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.

***

Since the dawn of capitalism the logic of collective commons has been systematically challenged by the capitalist class through commodification and private appropriation of wealth. One of their earliest objectives, when factories started to appear in Europe just over several centuries ago, was to take away the common people’s resources and livelihoods by grabbing the lands they lived on and so force them to migrate to the cities and accept the miserable and miserably paid jobs in the factories. On farther continents under European domination their goal had been to grab the land and resources of local populations and force them into hard labour under the whip of imperialist exploiters.

From the 16^th to the 19^th century the various countries that one after the other fell under the yoke of capitalism all went through vast periods of destruction of collective commons, a process that has been well documented by such authors as Karl Marx (1818-1883) book 1 of Capital, [1] Rosa Luxemburg (1871-1919) in The Accumulation of Capital, [2] Karl Polanyi (1886-1964) The Great Transformation, [3] Silvia Federici (1942) Caliban and the Witch. [4] A great film by Raoul Peck about the young Karl Marx [5] visualizes examples of the destruction of collective commons with dramatic scenes of the brutal repression of poor people collecting wood for fuel in German Rhineland forests and Karl Marx’s stand in support of their centuries old legal and traditional right to do so that was running contrary to capitalistic logic. Daniel Bensaïd wrote Les Dépossédés : Karl Marx, les voleurs de bois et le droit des pauvres (in French) a concise description of the process of destroying collective commons. [6]

In Capital, Karl Marx describes certain forms of grabbing by the capitalist system in Europe:

“The spoliation of church properties, the fraudulent alienation of the State domains, the robbery of the common lands, the usurpation of feudal and clan property, and its transformation into modern private property under circumstances of reckless terrorism, were just so many idyllic methods of primitive accumulation. They conquered the field for capitalistic agriculture, made the soil part and parcel of capital, and created for the town industries the necessary supply of a “free” and outlawed proletariat”. (Capital, Book I, eighth section. Chap. 27)

While capitalist production was being imposed on Europe it was also spreading all over the globe:

“The discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of black-skins, signalised the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production. These idyllic proceedings are the chief momenta of primitive accumulation”. (Capital, book I, part 8. Chap. 31)

Marx very succinctly describes the four centuries leading up to the generalization of the industrial revolution at the time Capital was written:

“The different momenta of primitive accumulation distribute themselves now, more or less in chronological order, particularly over Spain, Portugal, Holland, France, and England. In England at the end of the 17^th century, they arrive at a systematic combination, embracing the colonies, the national debt, the modern mode of taxation, and the protectionist system. These methods depend in part on brute force, e.g., the colonial system. But, they all employ the power of the State, the concentrated and organised force of society, to hasten, hot-house fashion, the process of transformation of the feudal mode of production into the capitalist mode, and to shorten the transition (Chap. 31).

Since then, capitalism has continued its offensive against collective commons for two reasons: 1. The commons have not yet entirely disappeared and therefore they limit the total domination of capital, which consequently seeks to appropriate them or reduce them to the bare minimum. 2. Important struggles have recreated commons during the 19^th and 20^th centuries. These commons are constantly being challenged.

During the 19^th and 20^th centuries there have been simultaneous destructions and creations of collective commons

During the 19^th century and the first half of the 20^th century, popular movements recreated social commons by developing systems of collective support: cooperatives, strike funds, solidarity funds. The victories of the Russian revolution also led to a short period of creation of common properties, until Stalinism degenerated into dictatorship and shamefully privileged a bureaucratic caste as described by Leon Trotsky in 1936 (Leon Trotsky The Revolution Betrayed. [7]).

In many capitalist countries (in varied degrees of development) the governments realized that to maintain social peace and even to avoid a resurgence of revolutionary movements some scraps had to be thrown to the populations. This resulted in the development of welfare states.

After WW2, from the second half of the 1940s to the end of the 1970s the wave of decolonizations mainly in Africa, Asia and the Middle-East, and the victorious revolutions in China (1949) and Cuba (1959) led to the redeployment of some collective commons notably through the nationalizations of strategic infrastructures (Suez canal in 1956 by the Nasser regime) and commodities such as copper by Allende in the early 1970s and petroleum resources (Algeria, Libya, Iraq, Iran…).

This period of reaffirming collective commons is expressed in several United Nations documents from the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the 1986 Declaration on the Right of Development which in article 1 paragraph 2 affirms: “The human right to development also implies the full realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, which includes,(…) the exercise of their inalienable right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources.” [8] This inalienable right of peoples to full sovereignty over their resources is constantly challenged by the IMF, the World Bank and the majority of governments in the interests of big private corporations.

Concerning collective commons

In this article we will not establish a stricto sensodefinition of what are ‘collective commons’. The term will be used in a wide generic sense. This will include the collective ownership of lands which under different forms has marked the history of Humanity right up to the most recent concepts of ‘collective commons’; public services which are 20^th century social conquests won through social struggles and financed through taxation. ‘Collective commons’ also includes workers’ own solidarity structures that grew with early capitalism such as solidarity and strike funds, cooperatives, mutual loans, not forgetting more recent developments such as labour laws and welfare state structures won by the working classes during the 20^th century and analyzed in an original manner by Bernard Friot. [9] In a collective commons environment mercantile relations are either excluded or reduced to minimal proportions.

An extract of Jean-Marie Harribey’s book, La richesse, la valeur et l’inestimable suggests that the ever worsening ecological crises would stimulate renewed interest in the ’notion of the commons [arising] from the awareness of the existence of a common heritage of humanity and therefore of the need to preserve certain material resources (water, air, soil, forests, raw materials) and also immaterial resources (climate, knowledge, culture, health, financial stability, peace, etc.)”. [10]

The activity of social reproduction has also come to the forefront of concerns about the commons through the work of feminist movements. As Cinzia Arruzza, Tithi Bhattacharya and Nancy Fraser write in their manifesto Feminism for the 99%, [11] “Finally, capitalist society harbors a social-reproductive contradiction: a tendency to commandeer for capital’s benefit as much ’free’reproductive labor as possible, without any concern for its replenishment. As a result, it periodically gives rise to ’crises of care,’ which exhaust women, ravage families, and stretch social energies to the breaking point (page 65). The authors’ define social reproduction as follows “It encompasses activities that sustain human beings as embodied social beings who must not only eat and sleep but also raise their children, care for their families, and maintain their communities, all while pursuing their hopes for the future. These people-making activities occur in one form or another in every society. In capitalist societies, however, they must also serve another master, namely, capital, which requires that social-reproductive work produce and replenish ‘labor power’” (page 68).

What the authors add later on brings us closer to the situation highlighted by the current multidimensional crisis of capitalism and the coronavirus pandemic: ’[Capitalism assumes]that there will always be sufficient energies to produce the laborers and sustain the social connections on which economic production, and society more generally, depend. In fact, social-reproductive capacities are not infinite, and they can be stretched to the breaking point. When a society simultaneously withdraws public support for social reproduction and conscripts its chief providers into long and grueling hours of low-paid work, it depletes the very social capacities on which it relies. (page 73)

What is denounced in this passage allows us to better understand the fragility of capitalist society in the face of epidemics, the inability of governments to do what is necessary in time to best defend the population, the pressure put on workers in the essential and vital sectors to come to the aid of the population while, at the same time, as a result of the decisions of these same governments, they are underpaid, devalued and in insufficient numbers. The same can be said about the causes of the failure of governments to address the consequences of climate change and the under-equipment and lack of civil protection personnel in the face of increasingly frequent ’natural disasters’.

Public debt has been and still is systematically used as a means of grabbing commons

Since the 1970s public debt has systematically been used as a means of grabbing commons, as much in the North as in the South. The CADTM, along with other social movements, has not ceased to denounce this since the 1980s. We have devoted a dozen books [12] and several hundred articles to this issue. It is very satisfying to see that more and more writers are now highlighting the issue of debt as a weapon against public property. [13]

We cite once again Feminism for the 99%:

’Far from empowering states to stabilize social reproduction through public provision, it authorizes finance capital to discipline states and publics in the immediate interests of private investors. Its weapon of choice is debt. Finance capital lives off of sovereign debt, which it uses to outlaw even the mildest forms of social-democratic provision, coercing states to liberalize their economies, open their markets, and impose ’austerity’ on defenseless populations. (page 77)

All through the neoliberal offensive that has been the dominating ideological tendency since the 1980s, governments and different international institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF have insisted on the “duty” to repay external debt in order to generalize a tidal wave of privatizations of many countries’ strategic economic sectors, public services and natural resources, whether in developed countries or not. As a consequence, the previously existing tendency towards reinforcing collectivism has been reversed.

The list of assaults on public properties based on public debt is long. Some have accelerated the ecological crisis and the development of zoonoses: rapid deforestation, intensive animal farming and monocrops to gain foreign currencies in order to pay foreign debt, all of this in the framework of structural adjustmentpolicies induced by the, already ill mentioned World Bank and IMF.

Some of the political policies imposed through debt repayment obligations have seriously hindered the capacity of states and populations to deal with public health crises including the coronavirus pandemic: stagnation or reduction of public health budgets, imposing compliance to medical patents, renouncing the use of generic drugs, giving up producing medical equipment domestically, preferring private sector medical treatment and medicine distribution, suppressing free access to medical care in many countries, reducing the quality of working conditions in the medical sector and introducing the private sector into numerous essential public health services.

Already, over a century and a half ago Marx put it in a nutshell: “Public debt: the alienation of the state – whether despotic, constitutional or republican – marked with its stamp the capitalistic era”. [14] Once we have become aware of the way repayment of public debt is instrumentalised to impose mortal neoliberal capitalist policies, we know we must fight for the cancellation of illegitimate debt.

Coming next part 2: Knowledge appropriation and Big Pharma profits during the 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.

Translated by Mike Krolikowski and Christine Pagnoulle

This article was originally published on CADTM.

Eric Toussaint is a historian and political scientist who completed his Ph.D. at the universities of Paris VIII and Liège, is the spokesperson of the CADTM International, and sits on the Scientific Council of ATTAC France. He is the author of Debt System (Haymarket books, Chicago, 2019), Bankocracy (2015); The Life and Crimes of an Exemplary Man (2014); Glance in the Rear View Mirror. Neoliberal Ideology From its Origins to the Present, Haymarket books, Chicago, 2012 (see here), etc. See his bibliography. He co-authored World debt figures 2015 with Pierre Gottiniaux, Daniel Munevar and Antonio Sanabria (2015); and with Damien Millet Debt, the IMF, and the World Bank: Sixty Questions, Sixty Answers, Monthly Review Books, New York, 2010. He was the scientific coordinator of the Greek Truth Commission on Public Debt from April 2015 to November 2015.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

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.

***

Sides are forming around the Iran vs Azerbaijan squabble. But this fight is not about ethnicity, religion or tribe – it is mainly about who gets to forge the region’s new transportation routes.

The last thing the complex, work-in-progress drive towards Eurasian integration needs at this stage is this messy affair between Iran and Azerbaijan in the South Caucasus.

Let’s start with the Conquerors of Khaybar – the largest Iranian military exercise in two decades held on its northwestern border with Azerbaijan.

Among the deployed Iranian military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) units there are some serious players, such as the 21st Tabriz Infantry Division, the IRGC Ashura 31 battalion, the 65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade and an array of missile systems, including the Fateh-313 and Zulfiqar ballistic missiles with ranges of up to 700 kilometers.

The official explanation is that the drills are a warning to enemies plotting anything against the Islamic Republic.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei pointedly tweeted that “those who are under the illusion of relying on others, think that they can provide their own security, should know that they will soon take a slap, they will regret this.”

The message was unmistakable: this was about Azerbaijan relying on Turkey and especially Israel for its security, and about Tel Aviv instrumentalizing Baku for an intel drive leading to interference in northern Iran.

Further elaboration by Iranian experts went as far as Israel eventually using military bases in Azerbaijan to strike at Iranian nuclear installations.

The reaction to the Iranian military exercise so far is a predictable Turkey–Azerbaijani response: they are conducting a joint drill in Nakhchivan throughout this week.

But were Iran’s concerns off the mark? A close security collaboration between Baku and Tel Aviv has been developing for years now. Azerbaijan today possesses Israeli drones and is cozy with both the CIA and the Turkish military. Throw in the recent trilateral military drills involving Azerbaijan, Turkey and Pakistan – these are developments bound to raise alarm bells in Tehran.

Baku, of course, spins it in a different manner: Our partnerships are not aimed at third countries.

So, essentially, while Tehran accuses Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev of making life easy for Takfiri terrorists and Zionists, Baku accuses Tehran of blindly supporting Armenia. Yes, the ghosts of the recent Karabakh war are all over the place.

As a matter of national security, Tehran simply cannot tolerate Israeli companies involved in the reconstruction of regions won in the war near the Iranian border: Fuzuli, Jabrayil, and Zangilan.

Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdullahian has tried to play it diplomatically:

“Geopolitical issues around our borders are important for us. Azerbaijan is a dear neighbor to Iran and that’s why we don’t want it to be trapped between foreign terrorists who are turning their soil into a hotbed.”

As if this was not complicated enough, the heart of the matter – as with all things in Eurasia – actually revolves around economic connectivity.

An interconnected mess

Baku’s geoeconomic dreams are hefty: the capital city aims to position itself at the key crossroads of two of the most important Eurasian corridors: North-South and East-West.

And that’s where the Zangezur Corridor comes in – arguably essential for Baku to predominate over Iran’s East-West connectivity routes.

The corridor is intended to connect western Azerbaijan to the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic via Armenia, with roads and railways passing though the Zangezur region.

Zangezur is also essential for Iran to connect itself with Armenia, Russia, and further on down the road, to Europe.

China and India will also rely on Zangezur for trade, as the corridor provides a significant shortcut in distance. Considering large Asian cargo ships cannot sail the Caspian Sea, they usually waste precious weeks just to reach Russia.

An extra problem is that Baku has recently started harassing Iranian truckers in transit through these new annexed regions on their way to Armenia.

It didn’t have to be this way. This detailed essay shows how Azerbaijan and Iran are linked by “deep historical, cultural, religious, and ethno-linguistic ties,” and how the four northwestern Iranian provinces – Gilan, Ardabil, East Azerbaijan and West Azerbaijan – have “common geographical borders with both the main part of Azerbaijan and its exclave, the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic; they also have deep and close commonalities based on Islam and Shiism, as well as sharing the Azerbaijani culture and language. All this has provided the ground for closeness between the citizens of the regions on both sides of the border.”

During the Rouhani years, relations with Aliyev were actually quite good, including the Iran‑Azerbaijan‑Russia and Iran‑Azerbaijan‑Turkey trilateral cooperation.

A key connectivity at play ahead is the project of linking the Qazvin‑Rasht‑Astara railway in Iran to Azerbaijan: that’s part of the all-important International North‑South Transport Corridor (INSTC).

Geoeconomically, Azerbaijan is essential for the main railway that will eventually run from India to Russia. No only that; the Iran‑Azerbaijan‑Russia trilateral cooperation opens a direct road for Iran to fully connect with the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

In an optimal scenario, Baku can even help Iranian ports in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman to connect to Georgian ports in the Black Sea.

The West is oblivious to the fact that virtually all sections of the INSTC are already working. Take, for instance, the exquisitely named Astara‑Astara railway connecting Iranian and Azerbaijani cities that share the same name. Or the Rasht‑Qazvin railway.

But then one important 130km stretch from Astara to Rasht, which is on the southern shore of the Caspian and is close to the Iranian–Azeri border, has not been built. The reason? Trump-era sanctions. That’s a graphic example of how much, in real-life practical terms, rides on a successful conclusion of the JCPOA talks in Vienna.

Who owns Zangezur?

Iran is positioned in a somewhat tricky patch along the southern periphery of the South Caucasus. The three major players in that hood are of course Iran, Russia, and Turkey. Iran borders the former Armenian – now Azeri – regions adjacent to Karabakh, including Zangilan, Jabrayil and Fuzuli.

Source: The Cradle

It was clear that Iran’s flexibility on its northern border would be tied to the outcome of the Second Karabakh War. The northwestern border was a source of major concern, affecting the provinces of Ardabil and eastern Azerbaijan – which makes Tehran’s official position of supporting Azerbaijani over Armenian claims all the more confusing.

It is essential to remember that even in the Karabakh crisis in the early 1990s, Tehran recognized Nagorno‑Karabakh and the regions surrounding it as integral parts of Azerbaijan.

While both the CIA and Mossad appear oblivious to this recent regional history, it will never deter them from jumping into the fray to play Baku and Tehran against each other.

An extra complicating factor is that Zangezur is also mouth-watering from Ankara’s vantage point.

Arguably, Turkey’s neo-Ottoman President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who never shies away from an opportunity to expand his Turkic-Muslim strategic depth, is looking to use the Azeri connection in Zangezur to reach the Caspian, then Turkmenistan, all the way to Xinjiang, the Uyghur Muslim populated western territory of China. This, in theory, could become a sort of Turkish Silk Road bypassing Iran – with the ominous possibility of also being used as a rat line to export Takfiris from Idlib all the way to Afghanistan.

Tehran, meanwhile, is totally INSTC-driven, focusing on two railway lines to be rehabilitated and upgraded from the Soviet era. One is South-North, from Jolfa connecting to Nakhchivan and then onwards to Yerevan and Tblisi. The other is West-East, again from Jolfa to Nakhchivan, crossing southern Armenia, mainland Azerbaijan, all the way to Baku and then onward to Russia.

And there’s the rub. The Azeris interpret the tripartite document resolving the Karabakh war as giving them the right to establish the Zangezur corridor. The Armenians for their part dispute exactly which ‘corridor’ applies to each particular region. Before they clear up these ambiguities, all those elaborate Iranian and Tukish connectivity plans are effectively suspended.

The fact, though, remains that Azerbaijan is geoeconomically bound to become a key crossroads of trans-regional connectivity as soon as Armenia unblocks the construction of these transport corridors.

So which ‘win-win’ is it?

Will diplomacy win in the South Caucasus? It must. The problem is both Baku and Tehran frame it in terms of exercising their sovereignty – and don’t seem particularly predisposed to offer concessions.

Meanwhile, the usual suspects are having a ball exploiting those differences. War, though, is out of the question, either between Azerbaijan and Armenia or between Azerbaijan and Iran. Tehran is more than aware that in this case both Ankara and Tel Aviv would support Baku. It is easy to see who would profit from it.

As recently as April, in a conference in Baku, Aliyev stressed that

“Azerbaijan, Turkey, Russia and Iran share the same approach to regional cooperation. The main area of concentration now is transportation, because it’s a situation which is called ‘win‑win.’ Everybody wins from that.”

And that brings us to the fact that if the current stalemate persists, the top victim will be the INSTC. In fact, everyone loses in terms of Eurasian integration, including India and Russia.

The Pakistan angle, floated by a few in hush-hush mode, is completely far-fetched. There’s no evidence Tehran would be supporting an anti-Taliban drive in Afghanistan just to undermine Pakistan’s ties with Azerbaijan and Turkey.

The Russia–China strategic partnership looks at the current South Caucasus juncture as unnecessary trouble, especially after the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit. This badly hurts their complementary Eurasian integration strategies – the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Greater Eurasian Partnership.

INSTC could, of course, go the trans-Caspian way and cut off Azerbaijan altogether. This is not likely though. China’s reaction, once again, will be the deciding factor. There could be more emphasis on the Persian corridor – from Xinjiang, via Pakistan and Afghanistan, to Iran. Or Beijing could equally bet on both East-West corridors, that is, bet on both Azerbaijan and Iran.

The bottom line is that neither Moscow nor Beijing wants this to fester. There will be serious diplomatic moves ahead, as they both know the only ones to profit will be the usual NATO-centric suspects, and the losers will be all the players who are seriously invested in Eurasian integration.

*

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 Cradle.

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 is an from Editorial/Transcontinental Times

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.

***

Summary

The Medical Case, U.S.A. vs. Karl Brandt, et al. (also known as the Doctors’ Trial), was prosecuted in 1946-47 against twenty-three doctors and administrators accused of organizing and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the form of medical experiments and medical procedures inflicted on prisoners and civilians.

Physician and surgeon Karl Brandt, the lead defendant, was the senior medical official of the German government during World War II; other defendants included senior doctors and administrators in the armed forces and SS. Brandt had been appointed by Adolf Hitler to head the Euthanasia Program, Aktion T4. The defendants were indicted on four counts:

1. Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity;

2. War Crimes (I.E., Crimes Against Persons Protected by the Laws of War, Such as Prisoners of War);

3. Crimes Against Humanity (Including Persons Not Protected By The Laws Of War); and

4. Membership in a Criminal Organization (the SS).

Karl Brandt, the lead defendant, was the senior medical official of the German government during World War II; other defendants included senior doctors and administrators in the armed forces and SS.  See Harvard Documents

The specific crimes charged included more than twelve series of medical experiments concerning the effects of and treatments for high altitude conditions, freezing, malaria, poison gas, sulfanilamide, bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, bone transplantation, saltwater consumption, epidemic jaundice, sterilization, typhus, poisons, and incendiary bombs.

These experiments were conducted on concentration camp inmates. Other crimes involved the killing of Jews for anatomical research, the killing of tubercular Poles, and the euthanasia of sick and disabled civilians in Germany and occupied territories. The defendants were charged with ordering, supervising, or coordinating criminal activities, as well as participating in them directly. The fourth count concerned membership in the SS (Schuttzstaffeln) of the Nazi regime.

Brandt on trial, 20 August 1947 (Public Domain)

Karl Brandt and six other defendants were convicted, sentenced to death, and executed; nine defendants were convicted and sentenced to terms in prison; and seven defendants were acquitted.

The material presented in this project includes case file documents (the briefs and document books created and used in the course of the trial), evidence file documents (the evidentiary documents from which the prosecution, and occasionally the defendants, derived their exhibits), and the trial transcript.

The trial documents and evidence file documents related to Case 1 amount to approximately 2800 documents and 13,000 pages of material.

Indictments – (25 Oct. 1946)

Four Counts:

1. Conspiracy to commit war crimes against humanity: The ordering, planning, and organization of the war crimes and crimes against humanity charged in counts two and three. Charged against all of the defendants. The tribunal decided not to convict on this charge.
2. War crimes: Charged against all defendants. 15 guilty, 8 acquitted.
3. Crimes against humanity: Charged against all defendants. 15 guilty, 8 acquitted.
4. Membership in a criminal organization:  Membership in the SS. Charged against K. Brandt, Genzken, Gebhardt, R. Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Brack, Hoven, and Fischer. All found guilty.

Human Experiments and Other “Medical” Crimes (itemized in counts 2 and 3):

1. High-altitude experiments. March – August 1942. Conducted for the German air force to investigate the effect of high-altitude flying; experiments were conducted at the Dachau camp using a low-pressure chamber. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Romberg, Ruff, Schroeder, Sievers, and Weltz. Charges against K. Brandt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, and Poppendick were withdrawn. R. Brandt and Sievers were convicted.
2. Freezing experiments. August 1942 – May 1943. Conducted primarily for the German air force to investigate treatments for persons who had been severely chilled, using prisoners at the Dachau camp. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Schroeder, Sievers, and Weltz. Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, Gebhardt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, and Weltz were acquitted; R. Brandt, Handloser, Schroeder, and Sievers were convicted.
3. Malaria experiments. February 1942 – April 1945. Conducted to test immunization for and treatment of malaria; experiments were conducted on more than 1000 prisoners at Dachau. Charged against Blome, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Rostock, and Sievers. (Evidence was also presented against Rose, but no judgment was reached.) No judgment was made concerning Mrugowsky. Blome, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Poppendick, and Rostock were acquitted; Sievers was convicted.
4. Mustard (“lost”) gas experiments. September 1939 – April 1945. Conducted for the benefit of the German armed forces to investigate treatment of injuries caused by Lost (mustard) gas; experiments were conducted at Sachsenhausen, Natzweiler, and other camps. Charged against Blome, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Rostock, and Sievers. Blome, Gebhardt, Handloser, and Rostock were acquitted; K. Brandt, R. Brandt, and Sievers were convicted.
5. Sulfanilamide experiments. July 1942 – September 1943. Conducted for the benefit of the German armed forces to test the effectiveness of sulfanilamide and other drugs as treatments for infected wounds; experiments were conducted at Ravensbrueck. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, Blome, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Genzken, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Oberheuser, Poppendick, Rostock, and Schroeder. Charges against Becker-Freyseng, Blome, and Schroeder were withdrawn. No judgment was reached concerning R. Brandt. Genzken, Poppendick, and Rostock were acquitted; K. Brandt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, and Oberheuser were convicted.
6. Bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, and bone transplant experiments. September 1942 – December 1943. Conducted for benefit of German armed forces, using Polish inmates at the Ravensbrueck camp. Charged against K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Handloser, Oberheuser, and Rostock. Charge against R. Brandt withdrawn. K. Brandt, Handloser, and Rostock were acquitted; Fischer, Gebhardt, and Oberheuser were convicted.
7. Seawater experiments. July – September 1944. Conducted for the German air force and navy to test methods of making seawater drinkable; experiments were conducted at Dachau. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, Beiglboeck, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Rostock, Schaefer, Schroeder, and Sievers. The charge against Mrugowsky was withdrawn. K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Handloser, Poppendick, Rostock, and Schaefer were acquitted; Becker-Freyseng, Beiglboeck, Gebhardt, Schroeder, and Sievers were convicted.
8. Epidemic jaundice experiments. June 1943 – January 1945. Conducted for the benefit of the German armed forcesto investigate causes of and inoculations against epidemic jaundice; experiments were conducted on Polish prisoners at Sachsenhausen and Natzweiler camps. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Rose, Rostock, Schroeder, and Sievers. Charges against Becker-Freyseng, Rose, and Sievers were withdrawn. R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Rostock, and Schroeder were acquitted; K. Brandt was convicted.
9. Typhus (“spotted fever”) and other vaccine experiments. December 1941 – February 1945. Conducted for the benefit of the German armed forces to test the effectiveness of vaccines against typhus, smallpox, cholera, and other diseases; experiments were conducted at Buchenwald and Natzweiler. Charged against Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Genzken, Handloser, Hoven, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Rose, Rostock, Schroeder, and Sievers. Becker-Freyseng, K. Brandt, Gebhardt, Poppendick, and Rostock were acquitted; R. Brandt, Genzken, Handloser, Hoven, Mrugowsky, Rose, Schroeder, and Sievers were convicted.
10. Poison experiments. December 1943 and September – October 1944. Conducted to investigate the effect of various poisons, including poison in food and poisoned bullets; experiments were conducted at Buchenwald (food) and Sachsenhausen (bullets). Charged against Gebhardt, Genzken, Mrugowsky, and Poppendick. Gebhardt, Genzken, and Poppendick were acquitted; Mrugowsky was convicted.
11. Incendiary bomb experiments. November 1943 – January 1944. Conducted to test pharmaceutical treatments for phosphorus burns; experiments were conducted at Buchenwald, involving the infliction of burns by materials from incendiary bombs. Charged against Gebhardt, Genzken, Mrugowsky, and Poppendick. All were acquitted.
12. Sterilization experiments. March 1941 – January 1945. Conducted to develop methods of rapid, large scale sterilization in order to ensure the eventual elimination of “enemy” populations while keeping captive workers as a labor force during the war. Experiments were planned and/or conducted at Auschwitz, Ravensbrueck, and elsewhere employing drugs, x-rays, and surgery. Charged against Brack, K. Brandt, R. Brandt, Gebhardt, Mrugowsky, Oberheuser, Pokorny, and Poppendick. The charges against Mrugowsky and Oberheuser were withdrawn. K. Brandt, Pokorny, and Poppendick were acquitted; Brack, R. Brandt, and Gebhardt were convicted.
13. Skeleton collection. June 1943 – September 1944. Conducted to complete a skeleton collection for an anatomical research project at the Reich University of Strasbourg; one hundred twelve Jews at Auschwitz were killed for the purpose. Charged against R. Brandt and Sievers; both were convicted.
14. Tubercular Polish nationals. May 1942 – January 1944. Polish nationals alleged to have incurable tuberculosis were imprisoned or killed on the pretext of protecting the health of Germans in Poland. Charged against Blome and R. Brandt; both were acquitted.
15. Euthanasia. September 1939 – April 1945. Involved the secret killing of the aged, insane, incurably ill, deformed children, and others, beginning at asylums in Germany and later in the camps and occupied territories. Charged against Blome, Brack, K. Brandt, and Hoven. Blome was acquitted; Brack, K. Brandt, and Hoven were convicted.

