of Jurists (see below) recognizes the important historical precedents that have shaped the charges against U.S. government agencies.

The year 2021 marks the 70^th anniversary of the campaign in which African American human rights leaders Paul Robeson and William Patterson, with the support of eminent sociologist Dr. W.E.B. DuBois, presented the “We Charge Genocide” petition to the burgeoning United Nations headquarters in 1951.^[55] Then in 1964, Minister Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik el-Shabazz) formed the Organization of Afro-American Unity, in part to bring the case of U.S. human rights abuses to the attention of the U.N.^[56] The 2021 Tribunal verdict itself will be delivered in front of U.N. headquarters, but hearings and community testimony will take place at the site of Malcolm X’s assassination, the now-refurbished and Columbia University-affiliated Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center in Harlem.

The Panel of Jurists is composed of nine members, with representatives including a former South African Member of Parliament; a board member of the distinguished Nobel Peace Laureate organization with a dozen Nobel Peace officer awardees; a Puerto Rican legal scholar who serves as an expert for the U.N. Committee on Decolonization; a U.N. representative of the oldest inter-faith pacifist organization in the world; an internationally accredited expert on genocide; the director of the only people-centered U.S. human rights network with ECOSOC status and consistent U.N. advocacy; the youngest elected Chair of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and leader of UNITY/the United National Indian Tribal Youth; and the former Chair of the United Nations Working Group on People of African Descent and a judge of the Permanent People’s Tribunal. They are majority women and majority Global South-rooted, from India, Eritrea, Haiti, France, Puerto Rico, the USA and elsewhere. (See list at tribunal2021.com/panel-of-jurists.)

These jurists will preside over two days of testimonies from impacted victims, expert witnesses, and attorneys with first-hand knowledge of specific incidents raised in the charges/indictment.

At the Tribunal, a team of experienced human rights attorneys, acting as prosecutors on behalf of U.S. Black, Brown, and Indigenous people as a class, will be charging the U.S., state and local governments with human and civil rights violations under the following five sections:

• Racist police killings of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Hyper/mass incarcerations of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Political incarceration of Civil Rights/National Liberation era revolutionaries and revolutionaries and activists, as well as present-day activists,
• Environmental racism and its disparate impact on Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Public health racism and its traumatic and disparate impact on Black, Brown, and Indigenous people.

As a result of the historic and systemic charges of all the above, the overarching charge of genocide will also be argued, based on 18 USC Sec. 1091 (the U.S. statute making genocide a felony) and the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention of Genocide.

The Panel of Jurists will deliver its Verdict following deliberations and discussions, planned for delivery at the Church Center for the United Nations on Monday, October 25, 2021.

Between the Verdict of the independent Jurists and the ongoing work of the Spirit of Mandela coalition, the lessons of the past will be brought forward to build U.S.-based human rights movements into the future. With these bold visions and newly produced tools, organizers hope that continued repressive measures, including the warehousing of political prisoners, will be left in the past as we step back from the specter of genocide and struggle together for lasting liberation.

Background on the 2021 Tribunal and planned next steps are here.

For more on efforts to free U.S. political prisoners from the 1980s to 2008, see Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners, Matt Meyer, ed. (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2008). See also the National Jericho Movement website and  the Northeast Political Prisoner Coalition’s Facebook page.

After Corbyn, Israel Lobby Turns Its Guns on UK Academia

By Jonathan Cook, October 18, 2021

A sociologist, Miller had been at the forefront of research into the sources of Islamophobia in the UK. His work includes a detailed examination of the Israel lobby’s role in fomenting racism towards Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians.

Indonesia: America’s Model “Democratic Leadership”. A Historical Review

By Shane Quinn, October 18, 2021

It may be no exaggeration to say that, in the post-World War II period, Iran has been persecuted largely without a break. The threats continue to the present day, with the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel pondering how to curtail Iranian influence. 

The Age of Chatham House and the British Roots of NATO

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, October 18, 2021

One America has been defended by great leaders who are too often identified by their untimely deaths while in office, who consistently advanced anti-colonial visions for a world of sovereign nations, win-win cooperation, and the extension of constitutional rights to all classes and races both within America and abroad.

“Expert” Calls for Denying Life-Saving Hospital Treatment to the Unvaccinated

By Paul Joseph Watson, October 18, 2021

An “expert” whose work on cybersecurity has been cited by the NY Times and the Washington Post announced on Twitter that the unvaccinated should be denied life-saving hospital treatment because they are “not fit for life on earth.”

Proof that the CDC Is Lying to the World About COVID Vaccine Safety

By Steve Kirsch, October 18, 2021

The CDC and the FDA claim that we can safely ignore the huge spike in event rates reported to the VAERS system this year (this is the official adverse event reporting system relied on by the FDA and CDC to spot safety signals).

It All Makes Sense Once You Realize They Want to Kill Us

By Mike Whitney, October 18, 2021

Yes, the experiments on mice showed that a low dose of the vaccine induces a robust antibody response to the infection. But, no, the antibodies were not able to attack the spike protein from a different strain of the virus.

The Revolving Door: All 3 FDA-authorized COVID Shot Companies Now Employ Former FDA Commissioners

By Jordan Schachtel, October 18, 2021

In today’s America, you can buy yourself a former FDA commissioner, and use the public-sector private-sector revolving door system of corruption to impose your will on the American public, and make a windfall for your executives and shareholders in the process.

Zoom Out

By Nowick Gray, October 18, 2021

Today in the grip of a worldwide pandemic of fear and control, our personal devices are always on; and we’re paradoxically being forced to drop out of previously normal social, cultural and economic life, while being practically forbidden to opt out of a medical mafia squeeze play.

Global Supply Chain Crisis? Pandemonium Looms as ‘Everything Shortage’ Meets ‘Dark Winter’

By Dr. Mathew Maavak, October 18, 2021

A global supply chain crisis is brewing, leading to a full-spectrum shortage of essential items. This is the result of mass centralization, where policies are dictated and synchronized by the aristocrats of the New Normal.

World Economic Forum Unveils COVID Passport that Uses Blood Test Markers to Determine Vaccination Status

By Infowars.com, October 18, 2021

The WEF COVID passport proposal is based on a blood sample – not documentation provided by a doctor – tied to a QR code to prove you have been vaccinated.

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 18, 2021

Peer reviewed reports confirm the causes  of vaccine related deaths and adverse effects (injuries) including among others blood clots, thrombosis, myocarditis, fertility.

The Banners of the King of Hell Advance. A World of Endless Propaganda

By Edward Curtin, October 18, 2021

Try to look ahead and see if you can see what’s been coming for decades.  Try to climb higher and see the beautiful things that Heaven bears, where we came forth, and once more see the stars and raise a banner of resistance to the King of Hell and all his henchmen.

Wall Street’s Takeover of Nature Advances with Launch of New Asset Class

By Whitney Webb, October 18, 2021

A project of the multilateral development banking system, the Rockefeller Foundation and the New York Stock Exchange recently created a new asset class that will put, not just the natural world, but the processes underpinning all life, up for sale under the guise of promoting “sustainability.”

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Nurse Luba refuses the COVID-19 vaccine and tells her story.

From the hospital where she’s currently suspended, a negative PCR test result twice a week is a requirement in lieu of COVID shots. 

She has not worked for three weeks now.

Watch the video below.

*

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.

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. Visit the author’s website at https://www.marktaliano.net where this interview was originally published.

---

Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click 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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Women play an increasingly important role in resolving issues that society and the state encounter and in the modern world, they should not face the choice between family and self-fulfillment,

According to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the third Eurasian Women’s Forum held in St. Petersburg on October 13-15.

“It is completely obvious that in modern conditions a woman should not face the choice between children and family or professional fulfillment. That is why in Russia the conditions are consistently created for a woman after childbirth to begin or resume her professional career at any moment, to become accomplished, to achieve growth in what she enjoys,” Putin stressed.

The Eurasian Women’s Forum, held since 2015, is one of the largest international platforms uniting female leaders from all continents to examine and discuss the role of women in the modern world and work out new approaches to solving global problems.

The forum was organized by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and Interparliamentary Assembly of the Commonwealth of Independent States (IPA CIS). This forum has won wide recognition as an effective mechanism of interaction and dialogue for women who are influencing social, political and economic decisions. It facilitates the growing participation of women’s movements in resolving global challenges.

The chosen theme of the third forum “Women: A Global Mission in a New Reality” has much significance for today’s world. Boosting international cooperation to enhance the role of women in order to meet the goals of sustainable development, forming women’s agenda and new approaches to solving global problems in the new reality – these are the main objectives for participants and organizers.

The participants, indeed, devoted key debates to the role of women in ensuring global security, the transition to new models of economic growth and social progress, overcoming the adverse consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, developing healthcare, balancing universal digitization, and addressing global environmental and climate problems.

For the first time, the forum feature meeting of the International Working Group of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency on improving gender balance in the nuclear energy industry.

Expert sessions featured prominently for international organizations and associations. Those include field sessions of Women 20, the UN session on industrial development (UNIDO), the World Bank session, the BRICS Women’s Business Alliance meeting, international club of APEC BEST AWARD winners and participants, and International Club of Women Regional Leaders.

Throughout the world, there is a growing demand for female leadership. Research has shown that companies with women on their boards of directors enjoy better results. As new skills requirements are emerging, so educational programmes for female leaders are becoming critical. The ability to share experience at an international level of implementing such programmes help foster joint initiatives. This shows a turn for women in political sphere.

In the face of global challenges, there is an increasing need for a new paradigm, along with a renewed focus on changing attitudes to women. Women have made an enormous contribution to efforts to improve health, raise life expectancy, and improve quality of life. These are the first role as women in the family, and this is unchangeable fact in the world.

Previously there had been some innovations. The BRICS Women’s Business Alliance was first presented at the 2nd Eurasian Women’s Forum. The leaders of Brazil, India, China, Russia, and South Africa gave their unanimous support to the initiative, and adopted the declaration on the establishment of the alliance. Last year (2020) saw the official launch of the BRICS Women’s Business Alliance.

The alliance seeks to implement multilateral cooperation projects aimed at consolidating and strengthening its role in the global economic agenda. The alliance’s areas of focus include the development of innovation, healthcare, food and environmental security, an inclusive economy, the creative industries, and tourism.

Women have been forging alliances and ahead of this forum for instance, the Women’s Business Association of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FLO FICCI), considered as the largest women’s business association in India, signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia. This collaboration aims at developing women’s entrepreneurship, social communications and at creating favourable conditions for cooperation between business circles in Russia and India.

It plans promoting entrepreneurship and professional excellence through seminars, conferences, lectures, trainings, and other events aimed at encouraging and stimulating the involvement of the skills, experience, and energy of women in all sectors and at all levels of economic activity.

The Eurasian Women Association has so many programmes and projects with other women’s groups and associations in the Eurasian region, in Asia, Africa, and Europe. Obviously, women have come a long way throughout the world, since their first conference held 1986 in Beijing, China and resultantly declared March 8 – as International Women’s Day marks annually throughout the world. Women have taken up the fight, sometimes collaborating with women-conscious men and thus paving the way up to the top echelon in all economic and social spheres. Women now have associations structure from the grassroots, in all countries, and up to regional organizations and to the United Nations.

Speaker of the Federation Council, Valentina Matviyenko, in her opening speech at the plenary session, highly stressed that the main goals of the global women’s community as that directed towards improving people’s quality of life as well as building mutual understanding and trust between countries and peoples in the name of peace and sustainable development.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister, Viktoria Abramchenko, similarly noted in her speech that women are directly involved in implementing broad scope of development tasks in Russia and beyond on international platforms.

Vietnamese Vice President, Vo Thi Anh Xuan, made a video conference presentation. She said that the forum is bringing together the majority of women around the world. “The role of women today is extremely important. We can make the world more just and help fight global challenges,” she said.