Other charges:

16. Phenol (gas oedema) experiments. 1942 – 1944. Conducted to investigate whether levels of phenol in gas oedema serum caused fatalities among wounded soldiers; experiments were conducted on prisoners at Buchenwald. Charged against Handloser, Hoven, and Mrugowsky. Handloser was acquitted; Hoven and Mrugowsky were convicted.
17. Phlegmon experiments. 1942. Conducted to test treatments for sepsis and related diseases, in coordination with sulfanilamide experiments at Ravensbrueck; experiments were conducted at Dachau and Auschwitz. Charged against Fischer, Oberheuser, and Poppendick; all were acquitted.
18. Polygal experiments. 1943 – 1944. Conducted to test the effectiveness of polygal, a blood coagulant, for the treatment of wounds. Charged against Blome, Handloser, Poppendick, and Sievers. Blome, Handloser, and Poppendick were acquitted; Sievers was convicted.
19. Planning, organization, and administration (of 1-15 above)
20. Conspiracy: Count 1.
21. Membership: Count 4.

The Nuremberg Code (1947)

Permissible Medical Experiments

See this.

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

*

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 Gary G. Kohls is a retired American family physician who practiced holistic (non-drug) mental health care during the last decade of his professional career. His patients came to see him asking for help in getting off the psychotropic drugs to which they were addicted and which they knew had sickened them and disabled their brains and bodies.

Dr Kohls lives in Duluth, MN, USA and writes articles that deal with the dangers of American fascism, corporatism, militarism, racism, malnutrition, Big Pharma’s psychiatric drugging and over-vaccination agendas, and other movements that threaten the environment, prosperity, democracy, civility and the health and longevity of the planet and the populace.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Dr Kohls’ Duty to Warn columns have been archived at a number of websites around the world, including the following:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/gary-g-kohls;

http://freepress.org/geographic-scope/national;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/author/gary-g-kohls/?ptype=article; and

https://www.transcend.org/tms/author/?a=Gary%20G.%20Kohls,%20MD

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.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.

***

For weeks, Iran has been concentrating troops and heavy vehicles on its border with Azerbaijan as tensions continue to mount. Participating in military exercises on the Azerbaijani border include several infantry, special forces and armored units, as well as several fighter jets, helicopters and missile systems.

The “Conquerors of Khaybar”, the name given to the military exercise, is a reference to a battle fought by Muhammed, the founder of Islam, against the Jews in 628 CE. This is an obvious reference to the close relationship Azerbaijan has with Israel. Not only does Azerbaijan acquire Israeli weapons, many of which were used against the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, but Mossad has a legal right to operate in the Caucasian country as part of their spying and espionage acts against Iran.

In response, the Azeris announced joint military exercises with Turkey between October 5 and 8, dubbed “Indestructible Brotherhood 2021.” Officially, the maneuvers are to improve cooperation and coordination between the land forces of Turkey and Azerbaijan, but it’s also a supposed message towards Iran that Azerbaijan is not alone. In fact, Azerbaijan is so confident that a lawmaker even quipped that Pakistan’s army would invade Tehran if it made any hostile move against Baku, while another lawmaker threatened to cut Iran’s tail.

Tensions between Iran and Azerbaijan have been building for months now, with no signs that relations are improving or stabilizing. On October 5, Azerbaijan closed down the office of the Iranian spiritual leader in Baku, a significant move when remembering that only Iran, Azerbaijan, Iraq and Bahrain are Shi’te-majority countries out of the 50 Muslim-majority countries across the world.

Closing down of the Iranian spiritual leader’s office in Baku was in response to Iran closing its airspace to the Azerbaijani Air Force. This is a major move as flying over Iranian airspace was the most direct route to carry military reinforcements and supplies to the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic from Azerbaijan proper. Both Azerbaijani territories are separated by Armenia’s Syunik Province, hence why the Iranian flight route was needed. However, for Azerbaijan to reach its detached autonomous region, it now must take an extended bypassed route over Georgia and Turkey. The move by Iran now adds extended travel time, something that would be catastrophic if a war broke out.

Moreover, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, tweeted on Sunday: “Those who, under the illusion of relying on others, think that they can provide security, know that they will be slapped soon.” The tweet also comes as news emerged that Azerbaijan will soon acquire a batch of Israeli-made Arrow 3 anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense missiles.

After rhetorically supporting last year’s joint Azerbaijani-Turkish invasion of Nagorno-Karabakh in a gross miscalculation on the intentions and purposes of the war, Tehran is now exerting pressure on the ongoing attempts to close the trade corridor between Iran and Armenia. Azerbaijani authorities recently announced that Iranian trucks heading to the Armenian capital of Yerevan, in addition to paying a transit fee of $300, will not be able to travel at night, but only during the day. Following the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, Azerbaijan captured a part of the road that links Iran to Yerevan, hence why Iranian Deputy Transportation Minister Kheirollah Khademi visited Armenia on Monday to express Tehran’s financial and technical support for a 400-kilometer transit road linking the Iranian border crossing at Nordooz to Yerevan, bypassing Azerbaijani-held territories.

From the Iranian perspective, assisting Armenia now is also a part of their conflict with Israel, a country that Yerevan has never had good relations with, unlike Baku. According to Tehran, Israel has four bases in Azerbaijan. Even though Israel denies having its own bases there, the Jewish state actually considers Azerbaijan as a part of its peripheral strategy – establishing alliances with countries close to enemy states.

This flurry of exchanges between Iran and Armenia, despite the former strongly backing Azerbaijan rhetorically during last year’s war, is undoubtedly due to the complex dynamics created by Turkey’s pursuit of an ideologically syncretic neo-Ottoman and pan-Turkic foreign policy. The Turks, along with cultural and linguistic affinities, are also motivated to strengthen their relations with Azerbaijan so they can collaborate in the energy field and establish trade corridors with Central Asia.

The confrontation between Iran and Azerbaijan can easily involve not only the Turks, but also the Israelis in a more meaningful way beyond weapon sales and intelligence exchanges. Tehran is taking a huge risk by threatening war with Azerbaijan as it could reignite the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh and draw in Armenia, Turkey and perhaps even Pakistan.

At the same time, despite all of Azerbaijan’s bravado and confidence after defeating a weak Armenian military with the assistance of Turkey and Syrian mercenaries, it is unlikely that Ankara will allow a war to occur as they recognize and understand Iran’s military might. While Baku is full of arrogance after last year’s victory, Turkey is struggling to keep its economy afloat while maintaining its various military operations across the region. For this reason, it is unlikely that a war between Iran and Azerbaijan will breakout as Turkey, which has de facto control over large parts of the Azerbaijani military, will not allow its ally to provoke a war in the same way they did with Armenia. Unlike Baku, Ankara understands that Iranian power is incomparable to Armenia’s.

*

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

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Featured image: Iran’s national army began exercises near its border with Azerbaijan, October 1, 2021. (Credit Image: © Iranian Army Office via ZUMA)

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.

***

While India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar is doing a masterly job to canvass support for the Biden Administration’s project to delay any constructive engagement with the Taliban Government in Kabul by the international community until Washington gets its act together, on a parallel track, the Anglo-American axis has been working systematically to re-engage the Taliban. read more 

In this connection, the overnight trip by the UK Minister for the Armed Forces, James Heappey to Uzbekistan on September 21-22 was actually a working visit to put in place the logistics for a sustainable engagement with the Taliban Government. The US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman swiftly followed it up this week in Tashkent. read more 

Heappey made a ‘field trip’ to Termez where a massive Soviet era air base is located (from where the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was staged in 1980.) The intention seems to have been to assess the possible use of Termez to open a ‘humanitarian corridor’ towards Afghanistan. 

There is a huge groundswell of opinion in the world community, repeatedly highlighted by the UN agencies and Secretary-General António Guterres in the recent weeks, that a humanitarian catastrophe is unfolding in real time in Afghanistan. For the Biden Administration, which is already badly wounded by the clumsy evacuation at Kabul Airport, this looming humanitarian crisis has the explosive potential to damage its reputation further. 

Suffice to say, the US and the UK are positioning themselves to spearhead a humanitarian aid programme that in political terms would also inevitably open the pathway to their engagement with the Taliban Government. The idea is to ‘normalise’ the relations with the Taliban at a working level and build mutual trust to a point from where formal diplomatic recognition of the government in Kabul can follow as a logical step sooner rather than later. 

Interestingly, there are some indications already that the Biden Administration is distancing itself from the previous Afghan ambassador in Washington Adela Raz who was appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government.  

Fundamentally, Washington and London have decided that it is possible to do business with the Taliban Government. At the root of this is their strategic assessment that there is no better way to address the security threat emanating from from the ISIS and other terrorist groups present in Afghanistan than by co-opting the Taliban Government, given the fact that Taliban and ISIS are mortal enemies of each other. read more

In the weekend, in fact, Taliban destroyed a major hideout of the ISIS in Charikar town to the north of Kabul. Second, any independent counter-terrorist operations by the US or the UK on Afghan soil will be firmly opposed by the Taliban as an attack on their country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. That is to say, the US and the UK would risk getting entangled in a confrontation with the Taliban, which is not only futile but can be counterproductive as it could destabilise Afghanistan and create conducive ground for the ISIS to exploit. 

Third, the fact of the matter is that the Taliban is a known entity for the Western intelligence agencies over the past many years, and rhetoric apart, western capitals have a positive impression about the Taliban’s pragmatic outlook and their eagerness to integrate into the western world. 

Of course, Western experts do not share the one-dimensional view of the Taliban that the Indian establishment propagates, namely, that they are a mere Pakistani proxy without an Afghan identity of their own. 

Fourth, the Western assessment is that it is unwise to let the Taliban become utterly dependent on the regional states surrounding Afghanistan — Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan — in the prevailing international climate of big power rivalry in new cold war conditions. 

Fifth, while the esoteric of ‘Afghan resistance’ is intoxicating to the uninformed mind, the cold professional assessment in knowledgable quarters is that the Taliban rule in Afghanistan is a compelling reality that cannot be ignored and the regime is consolidating in that country. Other thanks the maverick leadership in Tajikistan, no one thinks that The Taliban government is in any danger of being overthrown. read more

That is to say, realistically speaking, there is no alternative to doing business with the Taliban government, and the earlier the contacts in such a direction are initiated, the more productive it will be for both sides. The spectre of refugee flow from Afghanistan is indeed haunting the Western world. 

All these multiple considerations have prompted the visit by the UK Prime Minister’s special representative on Afghanistan Sir Simon Gass (concurrently the chairman of the UK Joint Intelligence Committee and formerly British ambassador to Iran) to Kabul earlier today to make the first direct contact with the Taliban government. 

Sir Simon was accompanied by Martin Longden, the C’dA in the British Embassy in Kabul (which is now relocated to Doha). The two British diplomats were received by the Taliban Foreign Khan Amir Khan Muttaqi.

The British side later tweeted that Sir Simon had “serious and substantial discussions with Muttaqi. A wide range of issues covered — including the humanitarian crisis, terrorism, the importance of safe passage for UK & Afghan nationals, and rights of women and girls.” A UK readout subsequently  said the British envoys also met the two deputy prime ministers of The Taliban government Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar Akhund and Mawlawi Abdul-Salam Hanafi.

It added, “Sir Simon and Dr Longden discussed how the UK could help Afghanistan to address the humanitarian crisis, the importance of preventing the country from becoming an incubator for terrorism, and the need for continued safe passage for those who want to leave the country. They also raised the treatment of minorities and the rights of women and girls. The government continues to do all it can to ensure safe passage for those who wish to leave, and is committed to supporting the people of Afghanistan.” Conceivably, a reopening of the UK embassy in a near future — or some form of British presence in Kabul — cannot be ruled out. 

The Allies Sculpture: Life sized bronze statues of Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill sitting on a bench in New Bond Street, London, reminding the world of the shared history of the two great powers.

There is no gainsaying the fact that as often in modern history, the US and the UK are moving in tandem. Presidents and prime ministers come and go but the ‘special relationship’ is alive and thriving! read more

Without doubt, Sir Simon’s mission had the full backing of the Biden Administration.. With Sir Simon flying into Kabul, the first move in the new great game begins in Afghanistan as a template of the so-called ‘strategic competition’ — to borrow the expression from the Biden Administration — involving the US, Russia and China.

This audacious British move cutting through the shibboleths of vitriolic rhetoric over the DNA of the Afghan Taliban would have taken Moscow and Beijing by surprise. Who’s afraid of recognising the Taliban government, after all?

It is a stark warning that the war in Afghanistan has mutated into a newer form of the 19th century great game. Only yesterday, there were rumours swirling in the Kremlin media that Chinese planes had landed in Bagram air base.

*

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: Sir Simon Gass, British Prime Minister’s representative on Afghanistan, seated second from left, with Taliban Foreign Minister Mullah Amir Khan Muttaqi, Kabul, October 5, 2021. (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.

***

Last night Alex Jones of Infowars.com did a special broadcast regarding an October, 2019 video that they had just become aware of that was a panel discussion hosted by the Milken Institute discussing the need for a Universal Flu Vaccine.

The video clip that they played of this event was a 1 minute and 51 second dialogue between the moderator, Michael Specter, a journalist who is a New Yorker staff writer and also an adjunct professor of bioengineering at Stanford University, Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Rick Bright, the director of HHS Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).

In this short clip, which was extracted from the hour-long panel discussion, Anthony Fauci explains that bringing a new, untested kind of vaccine like an mRNA vaccine, would take at least a decade (“if everything goes perfectly”) to go through proper trials and be approved by the FDA.

He would know, because he had been trying to do it for about a decade already by then (October, 2019), trying to develop an mRNA based vaccine for HIV.

But now they were discussing something much bigger than just a vaccine for AIDS patients. They are talking about a “Universal Flu Vaccine” that everyone would have to take – a huge market for Big Pharma!

Rick Bright, the director of HHS Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), then speaks and states that what could happen is that “an entity of excitement that is completely disruptive and is not beholden to bureaucratic strings and processes” could change that.

Here is the short clip which I put on our Bitchute and Rumble channels last night:

Alex Jones spent over 50 minutes covering this on his show last night, and it looks like he covered it on his show today as well.

I have not had a chance to watch these yet, as I went and found the original 1 hour panel discussion video, and spent the day listening to and analyzing that, so that I could supply this report to our readers.

Joining Fauci, Rick Bright, and Michael Specter at this event were:

• Margaret Hamburg, Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Medicine
• Bruce Gellin, President, Global Immunization, Sabin Vaccine Institute
• Casey Wright, CEO, FluLab

In short, this panel discussion focused on what they perceived as the need for a universal flu vaccine, but they admitted that the old way of producing vaccines was not sufficient for their purposes, and that they needed some kind of global event where many people were dying to be able to roll out a new mRNA vaccine to be tested on the public.

They all agreed that the annual flu virus was not scary enough to create an event that would convince people to get a universal vaccine.

And as we now know today, about 2 years after this event, that “terrifying virus” that was introduced was the COVID-19 Sars virus.

And so now we know why the flu just “disappeared” in the 2020-21 flu season. It was simply replaced by COVID-19, in a worldwide cleverly planned “pandemic” to roll out the world’s first universal mRNA vaccines.

This was always the goal, and previous efforts through various influenzas, AIDS, Ebola, and other “viruses” were all unsuccessful in leading to the development of a universal vaccine to inject into the entire world’s population.

Margaret Hamburg stated regarding getting a “Universal Vaccine” into the market:

“It’s time to stop talking, and it’s time to act.”

“I think it is also because we haven’t had a sense of urgency.”

Michael Specter asks:

“Do we need lots of people to die for that sense of urgency to occur?”

Hamburg replies that: “There are already lots of people dying” from the flu each year.

Bruce Gellin states that basically people just are not afraid enough of the term “the flu.”

There are so many things that are revealed about how Big Pharma and government health authorities think in this panel discussion. For example, they bemoan the fact that if they do too good of a job in public health, then they lose funding to develop products that fight viruses.

Michael Specter states: “It seems to me that one of the curses of the public health world is, if you guys do your job well, everyone goes along well and healthy.”

Hamburg: “And they cut your funding.”

Rick Bright complains that the yearly distribution of flu vaccines is inefficient in terms of collecting data, and in the process actually admits that some vaccines just don’t work well:

“We distribute 150 million doses of the seasonal (flu) vaccines every year, we don’t even know how many people are being vaccinated from the doses that are delivered to the people, which doses they got, and what the real outcome was, so that we can learn from that knowledge base on how to optimize or improve our vaccine. So there are opportunities that we have today…

I think if we uncloaked the poorest performing vaccines in the market place today, it might be very revealing to tell us which of the technologies we have, and allow us to go deeper into those technologies to determine why they are more effective. There are vaccines licenses today that are more effective. I think that we’re just afraid to admit the truth.”

So much for the public mantra that is espoused by Big Pharma and government that the “science” of vaccines is “settled,” and that they are completely “safe and effective.”

Casey Wright repeats the mantra that was publicized every year, before COVID, about just how deadly the flu virus was: “650,000 people die every year from the flu.”

As we have documented many times over the past decade here at Health Impact News, this is simply not true. This is an estimate because actual laboratory confirmed cases of influenza each year are very small, probably less than 1000 in the U.S.

Most flu-like symptoms are never tested in a lab to determine what is causing the symptoms. They were always just classified as “flu” to inflate the numbers to justify the very profitable flu shot each year. Some of our previous coverage of this issue: CDC Inflates Flu Death Stats to Sell More Flu Vaccines, Did 80,000 People Really Die from the Flu Last Year? Inflating Flu Death Estimates to Sell Flu Shots

So as they have inflated the COVID-19 cases since last year, they are simply continuing their policy of inflating flu numbers each year in order to sell their vaccines. They obviously could not have done both last year, as the public would have quickly seen that the math doesn’t work.

And yet, so many in the public bought the lie that the COVID-19 measures got rid of the flu, but not COVID-19.

Ultimately, this panel discussion can be boiled down to: Nobody wants to fund research for a universal flu vaccine. So how do we change that? Create a pandemic of fear over the flu (but they couldn’t call it the “flu” because people are no longer afraid of influenza, and the fear over “AIDS” had also subsided).

Fauci then addressed this “perception problem.”

There’s this perception (about the flu), if it’s so serious, how come people get the flu each year and it isn’t a catastrophe?

When you’re dealing with a disease like HIV, if you get HIV, it’s serious. Whether you’re young, whether you’re middle aged, or whether you’re old. If you get cancer, that’s bad. Whether you’re young, whether it’s intermediate… whereas if it’s influenza, some people, they go throughout life and it doesn’t impact them at all.

There isn’t anyone who is afraid of influenza. You go into a focus group and you say: Are you afraid of getting HIV if you’re at risk? Oh, absolutely.

Are you afraid of getting cancer? Absolutely. Are you afraid of the flu? Don’t bother me.

That’s the reality of how people perceive flu.

And it is going to be very difficult to change that, unless you do it from within and say, I don’t care what your perception is, we’re going to address the problem, in a disruptive way….

Specter then asks:

In the long run, over time, if the 2009 pandemic had been much more deadly, would that have ended up being a better thing for humanity?

Everyone is silent as they obviously were thinking about how to answer that, and Specter says: “Come on gang.”

Fauci ultimately answers and says “No” because there were other years that were worse than 2009 and it didn’t change a thing in terms of creating a universal vaccine.

Hamburg then states:

The sad truth is that when there is a major crisis, it focuses attention and usually resources and some significant mobilization follows.

We need, #1, this time to be different, and we also need to really organize ourselves in a way where there will be accountability for sustained action, and not just response.

Specter states:

Craig Venter, who is a controversial person, but interesting to me, has written that he thinks we ought to have a vaccine, such that, if you take off in a plane from Hong Kong, and are infected, by the time your plane lands in New York, there ought to be a vaccine assembled and deliverable to you.

How crazy is that? How far are we from that? Are we ever going to get there?

Bright replies:

I’m not going to say how far away, but I don’t think that’s too crazy.

I think that if we move towards the era of synthetic-based vaccines, I think we remove the dependencies of thinking the vaccine has to be grown into something else, an egg, a cell, or insect cell – any type of dependency embryo.

If we can move into more synthetic, the nucleic acid based, messenger RNA based, those sequences can be rapidly shared around the world.

He then goes on to talk about using a 3D printer to print out a “vaccine patch” that people use to administer the “vaccine.”

We also learn in this panel discussion why Anthony Fauci is so opposed to natural immunity, because natural immunity for influenza, according to his view, translates to an immune response against other strains of a particular influenza virus, which will interfere with what they are trying to do with the vaccines.

That is why he wants to inject infants as young as 6 months old with a universal vaccine, as he states here, to prevent that “confused” natural immunity from happening before the child grows older.

So the big question that this panel was tackling, was how do they implement their strategies, and what is holding them back?

Certainly the government/regulatory issue is a big one, and now two years later we can see exactly how they did that, by controlling the FDA and the CDC to promote the “killer virus pandemic” narrative as long as possible to justify taking emergency measures that short-cut the normal procedures for bringing novel, new drugs to the market.

It also clearly explains the vicious opposition to existing, cheap therapeutics that very easily treated what is really just the seasonal flu “virus,” which stood in their way of rolling out a universal vaccine.

Casey Wright then made a rather remarkable comment about “philanthropy” and its role in this effort:

There’s a potential role for philanthropy to play there… we are in a position to take on a little more risk (she smiles eerily as she says this), to be open to a little bit more experimentation and methods in how we do things. That’s what I think is unique about FluLab, and is unique about other philanthropies.

I think they can play a really important role there, and fund a set of bolder, maybe earlier promising concepts.

Bingo! Think Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and other “philanthropies” that are “unburdened” by regulatory issues as they spend their money pretty much unchecked, with no accountability, all in the name of “science” and the “greater good.”

We have seen most certainly how the Gates Foundation has done this in India by luring poor people into highly questionable ethical experimentations on vaccines, such as the Gardasil vaccine which we have covered so often over the years here at Health Impact News.

Bruce Gellin then talks about a report published by his organization that called for an “entity” that would make these decisions and bring everyone together to collaborate to create this universal vaccine, and eliminate those who oppose.

The report was published in 2019, and here is the press release.

He states:

They called for this “entity” which is the collaboration we talked about. They called for the need to infuse innovation, to find some of these people who we don’t know might be part of the problem to come into this. And to try to think about how we talk about this differently so that your stomach flu doesn’t keep us from making progress. (everyone laughs…)

I assume that this “entity” is Gellin’s group, The Sabin-Aspen Vaccine Science & Policy Group.

Today, this is the main group fighting “vaccine hesitancy” and trying to silence any dissenting voices that get in their way of rolling out this universal vaccine, which of course we now know is the COVID-19 vaccine.

Online Misinformation about Vaccines

Watch the entire panel discussion to learn just how arrogant these people are. This is on our Bitchute and Rumble channels.

Your Life Only has Value as a Lab Rat to These Satanic Tyrants

This is one of the most explosive videos I have ever watched that takes us into the mindset of the Globalist Tyrants and their greedy desire to control the human race by means of vaccines.

As you watch this, you need to ask yourself: Who appointed these people as caretakers of humanity to decide what is good for the entire human race?

At the very core of this problem of medical tyranny is a fundamental difference of how one views life.

This panel represents the Luciferian, Satanic worldview that completely excludes God as the Creator of Life.