Chairwoman of the National Assembly of Azerbaijan Sahiba Ali gizi Gafarova believes that the topics discussed at the Eurasian Women’s Forum provide an opportunity to consider the most pressing issues of modern life and enhance women’s status around the world. Gafarova unreservedly stated that fully unleashing women’s potential would be the foundation for building a healthy society.

Chairwoman of the Senate of Uzbekistan Tanzila Narbaeva noted that the forum once again demonstrated women’s growing role in resolving the socioeconomic issues facing their countries, and demonstrates new approaches to the women’s agenda.

Narbaeva stressed that Uzbekistan, for instance, is ready to share its experience in various areas and is open for multifaceted cooperation. She invited the participants to take part in the women’s forum during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in 2022, planned in Samarkand, the second largest city in Uzbekistan.

Chairwoman of the Lower Chamber of Parliament of Turkmenistan, Gulshat Mammedova, said the forum is an important platform for interaction between women and helps to harmonize efforts in addressing various issues of our time as well as exchange views and experience in promoting women’s rights.

Participation of African women was modest, that included for example President of the Senate of Gabon Lucie Milebou Aubusson, Liberian Dr. Jewel Howard-Taylor and Zimbabwean First Lady Auxillia Mnangagwa among a few others. President of the Assembly of Mozambique, Esperança Laurinda Francisco Nhiuane Bias, delivered a speech at the forum.

Zimbabwean First Lady, Auxillia Mnangagwa, on the sidelines held a special working discussion with the Speaker of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Valentina Matviyenko, focusing on developing inter-parliamentary relations, women in sustainable development, education and charity.

The First Lady and the Speaker snapshotted on the possibility of greater participation of Russian economic operators in the development process in southern African region. Both women have expressed an appreciation cooperating on various questions on international platforms. Diplomatic relations between the two marked its 40th year.

On October 15, the participating African women took part an exclusive discussion solely on “the Role of Women in the Integrated Development of the African Continent” at the Tauride Palace. It was attended by women from international organizations, business circles, scientific or academic community and non-governmental organizations.

Matviyenko held discussions with President of the Central American Parliament Fanny Carolina Fernandez on the margin of the forum. The conversation mainly focused on expanding interparliamentary ties, reaffirmed the growing interest of Central American countries to bolster ties with Russia.

She emphasized the fact that “Russia is ready to sign an agreement on its participation as an observer in the Central American integration system, which would provide an additional impetus to developing the entire range of ties.” She expressed support for the initiative put forward to establish the Eurasian – Latin American Parliamentary Assembly. In the nearest future, this project needs to be studied in terms of developing dialogue mechanisms for the Eurasian integration space and the Latin American region.

Thereafter, Matviyenko and the Senator of the National Congress of the Republic of Chile, Ximena Cecilia Rincón, had an interactive meeting to discuss inter-parliamentary ties between the two countries and opportunities for further mutually beneficial collaboration. Russia is keen to strengthen its cooperation with Chile on all fronts. The dialogue, so far, between Russian and Chilean parliamentarians has traditionally been productive and there is scope to enhance cooperation.

In addition, the brief meeting touched on issues such as ensuring bilateral economic and cultural collaboration, working together to combat coronavirus and facilitating exchanges between higher education institutions in the two countries.

Ximena Cecilia Rincón Gonzalez noted the importance of strengthening and developing Chile–Russia relations, both in a parliamentary setting as well as in the economic, technological and cultural spheres.

The entire third forum, organized primarily to review how women have performed in men-dominated world, identify challenges and roadblocks on their way to gender equality and fight for higher social status and, of course, outline new strategic goals for the future. Held partly offline using modern formats such as video conferencing and online broadcast, it aimed at ensuring extended outreach and providing audience engagement. The rules and regulations for physical presence was in strict accordance with safety measures aimed at preventing the spread of COVID-19.

*

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.

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

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The United States Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) in cooperation with the Army Research Laboratory and university partners from the Internet of Battlefield Things Collaborative Research Alliance (IoBT CRA) are hard at work on a new battlefield artificial intelligence (AI) solution.

The aim is to develop a system that can provide battlefield applications with pressing machine intelligence, even when the local environment is not able to facilitate AI processing.

The solution offloads data from the battlefield to remote processing engines by enabling a much higher degree of compression of the data than previously possible.

Transferring data between field devices like Army-relevant sensors, such as cameras, LiDARs, radars, IR sensors and a remote server usually takes a significant amount of time.

Compressing the data puts less burden on the battlefield system, allowing it to send the data to the processing machine elsewhere more efficiently.

Researchers recently tested the compression solution by offloading an image from one device at the lab’s Multi-Purpose Sensing Area at White Sands Missile Range and an IoBT CRA server in Massachusetts.

Testing of this solution showed that compression was four times more effective than an image’s compression capability, which is the current image compression standard.

This ultra-high compression was achieved by analyzing and then preserving only the data features the AI will need to use later for accurate processing.

For example, in an application where the goal is to recognize different types of vehicles in an image, it is important to identify what cues are used by the AI to distinguish the different types of vehicles.

Those cues should be preserved by compression when data is sent from the field. Other irrelevant information can be compressed away to improve compression abilities.

If successful, this solution can revolutionize AI for Army applications and increase autonomy in mission execution by bringing AI virtually to the point of need in the field through faster offloading and remote processing.

At a time when autonomy and machine intelligence play increasingly bigger roles in future conflicts, efficient solutions for moving complex sensor data to the right processing engines will become critical.

As a result, this new technology of Compressive offloading, and other sensing and processing research, are essential to the Army in effectively preparing for the future battlefield.

This sort of quick processing could lead to more effective AI-controlled defensive and offensive system. As it was reported earlier, the United States is lagging behind the United Kingdom in terms of active AI-operated defense systems for armored vehicles, but this could rapidly improve the capability.

Other significant improvements that it can lead to relate to greater precision for offensive strikes and preparation for attacks and raids.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Lithuania – a new government, a manufactured crisis

In 1980, when Russia was hosting the Moscow Olympics, I took my daughter and a close friend on a package tour of Moscow, Leningrad and Tallinn. Internal flights meant we got to see Vilnius in Lithuania, and I recall thinking how different it was to how it was portrayed, with beer-cellars, progressive shops and a strong German influence. No doubt we were being shown the most positive face of the Soviet Union.