When they talk about the “deficiencies” of natural immunity, this is a direct Satanic attack on the human race, created in God’s image, and this has always been the case behind the “science” of vaccines.

This worldview represented by this panel believes that they are a higher form of life that can dictate to the masses how to live their lives, because these people honestly believe that they are tasked with saving humanity, and saving the planet, and that everyone else is too ignorant to make these decisions.

They are psychopaths driven by greed and the desire to control. We only see their public side, but they are human beings just like everyone else, and if we could see how they live outside of their public life, they would probably never be able to maintain their positions of power, because it would be plain to see just how evil they are.

Look at Anthony Fauci, for example. Does he look like an 80-year-old man? What does he do to stay looking so young?

We know that the rich and famous are addicted to pursuing youth and maintaining their power, and that many do so by consuming “young blood,” the blood taken from young people, including what is reportedly the very addictive drug “adrenochrome” harvested from babies just before they are executed. See: “Young Blood” – The Emerging Market for Products Made from the Blood of Children

They think nothing of people dying in mass for the sake of “science” and developing their universal vaccines. This universal vaccine is something they have worked on for decades now, and their dreams are finally coming to fruition through COVID-19.

I have been covering this issue for over a decade now, and nothing in this panel discussion surprised me at all.

The only way to control the global population for their own agendas is to control their health, and they have learned after decades of failure that it is nearly impossible to develop a biological weapon capable of infecting and spreading through the entire population.

The reason for this is because God’s natural immune system is just too strong, as it adapts and overcomes these diseases, as a built-in safe guard for the human race.

I would suspect that pretty much ALL of the past historical “pandemics” have been failed biological weapon programs that they have tried to develop. In the end, they have learned that the only way to infect everyone on the face of the earth, is to inject them with a poison via vaccines.

This has ALWAYS been the goal of the vaccine movement, even if most in the movement were not aware of it, and were foolish enough to believe that vaccines actually conferred health upon people.

REAL health is not something that can be purchased from “health authorities.” It is a free gift given to us by our Creator, and the most healthy people on the planet today are those very few individuals who recognize this truth, and stay as far away from pharmaceutical products as they can knowing they are poisons, and make every effort to eat clean, whole foods as God created them, and breathe fresh air, something that is getting more and more difficult to do as they pollute the atmosphere with their chemicals in geoengineering.

There are “natural medicines” that God has supplied us to use when our immune system is not balanced properly, and they are found in nature and generally available to all, because they cannot be patented, since they are God-made, and not man-made.

We must resist these Satanic tyrants! Your health is the most important thing God has given to you. Without your health, you are at their mercy and enslaved by their medical system.

Without your health you cannot love your spouse, you cannot produce children, you cannot live your life to its fullest and accomplish the purpose that God placed you on this earth to accomplish.

The mark of the beast prophesied in the Bible that is necessary to take in order to participate in the economy is here, and it is the COVID-19 vaccine, and this video is just further proof to this fact.

*

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.

***

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 years now, and in response to similar projects at central banks in Europe and – more importantly – China with the PBOC, the Fed has been hemming and hawing about whether to take the possibility of creating a “FedCoin” more seriously.

Senior officials have been pretty tetchy about carefully weighing the “pros and cons” of a system that  would, in theory, enable the Fed to deposit money directly into the ‘digital wallets’ of regular Americans, a power that could ultimately render the entire private banking system obsolete.

And so, as we wait for the Fed to take the next tenuous steps toward developing a CBDC, WSJ has offered yet another leak confirming that the Fed is finally ready to release its official ‘report’ on CBDCs, which will serve as the start of a long-promised “review” of the pros and cons of CBDCs that’s supposed to allow for public feedback. The report could drop “as early as this week”.

Some more compassionate proponents of a FedCoin argue it could create a kind of “parallel” system where the Fed would be able to directly and easily dispense FedCoins to the public (the ideal of “helicopter money”, finally achieved), without relying on banks or the IRS as intermediaries, which could make delivering this type of aid faster and cheaper. It could also offer a more “efficient” avenue for distributing welfare or financial aid (that is, unless the Fed chose to distribute FedCoin through financial intermediaries instead of sending them directly from the Fed to the American people.

It could also be the greatest weapon in the war to make cash obsolete.

But within the Fed, the drive to create a “FedCoin” is primarily rooted in the fear that not having a central bank digital currency could potentially threaten the dollar’s dominance in the global financial system. In that respect, it’s like any other technological arms race.

Here’s more on that from Fed Governor Lael Brainard:

“It’s just very hard for me to imagine that the US, given the status of the dollar as a dominant currency in international payments, wouldn’t come to the table in that circumstance with a similar kind of an offering,” she said.

Chairman Powell has done his best to push for caution, arguing that it’s more important to “get it right” than be “first to market”. Put another way: who cares if the PBOC roles out the “e-RMB” first? The dollar’s role in the global financial system is much greater, which means the US is obligated to proceed with more trepidation.

Powell and others have said repeatedly that the Fed’s research so far has been early and exploratory. Powell has also pointed to the fact that many Americans still use and prefer cash. Most importantly, Powell has addressed concerns that a CBDC would effectively allow the Fed to monitor the finances of every American.

“It’s our obligation to do the work both on technology and on public policy to form a basis for making an informed decision,” he said last month.

Others on the Fed, including Randy Quarles, the Fed’s financial regulation guy, has slammed CBDCs as a fad, noting that the US dollar is already “highly digitized”. A report from the Philly Fed recently warned that a CBDC could also destabilize the financial system if everybody were to pull their digital dollars from markets, mutual funds and banks.

But enough of what senior Fed officials are saying: pretty soon, it will be the “public’s” turn, as the Fed has promised to solicit public comment during its review.

*

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.

***

During Hitler’s Nazi Reich, doctors and nurses were obliged to kill disabled or handicapped children – for the good of society, for obtaining a clean Arian State. And for economics.

Most of them complied. They killed innocent children, adults, and old-age people as well, for the same purpose. The elderly and infirm were injected with a poison, so they wouldn’t cost money to the state.

Did they have scruples? Maybe some of them did. But not following the orders of the tyrants, would have cost them their jobs – and livelihoods. And probably more. Punishment was not excluded.

At the end of the war, the criminals were judged.

The Nuremberg trials lasted about a year, from 20 November 1945 – 1 October 1946 and condemned the surviving criminals, those who could be apprehended in Germany or elsewhere in the world.

Many fled and went into hiding, many of them in South America, into states with military governments and who were “quietly” sympathetic to the Nazis. See this.

Today, the Situation is much Worse. In fact, there is No Comparison.

All 193 UN member countries are involved. They are subscribed to the same evil agenda. They are under the same diabolical blackmail spell, even the entire UN system doesn’t dare to oppose its tyrannical system. The UN and members of the UN family, in particular WHO, they actually help drive the agenda forward.

The people around the world have to be made aware of what’s behind this sinister plan – this outright killing spree.

The people have to know what is in the injections that go as “vaccines”, because most people haven’t a clue.

The mainstream media and their governments, in many cases governments elected and paid by the very people, who are now being betrayed, miserably betrayed and killed by their governments, still believe in their governments.

Simply because they cannot imagine the unimaginable. Yes, it is very difficult. But they should listen – and observe and research for themselves in those alternative media that the big and powerful mainstream hasn’t censured or shot-down altogether. The one publishing this article is one of them.

We Need Urgently a Nuremberg 2.0

We cannot wait until humanity has been extinct – and extinct it will be, if we do not react NOW to this madness, to this crime of biblical proportion, a crime of dimensions humanity has never experienced before in known history.

There is this phenomenon called cognitive dissonance, meaning they, those who bend over to the tyranny, believe in the devil’s narrative for comfort, but in their heart they now its false, it’s a lie. That happens when it’s easier to believe in a lie that accommodates their immediate life, rather than dealing with the often hard and devastating truth – which, if not attended to, will catch up sooner or later.

The Spanish Fifth Column Research Team, when they first examined a vaccine vial, they discovered that these vials are filled largely with a fluid called Graphene oxide, which has electromagnetic properties, thereby transforming your body into an electromagnetic field. See this.

Video: Interview with Ricardo Delgado 

***

The Spanish Fifth Column Research Team also discovered that babies born to parents who were inoculated between December 2020 and January 2021, were born with black eyes. These babies are also known as Pandemic Babies or, more recently, Black-Eyed Babies. See this. Is this a coincidence? What will be other consequences? We may find out, as time goes on.

What’s In the Vaccine Vials

As if these occurrences weren’t disconcerting enough, Dr. Carrie Madej gave a shocking interview on the Stew Peters show on 29 September 2021. What she had discovered after examining different vials from different batches of both Modern and J&J injections, called “vaccines”, is hair-rising. She appeared obviously shocked by what she had seen after examining the “vaxx” vials. It is absolutely devastating.

You should take the time to watch and listen to the entire video. But, starting about minute 11 (of a 15 min. video), she mentions the Bill Gates experiments in West Africa, where vaxxed adults were literally robotized with credit cards, which were their only means of payment, no cash – and that in a part of the world were talking digital money is like a foreign language. See this or watch the video below.

The West African experiment had started in August 2020. Bill Gates then openly spoke about how humans would be digitized, so that all their personal data, including their money accounts would be “built-in” an electromagnet system in their body.

He even used the term Operating System, that we will be living with a built-in Operating System. It was too strange to believe.

Now it’s happening. A trial, for what will come to us, if we do not stop it.

It is in our power. We have to become a unit of people in solidarity around the world, because We, the People, around the globe – those of us who survive the “killing spree” – are destined to live the same horror towards the new future, towards The Great Reset.

Of course, belonging to this “dark cult”, he had to tell the world, they have to tell us ever so often what they are up to. That’s part of their cult’s rule. And they obey it by the letter, as we can see when we go back in history. But they present these atrocities in such ways that we, who are conveniently blind-folded – don’t see it, or do NOT WANT to see it. And they, every time, are moving a step closer to their end goal of total control of a drastically reduced population.

The WEF Officially Announces “The Great Reset”

Almost in parallel, in mid-2020, Klaus Schwab, WEF, brought us The Great Reset. Its contents are also difficult to believe – with the ending, “You will own nothing and be happy”.

This infers that the human is no longer human, but has been transposed to become a “transhuman” through artificial intelligence, robots – and other digital gimmicks which control his life – if one may still call this a life.

“The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future” — Klaus Schwab, WEF (June 2020)

What is envisaged under “the Great Reset” is a scenario whereby the global creditors will have appropriated by 2030 the World’s wealth, while impoverishing large sectors of the World Population.

In 2030 “You’ll own nothing, And you’ll be happy.” (see video below)

“Transhumans”

Of course, such algorithms may also be used to turn off lives that are not worth having roaming-authority around Mother Earth, because somehow, they have found ways to oppose the system, or otherwise do not contribute.

Killing a “transhuman”, a half-robot, may not even be considered murder – since it is for the good of society.

Video: Towards Digital Tyranny with Peter Koenig

Click here to link to bitchute version

People! That’s the world we are living in, and have been living in for almost 20 months. That’s the situation we are moving towards, if We, the People, just let it happen. For this new world, “new normal”, as many like to call it, we need the dangerous ultra-shortwaves of 5G and soon 6G. They will transmit the algorithm-calculated signals, with which Artificial Intelligence (AI) and robots control us all, our behavior, our money, and, of course, our” wellbeing”.

This may happen, if We, The People, just keep slumbering in our cognitive dissonance dreams – that all will be the same as before, we just have to sit it out. Wrong, so wrong.

“Sustainable Development”: A Nightmare

The next ten years are crucial. It’s not by accident that they are called, UN Agenda 2030 – or “The Sustainable Development Goals”. These SDGs are a deviation bait for the developing countries and for all those in the UN system who work for them.

The 17 so-called SDGs are not achievable, because they would require several trillions of dollars, or dollars equivalents, of investments, money that is not available; money that is being spent for producing and selling injections, so-called “covid-vaccines”, the satellites and earthly antennas, millions, it takes to beam and receive on earth the 5G and soon 6G ultra-short vaves down to earth; and for paying Big Pharma to come up with ever new vaxxes, with new boosters every six months or so, all with the same or similar contents, to make sure your body becomes an electromagnetic field if, and this is a Big IF, you survive, as not all people react the same to these injections.

Never forget, the more you are “vaccinated” with these poison jabs and, in addition of deadly graphene, spike proteins are injected into your body, the more you jeopardize your own immune system. That’s what they want, of course. So, you become vulnerable to every little disease, including the common flu and covid.

Do not – ever – believe that these vaxxes are for the benefit of your health. They are for killing or dominating you, for controlling you, for stealing your assets and savings and transferring them upwards – to the ultra-rich – you know who they are, no need to mention them by name.

And even if the money was available for the 17 SDGs in some 130 developing countries, in the so-called Global South, these countries would lack the absorptive capacity to implement their largely foreign imposed ambitious dream-plans. Western money is simply stamped out of thin air, and as soon as it is transferred to a Global South country, it becomes debt. And as we know, debt is a rope around the neck. In other words, enslavement.

Back to where we are today. Thinking about Dr. Carrie Madej’s most recent video – see above – portraying the most recent knowledge on what these deadly injections are supposed to do, there is only one key warning – be aware, stay away from it. Stay away from the electromagnetic poison jab.

Why do you think they push so hard that every soul on earth – except them, of course, those in government, in their science, in their medical world, who play along with their narrative – is being inoculated with this deadly poison?

Today, the Government blackmails people, corporations, schools, universities, airlines, railway companies, hospitals, and of course, their own administration is the master example to request that all employees be “vaccinated” – if not they lose their job. Can you imagine? This means either you inject your body with a deadly poison, or you lose your livelihood. Not even Nazi Germany exerted such horrifying blackmail upon her citizens.

This concerns two to three generations today, who have to struggle to make a living – if they don’t give in to the vax coercion.

Many of them have to support families, pay rent – let alone food – and many will starve, because they do not have a support system that would share their income or housing with them. We are talking about hundreds of millions of people in the Global North, who are threatened and potentially lose their work.

We are only in 2021. This masterfully thought-out plan, The Great Reset, is supposed to finish its work and reach its targets in ten years, by 2030.

What may come next?

The unvaxxed are not allowed into super markets, and are not allowed to order food online.

Friendly vaxxed neighbors, a friend or even family member may then soon also not be allowed to shop for the unvaxxed – surveillance will be everywhere, is already everywhere.

We are moving towards a world for which the term tyranny is way too soft, a new word needs to be invented. It was shocking to hear all EU governments declare in lockstep: No jobs of the unvaxxed. George Orwell’s imagination in 1984, of how the future may look like, was way too benign.

“We are at the Gate to Hell”. So says Dr. Mike Yeadon – and he may be closer to the truth than you can ever imagine. See this.

Listen to Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer, talking about the pandemic and the COVID vaccine.

Watch the video below.

We Should Stand United

Why do the vaxxed and unvaxxed not unite in solidarity to fight their common enemy?

How many have been force-vaxxed and already died from the vaxx-injuries? The mainstream media will not tell: Cancers of the ovaries, prostate, breast, they affect often the reproductive systems – blood clots that move to the lungs, impairing breathing, oxygen intake, or move to the heart, causing heart embolies, or the brain, resulting in brain strokes, and so on. It will be difficult, as Dr. Yeadon, former VP and Chief Scientist of Pfizer, says, to link the cause of death to the covid injection – as the injuries can be very diverse, and autopsies are in most cases not allowed, exactly, to keep a veil over the cause of death.

They, the vaxxed, injured and death, leave families behind. Imagine what it means for so many children, for no reason, and no fault of theirs, they cannot go to school, or have to wear the oxygen-starving, totally useless masks, and / or losing one or both of their parents because they had to be poison-injected in order to continue earning a living!

We are so far gone, that all those who have submitted to the deadly potion have no idea whether they will live or die, and if they live how they will be ‘robotized’ or ‘trans-humanized’, by the all controlling “elite”, the dark, sinister side of non-humanity among us, still roaming Mother Earth.

How do these people at heads of governments, heads of the UN system and its multiple agencies, the bought – or coerced – scientists, lawyers, teachers, doctors – and so on – sleep at night? And live a seemingly normal life? The answer is, they are not humans. They are not even trans-humans. They are — a new term has to be invented for this abhorrent species of living beings.

*

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.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image is from First Things

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 paper published Sept. 30, in Eurosurveillance showed COVID spread rapidly by a fully vaccinated patient to fully vaccinated staff, patients and family members — despite a 96% vaccination rate and use of full personal protective equipment. Five patients died and nine had severe cases.

A paper published Sept. 30 in Eurosurveillance raises questions about the legitimacy of “vaccine-generated herd immunity.”

The study cites a COVID outbreak which spread rapidly among hospital staff at an Israeli Medical Center — despite a 96% vaccination rate, use of N-95 surgical masks by patients and full personal protective equipment worn by providers.

The calculated rate of infection among all exposed patients and staff was 10.6% (16/151) for staff and 23.7% (23/97) for patients, in a population with a 96.2% vaccination rate (238 vaccinated/248 exposed individuals).

The paper noted several transmissions likely occurred between two individuals both wearing surgical masks, and in one instance using full PPE, including N-95 mask, face shield, gown and gloves.

Of the 42 cases diagnosed in the outbreak, 38 were fully vaccinated with two doses of Pfizer and BioNTech’s Comirnaty vaccine, one had received only one vaccination and three were unvaccinated.

Of the infected, 23 were patients and 19 were staff members. The staff all recovered quickly. However, eight vaccinated patients became severely ill, six became critically ill and five of the critically ill died. The two unvaccinated patients tracked had mild COVID cases.

The authors concluded:

“This communication … challenges the assumption that high universal vaccination rates will lead to herd immunity and prevent COVID-19 outbreaks … In the outbreak described here, 96.2% of the exposed population was vaccinated. Infection advanced rapidly (many cases became symptomatic within 2 days of exposure), and viral load was high.”

According to the paper, the outbreak originated from a fully vaccinated haemodialysis patient in his/her 70s who was admitted with fever and cough and placed in a room with three other patients.

The patient had not been tested for SARS-CoV-2 on admission day, because his/her symptoms were mistaken for a possible bloodstream infection exacerbating congestive heart failure.

To determine the source of the outbreak, researchers conducted phylogenetic analysis on the whole-genome SARS-CoV-2 sequences that were available for 12 cases in the outbreak, including staff and patients from Wards A, B and C and dialysis departments.

All were infected with the Delta variant and epidemiologically and phylogenetically connected to the same outbreak, except for one case. That case and three staff members were not considered part of the outbreak.

“This is a very interesting paper and it is scientifically very sound,” said Dr. Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., Children’s Health Defense chief scientific officer and professor of biology at Simpson University.

“The breakthrough rate of 96.2% of the vaccinated population shows that in this instance, the vaccine was virtually useless in preventing transmission,” Hooker said. “It should also be noted the two reported cases among unvaccinated patients were mild, whereas six of the vaccinated patients died.”

BioNTech CEO says new COVID vaccine will be needed in 2022

The head of BioNTech — the German company that co-developed a COVID vaccine with Pfizer — said a new formula will likely be needed by mid-2022 to protect against future mutations of the virus.

According to Bloomberg, Ugur Sahin, co-founder and CEO of BioNtech, told the Financial Times that while current COVID vaiants, such as the contagious Delta strain, were not different enough to undermine current vaccinations, new strains will emerge that can evade booster shots and the body’s immune defenses.

“This year [a different vaccine] is completely un-needed, but by mid-next year, it could be a different situation,” Sahin said. “This is a continuous evolution, and that evolution has just started.”

According to a new pre-print study submitted for peer review, Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine antibodies disappear in many by seven months.

Six months after receiving the second dose of Pfizer’s two-shot vaccine, many recipients no longer have vaccine-induced antibodies that can immediately neutralize worrisome SARS-CoV-2 variants, Reuters reported.

Researchers analyzed blood samples from 46 healthy, mostly young or middle-aged adults after receipt of the two doses and again six months after the second dose.

“Our study shows vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine induces high levels of neutralizing antibodies against the original vaccine strain, but these levels drop by nearly 10-fold by seven months” after the initial dose, Bali Pulendran of Stanford University and Mehul Suthar of Emory University said in an email to Reuters.

In roughly half (47%) of all subjects, neutralizing antibodies that can block infection against COVID variants, such as Delta, Beta and Mu, were undetectable at six months after the second dose, the study showed.

Neutralizing antibodies are not the immune system’s only defense against the virus. Still, they “are critically important in protecting against SARS-CoV-2 infection,” said Pulendran and Suthar.

Researchers said the findings warrant administering a booster dose around six to seven months to enhance protection against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

Fauci says three shots of a COVID vaccine is ‘optimal regimen’

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said Tuesday he believes the “optimal regimen” of vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus will include a booster shot.

Fauci’s comments come a week after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention authorized boosters for millions of Americans, including those whose professions make them “high risk.”

Nearly 1 million Americans have already scheduled appointments to receive a third dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, according to the White House.

Pfizer and BioNTech on Sept. 30 submitted initial data from their vaccine trial on children between 5 and 11 years old to the FDA.

The FDA’s independent vaccine advisory committee will hold three meetings in October to discuss COVID booster shots, mix-and-match boosters and vaccines for children 5 to 11 years old, the agency announced Friday.

The first two meetings, on Oct. 14 and 15, will cover booster doses of Moderna and Johnson & Johnson’s COVID vaccines — both of which are authorized for use in adults.

During the second meeting, the committee also will discuss data from the National Institutes of Health on the safety and efficacy of getting initial doses of one COVID vaccine and, later, a booster dose of another manufacturer’s shot, Politico reported.

*

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.

***

A new vaccine “tailored” to target next-generation Covid-19 will likely be needed by the middle of 2022, according to the head of BioNTech, the biotechnology company that developed the Pfizer shot.

The German firm’s CEO, Uğur Şahin, told the Financial Times that Covid-19 variants such as the Delta strain were more contagious but could be tackled by booster shots of current vaccines.

However, he added that mutations would emerge that could slip past the body’s vaccine-acquired immune defenses.

“This year, [a different vaccine] is completely unneeded. But by mid next year, it could be a different situation,” Sahin said, adding that “tailored” versions of current vaccines would be needed to specifically target the new strains that emerge.

“This virus will stay, and the virus will further adapt,” he said.

“We have no reason to assume that the next-generation virus will be easier to handle for the immune system than the existing generation. This is a continuous evolution, and that evolution has just started.”

Vaccination programs will feature two main streams by next year, Sahin predicted, with booster shots for those already inoculated and a continued campaign to get the vaccines to those who have had minimal access to them thus far.

A number of vaccine developers, including BioNTech and US pharma major Pfizer – which helped bring the company’s mRNA vaccine to the market – have been under pressure to share patents and technology to allow wider production of vaccines.

While Sahin claimed patent-sharing posed no risks to quality control, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla has repeatedly argued that waiving intellectual property rights would disincentivize innovation. However, critics such as former US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention head Tom Frieden have accused pharma companies of “war-profiteering.”

Sahin declined to forecast how the Pfizer vaccine would be priced in the future, but told the newspaper that it would still be needed in the coming years.

According to the co-founder of BioNTech Dr Ugur Sahin, the COVID-19 vaccine he designed for Pfizer was designed in just few hours in a single day on January 25, 2020.

No other vaccine in history has been created and manufactured so quickly. Previously, the fastest vaccine ever developed took more than four years.

Meanwhile, new research from Trinity College Dublin and University of Edinburgh found more evidence that vitamin D protects against severe COVID-19 disease and death.

According to a whistleblower nearly 50000 patients died soon in 14 days after getting COVID vaccine shot. ‘They are lying. There is no question they are lying,’ said Attorney Renz. ‘The mantra of ‘safe and effective’ must stop after today’s information.’

*

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 GGI

The COVID-19 “Vaccine” and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 05, 2021

The mRNA vaccine is “experimental’ and unapproved. Since December 2020, it has resulted in a worldwide upward trend in deaths and injuries. Numerous scientific studies confirm the nature of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine which is being imposed on all humanity.

Pure Insanity: Now Anyone with Any Disease in Alberta Can be Counted as a “COVID” Case

By Ethan Huff, October 05, 2021

In order to keep the “case” count high and the plandemic moving right along, government officials in Alberta, Canada, are now counting all illnesses as “covid” in order to justify all the tyranny.

Spanish Government Says that the SARS-CoV-2 Virus Has Not Been Isolated

By Free West Media, October 05, 2021

The Spanish Ministry of Health does not have SARS-CoV-2 cultures for testing and does not have a list of laboratories with samples of this virus. The government confirmed this to critical lawyers and organizations.

The Monday October 4th Facebook Blackout Reveals Real Power of Big Tech Companies

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, October 05, 2021

The problem has hit the Facebook group companies, causing damage not only to social media, but also to various websites and apps that are somehow linked to Mark Zuckerberg‘s businesses – including banking and financial transaction apps.

Potentially Millions of First Responders, Police, Teachers, Healthcare Workers Will Soon be Out of a Job over COVID Vaccine Mandates

By J. D. Heyes, October 05, 2021

An increasing number of governments, including the federal government, are mandating that their employees get a COVID-19 vaccine or else lose their jobs.

Huge Uptick in Ivermectin Use Is Causing Profit-driven Big Pharma to Sell Patented Copycat Pills

By Joel S. Hirschhorn, October 05, 2021

I am confident in predicting that as more and more bad news about the ineffectiveness and dangerous side effects of COVID vaccines become increasingly known to more of the public, the big drug companies will increasingly switch from vaccines to prescription antiviral medicines.

Forever Wars, Recaptured in Real Time

By Pepe Escobar, October 05, 2021

The 21^st century, geopolitically, so far has been shaped by the U.S.- engineered Forever Wars. Forever Wars: Afghanistan-Iraq, part 2, ranging from 2004 to 2021, is the fourth in a series of e-books recovering the Pepe Escobar archives on Asia Times.