What we saw of Lithuania and Estonia through the coach windows, outside the cities, was little more than vast tracts of forest-land and open countryside with occasional mansions, which the guide said were high-ranking and Politburo family dachas (holiday homes). It demonstrated, if demonstration was necessary, that no political system is devoid of its privileged class – individuals who enjoy more ostentatious lifestyles than the hoi polloi.

Lifestyles today in Lithuania come largely in three tiers: the elite, the controlled and the free. Unlike former class tiers they do not span traditional divides.

There is a fourth tier, the ultra-elite, very small in number, who operate on a global scale and dictate by means of IMF and World Bank coffers what the media broadcast, what governments are allowed to do and say, the modus operandi of all authorities and all public utilities. Their agents, from the elite down, ensure that there is a unified global response to all activities. In other words this coterie controls the agenda. As the ultra-elite sit outside of Lithuania itself, and as hardly anybody gets to meet these manipulators and puppeteers who rank themselves above the law, their nasty work has to be done by others.

The elite

The elite, dacha-owning parasites are still there, like ex-prime minister, Andrius Kubilius, and politician turned TV celebrity, Arunas Valinskas. Both of whom have wished death on people choosing not to get “vaccinated”.

While poor people are always with us so are the vampires who feed on them. These are the ones pushing the agenda – and they should be on trial for killing and maiming people, having taken bribes to enforce the World Bank-funded vaccination purge of the human race. Such contemptible beings are in control of the controlled.

The controlled

The controlled group, a happy-go-lucky, live-now-pay-later majority, comprises those who have unwittingly fallen for the elite’s propaganda. Brainwashed by government and media they have bared their arms to take the loaded shots and some, just like Coriolanus, can already show their battle-scars to the crowds. For being good citizens they have received a pass, called an Opportunity Pass. Ironically, this allows them to do the things they used to do without a pass. The Opportunity Pass is a means of keeping tabs on those who carry it.

Those belonging to the controlled tier may not remember Soviet days, when a пропуск (propusk) or permit, was required to go into all official buildings. Younger generations had better get used to this old way of life. Because today it is a whole lot worse than then. The data collected now puts on file everything about everyone. Step out of line and it won’t just be a штраф (shtraf), a fine enforced upon you, but the whole income and household budget of Lithuanians is potentially in jeopardy.

Welcome to the Orwellian and Kafkaesque 21st century. You think not? Read on.

The free

To demonstrate how serious government stooges are at total control of everyone and everything you only need to look at the way the free are being treated. The free are the biggest danger to the elite, and ultra-elite’s, plans for a system of complete subordination. Free people are a stumbling-block which can bring down this totalitarian control. The Lithuanian government, in true Soviet style, is trying everything conceivable, carrot and stick, to bring to order those choosing freedom.

The carrot

A bribe was offered early in the injection rollout which purportedly took the form of compensation should there be adverse reactions. Compensation, if any but a chosen few get it, only applies to people who voluntarily roll up their sleeves for the life-threatening jab. So, if choice is removed, and the injections become mandatory there will be no compensation for those forced to take a shot if they subsequently suffer collateral damage. What emerges also from a CMS ‘question and answer’ sheet shows that the likelihood of compensation is slim to non-existent whether voluntarily or compulsorily jabbed.

Anyone suffering from “vaccine” damage or death must prove:

1. the occurrence of damage,
2. existence of defects in the product,
3. the causal link between the defects and the damages.

Furthermore “claims for damages caused by the vaccine can only involve the liability of the manufacturer.” As we all know the vaccine manufacturers have exempted themselves from liability.

“It is also worth mentioning that Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania establishes cases when the manufacturers could be exempted from the liability, for example, in cases when manufacturers prove that at the time of putting the product into circulation, the level of scientific and technical knowledge was not sufficient to identify the defect of quality.”

Source

So legally, and perhaps even physically, the claimant hasn’t a leg to stand on. That carrot does not even exist.

Offering the carrot to the elderly

Wiser, older people – those who remember Soviet days – are not happy to see the return of initiatives to take away their liberties. They have seen it all before. After all, they were the ones who fought to gain this freedom in the first place.

On 12 October 2021 the Lithuanian Seimas, the legislative body of parliament, rubber-stamped a government plot to cajole the elderly into getting their toxic shots. Not surprisingly the uptake among seniors for this experiment has been low. The scheme – which is unlikely to bear much fruit – was put together whereby those of 75 and over, who have up to now avoided the life-changing jab, will receive 100 euros if they get all their shots (presume 3) by 1 December. Only pressure from impecunious family members is likely to sway life-educated seniors who are aware of the history of their country.

Part of the carrot approach is the presentation of a plethora of lies about just how good the vaccines are. To promote the lie Lithuania’s statistics office issued a statement about the Pfizer vaccine without a scintilla of documentary evidence. This statement flies in the face of what is known about the Pfizer vaccine.

Fully vaccinated people have about five times less risk of infection; this is a highly effective vaccine

Source

A spokesman called it “an excellent result”.

Such claims, coming from an office allegedly responsible for statistics are dishonest and even ludicrous. The Statistics Office should be called out on this failed attempt to spin the truth. Demands should be made to see the evidence.

This is the same Statistics Office which in mid-September tried to spin the following:

“Lithuania registered 1,300 new coronavirus infections and eight deaths from Covid-19 over Wednesday, September 15, the country’s statistics office said on Thursday morning.

Notably, three out of the eight fatalities were persons either not vaccinated or only partially vaccinated.”

Source

Wonderful! You only need a handful of brain-cells to do the arithmetic on that one. Indeed, it looks like all of these people were killed by the “vaccines”. Five after the second dose, three after the first. All countries, because of the increasing death-toll, have been instructed by Big Pharma and its backers to call any death where the toxic shots have caused the death within fourteen days of a shot: “unvaccinated”.

When this crisis is over Lithuanians should never let it be forgotten their government tried to bribe old people with 100 euros that they may not have lived long enough to receive. They might as well have offered a bribe to take a cyanide capsule to have their deaths recorded as “unvaccinated”.

More follows on what has really happened statistically after the stick approach to getting the populace injected. And it is damning.

The stick

Individuals and families who choose to be free of the toxic jabs are made to suffer in countless ways. Restrictions are placed on them whereby they cannot participate in everyday life in a meaningful way. Many of these were outlined by a moving report smuggled out of Lithuania by Gluboco Lietuva, whose Twitter thread on the subject was removed. Gluboco is not anti-vaccine. Here are just some of the restrictions placed on those refusing the gene therapies.

• Not allowed in restaurants, cafes or bars
• Not allowed in hypermarkets and larger supermarkets
• Not allowed in non-essential shops
• Not allowed to visit people in hospital (except for terminally ill and children)
• Not allowed in polyclinics
• Not allowed to get a haircut
• Not allowed in banks (with a few exceptions)
• Not allowed to go to the gym
• Not allowed to go to the library
• Not allowed to sit in lectures
• Not allowed on inter-city transport

More on Lithuanian Covid-19 statistics

You cannot have a vaccination programme without something to vaccinate against and unlike most countries Lithuania had experienced very few deaths ascribed to Covid-19 until October 2020 when death-rate figures started to rise. In short it was getting on with life. The exact date on which certain factions of government took the bribe is unknown but it looks to be about the end of September beginning of October.

Source: Our World in Data

The “vaccination” programme began on 27 December by which time a figure of 1,613 deaths had been labelled Covid-19 deaths – regardless of what had been the real cause of death. To put it into perspective it means that 99.94% of the population had not died from Covid-19 – even if official figures were to be believed.

Source: Our World in Data

Following “vaccination”, deaths have increased to 5,282. Injections have unknown contentsand many people think they are giving people a variant of Covid-19. How else could it account for a whopping 227% increase in deaths? Yet, according to the Lithuanian office of statistics, those taking the “vaccine” have five times less risk of infection. Please!

How the media is managing to sell such nonsense is unbelievable. Stop the toxic shots and you stop the pandemic. It is as simple as that. The shots are giving recipients something much worse than Covid-19. It has only recently become apparent that there are foreign substances in the phials not listed on the manufacturers’ ingredients list. All sources of information – other than from the real media – withhold this information.

Lithuanians buying into the nonsense need to start asking why the truth is being withheld? Because they are not getting bribes from the World Bank. They’re getting the toxic shots. That is criminal. And now there really is a serious crisis in hospitals which did not exist before the conservatives became the strongest party.

Lithuania – regime change

Those who engineer regime change, whether through the gun or ballot box, are working in the background long before it becomes evident to the general public. Lithuania, like its neighbour Belarus, had experienced no “pandemic” of any note. Lithuania is more pluralist in its parliamentary structure than most western states. Regime change was engineered and the majority, by the smallest of margins, took over backed by George Soros money which was funding the media campaigns of Andrius Tapinas, the head of Laisvės TV.

Before the change of parliamentary structure suddenly, from nowhere, deaths began to appear. What could have happened was that some inducement took place to make testing centres increase the number of cycles in their PCR tests so that more people appeared to have died having tested positive for Covid-19.

While testing-centres were pushing up the death-rate an election was taking place and the media played its role in blaming the increase in deaths on the Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union (LVŽS), which was the largest party. With a new, obviously compliant, parliament installed the vaccine manufacturers moved in and the same garbage fell out of the mouths of government, government organisations, media, health authorities, education authorities and local authorities, all who voiced worries and promoted mandates to combat the non-existent pandemic in a cacophony of simultaneous death-chants. Fear was instilled in the public psyche that Covid-19 had arrived in Lithuania. If its people did not get “vaccinated” against it, they would all die.

One of the good things that Belarus, which borders Lithuania, did, was to divulge details of an attempted bribe of its president, Aleksandr Lukashenko, from the World Bank. Other leaders have said the same bribes were offered them so it is known that all the countries promoting the fake pandemic were corrupt enough to take the bribe. Is your country one of them?

Last year Lukashenko was re-elected despite attempts at regime-change. His opponent fled to Lithuania.

Source: Our world in data

Take a look at the comparative deaths from Covid-19 of Lithuania and Belarus as of 15 October 2021.

On the face of it there does not seem to be much difference between the two countries, other than the regular shape of the Belarus line, and Lithuania appears to have a better earlier record. Graphs can be misleading and this shows actual deaths, not per capita deaths. It is also claimed that earlier Lithuania was not recording all of its so-called Covid-19 deaths.

Belarus has nearly 3.5 times the population of Lithuania. What that means is that 1 in every 2,195 people has been recorded as having died from Covid-19 in Belarus. Whereas in Lithuania it is 1 in every 528 people. And following the vaccination programme which is giving people Covid-19 Lithuania really does have a crisis. Last week hospitals recorded 507 Covid patients including 10 children, and 48 ICU patients.

As explained in my last article in this series, if PCR testing for Covid-19 had never taken place, there would be no pandemic and the people who died would have had their cause-of-death recorded as something more in line with what actually killed them. Now the “vaccines” have arrived on the scene everyone taking them is liable to be diagnosed with Covid-19 – but what they’ve really got is a dose of poison called a vaccine.

As Belarus borders Lithuania it may be a safe haven to flee for Lithuanians who choose to avoid the jabs. As things stand there is still a choice in Belarus – even though sanctions are being applied to bring the country into line.

In Lithuania there is a substantial number of people still resisting, as well-attended protests show.

Source: dp.ru

Relocating might need to be done soon because Lithuania is planning a barbed wire fenceacross its border with Belarus. The government argument is to prevent more immigrants from Belarus entering the country. It is true that last year people fled to Lithuania from Belarus but that was after the failed regime change via the ballot-box, and they fled for political reasons.

Those fearful of the jab and living in Belarus now are unlikely to go to Lithuania knowing there is four times the chance of being killed by Covid-19 vaccines. The exodus is much more likely to be from Lithuania to Belarus.