Trump, Twitter and the Digital Town Hall

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, October 05, 2021

The merits are hard to stomach for partisans long jaundiced by presumption and dislike, but the cheer at the deplatforming of Donald Trump by a range of social media platforms said as much about the nature of any sentiment about democracy as it did about those claiming to defend it.

The Brutality of Denying Water to Palestinians in the South Hebron Hills

By Daphne Banai, October 05, 2021

Abu Hani and his family live only two kilometers from the Israeli settlement outpost of Avigayil in the occupied South Hebron Hills. But unlike Avigayil’s residents, who are connected to Israel’s national water grid, Abu Hani and his children are barred from doing so.

Pfizer Scientists Caught Undercover Admitting Pfizer Is Evil and that Natural Immunity Is Better than the COVID-19 Vaccine

By Brian Shilhavy, October 05, 2021

Project Veritas released their fourth video in its COVID-19 vaccine investigative series today which exposed three Pfizer scientists saying that antibodies lead to equal, if not better, protection against the virus compared to the vaccine.

What Biden Told the Indians

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, October 05, 2021

It has been a sobering two years. India’s economy crashed and it cannot be the magnet anymore for investors in Silicon Valley. ‘Make in India’ withered away. The current pitch for a spot in the global supply chain is unconvincing.    

Are US War Plans with China Taking Shape?

By Brian Berletic, October 05, 2021

The US and its allies continue beating the drums of war in regards to China, but how serious is this? Will it really lead to war, or is it merely posturing meant to give the US the most favorable position on the other side of a fully ascendant China?

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.

***

“Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges.”—George Carlin

You think you’ve got rights? Think again.

All of those freedoms we cherish—the ones enshrined in the Constitution, the ones that affirm our right to free speech and assembly, due process, privacy, bodily integrity, the right to not have police seize our property without a warrant, or search and detain us without probable cause—amount to nothing when the government and its agents are allowed to disregard those prohibitions on government overreach at will.

This is the grim reality of life in the American police state.

In fact, in the face of the government’s ongoing power grabs, our so-called rights have been reduced to mere technicalities, privileges that can be granted and taken away, all with the general blessing of the courts.

This is what one would call a slow death by a thousand cuts, only it’s the Constitution being inexorably bled to death by the very institution (the judicial branch of government) that is supposed to be protecting it (and us) from government abuse.

Court pundits, fixated on a handful of politically charged cases before the U.S. Supreme Court this term dealing with abortion, gun rights and COVID-19 mandates, have failed to recognize that the Supreme Court—and the courts in general—sold us out long ago.

With each passing day, it becomes increasingly clear that Americans can no longer rely on the courts to “take the government off the backs of the people,” in the words of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas. When presented with an opportunity to loosen the government’s noose that keeps getting cinched tighter and tighter around the necks of the American people, what does our current Supreme Court usually do?

It ducks. Prevaricates. Remains silent. Speaks to the narrowest possible concern.

More often than not, it gives the government and its corporate sponsors the benefit of the doubt, seemingly more concerned with establishing order and protecting government interests than with upholding the rights of the people enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

Rarely do the concerns of the populace prevail.

Every so often, the justices toss a bone to those who fear they have abdicated their allegiance to the Constitution. Too often, however, the Supreme Court tends to march in lockstep with the police state.

As a result, the police and other government agents have been generally empowered to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance.

In recent years, for example, the Court has ruled that police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits; police officers can stop cars based only on “anonymous” tips; Secret Service agents are not accountable for their actions, as long as they’re done in the name of “security”; citizens only have a right to remain silent if they assert it; police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” justifying any and all police searches of vehicles stopped on the roadside; police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime; police can stop, search, question and profile citizens and non-citizens alike; police can subject Americans to virtual strip searches, no matter the “offense”; police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home; and it’s a crime to not identify yourself when a policeman asks your name.

Moreover, it was a unanimous Supreme Court which determined that police officers may use drug-sniffing dogs to conduct warrantless searches of cars during routine traffic stops. That same Court gave police the green light to taser defenseless motorists, strip search non-violent suspects arrested for minor incidents, and break down people’s front doors without evidence that they have done anything wrong.

The cases the Supreme Court refuses to hear, allowing lower court judgments to stand, are almost as critical as the ones they rule on. Some of these cases have delivered devastating blows to the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

By remaining silent, the Court has affirmed that: legally owning a firearm is enough to justify a no-knock raid by police; the military can arrest and detain American citizens; students can be subjected to random lockdowns and mass searches at school; police officers who don’t know their actions violate the law aren’t guilty of breaking the law; trouble understanding police orders constitutes resistance that justifies the use of excessive force; and the areas immediately adjacent to one’s apartment can be subjected to warrantless police surveillance and arrests.

Make no mistake about it: when such instances of abuse are continually validated by a judicial system that kowtows to every police demand, no matter how unjust, no matter how in opposition to the Constitution, one can only conclude that the system is rigged.

By refusing to accept any of the eight or so qualified immunity cases before it last year that strove to hold police accountable for official misconduct, the Supreme Court delivered a chilling reminder that in the American police state, “we the people” are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to ‘serve and protect.”

This is how qualified immunity keeps the police state in power.

Lawyers tend to offer a lot of complicated, convoluted explanations for the doctrine of qualified immunity, which was intended to insulate government officials from frivolous lawsuits, but the real purpose of qualified immunity is to rig the system, ensuring that abusive agents of the government almost always win and the victims of government abuse almost always lose.

How else do you explain a doctrine that requires victims of police violence to prove that their abusers knew their behavior was illegal because it had been deemed so in a nearly identical case at some prior time?

It’s a setup for failure.

A review of critical court rulings over the past several decades, including rulings affirming qualified immunity protections for government agents by the U.S. Supreme Court, reveals a startling and steady trend towards pro-police state rulings by an institution concerned more with establishing order, protecting the ruling class, and insulating government agents from charges of wrongdoing than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Indeed, as Reuters reports, qualified immunity “has become a nearly failsafe tool to let police brutality go unpunished and deny victims their constitutional rights.”

Worse, as Reuters concluded, “the Supreme Court has built qualified immunity into an often insurmountable police defense by intervening in cases mostly to favor the police.”

For those in need of a reminder of all the ways in which the Supreme Court has made us sitting ducks at the mercy of the American police state, let me offer the following.

As a result of court rulings in recent years, police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless searches. Police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless arrests based on mere suspicion. Police can claim qualified immunity for using excessive force against protesters. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a fleeing suspect in the back. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a mentally impaired person. Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits. Police can stop, arrest and search citizens without reasonable suspicion or probable cause.  Police officers can stop cars based on “anonymous” tips or for “suspicious” behavior such as having a reclined car seat or driving too carefully. Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime.  Police can use the “fear for my life” rationale as an excuse for shooting unarmed individuals. Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes.” Not only are police largely protected by qualified immunity, but police dogs are also off the hook for wrongdoing.

Police can subject Americans to strip searches, no matter the “offense.” Police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home. Police can use knock-and-talk tactics as a means of sidestepping the Fourth Amendment. Police can carry out no-knock raids if they believe announcing themselves would be dangerous. Police can recklessly open fire on anyone that might be “armed.” Police can destroy a home during a SWAT raid, even if the owner gives their consent to enter and search it. Police can suffocate someone, deliberately or inadvertently, in the process of subduing them.

To sum it up, we are dealing with a nationwide epidemic of court-sanctioned police violence carried out with impunity against individuals posing little or no real threat.

So where does that leave us?

For those deluded enough to believe that they’re living the American dream—where the government represents the people, where the people are equal in the eyes of the law, where the courts are arbiters of justice, where the police are keepers of the peace, and where the law is applied equally as a means of protecting the rights of the people—it’s time to wake up.

We no longer have a representative government, a rule of law, or justice.

Liberty has fallen to legalism. Freedom has fallen to fascism.

Justice has become jaded, jaundiced and just plain unjust.

And for too many, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the American dream of freedom and justice for all has turned into a living nightmare.

Given the turbulence of our age, with its government overreach, military training drills on American soil, domestic surveillance, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, wrongful convictions, profit-driven prisons, corporate corruption, COVID mandates, and community-wide lockdowns, the need for a guardian of the people’s rights has never been greater.

*

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 Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president The Rutherford Institute. His books Battlefield America: The War on the American People and A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State are available at www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Featured image is from The Crux

O Relógio do Clima, instalado por Roberto Cingolani na fachada do Ministério da Transição Ecológica, iniciou a contagem decrescente: faltam menos de 7 anos para a catástrofe climática causada pelo aquecimento global. O relógio está regulado calibrado de acordo com as previsões do instituto MCC, em Berlim, e não nas do IPCC (Comissão das Nações Unidas para as Alterações Climáticas). Calcula que a temperatura média global, que aumentou cerca de 1 °C desde o nível pré-industrial de 1750, poderá aumentar 1,5 °C em 2050 (ou seja, em três séculos), principalmente devido ao CO2 (dióxido de carbono) libertado na atmosfera pelas actividades humanas, o que causa uma intensificação do efeito de estufa. Segundo os cientistas da ONU, contribui secondariamente para o aquecimento global o aumento da actividade do Sol, enquanto, pelo contrário, para outros cientistas é a causa principal.

No Pré-Cop de Milão, do qual o Ministro Cingolani foi o principal organizador, o complexo quadro científico das alterações climáticas e das suas consequências ambientais foi espectacularizado utilizando técnicas de filmes sobre catástrofes. Confrontados com a previsão “científica” de que dentro de sete anos o planeta Terra será envolvido numa catástrofe climática, os 400 jovens de todo o mundo, reunidos por Cingolani em Milão, exigiram que a indústria de combustíveis fósseis fosse encerrada até 2030 e que os governos deixassem de financiá-la agora, substituindo-a por fontes verdes que não emitem CO2.

O Ministro Cingolani comprometeu-se em concretizar esse objectivo. Há de facto uma forma de o fazer, se a Itália tivesse um plano estratégico para criar um sistema energético integrado baseado na energia solar fotovoltaica e especialmente termodinâmica (com espelhos que concentram os raios solares), e em grandes parques eólicos, especialmente offshore (com turbinas eólicas instaladas em águas pouco profundas ou flutuantes). O projecto inovador solar termodinâmico desenvolvido pelo Prémio Nobel, Carlo Rubbia, que teria tornado possível produzir um terço das necessidades eléctricas italianas com algumas centrais solares de emissão zero, foi deliberadamente afundado e está agora a ser utilizado na China. A construção de parques eólicos offshore está dificultada, de tal forma que existe apenas um, em Taranto.

O Ministro Cingolani tem, contudo, uma “solução”: a energia nuclear (ver artigo do Director do Greenpeace Itália no il manifesto de 3 de Setembro). Cingolani declarou-o, de modo aberto e polémico, quando foi convidado por Renzi para a Escola de Educação Política ‘Italia Viva’. O Ministro patrocinou então uma conferência de apoiantes nucleares. Não é coincidência que, depois de conhecer John Kerry, o enviado especial do Presidente dos EUA para a gestão climática, se tenha convertido de oponente a apoiante da energia nuclear. Cingolani foi imediatamente acompanhado por Salvini, que disse: “Uma central nuclear na Lombardia? Qual é o problema?” Assim, o poderoso lobby nuclear também se radicou em Itália, que já obteve um primeiro resultado fundamental na União Europeia: o Centro Comum de Investigação, encomendado pela Comissão Europeia, incluiu a energia nuclear entre as “fontes de energia verde” apoiadas e financiadas pela União Europeia, para eliminar as emissões de CO2 até 2050.

Assim, a União Europeia está a relançar a indústria nuclear, numa altura em que esta se encontra em profunda crise devido ao aumento dos custos e a problemas técnicos. Embora as centrais de energia solar possam produzir mais electricidade do que as centrais nucleares, sem custos adicionais ou emissões perigosas, só para armazenar temporariamente a enorme quantidade de resíduos radioactivos produzidos pelas centrais nucleares da União Europeia, espera-se que o seu custo seja de 420-570 biliões de euros. Adiciona-se a enorme cifra necessária para o desmantelamento dessas mesmas centrais, que, na maior parte atingiram ou superaram a idade limite de 35 anos e estão a tornar-se cada vez mais caras e perigosas. Entretanto, a Agência Internacional para a Energia Atómica autorizou a descarga no mar de mais de um milhão de toneladas de água radioactiva, que se acumulou na central nuclear de Fukushima, após o acidente de 2011, com o  resultado de que aumentaram as mortes por cancro provocadas por esta “fonte de energia  verde”.

Manlio Dinucci

Artigo original em italiano :

La transizione “ecologica” al nucleareBy Manlio Dinucci, October 05, 2021

Tradutora: Maria Luísa de Vasconcellos

L’Orologio del clima, installato da Roberto Cingolani sulla facciata del Ministero della transizione ecologica, ha iniziato il countdown: mancano meno di 7 anni alla catastrofe climatica provocata dal riscaldamento globale. L’orologio è tarato sulle previsioni dell’istituto Mcc di Berlino, non su quelle della Ipcc (la Commissione Onu sul cambiamento climatico). Essa calcola che la temperatura media globale, aumentata di circa 1 °C dal livello preindustriale del 1750, potrebbe salire nel 2050 (ossia in tre secoli) di 1,5 °C, principalmente a causa della CO2 (anidride carbonica) immessa nell’atmosfera dalle attività umane, che provoca una intensificazione dell’effetto serra. Secondo gli scienziati Onu, contribuisce secondariamente al riscaldamento globale la più intensa attività del Sole, che per altri scienziati è invece la causa principale.

Nella Pre Cop di Milano, di cui il ministro Cingolani è stato principale organizzatore, il complesso quadro scientifico del cambiamento climatico e delle sue conseguenze ambientali è stato spettacolarizzato con tecniche da film catastrofico. Di fronte alla previsione «scientifica» che tra sette anni il pianeta Terra sarà travolto dalla catastrofe climatica, i 400 giovani radunati da Cingolani a Milano da tutto il mondo hanno chiesto che l’industria delle fonti fossili sia chiusa entro il 2030 e che i governi smettano di finanziarla fin da ora, sostituendola con fonti green che non emettano CO2. Il ministro Cingolani si è impegnato a realizzare tale obiettivo.

Ci sarebbe effettivamente modo di farlo, se l’Italia avesse un piano strategico per realizzare un sistema energetico integrato basato sul solare fotovoltaico e soprattutto termodinamico (con specchi che concentrano i raggi del Sole), e su grandi parchi eolici soprattutto offshore (con turbine eoliche installate su bassi fondali o galleggianti). L’innovativo progetto del solare termodinamico messo a punto dal Premio Nobel Carlo Rubbia, che avrebbe permesso di produrre un terzo del fabbisogno italiano di energia elettrica con alcune centrali solari a emissioni zero, fu deliberatamente affossato e ora tale tecnologia viene usata in Cina. La realizzazione di parchi eolici offshore viene ostacolata, tanto che ce n’è solo uno a Taranto.

La «soluzione» il ministro Cingolani, però, ce l’ha: il nucleare (v. articolo del direttore di Greenpeace Italia sul manifesto del 3 settembre). Cingolani lo ha dichiarato in modo aperto e polemico quando è stato invitato da Renzi alla Scuola di formazione politica di Italia Viva. Il ministro ha quindi patrocinato un convegno di sostenitori del nucleare. Non a caso dopo che ha incontrato John Kerry, inviato speciale del Presidente Usa per la gestione del clima, riconvertitosi da oppositore a sostenitore del nucleare. A Cingolani si è accodato subito Salvini, che ha detto: «Una centrale nucleare in Lombardia? E che problema c’è?». Anche in Italia dunque si è radicata la potente lobby del nucleare, che ha già ottenuto nella Ue un primo, fondamentale risultato: il Centro congiunto di ricerca, incaricato dalla Commissione Europea, ha incluso il nucleare tra le «fonti energetiche verdi» sostenute e finanziate dall’Unione Europea per eliminare entro il 2050 le emissioni di CO2.

La UE rilancia così l’industria nucleare nel momento in cui è in profonda crisi a causa dei crescenti costi e problemi tecnici. Mentre le centrali solari possono produrre più elettricità di quelle nucleari, senza costi aggiuntivi né pericolose emissioni, solo per stoccare provvisoriamente l’enorme quantità di scorie radioattive prodotte dalle centrali nucleari della Ue si prevede una spesa di 420-570 miliardi di euro. Si aggiunge l’enorme cifra necessaria allo smantellamento delle centrali stesse, che per la maggior parte hanno raggiunto o superato l’età limite di 35 anni, divenendo sempre più costose e pericolose. Intanto l’Agenzia internazionale per l’energia atomica ha autorizzato lo scarico in mare di oltre un milione di tonnellate di acqua radioattiva, accumulatasi nella centrale nucleare di Fukushima dopo l’incidente del 2011. col risultato che aumenteranno le morti per cancro provocate da questa «fonte energetica verde».

Manlio Dinucci

O Presidente Biden anunciou o nascimento da AUKUS, uma parceria estratégico-militar entre os Estados Unidos, a Grã-Bretanha e a Austrália, com “o imperativo de assegurar a paz e a estabilidade a longo prazo no Indo-Pacífico”, a região que, na geopolítica de Washington, se estende desde a costa ocidental dos EUA até à da Índia.  O objectivo desta ‘missão estratégica’ é ‘enfrentar em conjunto, as ameaças do século XXI, como fizemos no século XX’. Está clara, a referência à China e à Rússia. Para “defender contra ameaças em rápida evolução”, a AUKUS lança um “projecto chave”: os Estados Unidos e a Grã-Bretanha ajudarão a Austrália a adquirir “submarinos a propulsão nuclear, armados convencionalmente”.

A primeira reacção ao anúncio do projecto AUKUS foi a da França: assim, ela perde um contrato de 90 biliões de dólares, estipulado com a Austrália, para o fornecimento de 12 submarinos Barracuda, de propulsão convencional. Paris, acusando ter sido apunhalada pelas costas, retirou os seus Embaixadores dos EUA e da Austrália. A atenção política e mediática tem-se concentrado na disputa entre Paris e Washington, deixando na sombra as implicações do projecto AUKUS.

Em primeiro lugar, não é credível que os Estados Unidos e a Grã-Bretanha fornecessem à Austrália, a tecnologia mais avançada para construir, pelo menos, oito submarinos nucleares da última geração, com um custo unitário de cerca de 10 biliões de dólares, para os equipar apenas com armamento convencional (não nuclear). É como se fornecessem porta-aviões à Austrália, incapazes de transportar aviões.  Na realidade os submarinos terão tubos de lançamento adequados tanto para mísseis não nucleares como para mísseis nucleares. O Primeiro Ministro Morrison já anunciou que a Austrália irá adquirir rapidamente, através dos EUA, “a capacidade de ataque de longo alcance” com mísseis Tomahawk e mísseis hipersónicos, que podem ser armados tanto com ogivas convencionais como com ogivas nucleares.

Naturalmente, os submarinos australianos também poderão lançar mísseis balísticos USA Trident D5, com os quais os submarinos americanos e britânicos estão armados. O Trident D5 tem um alcance de 12.000 km e pode transportar até 14 ogivas termonucleares independentes: W76 (de 100 kt) ou W88 (de 475 kt). O submarino de ataque nuclear Columbia, cuja construção foi iniciada em 2019, tem 16 tubos de lançamento para os Trident D5, pelo que tem capacidade para lançar mais de 200 ogivas nucleares capazes de destruir outros tantos alvos (bases, portos, cidades e outros).

Neste contexto, é evidente que Washington cortou Paris do fornecimento de submarinos à Austrália não simplesmente por razões económicas (favorecer as suas próprias indústrias de guerra), mas para fins estratégicos: passar para uma nova fase de escalada militar contra a China e contra a Rússia no “Indo-Pacifico”, mantendo o comando absoluto da operação. Cancelado o fornecimento de submarinos franceses de propulsão convencional, obsoleto para esta estratégia, Washington iniciou o que a ICAN-Austrália denuncia como “a crescente nuclearização da capacidade militar da Austrália”. Uma vez operacionais, os submarinos nucleares australianos serão efectivamente colocados na cadeia de comando norte-americana, que decidirá o seu emprego.  Estes submarinos, cujo verdadeiro armamento ninguém será capaz de controlar, aproximando-se das costas da China, em profundidade e silenciosamente e também das da Rússia, poderiam atingir os principais alvos nestes países em poucos minutos com uma capacidade destrutiva igual a mais de 20.000 bombas de Hiroshima.

É fácil de prever qual será a primeira consequência. A China, que de acordo com o SIPRI, possui 350 ogivas nucleares em comparação com as 5.550 dos Estados Unidos, irá acelerar o desenvolvimento quantitativo e qualitativo das suas forças nucleares. O seu potencial económico e tecnológico permite-lhe equipar-se com forças nucleares comparáveis às dos Estados Unidos e da Rússia. Isto deve-se ao aprendiz de feiticeiro Biden que, ao lançar o “projecto chave” dos submarinos nucleares na Austrália, exalta “a liderança de longa data dos Estados Unidos na não-proliferação global”.

Manlio Dinucci

Artigo original em italiano :

Joe Biden apprendista stregone nucleare

il manifesto, 21 de Setembro de 2021

Tradutora: Maria Luísa de Vasconcellos

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.

***

After a short hiatus amid the meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Russian President Vladimir Putin, airstrikes on Syria’s Greater Idlib have made a comeback.

On October 3^rd, the Russia’s Aerospace Forces (VKS) carried out strikes on the area, targeting Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) positions.

According to the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the raids targeted the outskirts of the town of Kinda in the western countryside of Idlib as well as the al-Akrad Mount in the northern Lattakia countryside.

Recent reports claim that HTS and its allies are preparing a provocation in Greater Idlib with chemical-armed rockets, possibly to hinder any operation by the SAA.

With help from the Western-backed White Helmets organization and the Turkistan Islamic Party, HTS moved eight newly-made rockets, armed with chlorine and sarin from one of its headquarters in the outskirts of Idlib city to al-Ghab Plains in the northwestern Hama countryside.

HTS believes that a false-flag chemical attack in Greater Idlib could provoke military strikes by the US and its Western allies against the SAA. This is not too far-fetched, as the US-led coalition has bombed Syrian government positions in the past following alleged chemical attacks carried out by the Bashar al-Assad government.

Meanwhile, in a sign of improvement of their bilateral relations, the royal Jordanian palace announced that King Abdullah had received a phone call from Syria’s President, the first such call in 10 years.

During the phone call, King Abdullah and President Assad discussed bilateral ties and means of enhancing cooperation between their respective countries.

Just two weeks earlier, Syrian Defense Minister and Chief of Staff Ali Ayyoub paid a visit to Jordan where he discussed “fighting terrorism and border control” with the Kingdom’s military leadership. Later on September 23, Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad met with his Jordanian counterpart in New York on the side line of the United Nations General Assembly meeting.

Damascus, having consolidated power in most of the country and especially amid the recent success in Dara’a, is beginning to return on the local and even international scene, attempting to restore bilateral relations and take part in various international forums.

As a result, it is not also too unexpected that a large-scale ground operation in Greater Idlib is impending, as this is the only significant militant pocket left in the country. To carry it out, the government needs as much support as it can get, in order to guarantee that as little outside meddling is allowed.

*

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.

***

This Monday, October 4th, the world suffered a very unusual episode: a major blackout of social networks. Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram and several other networks went offline worldwide for more than seven hours. Far from affecting only people addicted to social networks, the blackout had a strong impact on the economy, influencing several companies that depend on the use of these networks to operate their marketing. In parallel, several suspicions remain, paving the way for conspiracy theories about the real reasons for the temporary collapse of networks.

The cyber-blackout affected the entire world. For hours, the main social networks on the planet were completely off. The problem has hit the Facebook group companies, causing damage not only to social media, but also to various websites and apps that are somehow linked to Mark Zuckerberg‘s businesses – including banking and financial transaction apps. The affected platforms were completely inaccessible for seven hours, both on computers and mobile phones.

The main social networks on a global scale that remained immune to the blackout were Twitter and Telegram, which have no links with the Facebook group. However, with the high volume of simultaneous accesses, the problem started to affect these networks as well. As people were unable to use their accounts on Facebook, Whatsapp or Instagram, the number of accesses and downloads of twitter and telegram apps reached unprecedented levels, which created an overload, resulting in operational crises and successive system crashes.

The internal servers of companies linked to Facebook were also affected by the sudden blackout. In the installations of Facebook and its branches, employees could not communicate with the company’s headquarters and had great difficulties in trying to solve the problem, because their machines were completely offline. In fact, blackouts of Facebook Group’s companies are nothing new, having become a common occurrence in recent years. In 2021, episodes of blackouts on the networks were reported on three occasions, in March, June and September. However, in all these cases, the connection was restored in less than two hours. Furthermore, these were just common system errors, while yesterday the DNS of Facebook and other apps went down – apparently, the BGP routes of these services were temporarily removed from the internet, which is something curious and practically inconceivable.

It is not by chance that the most varied conspiracy theories have emerged around the internet trying to explain the occurrence. Recently, the debate about the power of Big Tech companies has taken a central role in American political society. The White House is increasingly in favor of passing stricter legislation on the freedom of these companies, advocating restrictive measures that are severely criticized by high-tech investors. In recent months, Joe Biden has continued the policy initiated by Donald Trump in relation to social networks.

The former president limited freedom of expression in the virtual environment by restricting companies’ immunity for posts by their users. Biden has continued this trend and has tried to impose rules that make it possible to judicially punish corporations that allow the propagation of fake news and hate speech on their networks. Both Republicans and Democrats almost unanimously support the imposition of new norms on the tech companies, which has made the debate more and more fierce. In this sense, there is clearly a conflict of interest between the US government and Big Tech that cannot be ignored when we look at Monday’s case.

But what is most remarkable is another factor. In recent days, the world has been shocked after former Facebook employees leaked confidential information that reveals that the company has a policy of prioritizing profit over security.