*

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 nakedtruth.in

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It is disappointing that the Malaysian government has chosen to adopt a passive approach to the Pandora Papers. Leaving it to the police to investigate may suggest that the government is not prepared to assume leadership in setting the moral tone for society especially since some of the underlying ethical concerns in the Pandora Papers may have serious implications for society as a whole.    

The Pandora Papers refer to the millions of leaked documents that allegedly reveal offshore accounts of present and past leaders, including  presidents, prime ministers, billionaires and prominent business people put together by an international consortium of investigative journalists and made public on the 2^nd of October 2021.  Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the current Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, are on the list. It is now public knowledge that the Malaysian finance Minister, Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz and one of his predecessors, Tun Daim Zainuddin are also named.

The inclusion of their names in the Pandora Papers, why they as public figures chose offshore accounts for their assets, and how this impacted upon the local economy are matters which should be investigated.  At the very least it would help to clear their names. It is in this spirit that a number of governments, like the Pakistani government, have chosen to investigate allegations in the Papers against their people.

In investigating the allegations, the authorities and the public will have to examine seriously both the legal and ethical dimensions. Beyond the rules pertaining to off-shore accounts and the like, there is the more powerful issue of how off-shore accounts of important and wealthy personalities drain the economies of many countries.  A 2016 report by Oxfam estimated that a third of the wealth of rich Africans — about 500 billion US dollars — was kept in off-shore accounts.  This resulted in a huge loss in tax revenue, about 1. 4 billion a year, for the people, enough to pay for the healthcare of millions of poor. A global network of tax havens enable the very rich to hide 7.6 trillion US dollars.

This is why a firm message to the nation from the government that it will not tolerate off-shore accounts is imperative. It must be part of the overall endeavour to eradicate corruption. Private gain should never take precedence over the public good. Parliament should immediately establish a small committee of say 3 persons to investigate thoroughly the Malaysians named in the Pandora Papers with the focus upon the public-office holders. The committee should be independent, credible and committed. Its report should be submitted directly to the Dewan Rakyat for scrutiny within two months of its appointment.

*

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 Chandra  Muzaffar is the president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Thailand’s government is using green chiretta to treat people with asymptomatic or mild coronavirus infections, following a trial in prisons which found that 99% of those who consumed the plant recovered.

In Thailand’s fields, convicted criminals tend to a precious crop.

In the blazing sun, in neon orange tops, they bend and scrape, painstakingly weeding the ground around neat lines of dark green plants.

They’re growing green chiretta (Andrographis paniculate) – or Fah talai jone, as it’s called in Thailand.

Chainat jail is using the herbal remedy to treat prisoners

It’s a traditional herbal medicine commonly used in Thai homes to treat colds, but it is now playing a central role in the country’s fight against COVID-19.

“Its properties help to reduce fever and coughing,” one of the prisoners tells me.

In jail for drugs offences, the 31-year-old is now tasked with harvesting a plant which has been used to treat more than 69,000 other offenders with coronavirus.

“I feel proud to be looking after these Thai herbs that are used to help cure prisoners who have COVID,” he says.

Image on the right: Jail medic Chitsanuphong Saublaongiw believes the traditional tablet successfully eased mild symptoms

After his team snips and gathers all the mature stems, the plant is dried and ground by another group.

The dark green powder is then packed into capsules before being shipped to other prisons nearby.

In July, Thailand’s cabinet approved green chiretta for use in people with asymptomatic or mild coronavirus infections following a successful trial in prisons.

The government claims that out of 11,800 inmates who took it to treat coronavirus, 99.02% recovered.

A few miles down the road from where the plants are being harvested, Chainat jail is one of those using the herbal remedy.

During an outbreak of COVID-19 in August, more than 700 inmates took 15 pills a day for five days.

Staff say all of them recovered.

Jail medic Chitsanuphong Saublaongiw believes the traditional tablet was effective in easing mild symptoms.

“From the research, green chiretta has a substance called andrographolide, which is the substance that helps limit the spread of the virus,” he explains.

“After taking green chiretta, the prisoners had better chest X-ray results, fewer symptoms, the disease was less severe, and they returned to normal quickly,” he adds.

“Asymptomatic patients didn’t develop any severe symptoms.”

Critics say more testing is needed to prove green chiretta’s efficacy against COVID-19

Often overcrowded and cramped, the virus has spread rapidly in Thailand’s jails.

Around a quarter of the country’s prisoners tested positive in the six months from April 2021.

Severe infections are still treated with antivirals or hospital care, but cheap and available green chiretta has offered Thailand an alternative option for those in the early stages of COVID-19 at a time when the country has been tackling a surge in cases.

Prisoners tell Sky News they are proud to be harvesting green chiretta

“In prisons, we sleep close to each other, so we can’t [social] distance,” says Poj, one of those given the tablet at Chainat jail.

His name has been changed to protect his identity.

“I had a high fever, then after taking green chiretta, the fever reduced,” he explains. “[My] sore throat and cough also reduced when I took green chiretta for five days.”

Some 141 jails around the country now plan to produce 38 million green chiretta tablets by November. They’ll be used to treat more inmates.

Experts say the plant contains a substance called andrographolide which helps limit the spread of the virus

The government has also been trialling the treatment in some hospitals and is encouraging 24,000 villages to grow the crop, so they have supplies.

“If we use modern medicine, the cost is 20 times, 30 times, 50 times higher… and in the prisons, it’s very crowded,” Somsak Thepsuthin, Thailand’s minister of justice, tells me at a chiretta event in Bangkok.

“We must have this to treat people. If it’s a mild illness, we can use this medicine, as it’s inexpensive and effective.”

But green chiretta isn’t a silver bullet to cure the world of COVID-19.

Green chiretta is traditionally used to treat colds but is now being produced as a COVID treatment

Thai authorities have only cleared it for use in mild cases – it doesn’t stop you from getting the virus, and it isn’t a substitute for a vaccine.

The World Health Organisation’s list of recommended drugs to treat coronavirus doesn’t mention the herbal remedy.

Critics in Thailand say more testing is needed to prove its efficacy.