A series of millions of documents popularly known as “Facebook Files” came to light, revealing some of the company’s most confidential information. The case is still closely related to the scandal of the “Pandora Papers”, which were a recent leak of information about offshore businesses held by entrepreneurs and politicians in tax havens, far from tax legislation.

In practice, what happens is that Facebook privileges famous and rich people over ordinary users in terms of security policies and, therefore, covers up signs of illegal transactions. The company possibly had data on several of the businesses revealed in Pandora Papers but did not deliver them to security agencies due to the high profitability it obtained from the permanence of criminal users. Both scandals are bringing new horizons to the debate about the ethical limits Big Tech companies’ freedom, with a notorious strengthening of the support for new restrictions.

It is precisely considering this topic that the questions arise: could Facebook itself have caused an internal crash to get rid of compromising data? Was the global blackout a tactic to avoid a lawsuit? It’s difficult to answer these questions as we do not know for sure how much data was lost during the blackout, but certainly the coincidence of dates with the Pandora Papers scandals is something quite interesting.

It is not conspiracy theory to think that this may have been another chapter in the war between the US government and the Big Tech companies. Also, the event appears to have given corporations even more power. The economic impact was immense, companies lost billions of dollars and stock exchanges had a historic drop in just seven hours of blackout. So, what to expect from a scenario where these episodes become more frequent? What would happen if Big Tech companies began to sabotage themselves to harm the economy and pressure the government to reject the restriction projects?

Apparently, Washington is realizing that it has conceded too much power to the Big Tech companies and that it may be too late to reverse this scenario.

*

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

Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

Featured image is from Pavlo Gonchar/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire

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.

***

Project Veritas released their fourth video in its COVID-19 vaccine investigative series today which exposed three Pfizer scientists saying that antibodies lead to equal, if not better, protection against the virus compared to the vaccine.

These scientists talk about the kind of culture they have to work in with Pfizer, with one scientist calling the company “evil.”

They did not know they were being recorded.

This is on our Bitchute and Rumble channels.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Three Swiss Guards have resigned and three others have been suspended after refusing to comply with a Vatican mandate that they get the COVID-19 vaccination.

The Swiss Guards, colloquially known as the Pope’s bodyguards, had previously been ordered “to protect their health and that of the others they come into contact with as part of their service” by getting the jab.

The mandate was part of a broader instruction to all Vatican employees to get the COVID shot or face losing their jobs.

“Besides the three guardsmen sent back to Switzerland, at least three others were suspended from active duty after they agreed to vaccinate but have yet to receive their jabs,” reports RT.

The fact that there is no religious exemption against taking the vaccine within the Vatican tells you everything you need to know about the Vatican and the Pope.

Pope Francis has repeatedly amplified pro-vaccination narratives and refused to extend any understanding to Catholics who are hesitant to take the jab.

The Pontifical Academy for Life, the official bioethics academy of the Catholic Church, has also insisted that it is a “moral responsibility” for Catholics to take the vaccine.

“The Vatican has said that it considers it acceptable for Catholics to use vaccines, even those that use stem cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research,” reported the Mail.

The Italian government has also passed a decree applying to both the private and public sector ordering companies to withhold pay from workers who refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

Those found working without the pass face fines of up to €1,500 euros after it was extended as a condition of entry for museums, stadiums, pubs, restaurants, and schools.

As we highlight in the video below, by enforcing vaccine mandates, the Pope is also enforcing vaccine passports, which some Catholics would argue represent something not too dissimilar from the Mark of the Beast from the book of Revelations.

Wow, so Christian!

*

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.

***

In order to keep the “case” count high and the plandemic moving right along, government officials in Alberta, Canada, are now counting all illnesses as “covid” in order to justify all the tyranny.

In an announcement, Alberta Chief Health Officer Deena Hinshaw explained that people who test “negative” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19), as well as people who never get tested at all but who show respiratory symptoms of any kind, will be automatically added to the official case count that the government relays to the media.

“So, we do have that framework where schools, if they see that there are an increased number of children who are ill because of respiratory illness, or teachers or staff, they can work with Alberta Health Services,” Hinshaw revealed.

“And in some ways, that is adding an additional layer of protection because if individuals choose to not get tested for covid but are home with an illness, they’re now counted in the list as being part of that ‘outbreak.’”

Words like “outbreak” really get the people going, even if they are completely fictitious, so this approach is likely to keep the Branch Covidians scared as can be and ready to get their next Biden Booster shot the moment it becomes available.

“So, it’s less dependent on needing a test to be a part of identifying where there is an issue,” Hinshaw added, indicating that the government is making everything up on the fly to push an agenda.

“We are, as I mentioned, working with education to determine if there are any adjustments that need to be made to this framework. But there are no other settings right now aside from continuing care and acute care at locations where there’s a significant risk of transmission and severe outcomes.”

Alberta Chief Health Officer Deena Hinshaw: Going forward, we’re counting all sick people who decline Covid tests as Covid-positive pic.twitter.com/mDZqT030Gh

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021

Covidism is the real virus

As it turns out, most new “cases” of the Chinese Virus are fictitious, even outside of Canada. Here in the United States, every reported “surge” or “outbreak” is completely made up to scare people into compliance.

At least half of all new cases are either asymptomatic or erroneous, a recent study found. The same is true about hospitalizations, which are largely being manufactured to create the illusion that sickness is spreading like wildfire.

The disease that threatens us all is the religion of Covidism, and Hinshaw is one of its high priestesses. Watch below as she runs through a ridiculous masking and hand sanitizing ritual before speaking to the press:

“If there should be an outbreak in those settings, we are ensuring that follow-up takes place to mitigate and to manage outbreaks,” Hinshaw added in a statement.

“However, in schools, again we are taking the approach that an illness that fits that definition of respiratory illness is treated the same way whether it’s someone who is diagnosed with covid or not.”

Meanwhile, India is seeing the fewest real-life cases of illness because of its use of ivermectin as opposed to “vaccines.” Conversely, Israel is seeing a massive spike in disease thanks to the country now being about 80 percent vaccinated with more “booster” shots soon on the way.

“No one in their right mind believes you clowns anymore,” wrote one commenter at Citizen Free Press about Hinshaw and her fellow Branch Covidians.

“It has nothing to do with a virus and has never had anything to do with the virus,” wrote another. “This is all orchestrated to take our rights away and push us towards a socialist ‘utopia’ that most of us do not want.”

*

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 Medical Tyranny

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 Spanish Ministry of Health does not have SARS-CoV-2 cultures for testing and does not have a list of laboratories with samples of this virus. The government confirmed this to critical lawyers and organizations.

“The Spanish Ministry of Health does not have SARS-CoV-2 cultures for experiments and does not have a directory of laboratories that have isolation cultures for experiments,” the government stated in response to a public request from critical citizens, including the organizations Asociación Liberum and Biólogos por la Verdad [Biologists for the Truth] on July 22, 2021. This was received by the authorities on August 10 and was registered under the number 001-059144.

Among other things, the lawyers and scientists were interested in whether the virus had been isolated. According to the Transparency Act 19/2013 of 9 December, the Ministry of Health had one month from this point in time to formulate a corresponding statement.

Various critics of the government measures against Covid report on the curious response of the Spanish government, which transformed the country into a health dictatorship from March 14, 2020 onward. These include the lawyer Aitor Guisasola and the media portal El Diestro.

“All responsibility for diagnosis and treatment has been shifted to the health professionals, recognizing that ‘tests alone are often not enough to diagnose the disease’… But the tests are being used to make decisions about curfews, shop closures, quarantine, patient treatment, vaccinations and absolutely dictatorial measures are justified and people’s freedoms are revoked, while they ‘are usually not sufficient to determine the disease’.”

Finally, El Diestro addressed a message to all those who have been vaccinated:

“Take this document and go to your family doctor or your health center and ask for explanations. Because something has been injected into your body, but the person who administered it to you, does not even know what it is for or what is contained in it. Will this wake people up or will they go back to sleep?”

*

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

Featured image is from Pixabay

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Our country is still reeling from the still-lingering COVID-19 pandemic, but that’s not because the virus is such a massive threat to the survival of the human race.

It’s because leftists in government at all levels continue to exploit the coronavirus in ways that greatly enhance their own power and authority, which is part of the same long game that leftists always play in their quest to someday completely trash our founding constitutional system and replace our republic with a dictatorial regime centering all power, ultimately, in Washington, D.C.

An increasing number of governments, including the federal government, are mandating that their employees get a COVID-19 vaccine or else lose their jobs; an increasing number of Americans are opting out of the mandate, and while we applaud them for standing up for bodily autonomy, it seems that many of the vaccine rejectors are frontline emergency personnel and caregivers.

The Daily Mail reports, for example, that dozens of Massachusetts State Troopers have left the force in opposition to Gov. Charlie Baker’s vax mandate:

A Massachusetts police union said on Friday that dozens of state troopers have resigned over a COVID vaccine mandate for state workers.

The mandate requires state workers to get the vaccine shot by October 17 or may face termination from their jobs.

A lawsuit was filed by The State Police Association of Massachusetts – a union that represents 1,800 officers – in an attempt to delay the mandate enforced by Republican Governor Charlie Baker. That suit was thrown out Thursday.

“Many of these troopers are going to be returning to their previous municipal police departments within the state that allow for regular testing and masks,” union president Michael Cherven noted. “To date, dozens of troopers have already submitted their resignation paperwork.”

What is angering is that not long ago police officers, nurses, teachers, paramedics and other frontline workers (including truck drivers) were being hailed as heroes as they carried out their duties without a vaccine being available — and without anyone seeing them as some sort of societal threat.

Not anymore, which again shows you just how politicized the left has made this virus and the vaccine.

“Throughout COVID, we have been on the front lines protecting the citizens of Massachusetts and beyond,” SPAM chief Cherven added.

“Simply put, all we are asking for are the same basic accommodations that countless other departments have provided to their first responders, and to treat a COVID related illness as a line of duty injury,” he added.

However, Judge Jackie Cowin of the Massachusetts Supreme Court denied the request last week.

“Specifically, the public interest is, unquestionably, best served by stopping the spread of the virus, in order to protect people from becoming ill, ensure adequate supply of medical services, and curtail the emergence of new, deadlier variants of the virus,” Cowin told the Daily Wire.

Only, the vaccine isn’t doing that; there have been an increasing number of so-called ‘breakthrough infections’ in people who have been vaccinated. So what is the point of getting one? And remember when we were being told life would ‘get back to normal’ with the availability of the vaccine?

How come COVID has become a vaccine mandate throughout society but flu vaccines haven’t, though flu kills children and is a seasonal death threat?

But it’s not just police officers we’re losing; nurses and teachers have lined up to refuse the vaccine as well.

Yahoo News recently reported on one case involving Texas nurses:

More than 100 staff members at Houston Methodist Hospital who were fired for refusing to get vaccinated for COVID-19 appealed a judge’s ruling that sided with the hospital’s right to terminate their employment.

“We are going to most likely go all the way up to the Supreme Court,” Jennifer Bridges, a registered nurse and the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, which was enjoined by 117 former employees of the hospital.

And in New York City, as many as 28,000 public school teachers and employees risk losing their jobs if they don’t take the jab by an Oct. 1 deadline.

So much for the left’s chant, ‘My body, my choice!’ What hypocrites.

*

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 Immunization.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 merits are hard to stomach for partisans long jaundiced by presumption and dislike, but the cheer at the deplatforming of Donald Trump by a range of social media platforms said as much about the nature of any sentiment about democracy as it did about those claiming to defend it.  For one, it shut off a valve of fantastic, instant recognition to a figure whose thoughts are best aired rather than cellared in underground vats.

But cellaring, hiding, suppressing unsavoury viewpoints are the very things social media platforms are getting more enthusiastic about, much of it pushed on the censorious lobby that claims to have a monopoly on veracity and good behaviour.  In the name of misinformation, offence and incitement, users will be either suspended, barred or subjected to digital excommunication in the name of safety.

Which brings us to the fascinating nature of Trump’s latest legal action against Twitter.  In January, the former US president was banned from the platform following the January 6^th riot at the Capitol building inspired by supporters riled by claims that the election had been stolen.  It began as a temporary ban of 12 hours for “repeated and severe violations of our Civic Integrity policy”.  Two days later, the ban was made permanent.  “In the context of the horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would permanently result in this very course of action,” Twitter claimed in its January 8 statement. “The company’s “public interest framework” existed to permit “the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly.”  But this role did not exist “above our rules entirely” and could not be used “to incite violence, among other things.”

The reasoning behind the ban was illuminating of a social media giant sitting in shallow judgment.  Two of Trump’s tweets were singled out: one claiming that 75 million “great American patriots who voted for me” would “not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”; the second stating that he would “not be going to the Inauguration on January 20^th.”  Assuming the imperious role of civics guardian, the company strained to identify these mutterings as violating “our Glorification of Violence policy”.

At the time German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the decision “problematic” while Jens Zimmermann, Social Democrat member of the Bundestag, wondered what it meant “for the future actions of social media platforms”.

In July, Trump began his legal battle to seek reinstatement across a range of platforms, filing a class action lawsuit against Google, Twitter and Facebook. “We are demanding an end to the show-banning, a stop to the silencing, and a stop to the blacklisting, banishing, and cancelling that you know so well,” he stated at the time.

On October 1, Trump filed a more specific complaint in the Southern District of Florida claiming that Twitter “coerced by members of the United States Congress” was censoring him.  The social media platform, the complaint argues, “exercises a degree of power and control over political discourse in this country that is immeasurable, historically unprecedented, and profoundly dangerous to open democratic debate”.  With 88 million followers, Trump argued that his account had become “an important source of news and information about government affairs and was a digital town hall.”

The filing also made a pointed remark to Twitter’s somewhat varied approaches to users.  Why permit the Taliban, “a known terrorist organization”, room to tweet about their military victories across Afghanistan yet claim that his own efforts had been accused of “glorifying violence”.

Resort was also made to Florida’s social media legislation, the Stop Social Media Censorship Act, which was signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis in May to spite “the Silicon Valley elites” only to be blocked two months later by a bemused judge.  One of the plaintiffs, Steve DelBianco of the industry group NetChoice, expressed delight at the absurd proposition that the court ruling “ensured that social media can remain family-friendly”.  But equally absurd was the law’s idiosyncratic drafting, which included an exemption for companies operating theme parks in Florida.  It is likely to perish at the hands of the Federal Appeals Court.

Leaving aside the twaddle put forth by DelBianco, the difficulties of targeting social media platforms are almost insurmountable.   Content moderation remains a pillar of using such fora, one guaranteed by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which gives the digital giants platform rather than publisher status. And the sacred First Amendment is assumed to apply to government actions rather than corporate mischief.

The efforts by Trump to place his legal arguments against Big Tech on the hook of the First Amendment has received little support. One mighty voice in the field of jurisprudence thinking Trump has a case is Alan Dershowitz, who has argued that the case “pits freedom of speech on the one hand against the First Amendment on the other.”  Such reasoning can well justify why lawyers deserve a bad name, but Dershowitz sees it as the high-tech behemoths quashing free speech. “They are censoring but they’re claiming the right to do so under the First Amendment”.

Withering scorn has been levelled at that view. “Unlike delusional Dershowitz,” Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu insisted with smug confidence, “I read the First Amendment and it does not apply to private sector companies.”  Laurence Tribe, formerly Carl M. Loeb Professor at Harvard Law School, took a dim view of his former colleague.  “How low can a former law professor sink?  To call a bogus lawsuit on a fake version of the First Amendment an important case, much less ‘the most important’ of the century?  Has he no shame?”

Democratic strategist Kaivan Shroff, conforming to the fashion of the times, suggested a retributive remedy: the cancellation of Dershowitz’s status as emeritus professor.  Harvard Law School had “a professional and ethical responsibility to its community – past, present and future – to associate with faculty who are ethical and have a high regard for the law.”

For all such righteous splutters, Dershowitz and Trump have a point in pointing out a symptom of the US body politic that has become cripplingly apparent: business and the interests of capitalism have come to control speech, its circulation, its distribution.  For decades, they had already come to guide politicians and political parties, exercising influence through campaign donations. Why run for elected office when you can buy it?

In 2010, the US Supreme Court decision of Citizens United v Federal Election Commission found that limits upon “independent political spending” from corporations and private interest groups violated the First Amendment.  Those with deep purses could only deem this the natural order of things: if you have cash, spend it to influence opinion in the name of free speech.  Put rather simply, such speech was a shield big capitalism could well employ if it needed to. (Rep. Lieu, take note.)

Gore Vidal used to remark that anyone seeking the keys to the White House could only do so with the approval of the Chase Manhattan Bank.  Had he lived to see the Trump cancellation saga, he may well have added those Big Tech titans to the sterile committee of electoral approval.

*

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]

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.

***

Although there are 23 fewer nuclear reactors in the world today than at the 2002 peak of 438, the past year saw a small uptick in the number of reactors operating worldwide and a corresponding increase in the global fleet’s net operating capacity.

That’s one data point in the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2021, the latest in a series of annual industry reports compiled by an international team of independent experts led by Mycle Schneider, a consultant based in Paris. The 409-page report, released this week, is packed with information about global and country-specific trends, but several findings stand out, and they don’t bode well for the nuclear energy industry.

First, although nuclear capacity is up, nuclear electricity production is down.

Without China, where most of the new construction is happening, the decrease in production would look even bigger. In 2020, China for the first time produced more nuclear electricity than France, which relies heavily on nuclear energy. Only the United States produced more.

Nuclear energy’s share of global electricity generation also continued its steady decline, dropping from a peak of 17.5 percent in 1996 to 10.1 percent in 2020.

Although net nuclear capacity rose last year, the 0.4-gigawatt increase was minuscule in comparison with the gains made by renewable energy. “Nuclear is irrelevant in today’s electricity capacity newbuild market,” the industry report concludes.

Second, the report throws cold water on the prospects for small modular reactors. These reactors get a lot of media coverage and some public funding “but are so far unavailable commercially and will not be for another 10–15 years—if ever. Pilot projects in Argentina, China, and Russia have been disappointing,” according to the authors.

Third, the report warned that nuclear power is less resilient than renewables to challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change. While there is no indication that the COVID-19 pandemic compromised safety at nuclear power plants, the pandemic not only reduced nuclear electricity consumption but also affected some schedules for reactor commissioning and fuel loading.

And finally, the 2021 report for the first time devoted an entire chapter to how criminality is affecting the industry. “There is a real question about the exposure of the nuclear power sector to criminal activities including bribery and corruption, counterfeiting and other falsification, as well as infiltration by organized crime,” the report says.

The report cites three major corruption cases involving US nuclear energy companies in 2020. In one case involving the construction of two new reactors, the United States Attorney for South Carolina has charged two Westinghouse officials with multiple felonies.

“Fraudulent and criminal activities in the nuclear industry entail significant potential and real consequences for the public,” the report warns. These activities can affect safety and security at nuclear power plants, and increase the cost of nuclear energy.

*

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.

Dawn Stover is a contributing editor at the Bulletin. A science writer based in the Pacific Northwest, her work has appeared in Scientific American, Conservation, Popular Science, New Scientist, The New York Times, and other publications. One of her articles is included in the 2010 Best American Science and Nature Writing, and another article was awarded a special citation by the Knight-Risser Prize for Western Environmental Journalism.

Featured image: The sixth reactor at the Tianwan Nuclear Power Station in China entered commercial operation in June 2021. Credit: China National Nuclear Corporation/Facebook

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.

***

When the first COVID-19 shots were given emergency use authorization back in December of 2020, we started publishing the stories that were available in the public space of those who were suffering and dying after taking the shots.

I began a list that I appended to the end of any articles we published about the COVID-19 shots, so people could get an idea of how many were suffering from these experimental shots that dissenting doctors and scientists began to call “bioweapon” shots.

The corporate media and Big Tech have done their best to suppress these stories, publishing a few every once in a while to acknowledge this was happening, but always in the context that these were “rare” side effects, and that the benefits of the shot were greater than the risk, which we now know is a complete lie.

After more and more people made the fateful decision to get the shots, I could no longer keep up with the individual stories that were being published, and began publishing articles of stories in batches.

The list became so long, that people started complaining that they had to scroll too far down the page to get to the comments, so I truncated the list and then published the entire list on a separate page.

Now, as we start the month of October, 2021, the number of people going public with their stories are so many, that I just pick and choose some that are representative of the sheer mass of reports now coming in, and try to do at least one story a week highlighting these tragic stories, as we are constantly getting new readers and subscribers who are just now beginning to wake up to the truth about what is really going on with these shots.

It is truly overwhelming, and as I read these stories every day, I know the emotional toll it can take on the people who are aggregating these stories and publishing them. I am truly grateful for them, as I share that emotional trauma myself, and it drives me to publish these as much as I can, even though if I spent all of my waking hours now trying to read and publish all of these, it would not even be enough.

And even though there are so many now that have gone public, all of them are still but a tiny fraction of the actual injuries and deaths that follow these shots, because the vast majority being injured and dying are being told it has nothing to do with the shots, and many actually still believe that and would not dare go public and endure the scorn and ridicule that accompany all who do go public.

I am putting today’s update into a video, because we now have tens of thousands of subscribers to our video channels, and the videos often get more traffic than our articles.

As I publish this today on October 4, 2021, there appears to be some kind of cyber attack happening against Big Tech, as Facebook and their platforms have been down for most of the day already.

I do not know how much longer we have before there is a total Internet blackout, so I feel the urgency more than ever to bring you these stories.

Please download all of our videos (and articles!) whenever you can to your local devices, so you can continue sharing them with your family and friends should we be taken down off the Internet.

This report starts with warnings from the survivors, and then documents a few of the many who have now died, including children and babies who have died, not because they made a choice to get the shots, but because their parents did.

I believe all of these stories came from the COVID Vaccine Injuries Telegram channel, although some of them can be found on other platforms aggregating these also. We are extremely grateful for your work!

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Maddison Farris, editor-in-chief of a student newspaper at Oklahoma State University, was forced to resign after criticizing the school’s mask policy.

“I think that this whole event truly shows that not all opinions are valued and that diversity of thought is falsely advertised here,” Farris told Campus Reform.

On September 9, Farris wrote a column for The O’Colly explaining that she had been removed from a classroom for not wearing a mask.

Farris had previously researched Senate Bill 658, which affirms that a mask cannot be required within a school setting in Oklahoma. She noted that “multiple phone calls with the governor’s office confirmed what I already knew.”

“If I believed that it was just a mask, then, of course, I would simply wear it for an hour or two and then go about my day,” Farris explained.

“But it is more than a mask. It’s control. It’s control over my choices, desires and body,” she continued. “I will not allow any institution to take away my right to decide for myself what is best and to make my own decisions, or to take away the rights and decisions of others.”

Two days later, The O’Colly’s editorial board added a “correction” to the article stressing that Farris’ article was indeed an opinion piece. It claimed that though Farris’ explanation of the law was “misleading,” they supported Farris’ freedom of expression.

“As American citizens, we affirm our belief in the First Amendment and the right as journalists to express our personal opinions no matter if our viewpoint is different from those around us,” the correction stated.

Nevertheless, Farris submitted a letter of “forced resignation,” explaining that she had been called into a September 13 meeting with the rest of the editors and pressed into leaving her post.

Farris told Campus Reform that although most students at Oklahoma State support free speech, but there is a “portion of students who value free speech until it makes them uncomfortable.”

Campus Reform reached out to Farris, The O’Colly, and Oklahoma State University for comment; this article will be updated accordingly.

*

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.

Ben Zeisloft is a Campus Reform Student Editor and Pennsylvania Senior Campus Correspondent, reporting on liberal bias and abuse for Campus Reform. He is studying Finance and Marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Benjamin also writes for The UPenn Statesman and the Wharton International Business Review.

Featured image is from Campus Reform

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 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a long and well-documented history of questionable conduct when it comes to regulation of chemicals important to the profit centers for many large and powerful corporations.  Numerous examples show a pattern of agency actions that allow for the use of dangerous chemicals by consumers, farmers, groundskeepers and others despite evidence of harm.

Documents and other evidence, including information provided in public disclosures by multiple EPA scientists, reveals actions in which EPA managers have intentionally covered up risks associated with certain chemicals. According to the evidence from these EPA insiders, pressure from chemical manufacturers, chemical industry lobbyists and from certain U.S. lawmakers drives internal agency manipulations that protect corporate interests but endanger public health.

Evidence indicates the misconduct dates back decades and has occurred in administrations led by Democrats and Republican alike.

A research project sponsored by Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics said while the EPA has “many dedicated employees who truly believe in its mission,” the agency has been “corrupted by numerous routine practices,” including a “revolving door” between EPA and industry in which corporate lawyers and lobbyists gain positions of agency power; constant  industry lobbying against environmental regulations; pressure from  lawmakers who are beholden to donors; and meddling by the White House.

Background: Blowing the whistle

The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21 Century Act, signed into law on June 22, 2016, was the first substantive reform to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The law requires EPA to make an affirmative determination on whether a new chemical substance presents an “unreasonable risk” to human health or the environment under “known, intended or reasonably foreseen conditions of use.” See information here.

Despite the law, the EPA has failed to make valid determinations about the risk presented by numerous chemicals.

In June 2021, four EPA scientists, each working within the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), publicly accused the the EPA of deliberate tampering with chemical risk assessments. The four whistleblowers made their complaints public through a group called Public  Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

In a June 28 letter to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform, PEER said the four EPA scientists were providing “disturbing evidence of fraud and corruption,” involving “deliberate tampering with chemical risk assessments conducted under the Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA), including PFAS (a.k.a. “forever chemicals”), and the deletion of potential health effects without the knowledge or consent of the human health assessors.”