“Andrographolide is referred to as a substance found in green chiretta that helps suppress viruses and inflammation,” says associate professor Dr Mayuree Tangkiatkumjai, of the department of clinical pharmacy at Srinakharinwirot University.

“However, COVID-19 is still a new emerging infectious disease, so there is no sufficient research to confirm that green chiretta can prevent and cure COVID-19 yet.”

Two more trials of green chiretta involving COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms are being conducted on 1,400 people

While she supports people with colds using it at home, this is no replacement for antivirals in severe coronavirus cases.

“The suitable amount of andrographolide for patients is still debatable, and it still needs further studies to verify its efficacy and side effects,” Dr Tangkiatkumjai adds.

Two more trials of green chiretta involving COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms are being conducted on 1,400 people, with initial results due next spring.

While Thailand has also been investing in revolutionary coronavirus vaccines and antivirals, green chiretta, a traditional herbal pill, has a new role in fighting a modern pandemic.

*

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: Somsak Thepsuthin, Thailand’s minister of justice, says the medicine is ‘inexpensive and effective’; All images in this article are from Sky News

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

Watch the video below.

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Wieso haben unsere Kinder mit Drogen zu tun? Weil der Drogenhandel ein gutes Geschäft ist mit großem Profit. Wenn damit nicht viel zu verdienen wäre, hätten Eltern keine Sorgen, der Jugendliche würde nicht an Drogen herankommen und daran zugrunde gehen, der Markt wäre leer (1). Die in Deutschland von der grünen, liberalen und sozialdemokratischen Partei geforderte Legalisierung von Cannabis könnte jedoch einen Wirtschaftsboom auslösen. Die Staatskasse würde von der im Land am häufigsten konsumierten illegalen Droge profitieren; das heißt, der Staat würde zum Dealer werden. Deshalb ist die Forderung nach Legalisierung rein politischer Natur und wissenschaftlich nicht gerechtfertigt.

Vor dem Hintergrund neuerer Studien über die schweren psychischen „Kollateralschäden“ der Corona-Maßnahmen bei der jungen Generation ist eine Legalisierung der Einstiegsdroge Cannabis noch weniger zu befürworten als in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten. Die staatlich verordneten Einschränkungen wie Lockdowns, „social distancing“ und das Verbot von Schulbesuchen, musischer und sportlicher Aktivitäten führten 2020 speziell in dieser Altersgruppe zu einem starken Anstieg von Depressionen, Angststörungen und Einsamkeitsgefühlen (2). Diese prekäre Gefühlsgrundlage darf durch den Konsum leicht verfügbarer illegaler Drogen und wegen der Gefahr einer Abhängigkeit auf keinen Fall betäubt und verstärkt werden. Die Konsequenzen für die Betroffenen und ihr familiäres und gesellschaftliches Umfeld wären verheerend. Persönliche Erfahrungen als Vater, Lehrer und Psychologe mit drogengefährdeten und -abhängigen Jugendlichen in Deutschland und der Schweiz bestätigen meine unabhängige wissenschaftliche Argumentation.

Wie wäre es, wenn ihr Kind Drogen nähme?

„Ich bin eine ganz normale Mutter von ganz normalen Kindern – aber ich bin auch die Mutter eines ehemaligen Drogenabhängigen.“ Mit diesem Satz beginnt der Vortrag einer Mutter aus einem Elternkreis drogengefährdeter und drogenabhängiger Jugendlicher. Und sie sagt weiter:

„Dabei hatten mein Mann und ich, sicherlich wie die große Mehrzahl von jungen Eltern, einen so schönen Traum von einer Familie, von unserer Familie. Unser Heim sollte von Liebe, von Freude, Vertrauen, Fürsorge, Stabilität und Wärme erfüllt sein. Wir waren bereit und willens, alles zu tun, das zu verwirklichen. Wir erlebten auch, dass unser Traum wahr wurde…bis…bis er sich über Nacht zum Albtraum wandelte. Liebe wurde zur Erpressbarkeit, Freude zur Beklemmung, Vertrauen zu Misstrauen, Fürsorge zur Sorge, Stabilität zum Ausgeliefertsein und Wärme zur Angst. (…) Wir konnten uns überhaupt nicht vorstellen, dass eines unserer Kinder Drogen konsumieren oder drogenabhängig werden würde.“ (3)

Die Legalisierung liegt in der Luft

Der Vortrag der betroffenen Mutter hatte den Titel „Können Sie sich vorstellen, wie es wäre…wenn Ihr Kind Drogen nähme?“ und wurde am 11. November 1985 gehalten. Es war die Zeit einer regelrechten Drogenschwemme, die sich seit den sechziger Jahren mit Hilfe einer stark propagierten Drogenideologie lawinenartig in Europa ausbreitete. Und wie ist die Situation in Deutschland heute, siebenunddreißig Jahre später? Müssen sich Eltern Sorgen machen?

Ja, das müssen sie! Nicht nur die drei möglichen Regierungsparteien rühren die Werbetrommel für eine umgehende Legalisierung von Cannabis. Auch ein Brandenburger Amtsrichter und Cannabisaktivist meint laut „SPIEGEL“ vom 13. Oktober: „Die Legalisierung liegt in der Luft“ (4). Deutsche Polizeigewerkschaften hingegen warnen eindringlich vor einer Legalisierung (5). Mit einer Liberalisierung der Drogenpolitik wird der missbräuchliche Konsum nicht eingedämmt, sondern im Gegenteil ausgeweitet. Bereits eine die Gesundheitsgefahren verharmlosende Argumentation der Befürworter einer Legalisierung wirkt sich negativ aus.

Cannabis – eine berauschende gesundheitsgefährdende Substanz

„Kiffen“ ist die Szene-Bezeichnung für das Inhalieren von Cannabis bzw. von Marihuana (zerkleinerte Blätter oder Teile der ganzen Pflanze) und Haschisch (das gepresste Harz der Blüten). Cannabis enthält mindestens vier rauscherzeugende Cannabinoide (chemische Stoffe). Das bekannteste mit dem größten Anteil an der Erzeugung des Rausches ist das Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Die gefährliche Eigenschaft der Cannabinoide besteht in deren Fettlöslichkeit. Das heißt, sie lagern sich im menschlichen Fettgewebe ab – speziell im peripheren Nervensystem, im Gehirn und in den Fortpflanzungsorganen – und entfalten dort ihre Wirkung.

Da die Cannabinoide nur sehr langsam abgebaut und aus dem Körper ausgeschieden werden, kommt es zu einer Anreicherung von Giftstoffen. So dauert es drei Tage bis zu einer Woche, bis nur die Hälfte des THC von einer einzigen Marihuana-Zigarette abgebaut und ausgeschieden ist. Wissenschaftlich nachgewiesen sind seit vielen Jahren Schädigungen der Lunge, des Herzens, des Immunsystems, des Erbmaterials, der Sexualentwicklung, der Embryonalentwicklung bei Schwangerschaft, des Gehirns und das Auslösen von Psychosen. Aus diesem Grund haben sich in der Drogenkonvention der Vereinten Nationen 184 Staaten – darunter Deutschland – verpflichtet, den Umgang mit Cannabis und anderen Drogen ausschließlich zu medizinischen oder wissenschaftlichen Zwecken zuzulassen. Die Wirkungen der Droge sind bei einem Jugendlichen in der Pubertät zudem völlig anders und wesentlich schädlicher als bei Erwachsenen (6).

Alle diese wissenschaftlichen Befunde sind seit Jahrzehnten bekannt und unter seriösen Wissenschaftlern unstrittig. Ein Experten-Beitrag zum Cannabis-Konsum mit dem Titel „Kiffen vergiftet die kreativsten Köpfe“ von Professor Holm-Hadulla, Facharzt für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie bestätigt die bisherigen Befunde. (6) Holm-Hadulla zitiert darin u. a. die angesehene Fachzeitschrift „New England Journal of Medicine“, die 2014 die wissenschaftlichen Daten zum Cannabis-Konsum zusammengefasst und bewertet hat und zu alarmierenden Ergebnissen kam:

„Bei häufigem Konsum von den heute üblichen hochdosierten Cannabisprodukten verdoppelt sich das Psychose-Risiko. Schädigungen der Hirnentwicklung, die mit Störungen von Motivation, Konzentration und Gedächtnis einhergehen, gelten als wissenschaftlich bewiesen. (…) Besonders gefährlich ist der Cannabiskonsum während der Pubertät. Diese Lebensphase ist wegen der in dieser Zeit stattfindenden neuralen Umbauprozesse besonders anfällig. Deswegen ist es katastrophal, wenn Jugendliche schon mit zwölf Jahren oder früher beginnen, Haschisch und Marihuana zu rauchen und große Mengen Alkohol zu trinken. (…) Neben Hirnveränderungen und psychotischen Erkrankungen kann Cannabis zu weniger deutlichen, aber doch gravierenden Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigungen führen. (…) So dient Cannabis eben nicht dem emanzipatorischen Unabhängigkeitsstreben, sondern dem resignativen Einfügen in bestehende Missstände.“ (7)

Faktoren, die zum Drogenkonsum führen

Die Entscheidung, Drogen zu nehmen, ist von verschiedenen Faktoren abhängig. Einer der entscheidendsten ist ihre Verfügbarkeit. Wenn mit dem Drogenhandel nicht sehr viel zu verdienen wäre, hätten Eltern keine Sorgen. Der Jugendliche würde nicht an Drogen herankommen und daran zugrunde gehen, der Markt wäre leer. Des Weiteren ist die schon erwähnte Einstellung der Bevölkerung, speziell die von Eltern und Lehrern gegenüber dem Drogenmissbrauch von großer Bedeutung – also die soziale Akzeptanz oder Nichtakzeptanz von Drogen. Soziale Akzeptanz bedeutet für den jungen Menschen, dass die Droge ungefährlich ist und er mit ihr experimentieren kann. Mangelnde Aufklärung, Verharmlosung oder sogar Propagierung von Drogen senken die Hemmschwelle für den Einstieg. Deshalb ist ein gesetzliches Verbot wichtig. Es stellt für den Jugendlichen eine Klippe dar und damit einen Schutz vor dem Abgleiten in den missbräuchlichen Drogenkonsum.

Ein Grund für die Verbreitung der Sucht ist die direkte persönliche (d. h. psychosoziale) Ansteckung zwischen einem Drogenkonsumenten und einem Neueinsteiger aufgrund des Gruppendrucks von Gleichaltrigen (peer-pressure). Gerade in der Pubertät, einer Zeit des Suchens nach Selbstfindung, nach der eigenen Identität und einer Zeit des Erprobens neuer Verhaltensweisen bekommen die Gleichaltrigen (peers) neben Eltern und Lehrern eine immer größere Bedeutung für den einzelnen. Die frühe Stärkung der Persönlichkeit und des Selbstwertgefühls des Jugendlichen in Familie und Schule ist deshalb der größte Schutz. Er ist dann in der Lage, nein zu sagen, wenn ihm Drogen angeboten werden (8).

*

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, NRhZ-Online.

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel ist Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe.

Noten

(1) Der vorliegende Artikel ist eine Aktualisierung und teilweise Ergänzung eines entsprechenden Artikels in der „Neuen Rheinischen Zeitung“ (NRhZ) Nr. 531 vom 7.10.2015 „Wie wäre es, wenn ihr Kind Drogen nähme“ http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(2) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=27727, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/das-wagnis-des-wissens

(3) Vortrag von Frau Elsa Meyer am 8. 11.1985. Veröffentlicht in der EK Schriftenreihe Nr. 1 des Elternkreises drogengefährdeter und drogenabhängiger Jugendlicher e. V., Bonn

(4) https://www.spiegel.de/panoramajustiz/cannabis-wie-richter-and…cannabisaktivisten-wurde-a-e4ecb378-1419-4980-be54-5a642fae80d9

(5) https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/cannabis-polizeige…warnen-vor-legalisierung-a-6492feda-b3b6-4e1d-9fe9-9696eaa4a8e0

(6) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(7) A. a. O.

(8) A. a. O.