The letter further states:

“All four clients have experienced numerous instances where their risk assessments were changed by their managers or by colleagues in response to direction by management. These changes include –

• Deleting language identifying potential adverse effects, including developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity, mutagenicity, and/or carcinogenicity;
• Major revisions that alter the report conclusions to indicate that there are no toxicity concerns despite data to the contrary; and
• Risk assessments being reassigned to inexperienced employees in order to secure their agreement to remove issues whose inclusion would be protective of human health.”

As a result of the manipulations, people who work with these chemicals are not receiving information they need to protect themselves, such as “proper handling procedures, personal protection needed, accidental release measures, and first aid and firefighting measures,” according to PEER.

This is a particular concern for pregnant women, according to the PEER complaint.

Erasing important information

On August 26, 2021, PEER filed a separate complaint alleging that the EPA has been breaking the law by erasing original versions of internal communications and draft documents and retaining only the final version of key documents. The practice violates the Federal Records Act by eliminating details of the decision-making process from outside review, according to PEER.

PEER states that that discarding of documents trails is not only contrary to law but also violates the EPA’s own records retention policy. According to PEER, its complaint focuses on two classes of documents:

• Alterations of chemical risk assessments by managers in which both the identity of the manager and the alterations themselves are not apparent; and
• Internal comments related to the development of its Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, in which EPA software overwrote the original and all prior versions any time there was an edit. Thus, only the “final” version was saved.

“It is as if EPA memorializes its internal decision-making in disappearing ink,” PEER Executive Director Tim Whitehouse, a former EPA enforcement attorney, said in a press release. “EPA’s record-keeping practices allow unknown officials to make changes while disguising what precisely was changed and who changed them.”

PEER said it has asked the National Archives and Records Administration to intervene to prevent the EPA from destroying more records and to adopt safeguards to prevent any recurrences.

The case of Ruth Etzel

Ruth Etzel,  former director of the EPA’s Office of Children’s Health Protection (OCHP), filed a  whistleblower complaint with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board contending she was subject to illegal retaliation in 2018 and 2019. Etzel said the agency retaliated against her after she complained publicly about what she said was  EPA resistance to stronger public protections against lead poisoning.

At the EPA it was Etzel’s job to determine the impacts of regulations on children. But she alleges she was improperly removed from her position after speaking out about EPA failures, and was assigned to a division where she was not allowed to work on prevention of lead poisoning.

Etzel is both a pediatrician and an epidemiologist and is recognized internationally as an expert on child health and the environment. She was named the 2021 winner of the Public Policy and Advocacy Award by the Academic Pediatric Association.

More than 120 environmental and health organizations  complained to EPA about Etzel’s removal, saying the agency was sending a “signal that children’s health is not a priority for the agency.”

Reporting on EPA’s misconduct

See here information, including news articles, regarding alleged EPA misconduct and regulatory failures:

New evidence of corruption at EPA chemicals division, by Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, September 18, 2021

EPA whistleblower testifies her advocacy for stronger health protections drew agency retaliation, by Carey Gillam, USRTK, September 13, 2021

‘The harm to children is irreparable’: Ruth Etzel speaks out ahead of EPA whistleblower hearing, Carey Gillam, The Guardian, September 12, 2021

The EPA’s rationale for banning chlorpyrifos may make it harder to eliminate other brain-harming pesticides , Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, August 24, 2021.

Formaldehyde causes leukemia, according to EPA assessment suppressed by Trump officials, Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, August 19, 2021.

EPA exposed: Leaked audio shows pressure to overrule scientists in “hair-on-hire” cases,  Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, August 4, 2021.

Whistleblowers expose corruption in EPA chemical safety office, Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, July 2, 2021.

How pesticide companies corrupted the EPA and poisoned America, Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, June 30, 2021.

Flawed analysis of an intentional human dosing study and its impact on chlorpyrifos risk assessment,  Lianne Sheppard, Seth McGrew, Richard Fenske, Environment International, July 2020.

Further Efforts Needed to Uphold Scientific Integrity Policy at EPA,  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General, May 20, 2020.

EPA Allowed Companies to Make 40 New PFAS Chemicals Despite Serious Risks, Sharon Lerner, The Intercept, September, 19, 2019.

E.P.A. Won’t Ban Chlorpyrifos, Pesticide Tied to Children’s Health Problems, Lisa Friedman, New York Times, July 18, 2019.

Emails show Trump EPA overruled career staff on Wisconsin air pollution, Timothy Gardner, Reuters, May 28, 2019.

US environment agency cuts funding for kids’ health studies, Sara Reardon, Nature, May 13, 2019.

Meet 3 women who stood up to Trump to protect the American people — and lost their jobs,  The Hill, January 19, 2019.

White House, EPA headed off chemical pollution study, Annie Snider, Politico, May 14, 2018.

Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science, Carey Gillam, Island Press, October 10, 2017.

Records Show EPA Efforts to Slow Herbicide Review Came in Coordination with Monsanto, Carey Gillam, Huffington Post, August 18, 2017.

EPA Official Accused of Helping Monsanto “Kill” Cancer Study, Joel Rosenblatt, Lydia Mulvany, and Peter Waldman, Bloomberg, March 14, 2017.

Poison Spring- The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA, Evaggelos Vallianatos and McKay Jenkins, Bloomsbury Press, April 14, 2014.

*

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.

***

Abu Hani and his family live only two kilometers from the Israeli settlement outpost of Avigayil in the occupied South Hebron Hills. But unlike Avigayil’s residents, who are connected to Israel’s national water grid, Abu Hani and his children are barred from doing so. Not only do they not receive a drop from Mekorot, Israel’s national water company, the Israeli authorities also prohibit them from maintaining cisterns for storing rainwater, as they had been doing until Israel took over the area.

Abu Hani, like many other Palestinian breadwinners in the South Hebron Hills, is forced to travel great distances and pay exorbitant prices in order to fill up a rusty container that will provide his family with water.

He is not the only one. According to human rights group B’Tselem, Palestinians in the South Hebron Hills buy water transported by trucks that usually come from the nearby Palestinian city of Yatta, often paying more than four times the price of water for residential use in Israel. These high prices mean that Palestinians may spend as much as a third of their monthly income on water. Contrast that with Israel, where the average family spends only 1.3 percent of its monthly income on water.

The lack of local water infrastructure for Palestinians means average daily water consumption per capita among Palestinian West Bank residents stands at 28 liters per capita per day, whereas consumption in the Israeli settlements in the South Hebron Hills is 211 liters per capita per day. This consumption level is similar to that in humanitarian crisis areas around the world such as Darfur, according to B’Tselem.

Denying water to the Palestinians in the South Hebron Hills is one of many brutal methods for expelling the local population in order to take its land and hand it over to Jewish settlers.

That brutality, of course, cannot be enforced without the presence of an occupying army. I witnessed it last week when 50 Israeli activists, including members of Knesset Mossi Raz (Meretz) and Ofer Cassif (Joint List), accompanied Abu Hani and his water tanker from the village of A-Tuwani to Al-Mugafara community, where he lives.

As we were walking on the main road, an army ambulance suddenly drove past us. We politely cleared the way, but as it passed us, the ambulance stopped, blocked the road, and out poured a group of armed soldiers. Within minutes, more army jeeps arrived.

An Israeli soldier kneels on the neck of an Israeli left-wing activist during an attempt to bring water to Palestinian communities in the South Hebron Hills, April 17, 2021. (Osama Iliwat)

The soldiers attacked us, threw tear gas, and tried to stop us from delivering the water. One of the protesters was violently thrown on the ground, and wounded by an Israeli officer. Another demonstrator was knocked to the ground, after which a soldier kneeled on his neck. Six demonstrators were arrested and detained for seven hours.

As an activist in the occupied Jordan Valley for the past 15 years, I have witnessed this injustice on a daily basis. Thousands of Palestinians in the area do not have access to water in temperatures that can swell up to 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) in the summer. Palestinian families must travel every three days through IDF live-fire zones (which sprawl over 46 percent of the Jordan Valley) to bring water in rusty containers at the price of NIS 1,700 ($530) per month.

Often the army will confiscate or destroy the containers, leaving entire families without a drop of water for long stretches of time, as they did in the hamlet of Khirbet Humsa or Ras a-Tin in the peak of July’s summer heat. Other times, if Palestinians decide to buy their water from the Palestinian Authority, the army will destroy their water pipes.

The settlers themselves also take an active role in water sabotage. Over the last two years, they have cordoned off two springs in the area, blocking access to local Palestinian shepherds from watering their flocks.

An aerial photo of the demolition of the Khirbet Humsa community in the Jordan Valley, occupied West Bank, July 8, 2021. (Oren Ziv)

Many Palestinians in the Jordan Valley who depend on agriculture install makeshift water pipes and connect to the national water grid independently. However, without a construction permit, doing so is considered “illegal” and means the Israeli authorities can demolish those pipes at any time. The Civil Administration — which runs the day-to-day affairs of the millions of Palestinians under occupation — rejects over 98 percent of Palestinian building permit requests in Area C, where both the Jordan Valley and the South Hebron Hills are located, while regularly carrying out demolitions for so-called planning and construction violations.

Water is a given for most Jewish Israelis, regardless of what side of the Green Line they live on. Palestinians in the Jordan Valley and the South Hebron Hills must struggle every day to secure every drop of water for themselves and their families. For 54 years, the Israeli authorities, through an increasingly brutal military, have been depriving Palestinians living under occupation of the right as part of its efforts to expel a native, civilian population from their land, simply because they are not from the right ethnic or religious group. This is apartheid at its worst.

*

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 Palestinian farmer fills water tanks in the West Bank village of Khirbet al-Makhoul, Jordan Valley, October 9, 2013. (Activestills.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.

***

New Hampshire, like many other states, is deeply penetrated by military culture, funding, and institutions. Yet its presence is hardly visible to many people.

This is amazing, as the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about was a mere fragment of its scope today.

An interactive map of the New Hampshire military-industrial-educational-recreational complex is available here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1DW10hd6cE7XmFuNIrycFLEShv7f0RtE-&usp=sharing

Military contractor campaign donations, propaganda, and patriotism account for much of the support for our endless wars and preparation for them, costly in economic, environmental, and human ways. In addition, a multitude of interests sustains the military and its budget, and encourages silence about its wars of aggression and other activities.

The antiwar movement must contend with the many ordinary citizens who may have no desire to kill people, destroy the environment, or overthrow governments. They are trying to earn a living, fund their charitable organizations and schools, or save their communities from economic devastation. At present, without a national budget devoted to human needs, they see no other choice but to slip under the wings of the lush military budget.

The military contracts for almost everything. Along with other government enterprises, such as prisons and highways, this further ensures their survival while contributing to booming regional economies where unemployment levels are low.

F-35, BAE Systems and More

Readers of specialty publications, such as the NH Business Review, may learn that: “In New Hampshire, the F-35 program supports 55 suppliers—35 of which are small businesses—and over 900 direct jobs, much of them located at BAE Systems in Nashua. The F-35 program generates over $481 million in economic impact in the state” (9-21-17).

Incidentally, the F-35—considered the most expensive weapon in history—has been rated unfavorably by military experts.

The city of Nashua’s website informs us that BAE is the largest employer in the city and, in addition: “A total of 130 defense contractors were awarded contracts between 2000 and 2012, which is indicative of how robust the defense industry has become in Nashua.” Not coincidentally, Money magazine has rated Nashua as the best place to live.

BAE Systems in Nashua, New Hampshire. [Source: facebook.com]

The weapons manufacturers and their component suppliers dominate the manufacturing sector of the NH economy. BAE, a British corporation, has the largest slice of Department of Defense (DoD) contracts in NH, totaling more than $2 billion in the 21^st century. The company is the premiere advanced weapons provider to the U.S. Navy.

Its products include advanced naval machine guns, electromagnetic railguns and hypervelocity projectiles along with tracked and wheeled armored combat vehicles, naval guns, artillery and missile launching systems, and advanced precision strike munitions and ordnance.

Other large NH weapons firms and their suppliers include: L3 Technologies, Impact Science and Technology, Kollsman (a subsidiary of Elbit, the Israeli firm that builds hi-tech walls), Timken, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed (the latter two have subsidiaries here).^[1]

The New Hampshire Aerospace & Defense Export Consortium boasts of its great success and significant growth in finding foreign markets for New Hampshire’s defense exports.

New Hampshire Senator Maggie Hassan (D) visits Timken Aerospace offices in Lebanon, New Hampshire. [Source: hassan.senate.gov]

Nationally, multimillion and billion-dollar defense contracts also go to firms in information technology, intelligence, construction, remediation, and logistics (transportation, food, clothing, janitorial services, etc.).

Among the larger recipients in NH are Red River Technology (software maintenance), Warwick Mills (technical textiles), Environmental Alternatives (nuclear remediation), and C & S Wholesale Grocers (food and transport). The DoD, a larger economy than most nations, contracts out to every nook and cranny.

Medium and small businesses also received stimulation from its budget, such as Portsmouth Blind & Shade (window shades), Alan’s of Boscawen (meals), Velcro (hook and loop material), Univex Corporation (fat analyzing kit), and Monadnock Lifetime Products (disposable double handcuffs).

Green Feet Enterprises provided specialized mountain rescue training for Naval Special Operations Warfare. Child care centers, heating oil companies, landscapers, carpenters, appliance dealers, and others get some of the pie. This may explain the vast silence regarding the trillions spent.

The DoD has preferential provisions for contracts with small, disadvantaged, veteran-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned, woman-owned, minority-owned, American Indian-owned, or Black American-owned businesses, and also for firms in the AbilityOne Program or labor surplus areas.

Thus, out-of-state contractors may be used without meeting market efficiency standards. Silver Wolf Enterprises of Great Falls, Montana, an American Indian-owned business, provided “Microwaves” (contract description but apparently the kitchen equipment), to a site in Newington, NH.

The Pentagon, Non-Profits, and Higher Ed

For-profit businesses are not the only recipients of large DoD contracts. From 2000 to 2018, there were about 800 contracts and grants to NH non-profit organizations, state and local governments, higher education, and medical institutions. Many of the non-profits are research institutes, think tanks, or engineering firms, not charitable organizations.

For example, the Advanced Regenerative Manufacturing Institute had grants for $19m and $1.5m for biotechnology research, and Autonomous Undersea Systems had a $969,348 grant for research to improve naval operations. One of the grants to the Academy of Applied Science of Concord was for $11m, for basic research. The Student Conservation Association (a non-profit organization) has received many large DoD grants for construction monitoring, conservation work, and other activities.

Advanced Regenerative Manufacturing Institute (ARMI) hosts the official opening of BioFabUSA in 2017. Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan, Governor Chris Sununu, former Senator Kelly Ayotte, former Governor John Lynch, and Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas attended to demonstrate their non-partisan support. [Source: businessdefense.gov]

Similar to the DoD contracts in the billions that Goodwill Industries receives nationwide for clothing and janitorial services, organizations that train and employ disabled people perform this type of work in NH. Northern New England Employment Services, with headquarters in Maine, had many contracts to supply workers for NH military sites. Industries for the Blind had contracts for furniture; CW Resources provided janitorial service in Portsmouth.

The University System of New Hampshire and Dartmouth participate in the DoD’s environmental research programs as well as others. Of the USNH contracts, one for nearly $2m, is to study “Seed dispersal networks and novel ecosystem functioning in Hawaii.” Dartmouth also receives grants for military medical research. The state’s universities and colleges are provided with tuition and fees for ROTC students.

In Keene, the Monadnock Economic Development Corporation is planning a joint project with Keene State College to create a “business hub” that will train students for work at BAE and other military contractors. Their announcements do not explain the nature of these businesses.

Defense Department Installations in the State

The State of NH receives support for National Guard facilities; one such grant was for $22,545,587. The Guard serves civilians in natural disasters, and more recently as a very efficient vaccination service. It is needed and appreciated here, but the other side of its service is deployment on overseas military adventures.

New Hampshire National Guard. [Source: nh.ng.mil]

Towns and counties have DoD contracts to provide police protection, for example, to Army Engineers recreational and flood control sites. The militarization of police, such as the Bearcat of Keene, may also be noted.

Bearcat of Keene, an example of police militarization. [Source: flickr.com]

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) performs much essential civilian work. In NH, it maintains many lovely lake sites for civilian recreation, and also awards subcontracts. For example, a local contractee is Bigg Dawg Landscaping of Weare, a woman-owned business providing janitorial service at Hopkinton-Everett Lakes. However, USACE is a DoD component and helps to mitigate criticism of it.

Force Protection recreation area from New Boston Air Force Station. [Source: schriever.spaceforce.mil]

Children are fostered by the military in several ways. There is, of course, the national menu of war games: on TV and the computer, and at sporting events. Closer to home, military recruiters appear in high schools. Many children take the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB); their names and results are sent to recruiters. Although it is possible to opt out of the testing, children and parents are often unaware of this.

There are about 10 high schools in NH with Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps (JROTC) programs, some with marksmanship activities. Most of those taking the training do not become officers, but they are indoctrinated in the military perspective and may become comfortable with violent solutions.

On November 1, 2017, the Keene Sentinel reported: “Plans for air marksmanship training in Fall Mountain cafeteria cause concern, by Meg McIntyre. LANGDON—A school board decision to allow JROTC air marksmanship training in the Fall Mountain Regional High School cafeteria has drawn concern from parents, prompting the district’s superintendent to put the training on hold. After considering every option, the school cafeteria was determined to be the best location for JROTC to conduct Air Rifle Marksmanship.” (Its usual venue was under construction.)

Philanthropy represents another stretch of the arms. The DoD itself donates surplus property to the Red Cross, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Boys and Girls Clubs of America, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Camp Fire, Little League Baseball, U.S. Olympic Committee, National Civilian Community Corps and others, and also participates in programs such as Boy Scouts’ encampment. The weapons contractors generously fund community organizations and take a particular interest in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) education.

A popular robotics program in NH schools is FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology), a non-profit that aims to increase interest in STEM education. “BAE Systems, Inc. is proud to partner with FIRST® because we know that the hands-on experiences and life skills which students gain through FIRST®–including collaboration, critical thinking, communication, creativity and confidence—are necessary for our country, our communities, and even our own future workforce worldwide.”

Strategic Partners include Bechtel, Boeing, Booz Allen, GM, Lockheed, and United Technologies.

BAE Systems partnering with FIRST®. [Source: baesystems.com]

FIRST is also funded by the DoD and the New Hampshire Department of Education, which offers “grants to every public and charter school in New Hampshire to give every student a chance to be on a FIRST team.” “For grades 9-12, ages 14-18 the FIRST Robotics Competition provides for teams of students that build and program a robot to perform prescribed tasks against a field of competitors. . . . For grades K-4, ages 6-10 the G FIRST LEGO® League Jr. teams design and build a Team Model based on the Challenge, using LEGO® Education WeDo to program it to move.”

BAE has an additional program: “[I]n partnership with the University of New Hampshire, the ‘BAE Systems Summer STEM Scholar Program’ provided scholarships for 10 students to attend the university’s Tech Leaders camp. The project was designed and run by seven BAE Systems engineers, who also served as mentors for the students and provided insight on what it is like to have a career at BAE Systems.”

BAE-sponsored STEM project in New Hampshire. [Source: baesystems.com]

The pension fund for NH state government workers has been heavily invested in Microsoft and Cisco, major defense contractors. Churches, museums, and many non-profit organizations (as well as individuals) have investments in mutual funds that do very well with returns from military contractors.

Bought and Paid For

New Hampshire’s congressional representatives’ campaigns are funded by military contractors, and they have fruitful mutual relationships. Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen, for example, received $28,027 from BAE Systems in the 2020 election cycle.

A member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, Shaheen voted for record military budgets under the National Defense Authorization Acts, and for military intervention in Syria in September 2013.

Even if there were no campaign donations, every politician knows how important military spending is to the state’s economic survival. The NH Aerospace & Defense Export Consortium includes manufacturers, banks, non-profit organizations, universities, and local governments.

Recruiting Stations and Bases

Military institutions are well established in the Granite State. Recruiting stations are found throughout the state, as well as armories—many with lead contamination.

There are five military bases: Londonderry Army Reserve, New Boston Air Force Station, Air Force Active Newington, Pease ANGB Air Force Guard Portsmouth, and Somersworth USARC Army Reserve. New Boston and Pease are superfund sites now reported as clean.

Bases in the U.S. generally cannot be shown on a single printed map, as there are more than 4,000 of them.

They are economic hubs in their areas. Real estate, shopping, entertainment, restaurants, motels with housekeeping suites, car rentals, even museums, are advertised on base websites.

New Boston, a former bombing range, is now part of the Space Force, and uses a small area for “critical satellite command and control.” Other parts of the range, deemed clean, are available for recreation (for those with military connections), including rentals of cabins, kayaks, RV sites, party supplies, bikes, and bouncy castles.

New Boston Space Force site. [Source: upload.wikimedia.org]

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and many non-profit organizations providing services or solidarity for veterans are also part of the military-industrial complex. While there are a few member organizations critical of our military operations, e.g., Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War!, most are strongly supportive.

Contractor philanthropy is especially directed to military charities. The corporation’s website states: “BAE Systems supports organizations that provide services to military members and their families, veterans, or operate in the security and intelligence fields or other military support functional areas.”

There is much more to the bootprint. Militarized police forces; board members of military contractors with educational, charitable, and political ties; board members of non-profits with military connections; and the old symbols of statues, parades, and glorification of our violent history in schools and speeches.

So many citizens are included, some happily, others because it is the best way to earn a living or keep a worthy organization afloat. This is not to blame them—almost all of us are connected in one way or another—but it helps to explain why there is so little protest about the military budget or the international predations of the military.

The DoD has spent trillions in the 21^st century. Meanwhile, funds are lacking for support of essential infrastructure and social services—even in NH, one of the richest states in the richest nation.

Even more tragic is the history and future aim of the military’s mission: not to “defend” the nation, but to protect corporate “interests,” and to maintain “world supremacy,” even when that results in the murder of people, destruction of the environment, and obliteration of governments, in violation of U.S. laws, the U.S. Constitution, and international law.

*

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.

Joan Roelofs is Professor Emerita of Political Science, Keene State College, New Hampshire. She is the author of Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism (SUNY Press, 2003) and Greening Cities (Rowman and Littlefield, 1996). She is the translator of Victor Considerant’s Principles of Socialism (Maisonneuve Press, 2006), and with Shawn P. Wilbur, of Charles Fourier’s anti-war fantasy, The World War of Small Pastries (Autonomedia, 2015). Joan can be reached a: [email protected].

Notes

1. My information on contractors, obtained from the usaspending.gov database of federal contracts, covers approximately the period from 2000 to 2018. 

Featured image is from nhpr.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.

***

I am confident in predicting that as more and more bad news about the ineffectiveness and dangerous side effects of COVID vaccines become increasingly known to more of the public, the big drug companies will increasingly switch from vaccines to prescription antiviral medicines.

The unrelenting opposition to using ivermectin to treat and prevent COVID-19 is stronger than ever. This has resulted from a gigantic increase in demand for IVM by much of the public. Despite big media tirades against IVM, the truth about its effectiveness (together with failure of COVID vaccines) has reached the public through many articles on alternative news websites and truth-tellers on countless podcasts. Its success has forced Big Pharma to create expensive copies of it.

Monthly IVM prescriptions increased 72 percent from 39,864 in 2019 to 68,428 in 2021 (through May). Just when COVID vaccination started to be pushed in January 2021 prescriptions hit a high of 97,192. A number of medical specialties greatly increased off-label use of IVM for fighting COVID in this period: anesthesiology, 1,319%; pulmonology, 1,167%; cardiology, 741%, for example. Strong support by physicians for IVM to cure and prevent COVID.

And in my book Pandemic Blunder I made the case with data that using cheap, safe and effective generics like IVM and hydroxychloroquine would prevent 80% or more of COVID deaths. Esteemed physician Peter McCollough later said 85%. For the U.S., that means some 600,000 lives could have been saved, and globally over 4 million lives.  Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people worldwide have also died from COVID vaccines, the failed solution to the pandemic.

Merck, a maker of IVM, is getting much positive press coverage for its forthcoming prescription oral antiviral (molnupiravir). It is designed to replace IVM, which they cannot make big money from. The FDA will soon give it emergency use authorization because of the emerging clarity that COVID vaccines do NOT work effectively or safely.

That the Washington Post says that what Merck has created is the “first covid-fighting pill” illustrates how awful big media has been in ignoring the proven benefits of the IVM and HCQ generics. And in ignoring the many failures of COVID vaccines. In its October 2 front page story on the new Merck pill, it did not even mention IVM or present any data showing IVM as proven even more effective than the new expensive drug tested on only hundreds of people for a short period. In contrast, IVM has been used successfully on hundreds of thousands of people to treat and prevent COVID.

Speaking as someone who is using IVM as a prophylactic, here is what I have seen in recent times. Though getting a prescription for it is very difficult and stressful it can be done through a number of websites. But then the battle just begins. Many pharmacies, especially big chain ones, will not fill IVM prescriptions if there is any evidence that it is being used to fight COVID. And then you will likely discover, as I did, that virtually no pharmacy (typically small community ones) that will fill such prescriptions has any IVM. That’s right. There is a national shortage of IVM because of huge demand in recent months and because U.S. makers have not escalated production.

Probably, millions of vaccine resisters are using IVM, especially those resisting booster shots.

Can you still get it? Yes, and even without a prescription. It will have to come from India, with many makers of IVM. It can take many weeks to get it. But the cost is a tiny fraction of what U.S. pharmacies have been charging when they did have it in stock. Rather than $4 or $5 for a 3 mg pill, you can buy 12 mg pills for way under $1 a pill.

But there is more to the IVM story.

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that there is massive medical science data showing absolute reliable data that IVM is safe and effective for both treating and preventing COVID. This is what should be a bold large headline in newspapers if we had honest big media: IVM SAFE AND EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE TO COVID VACCINES.

But instead, there is a constant barrage of articles and statements from government agencies asserting IVM should not be used to fight COVID. They argue it is unsafe and ineffective. Both are lies aimed solely at protecting the mass vaccination effort and the profits of big drug companies. And now protecting the new Big Pharma market for antiviral pills.

FDA has issued very strong warnings against using IVM for COVID. Nothing it has said follows the true science and mountains of data supporting safe and effective IVM use. Like other IVM opponents, it has conflated personal IVM use with the use of IVM products designed for animals.

This is even more infuriating. Merck, despite being a maker of IVM discredited its use for COVID by irresponsibly stating, “We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.”

Clearly, Merck, Pfizer and other vaccine makers are developing their own oral antivirals to directly compete with the cheap and effective IVM. These antivirals, unlike cheap generic IVM, would be patented so expensive pills could be sold worldwide. They will find some ingenious ways to copy IVM but make enough changes to get patents.

Already, Merck has begun production of its new pill to be taken twice daily for five days. Even more significant: The U.S. government has made an advance purchase of 1.7 million treatment courses for $1.2 billion! That is over $700 per treatment. So much more profitable than making IVM. Forget the billions of dollars spent on vaccines that are injuring and killing many people.

I am confident in predicting that as more and more bad news about the ineffectiveness and dangerous side effects of COVID vaccines become increasingly known to more of the public, the big drug companies will increasingly switch from vaccines to prescription antiviral medicines. This is what smart corporate business strategic planning is all about. With Merck, it has already started. And FDA, CDC and NIH will go along with this strategic switch.

This will preserve a trillion-dollar market for pharmaceutical companies. How the government and public health establishment weasel word their switch from COVID vaccines to antiviral pills will be a marvelous magical trick to watch. Do you think that they will admit that millions of people worldwide have lost their health and lives from vaccine use? Of course not. Expensive antiviral pills will simply be sold as a better solution.

Be clear about the science explaining why IVM and HCQ have worked. They both (along with zinc) interfere at the earliest stage of COVID infection with viral replication. Stops infection in its tracks. They work as prophylactics for the same reason. If you keep a modest amount of IVM and HCQ in your body (and take zinc, vitamins C and D, and quercetin), any virus that enters your body can be stopped before major viral replication. The new prescription medicines coming from Merck and other Big Pharma are designed to serve the same function as the cheap generics.

This is the big truth coming to fruition: All the emerging information on COVID vaccine ineffectiveness and dangerous and often lethal side effects is forcing a major strategic shift to antivirals.

Congressman Louie Gohmert has recently made a number of solid observations about IVM:

Almost 4 billion doses of ivermectin have been prescribed for humans, not horses, over the past 40 years. In fact, the CDC recommends all refugees coming to the U.S. from the Middle East, Asia, North Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean receive this so-called dangerous horse medicine as a preemptive therapy. Ivermectin is considered by the World Health Organization (WHO) to be an “essential medicine.” The Department of Homeland Security’s “quick reference” tool on COVID-19 mentioned how this life-saving drug reduced viral shedding duration in a clinical trial.

To date, there are at least 63 trials and 31 randomized controlled trials showing benefits to the use of ivermectin to fight COVID-19 prophylactically as well as for early and late-stage treatment. Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of many viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. It has strong anti-inflammatory properties and prevents transmission of COVID-19 when taken either before or after exposure to the virus.

Ivermectin also speeds up recovery and decreases hospitalization and mortality in COVID-19 patients. It has been FDA approved for decades and has very few and mild side effects. It has an average of 160 adverse events reported every year, which indicates ivermectin has a better safety record than several vitamins. In short, there is no humane, logical reason why it should not be widely used to fight against the China Virus should a patient and doctor decide it is appropriate to try in that patient’s case.

And that small number of adverse events pales in comparison to hundreds of thousands for COVID vaccines.

A new, comprehensive report noted that 63 studies have confirmed the effectiveness of IVM in treating COVID-19. There’s a great website to see positive IVM data.

And consider what former Director of Intellectual Property at Gilead Pharmaceuticals, Brian Remy, said about the necessity of implementing ivermectin. “It is simple — use what works and is most effective — period. Ivermectin used in combination with other therapeutics is a no-brainer and should be the standard of care for COVID-19. Not only would this be good for business and help avoid the criticism and bad PR, and potential civil/criminal liability for censorship, scientific misconduct, etc. for misrepresentation of Ivermectin and other generics, but most importantly it would save countless lives and end the pandemic for good.” Amen.

Want even more positive facts? Consider the India experience. In India’s deadly second pandemic surge, ivermectin obliterated their crisis. Within weeks after adopting IVM cases were down 90%. Those states with more aggressive IVM use were down more dramatically. Daily cases in Goa, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, and Delhi were down 95%, 98%, 99%, 99%, respectively.

And appreciate this: Dr. Kory and the FLCCC published a narrative review in May 2021, showing the massive effectiveness of IVM against COVID-19 in reducing death and cases. They concluded that it must be adopted globally immediately. Yet big media without respect for public health waged war against IVM. Now it is going crazy in support of the expensive Merck antiviral pill.

To sum up: The IVM story is far from over. We now have a pandemic of the vaccinated. From all over the world the fractions of people said to have died from COVID who were fully vaccinated are very high, often 80%. Many people with breakthrough COVID infections die. Blame those deaths on the vaccines. Big media suppresses all the negative information on the vaccines and all the positive information on IVM. This double whammy is pure evil. It is designed to pave the way for the new, expensive generation of antiviral pills once the medical and public health establishments backtrack from their vaccine advocacy and coercion.

*

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 LifeSiteNews.

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn has a doctorate in engineering but has worked on health issues for decades. He is the author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles on the pandemics. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors. He has lectured at many universities, including the Army War College.

Featured image is from 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.

***

The 21^st century, geopolitically, so far has been shaped by the U.S.- engineered Forever Wars.

Forever Wars: Afghanistan-Iraq, part 2, ranging from 2004 to 2021, is the fourth in a series of e-books recovering the Pepe Escobar archives on Asia Times.

The archives track a period of 20 years – starting with the columns and stories published under The Roving Eye sign in the previous Asia Times Online from 2001 all the way to early 2015.

The first e-book, Shadow Play, tracked the interplay between China, Russia and the U.S. between 2017-2020.

The second, Persian Miniatures, tracked the Islamic Republic of Iran throughout the “axis of evil” era, the Ahmadinejad years, the nuclear deal, and “maximum pressure” imposed by the Trump administration.

Forever Wars is divided in two parts, closely tracking Afghanistan and Iraq.

Forever Wars, part 1 starts one month before 9/11 in the heart of Afghanistan, and goes all the way to 2004.

Part 2, edited by my Asia Times colleague Bradley Martin, starts with the Abu Ghraib scandal and the Taliban adventures in Texas and goes all the way to the “Saigon moment” and the return of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

The unifying idea behind this e-book series is quite a challenge: to recover the excitement of what is written as “the first draft of History”.

You may read the whole two-volume compilation chronologically, as a thriller, following in detail all the plot twists and cliffhangers.

Or you may read it in a self-service way, picking a date or a particular theme.

On part 1, you will find the last interview by commander Massoud in the Panjshir before he was killed two days before 9/11; the expansion of jihad as a “thermonuclear bomb”; life in “liberated” Kabul; life in Iraq in the last year under Saddam Hussein; on the trail of al-Qaeda in the Afghan badlands; who brought us the war on Iraq.

On part 2, you will revive, among other themes:

• Abu Ghraib as an American tragedy.
• Fallujah as a new Guernica.
• Iraq as the new Afghanistan.
• The myth of Talibanistan.
• The counter-insurgency absurdities in “AfPak”.
• How we all remain hostages of 9/11.
• The Pipelineistan Great Game.
• The failing surges – in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
• How was life in Talibanistan in the year 2000.
• NATO designing our future already in 2010.
• Afghanistan courted as a player in Eurasian connectivity.

And since July 7, the chronicle of the astonishing end of the 20-year-long Forever War in Afghanistan on August 15, 2021.

The majority of the articles, essays and interviews selected for this two-part e-book were written in Afghanistan and in Iraq and/or before and after multiple visits to both countries.

So welcome to a unique geopolitical road trip – depicting in detail the slings and arrows of outrageous (mis)fortune that will continue to shape the young 21^st century.

Ride the snake.

Click here to purchase the e-Book from Asia Times.

*

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.

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.

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.

***

“You cannot pretend nothing has happened!” That was the rallying cry at the San Francisco State University faculty grievance hearing, addressed to President Lynn Mahoney and Provost Jennifer Summit.

On Sept. 30, 2021, from ten in the morning until 4 pm, Rabab Ibrahim Abdulhadi, Director/Senior scholar of Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies Program (AMED) at San Francisco State University (SFSU), presented her case against the university administration in a public grievance hearing during which she alleged that SFSU failed to protect her academic freedom when Zoom cancelled an open classroom she had co-organized with Tomomi Kinukawa (Lecturer Faculty, Department of Women and Gender Studies) almost exactly a year ago, a webinar described in one of their announcements as “a historic round-table conversation with Palestinian feminist, militant, and leader Leila Khaled.”

For background information on the cancellation last year of the webinar on Palestinian rights called “Whose Narratives? Gender, Justice and Resistance: A Conversation with Leila Khaled,” see my blog post: Learning the Palestinian Revolution & The Zoomification Of Higher Education.

Capture on the left is from a Zoom public grievance hearing at SFSU on Sept 30, 2021 over the university administration’s mishandling of Zoom’s cancellation a year ago of an open classroom webinar that included Palestinian feminist icon Leila Khaled on the guest panel.

The hearing (ironically conducted on Zoom) was accessible to the public in accordance with university regulations, although accessibility issues came up on more than one occasion as the hearing proceeded, with Professor Abdulhadi saying at one point: “Many of my family members in Palestine and elsewhere have tried to come in and they are also being interrogated [as to] who they are and people in Palestine do not like invasive questions, so they should be able to attend without actually being asked who they are and [told] they shouldn’t be there to support me.” And at another point: “I’m just asking about people who might be in the waiting room. I know that one of my nieces said to me, can you let me in? I said I’m not the one who can let you in.”

Addressing Professor Abdulhadi’s concerns, her representative at the hearing, Sang Hea Kil, Department of Justice Studies, San Jose State University, said: “This brings up some problems about process, because if this hearing was happening on campus, then San Francisco State University is a public campus, so basically anybody can walk on campus and if they think that the faculty hearing is interesting, they can walk in, without having to have their name be required or their affiliation to the university [questioned]. So, I just want to mark for the record that there seems to be some problems here with maybe San Francisco State’s interpretation of the faculty hearing manual because I definitely interpret it very differently.”

I sat through the entire proceeding (which was recorded with live transcription) and was startled by the pro forma and halfhearted nature of the administration’s response to the passionate outpourings of the principals and witnesses at this grievance hearing. They had one expert witness, Carleen Mandolfo, SF State’s associate vice president of Faculty Affairs and Development, who prompted the remark by Professor Abdulhadi’s representative: “It’s unclear to me why you were chosen for the expert witness for the … administration if you kind of repeatedly said that you weren’t involved in the event or what happened.” The response from the witness: “I don’t know.”

Quoting the grievance hearing manual, the university representative’s opening statement highlighted the standards by which the allegations must be weighed and stated that the faculty member bringing forward the grievance must connect the alleged wrong done to them by the university “with the rights accruing to his or her job classification. And I want to stress the fact that as stated by the hearing manual … Dr. Abdulhadi bears the burden of proof today. She must present enough evidence that convinces the panel by a preponderance of the evidence that she was wronged by the University in connection with her rights as a faculty member… And just to make it very clear, there are no tie-breakers and the preponderance of the evidence standard [applies]. She must show that it is more likely than not that her claims are valid.”

Professor Abdulhadi’s representative, Professor Sang Hea Kil, then presented compelling evidence in the form of exhibits of emails, other documents and poignant testimonies by four individuals, two of whom were directly involved in the preparation and coordination of the cancelled webinar. At the end of this presentation, she listed four proposed remedies, denying the University’s claim that “the remedy requested for the university to create its own video platform is unreasonable, unduly burdensome and outside of the scope of the university’s responsibility and purpose.”

Capture from a US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel webinar streamed on Sept 28, 2021 that explored SFSU’s “consistent undermining of the AMED studies program, its sabotaging of the incorporation of Palestine into critical ethnic studies, its consistent flouting of academic freedom, its privileging of Zionist Jewish voices, feelings and perspectives over the lived experiences and struggles of anti-Zionist Jewish students and activists as well as Arab, Muslim and/or Palestinian students.”

The evidence was compelling. It was presented with only cursory cross-examination of the witnesses by the administration and a final statement riddled with “technical difficulties” that simply reiterated the administration’s opening statement and failed to engage with the specific allegations presented by Professor Abdulhadi’s team.

The evidence directly challenged the university administration’s claims that the cancellation of the webinar “was not by any act of the University at all. In fact, the University actually asked Zoom not to cancel the event, and they on numerous occasions, offered Dr. Abdulhadi … university resources and support to host the event on different platforms… [and that] Dr. Abdulhadi has not suffered any harm in connection with her rights as a professor, not by means of a contract violation … or any other right or benefits associated with her position. The person censored here was Leila Khalid, and as unfortunate as that is, she’s not an employee at this university and we do not owe her any duties, or responsibilities.”

Professor Sang Hea Kil provided evidence that Professor Abdulhadi’s right of academic freedom was violated by San Francisco State Administration “by their words and actions that the administration attempted to chill her free speech by erroneously threatening her and her co-organizers with possible criminal liability and imprisonment for classroom speech, and that the administration did nothing to alleviate Zoom censoring of her and her co-organizers’ open classroom [and facilitated] the shutdown of their Zoom open classroom on other venues … We have three parts to the presentation roadmap: first we’re going to review the tenets of academic freedom that permeate the campus and academic programs, we’re going to review what happened. We’re going to review what happened before the classroom [event], what happened the day of the classroom, and what happened after with the open classroom webinar.”

I will now quote excerpts from testimonies by two professors who acted as witnesses at the hearing. The first is Dr. Tomomi Kinukawa, who disputed the University’s claim that “Dr. Abdulhadi cannot show harm or any infringement on the rights related to her employment and [that therefore] it essentially means that she has no standing for this grievance.”

The second is Dr. Blanca Missé, Assistant Professor of French in the Modern Languages and Literatures Department and is a member of the board of California Faculty Association as well as the California State University Employees Union, who explained why one of the remedies requested (for the university to create its own video platform) is neither “unreasonable” nor “unduly burdensome and outside of the scope of the University’s responsibility and purpose,” as the University representative claimed.

A call by Palestine Legal inviting the public to attend the second grievance hearing against SFSU on 10/19 from 10–4pm PST to addresses 14 years of attacks on Professor Abdulhadi and the Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas (AMED) program she directs. Attend this grievance here.

From Professor Dr. Tomomi Kinukawa’s testimony in response to the question: “Please explain if there were any negative outcomes for you and how the San Francisco State University administration handled the situation with your collaborative classroom event?”

The silencing of the webinar has multiple negative outcomes. First of all, the burden of [extra work] carried out by Dr. Abdulhadi and myself. We had to work for months to address all the issues created by the censorship, I mean the silencing, and we had to explain to our students what took place, and we had to write additional lectures, then assign readings to turn silencing into a teachable moment. We had to readjust our syllabi and assignments and so forth, and while doing that we also had to seek legal help.

… What we had to go through before and after the cancellation of the open classroom also needs to be understood as a form of violence…. This administration’s validation [of accusations of criminality on the part of Zionist groups pressuring Zoom] exposed us to [attacks] by the media and right-wing tabloids. For example, a New York Post journalist emailed me and informed me that the US Department of Education is asking other federal agencies, the Treasury Department and the Justice Department to review the September 23 events, and also it was reported that right-wing, far-right [individuals] were urging the Attorney General and FBI director to investigate whether our classroom [teaching] violated the material support for terrorism act, and it was then under the Trump administration and in that political climate.

[All that] took a huge toll on our emotional and physical health and wellbeing. And also … all of us who are engaged in knowledge production and teaching know how violent it is when our meticulously planned courses get publicly demeaned, and our anti-colonial narratives for justice, our life’s work, gets silenced by the leaders of our own institution.

And finally, I must say that it angers me that our administration denied our students and the rest of this once in a lifetime opportunity to directly learn from the panelists and the prominent feminist scholar and global revered public intellectual Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi. Anyone who teaches can understand it doesn’t happen very often, it’s a very rare moment and very privileged moment for all of us, and that includes the older community members who registered for the webinar.

It’s as if the administration completely failed to see the value of our open classroom, and that hurts especially, because both the provost and president are feminist scholars, and I must say this is intellectually irresponsible, that they didn’t support a classroom in a meaningful way so that our students and also wider community were able to actually listen to all these great thinkers of our time. I’m actually very much embarrassed, as a community member of their efforts to silence us.

Professor Blanca Missé began by pointing out that she too teaches about armed struggle [in her case, in the French colonial and WWII contexts] and the liberation of people from colonial and foreign domination, and then she went on to focus her remarks on the question of academic freedom and how the administration is accountable.

… I’m here today, of course, because I want to support my two colleagues … [against an administration that “was carrying forward” the libelous accusations [by Zoom] that they were engaging in criminal activity, that they were associated with terrorist groups].

But also, because I feel like these actions have a chilling effect on everybody. Just imagine a lecturer faculty member or non-tenured faculty member like myself getting an email like that sent by the provost [addressed to the organizers and accepting at face value that they might be engaged in criminal activity at the say-so of Zoom and Jewish Zionist groups], the impact it has, in what I think I can do and teach in this institution is very restrictive and censoring. If I had to ever receive an email like that, it will be really traumatizing.

We all teach difficult and controversial topics. [For example] I teach in the French program right now the history of the resistance in France and how the Nazi army criminalized the French resistance, the acts of sabotage and armed resistance against the Nazi occupation. Next week, I will be teaching the anti-colonial struggle in Algeria and we will be watching the Battle of Algiers.

… one of the moments when I decided to proactively start organizing and discussing this matter with my colleagues, is after receiving the email that was sent by President Mahoney [on September 23, 2020] explaining the cancellation of the event. It was an interesting email, because we were told that although the university disagreed with the action carried forward by Zoom, [the corporation] had the right to this action to censor the class, because [the class] violated Zoom’s terms of service. And that was the end of the story. And many of us were waiting for: and what are you going to do about it?

And then, and what are you going to do about it never happened. So, we were told that in this period when most of the instruction was being conducted on Zoom, that there is now a conflict between academic freedom, which is what should govern and rule educational institutions in this country, and the terms of service of Zoom. And when this conflict emerges, our administration goes AWOL.

[Our academic] freedom is governed by the terms of service of Zoom, which is a private company, because of course they can do what they want as a private company, but our administration has failed to reestablish the framework of academic freedom in education and say that all education on campus is decided by the faculty, and all the classes should be allowed. And it is our role as the administration to provide the material infrastructure for litigation and scholarly debates, to move forward.

So, when we were presented with this as a matter of fact, and then no action was required by the administration, I decided as an active member of my union who is engaged in questions of academic freedom (I belong to several organizations) to discuss this thoroughly with specialist colleagues outside of the institution, such as Professor [Judith] Butler, who couldn’t be here today, with whom I consulted, and we decided we need to push back against this new normal.

Which is that we don’t have academic freedom, we’re governed by the terms of service of a private corporation. We wrote a petition with our demands, and two days ago got more than 100 faculty members at San Francisco State to say okay what’s going on here.

If the terms of service of Zoom violate academic freedom, you need to take action. You can either review these terms of service or provide an alternative platform and drop the contract with Zoom, but you must do something as a State University because it is your responsibility to ensure that academic freedom is upheld in our campus. And that is regulated by the Academic Senate, that is a preamble of our contract in the CFA [California Faculty Association]. We come to work in this institution, under the understanding that it is the duty of our administration to materially protect our academic freedom. That is a contract we have, and that contract was broken.

It was broken and it has not been repaired. And we have seen zero actions to attempt to repair this contract — that is to say to restore academic freedom and to restore the dignity, the reputation and the academic freedom of the two colleagues, whose academic freedom was violated.

So this is something that, in my opinion, we crossed the line, and we need to change, and to seek structural change in our campus in terms of academic freedom to demand that we do something about Zoom. We would like our own university to provide a way to stream classes so we don’t rely on an outside company. During the pandemic, our administration outsourced part of learning to a private company. They outsourced it, and then we lost control of it … to a corporation. We should have the material resources to provide online instruction regulated by a public institution where the faculty remains the sole power to define what is allowed or not allowed.

It’s very clear that outside groups off campus start pressuring and bullying our administration, and then bullying private companies like Zoom to then interfere in the business of our administration, and that completely changes what is going on on campus, and what can be said what cannot be said, what can be taught, what cannot be taught and that affects all of us, because you know, many faculty who signed that petition are faculty teaching in the field of science. Why? Because they’re struggling, every day with the encroachment of private interest groups and private corporations who seek to limit, regulate and censor some of the research happening in the science field. So, they are very familiar with this problem, right.

It is very important for us as a faculty that we send a clear message to our administration about the new normal that has been established. It is a violation of our academic freedom and it needs to be redressed and changed. We cannot pretend nothing has happened. And the most shocking thing in this case is that for the administration, nothing has happened; there is no evidence provided to us that they’ve been really thinking hard about this matter.

The remedies proposed at the grievance hearing were as follows:

1. Dropping Zoom as a corporate partner to the university.
2. Creating alternative streaming platforms that protect academic freedom.
3. Ensuring the timely rehosting of the same webinar, this time with no interference.
4. Issuing a public apology to Drs. Abdulhadi and Kinukawa, their invited guests, and the 1,500 SFSU students and other participants who registered for the open classroom.

The faculty panel will announce its decision in two weeks. Their recommendation then goes to the university president who can uphold or reject it. Next step is arbitration by an arbitrator agreed upon by SFSU administration and the union, whose decision is binding.

*

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.

Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa. She is an activist, researcher and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank.

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

The Pentagon’s Dilemma: The Covid Vaccine Impairs the Performance of U.S. Fighting Forces

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 04, 2021

The adverse events and injuries pertaining to the Covid vaccine are amply documented: thrombosis, heart attacks, myocarditis, blood clots, neurological impacts. Indelibly these conditions will affect the performance and capabilities of US fighting forces.

Video: Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”: Towards a World War III Scenario

By Peter Koenig, October 04, 2021

Behind its development is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – with support of the Rockefeller Foundation – and others belonging to the sinister all-digitization, depopulation and eugenics agenda.

Video: Why Do So Many Still Buy the Covid Narrative? Prof. Mattias Desmet

By Prof. Mattias Desmet and Dan Astin-Gregory, October 04, 2021

My guest tonight is Mattias Desmet, Professor of Clinical Psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, and his observations over the past 18 months have led him to conclude that the overwhelming majority have indeed fallen under a kind of spell.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Historic and Legal Perspectives of the Pandemic

By Robert F. Kennedy Jr, October 04, 2021

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. covers both the legal aspects of our efforts seeking to disapprove the emergency use of the experimental gene therapies and points out the dangers of the political climate that allows these restrictions and mandates to be enforced while the global economy is about to burst.

Video: Attorney Thomas Renz Releases Medicare and Pfizer Whistleblower Data: Vaccine Related Injuries and Deaths Far More Widespread Than Reported

By Sundance, October 04, 2021

Thanks to a Whistleblower that came forth to Attorney Thomas Renz, the public is now seeing, for the first time ever, hard data from the largest database available in the U.S. to study the COVID-19 impact including deaths & injuries; The CMS Medicare Tracking System.

The Military and Intelligence Origins of Public Health. The Pharmaceutical Branch of the Military Industrial Complex

By Dr. T. P. Wilkinson, October 04, 2021

As a conservative campaigner for healthcare safety, especially for children, and an environmental activist Kennedy has concentrated on corporate malfeasance and regulatory capture by the pharmaceutical industry. In this talk he explains the relationship of the health crisis to the State itself.

“Our Species is Being Genetically Modified”: Humanity’s March Toward Extinction? Analysis of the Microbiome and Virome

By David Skripac, October 04, 2021

The innate immune system is the initial and primary means by which our bodies interact with a virus. The innate system helps the body find a genetic balance with each new viral update that is being presented to it.

U.S. Military Vaccine Mandate: A Teachable Moment.

By Thomas L. Knapp, October 04, 2021

On August 25, two days after the US Food and Drug Administration fully approved the Pfizer-Biontech COVID-19 vaccine, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered “full vaccination of all members of the Armed Forces.”

As Tories Fete Boris Johnson, a Social Catastrophe Looms

By Peter Oborne, October 04, 2021

While the ruling party gathers for a swanky conference to celebrate its political successes, average Britons are struggling with fuel shortages, economic devastation and a deadly pandemic.

Trump’s Decision to Reinforce Blockade and Dismantle US Embassy in Cuba: Declassified US Report Dismantles Story of Alleged “Acoustic Attacks”

By Telesur, October 04, 2021

According to the study, there are no microwave weapons associated with the alleged health ailments that caused the Trump administration to decide to dismantle its embassy in the Cuban capital.

Revolution at the United Nations? First Ministerial Meeting of the “Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations”

By Carla Stea, October 04, 2021

This new “Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations” offers an alternative option to vulnerable targeted member states, and the inclusion of China and Russia in this new organization seeking to re-create balance in “Defense of the United Nations Charter” promises a formidable alternative of hope, and, indeed, power for the increasing number of United Nations member states threatened with subjugation by Western capitalist dominance.

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.

***

Iran conducted military exercises near its border with Azerbaijan on October 1.  The tensions between the two neighbors were caused by Israel and Turkey, who are allies of Azerbaijan and play divisive roles.

Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev commented he was surprised by Iran’s military drills; however, his country hosted joint military drills with Turkey and Pakistan beginning on September 21, in what was dubbed the ‘Three Brothers-2021’.  Turkey has the second-largest NATO army, and Pakistan is a nuclear power.

Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov met with his Iranian counterpart Hossein Amir-Abdollahian on September 23, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. Later, Amir-Abdollahian commented that ‘third parties’ were causing divisions between Iran and Azerbaijan, in a reference to Israel, who is a close ally of Azerbaijan, who shares a 700-kilometer border with Iran.

Tehran is also worried about the presence of “terrorist forces that came to the region from Syria.”  Last year, Turkey delivered Radical Islamic terrorists from Syria to Azerbaijan during a military confrontation with Armenia.  The terrorists had been affiliated with the Al Qaeda branch in Syria, which occupies Idlib province, and is supported by Turkey.

The tensions between Baku and Tehran began to escalate on August 11, when Baku invited Iran’s ambassador, Seyyed Abbas Mousavi, to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  The meeting concerned Iranian truck drivers who had been detained carrying cargos from Iran to Armenia and passing through the Karabakh region, along the Goris-Kapan Highway.

Azerbaijan imposed a $130 road tax on Iranian commercial trucks transporting goods and fuel to neighboring Armenia. Azerbaijan had regained control of the highway last year during six weeks of intense fighting with Armenia.

Throughout the conflict in 2020, Iran had urged both Armenia and Azerbaijan to find a negotiated solution, but made it clear that “the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh belongs to Azerbaijan.”  However, biased media coverage falsely reported that Iran is on the side of Armenia, which political analyst Eldar Mamedov disputes.  Iran has an Armenian community of up to 300,000 individuals.

In 2016, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu signed an arms sale agreement with Azerbaijan, while it was certain that the Israeli drones would be targeting Armenia.  The Muslim country of Azerbaijan is one of the closest allies of Israel, having recognized the Jewish State early on, and is a major gas and oil provider for Israel. Tel Aviv and Baku have signed an agreement whereby Israeli jets can use Azerbaijani airports in an attack against Iranian nuclear installations in the event of a war. Israel provided Azerbaijan with some $825 million in weapons between 2006 and 2019, and Iran has criticized the sales and relationship. Netanyahu’s visit to Baku in 2016 and the Azerbaijani finance minister’s speech to the American-Israeli Public Affairs Council conference in 2020 are proof of the close ties between the two countries, which spans defense, energy, and security sectors.

The Israel lobby

Brenda Shaffer is an energy specialist with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), which is a registered lobbying institution based in Washington, DC. and part of the Israel lobby. Shaffer speaks neither Azeri Turkish nor Persian, has never conducted any field research in Iran, and her career was heavily funded by Azerbaijan’s state oil company.

Shaffer has been promoting ethnic strife in Iran, based on the fact that Iran is made up of numerous non-Persian peoples, and up to a quarter of the total population are ethnic Azeris, amounting to about 15 million. The Azeris, are cultural and linguistic kin with the Turks. Aliyev and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan are often heard saying that Azerbaijan and Turkey constitute “one nation in two states.”

Shaffer also points out that Iran is home to about 300,000 Armenians. By pitting different ethnic groups against each other inside Iran, Shaffer and her Israeli supporters, hope to foment ethnic divisions which would destabilize Iran.

Shaffer and the FDD are behind the false media narrative that Iran sides with Armenia on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Turkey, Israel, and Azerbaijan alliance 

Iran’s relations with Azerbaijan steadily improved under the presidency of Hassan Rouhani, who exchanged multiple visits with his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev. However, the recent tensions highlight the differences between them and the various allies of Azerbaijan who are antagonists of Iran.

Turkey and Israel are on the same side of the conflict in Artsakh, and are Azerbaijan’s closest military partners, with Israeli military equipment still being delivered via Turkish and Georgian airspace to reach its destination in Azerbaijan. The trio of Turkey, Israel, and Azerbaijan are being used by the Israeli lobby in the US to put further pressure on Iran and to isolate them from their neighbors.

*

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 Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

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.

***

Does it sometimes feel like you’re surrounded by people who’ve been hypnotised in some way? Well, maybe you are.

My guest tonight is Mattias Desmet, Professor of Clinical Psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, and his observations over the past 18 months have led him to conclude that the overwhelming majority have indeed fallen under a kind of spell.

Except it’s not actually a spell, of course: the term for it is ‘mass formation’ and right now it’s manifesting as a psychological response — not unlike hypnosis — to the unrelenting, single-focus campaign of fear to which we have all been subjected.

Join me as I explore with Mattias what triggers and sustains this mass response, where it could ultimately lead us, why a minority somehow manages to remain unaffected, and whether there’s anything we can collectively do to break the spell before it’s 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.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Thanks to a Whistleblower that came forth to Attorney Thomas Renz, the public is now seeing, for the first time ever, hard data from the largest database available in the U.S. to study the COVID-19 impact including deaths & injuries; The CMS Medicare Tracking System. 

The Total number of American Citizens that died within 14 days of receiving the COVID-19 vaccine is 48,465 according to hard data revealed in the Medicare Tracking System. 

Attorney Renz is also in possession of Remdesivir death data from the Medicare Tracking System that has been withheld by the government from our citizens. The Remdesivir data reveals of the 7,960 beneficiaries prescribed Remdesivir for Covid-19, 2,058 died. That is 25.9%.

46% of people died within 14 days of  the Remdesivir Treatment. The Remdesivir Treatment was established in U.S. Hospitals at the direction of Dr. Anthony Fauci. Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received Remdesivir. That is 24.6%. Attorney Renz says, ”This begs the question… why is this the protocol in American Hospitals? Does this appear “Safe and Effective” to you?”

LifeSiteNews has more details on the presentation specifically as it pertains to the risks within the Pfizer vaccine.  {SEE HERE} “So, when they weren’t injected, their infection rate was 1.3%, and when they got injected, it was 4.34%. It went up by over 300%,” Kingston stated.  “They had less infection when they had no protection. So, that’s a problem.”

*

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 TLR

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 November the latest book by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will be available to readers: The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health.

In an address to a conference on the Covid-19 crisis held in Budapest, Hungary this past August Robert Kennedy gave a preview of his research results to the participants. His “Historical and Legal Perspectives of the Pandemic” takes an unusually wide view of the context in which the past 18 months unfolded. As a conservative campaigner for healthcare safety, especially for children, and an environmental activist Kennedy has concentrated on corporate malfeasance and regulatory capture by the pharmaceutical industry. In this talk he explains the relationship of the health crisis to the State itself.

Ask for instance “How much grant or budgeted money from the military establishment is needed before scientific research is called military or weapons research?” or “How much objective science is produced by people entirely dependent or whose salaries are determined by the amount of money from corporate donors and military or intelligence agencies contribute to buy results?” or “How many deceptions and frauds must be perpetrated before those responsible are deemed liars and criminals?” These are of course rhetorical questions. Where a significant majority has learned to accept that pay warrants obedience and profit is the highest form of success and virtue, these questions can mean little and their answers mean even less.

Karlheinz Deschner wrote more than 10 volumes of historical research documenting from the records of the Roman Catholic Church itself all of its criminal activity since the very fraudulent founding of the Holy See in Rome. Yet none of this will alter the conviction of a true Catholic that he or she is adherent to a criminal organisation more than a thousand years old. Deschner includes all of Christendom, not just the Catholics, since the Reformation did not end the crimes.

Here it might be worth noting that some of the most vicious enforcers of the medical martial law regime, Emmanuel Macron, Justine Trudeau, Gavin Newsom, and of course Anthony Fauci were Jesuit educated. The current collaborationist pontiff himself is a Jesuit. The founder of the Society of Jesus understood his work as a military organisation for the aggressive propagation and defence of the holy church. It is a commonplace that Cecil Rhodes was inspired by the Jesuits when he created his Round Table movement for British imperial unity. The Jesuits enjoy the reputation within the espionage profession as an elite element of the Church’s notoriously wide-spun and efficient intelligence operation.

So when Robert Kennedy explains the sources of Anthony Fauci’s funding, the integration of the military and intelligence organisations in the ostensibly civilian NIAID  (and hence NIH as a whole), he is scraping some of the veneer from a carefully created body of mythology about institutional medical research and major medicine.

The story and context Kennedy presents in this talk will presumably be more detailed in his forthcoming book. However, it is useful to go back in history even further than Eisenhower’s famous farewell speech to which Kennedy refers.

The regimental genealogy of the NIAID can be traced to the War Research Service, the US regime’s secret biological and chemical weapons research office, run by George W. Merck, president of one of the largest pharmaceutical corporations in the world.[1]

In 1948, coincidental with the importation of Japanese and German war criminals with their cases of prison experimentation results, the War Research Service was transformed into the US Microbiological Institute. The War Research Service had been hidden in the Federal Security Agency, a Roosevelt organisation that included a variety of civilian programs deemed to have national security relevance. Federal security meant programs to protect against anything that could destabilise the US regime during the 1929 Great Reset.

After 1945 and the adoption of the UN Charter, repeating the injunction of the Kellogg-Briand Pact and establishing the offense at Nuremberg of “crimes against the peace”, wars did not stop. Instead names were changed. Names make a difference. The Washington Naval Treaty (1922) restricted the tonnage and types of ships that could be built. Hence ship classes were also renamed. At the same time armament and displacement were reallocated among new ship classes so that construction could continue. The US sought not only to buttress its secret first strike strategy against the Soviet Union but also later to circumvent the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaties (starting 1972) by maintaining the same number of missiles and introducing the so-called MIRV, multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles. In other words one missile was turned into a delivery system that could deliver the same number of warheads as additional missiles.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), America’s Gestapo, could not have been sold to the states had it beencalled a police force.

In 1947, the National Security Act was also a response to the need for new language. If war was illegal then one could not have a “war department”. So the national military establishment was renamed the Department of Defence. After the ceasefire in Korea, the US was also forced to rebrand the programs developing weapons it denied ever having or using—namely the chemical weapons, already prohibited and the biological weapons it had inherited from the Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Kwantung Army and the Japanese war criminals of Unit 731 Douglas MacArthur hid from exposure or trials. The principal war criminals from this secret Japanese military research facility no doubt joined their German colleagues recruited through the good offices of Allen Dulles.

Although military research continued under the auspices of the US Army’s Chemical Corps and biological weapons research was still conducted, mainly at Fort Detrick in Frederick, MD—with other major facilities such as Dugway Proving Ground, Wendover, UT—World War II had also raised the petrochemical industry and its sister pharmaceuticals to a major role in the military – industrial – complex. Atomic weapons had enormously expanded the already firm hold of DuPont on the munitions side. The Army Air Corps and the vastly expanded aeronautical and aerospace industry joined behind the new Air Force. Thus it should be no surprise that petrochemicals and pharmaceuticals needed their State bureaucratic partner for the massive post-war armaments program.

It is important to remember here that one of the benefits of US strategic success in the war was the plunder of some of the most lucrative basic research and capture of the most ruthless research personnel available in Germany and Japan. When the leaders of the US regime whine about alleged intellectual property theft by China, they are merely sobbing at the inevitable trickle down from their historical larceny and brain draining.

It simply would have been impossible after the war in Korea to openly foster a biological warfare service in the US war machine. A solution was found. This was supported by trends already well established in the US. Since Frederick Taylor Gates assumed control over the General Education Board (GEB) within the Rockefeller tax dodge, the two largest tax dodges of the time, Carnegie and Rockefeller, had agreed to allocate the theatres of ideological warfare in defence of their fortunes, their class and the system that had come to be called capitalism. Rockefeller money would be devoted to manipulation of the domestic political environment and Carnegie money would be used to buy control of the international side.

At the same time Gates advised Rockefeller to invest his loot in scientific medicine. Although Gates, like Rockefeller, came from a Baptist background, both had come to recognise that medicine is more powerful and intimate even than religion. Scientific medicine, based on the work of professionals operating with “security clearances” could turn the laboratory into technology for social transformation. Just as John D. Rockefeller had legalised his criminal activities to establish the Standard Oil monopoly, Gates proposed a strategy for establishing an ideological monopoly on medicine and thus a practically invincible defence of the gangster class’ prerogatives to rule.

Today’s complicity of the Johns Hopkins University (Bloomberg) School of Public Health should not be a surprise to anyone who recognises that history did not begin in 2019 or 2020. It was GEB money that founded the JHU School of Public Health (in 2001 named after the financial propaganda magnate, Michael Bloomberg, whose tax dodging has permitted him since 1995 to buy reputation at the nation’s premier population control academy).

Corporate control over scientific medicine, especially through funding of medical schools and medical research laboratories, combined with the integration of the pharmaceutical industry into the military-industrial complex. This process reached its international apex when the Rockefeller tax dodge, which had already made substantial financial donations to the United Nations organisation (notoriously supplying part of its feudal estate in Manhattan to build a kind of international “Vatican City”), managed the foundation of the World Health Organisation (WHO).

The chief US delegate to the 1946 International Health Conference was Thomas Parran, the US Surgeon General, who would also be credited with the Tuskegee syphilis experiments on unwitting African-Americans (1932-1972). Rockefeller sent five official observers to the conference. Without a doubt the most powerful delegation at the conference was on the side of corporate medicine and pharmaceutical weaponry.

Recently those few critics of the WHO to be found complain about the amount of money it receives from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. However, it is important to note that WHO was deliberately underfunded when it was started. A proposal that the organisation be funded by the United Nations was defeated in favour of separate contributions by members and a provision for financial gifts (bribes) from other sources.

In 1955, the US Microbiological Institute was again renamed. It became the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. In 1946, the Office of Malaria Control in War Areas, a military operation was renamed the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) and later becomes part of the US Public Health Service—itself a derivative of military/naval hygiene operations. In 1951, the CDC established its cadre program keeping with the ultimately military tradition to which it belongs. The Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) was intended to satisfy “the need for an adequate corps of trained epidemiologists who can be deployed immediately for any contingency, including chemical or biological warfare”. The Communicable Disease Center was later renamed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

If one applies the model Philip Agee used to identify intelligence officers in the US State Department, namely a critical reading of the official biographies with attention to job titles, assignments, and areas of responsibility, one can establish a strong hypothesis that the NIAID officials Robert Kennedy Jr compares with hitmen are all military or intelligence officers under cover.

Most of Fauci’s top deputies—according to the official biographies on the institute website are doused liberally with espionage or military eau de Cologne. Even were Anthony Fauci to be fired, resign or retire, perhaps like William Colby or William Casey did, there are sufficient members of the secret team to continue the work—unless the institution itself and the reality of a massive life science/ biological weapons department is finally admitted. If we are able to conceive that the mission of NIAID is to create allergies and infectious diseases—for war and profit. Then it is not far fetched to see how the work of the National Cancer Institute might have helped Hugo Chavez or other inconvenient personalities.

While these institutions have been labelled and marketed as if they were public services and benign operations for the protection and preservation of a social good, namely human health, they were created, and as Kennedy also shows, have been maintained for the purpose of supporting what is essentially a major arm of the US war establishment, the pharmaceutical industry.

The pharmaceutical industry and its soldiers, the lab-coated officers of the medical profession, fight to control the greatest threat to international capitalism of all—free human beings. Since the start of the 20^th century what most people call “science” was harnessed to augment and where necessary replace religion—not to liberate humans from superstition but to anchor them more firmly in it. Social sciences were promoted because they turned social movements and struggle into managerial problems.

Medical sciences replaced the healing arts, first to exclude women who previously would have been burned as witches, and then to exclude any attempts organise healing within healthy communities—by turning health into disease and the patient into an enemy. This pandemic of scientism also infected the humanities but for the most part by causing their atrophy. The imposition of science in its present form was forced by the Progressive movement in North America and the Fabians and Positivists in “Old Europe”. Their descendants today have stolen the language of popular struggle in the 19^th and 20^th century and wear it as a “lab-coat of jargon” with which they sell their 4^th Awakening fanaticism to complement the so-called 4^thIndustrial Revolution.

The old national military establishment that invented the national security ideology in 1947 to subjugate the peoples of the expanding capitalist empire after World War II, realised quickly that they could not “kill ‘em all”. They began quickly to improve on the technology first applied industrially to wage the Great War. The target of that technology was and remains the human mind itself. The body housing it was and is of collateral interest. The mission of the war departments in the Pentagon and elsewhere around the world is to control territory and resources, including populations. The mission of the National Institutes of Health is to conquer the human mind and destroy the will of capitalism’s greatest enemy, humans striving toward liberty.

*

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] The following is excerpted from an earlier article by this author. https://dissidentvoice.org/2021/03/the-health-which-i-see-is-disease-if-the-hierarchical-church-so-defines/

Featured image is from Ghion Journal

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 August 25, two days after the US Food and Drug Administration fully approved the Pfizer-Biontech COVID-19 vaccine, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered “full vaccination of all members of the Armed Forces.”

Cue outrage and objection. Some officers have resigned their commissions; some enlisted personnel seem willing to risk court-martial and dishonorable discharge rather than get vaccinated. Some claim the mandate violates their rights or lacks a legal basis.

In the quarter century since my honorable discharge from the US Marine Corps, I’ve occasionally been asked by friends to have “the talk” with their teenagers who are considering military careers.

In my view, “the talk” shouldn’t be about whether joining the armed forces is a good idea. That’s a personal decision. “The talk” should be an unvarnished description of what to expect.

Here’s a short version of “the talk,” for those considering enlisting and those who have, in the age of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate:

For the entirety of your military career, you will spend most of your waking hours (and you will be roused from sleep many, many times) doing what you’re told to do. Period.

You’ll go where you’re told to go. You’ll wear what you’re told to wear. You’ll eat what you’re given, when it’s given to you, and you’ll have your hair cut as directed.

You’ll be ordered to do unpleasant things, and do them, possibly including killing other people, being killed yourself, or watching your friends die.

Yes, there’s a contract — a contract more for the government’s protection than yours, which can be unilaterally changed at the government’s convenience. Here’s section 9b of that contract:

“Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may affect my status, pay, allowances, benefits, and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment/reenlistment document.” [Emphasis in original]

If they do things now as they did in 1984, you’ll be taken through that contract line by line, twice, initialing each section to attest that you understand what it means so you can’t claim otherwise later, before you’re allowed to sign it, take the oath of enlistment, and ship out for boot camp.

The government’s end of the contract involves providing you with three hots, a cot, a paycheck, healthcare, college benefits, etc.

Your end of the contract says that when you’re ordered by your platoon commander to assault an enemy position, or by the Secretary of Defense to get vaccinated, you’ll assault that position or get that injection.

If you can’t stomach that, don’t sign the contract. If you do sign the contract, don’t whine about it or renege on it later when it requires you to do something you don’t want to do.

Thus endeth “the talk.”

Do I like vaccine mandates? No.

Do I believe vaccine mandates are constitutional or morally acceptable where private citizens, un-obligated by contract, are concerned? No.

But as for members of the armed forces: Buy the ticket, take the ride.

*

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.

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

Featured image: Into the Jaws of Death 23-0455M edit. (Image by Wikipedia (commons.wikimedia.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.

***

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. covers both the legal aspects of our efforts seeking to disapprove the emergency use of the experimental gene therapies and points out the dangers of the political climate that allows these restrictions and mandates to be enforced while the global economy is about to burst.

He is also sending a message, that supports the people who are being silenced to empower them to refuse the COVID vaccines and non-pharmaceutical interventions.

*

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 Orvosok

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.

***

What this suggests that these so-called “Delta Deaths” have nothing to do with Covid. They are attributable to the deadly vaccine and its toxic substances.

M. Ch. Global Research Editor, October 4, 2021

.@POTUS says this is a pandemic of the unvaxxed.

Data from England show 63% of Delta deaths in last 7.5 months were fully vaxxed.

Why won’t @CDCgov share US data with the American people?

What is the justification of mandates and refusal to recognize natural immunity? pic.twitter.com/p3hA1eTiWZ

— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) October 1, 2021

*

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.

***

Following the Taliban’s victory over the U.S. military, U.S. corporate media has churned out a new narrative about the imminent threat of terrorism from Afghanistan that sets the stage for future military interventions. Blasted out in a stunningly disciplined fashion, the media has demonstrated as clearly as ever its coordination with the national security state and advancements of its interests.

The corporate media coverage in the the weeks following the Taliban entry into Kabul conveyed two overriding political messages: first, that the Taliban victory had brought to power the Haqqani network, which is said to be even more violent than the Taliban and even closer to al Qaeda; and second, that the the danger of terrorism had now become much more serious, because the Taliban had could not be counted on to prevent al Qaeda from planning terrorist attack.

Those two messages are firmly rooted in the U.S. military’s determined opposition to ending the U.S. military presence in the country, which shaped the media echo chamber that launched its assault in mid-August on the Biden administration withdrawal, as The Grayzone reported. They also reflect the interest of the U.S. counter-terrorism bureaucracy in maintaining the fiction that al Qaeda’s presence in Afghanistan poses an imminent threat to the U.S.

The escalating media panic over a terrorist threat was not grounded in any concrete evidence. Indeed, al Qaeda has not mount any global terrorist operation from Afghanistan since the U.S. occupation began in 2001. The media’s chorus also overlooked the well-documented fact that the Taliban would not have let it do so, as it has renounced al Qaida’s violent international adventurism and staked out a commitment to a purely nationalist Afghan jihad.

Sounding a phony terrorism alarm 

Steven Erlanger, the New York Times chief diplomatic correspondent in Europe, set the tone for the new stage of media alarmism over Taliban control in an August 17 article. “Now that the Taliban are back in power,” Erlanger wrote, “there are already worries that Afghanistan will again become a breeding ground for Islamist radicalism  and terrorism, aided by new technologies and social media.”

Erlanger acknowledged that the “experts” disagreed on “how big a threat” the Taliban “might become — or how quickly.” However, he claimed that “many doubted at the time that the Taliban would or could keep its promises” in the February 2020 agreement with the Trump administration not to allow al Qaeda or anyone else to “to use Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.”

Erlanger then established his argument by citing the view — “especially in Washington” — that the Taliban government was “almost certain to repeat its encouragement of Islamist terrorist groups” and that “the chances of anther attack on the United States and its allies are much higher now”.

To support his conclusion, he turned to Nathan Sales, the State Department’s Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator for Counterterrorism during the Trump administration. “The terrorism risk to the United States is going to get dramatically worse” during the new Taliban regime, Sales claimed, because “it is virtually certain” that al Qaeda would get “safe haven in Afghanistan and use it to plot terrorism against the United States and others.”

The New York Times was not done hyping up the terror threat of a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. A story the following week reinforced the theme of a growing risk of al Qaeda terrorism by quotijng Colin P. Clarke, a counterterrorism analyst at the Soufan Group consulting firm founded by former FBI agent Ali Soufan. “The Taliban, Haqqani network, and al-Qaida function as a triumvirate” and “work together hand-in-glove,” Clarke alleged. Thus, according to the Times, “analysts fear” that the Taliban could never deliver on its promise to deny al-Qaida Afghan territory for attacks on the United States.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) weighed in by emphasizing the supposed threat posed by the rise of the “Haqqani network” in a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. The WSJ reported that Sirajuddin Haqqani, the son of the Jallaluddin Haqqani, the founder and head of the Haqqani organization until his death in 2018, had been sought by the United States as a “specially designated global terrorist” for large scale bombing attacks against U.S. and Afghan government forces.  He had been deputy commander of Taliban armed forces for years and was recently named Minister of Interior in the new Taliban government.

The WSJ reported that “experts who have followed the group for years” feared that the Haqqani network’s “consolidation of power” would enable a new period of “transnational terrorism” against the United States and its allies. It added that “Afghan officials have for years accused the Haqqani network of facilitating deadly attacks on civilians by providing Islamic State’s local affiliate with technical assistance and analysts don’t accept it and that the Islamic State-Khorasan and the Taliban are “sworn enemies”.

WSJ’s reporters insisted, however, that the Haqqani network has remained “close” to al Qaeda, citing a report by a U.N. Security Council-sponsored group that publishes information on the Taliban and al Qaeda from U.N. member states. The only source cited to support that claim, however, claimed that Al Qaeda “are basically a subsidiary of the Taliban at this point.”

However, that comment  implied that, far from being beholden to Al Qaeda, the Taliban exercise enough control over al Qaeda’s activities to ensure that it refrains from any terrorism-related activity.

Finally, MSNBC added its voice to the chorus of terror hype with a September 8 piece advancing the claim that the Haqqani network had linked up with ISIS-Khorasan and the Taliban to form a transnational jihadist hydra. To advance its assertion, MSNBC reported that several major terrorist incidents attributed to the IS had actually involved cooperation with the Haqqani network.

However, MSNBC was merely echoing officials of the deposed, U.S.-backed Afghan government who had conjured up the Haqqani-IS connection to maintain American support.

Rewriting history to maintain U.S. hostility 

The corporate media’s framing of the unholy alliance between the Taliban and Haqqani represents a politically-motivated rewriting of history that overlooks the record of U.S. intervention in Afghanistan and the country’s experience after the 9/11 attacks.

The Haqqani network arose during the US proxy war against Soviet forces. At the time, the group was dependent on Pakistan’s military intelligence service and the CIA for cash and weapons — not on bin Laden. As the late journalist George Crile recalled in Charlie Wilson’s War, the Haqqani network’s founder Jalaludin Haqqani was the CIA’s the “favorite commander” and “received bags of money each month” from the CIA station in Islamabad.

When the Taliban was in power, its leader Mullah Omar not only repeatedly warned bin Laden against any move to threaten the United States but reacted angrily to bin Laden’s calling press conferences that threatened the United States in defiance of Omar’s explicit orders. Omar also told Prince Turki al Faisal, the head of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency, that he sought a joint committee of Islamic scholars to issue a fatwa that would absolve him from any responsibility for protecting bin Laden.

In 1999, Mullah Omar threatened to kick the entire bin Laden operation out of Afghanistan. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, the primary planner of the 9/11 operation, told his interrogators that bin Laden had complained in summer 2001 about Omar’s absolute opposition to any attack on the United States, implying that he had to be deceived about Al Qaeda’s plans.

Following the U.S. military overthrow of the Taliban government in 2001, al Qaeda’s leadership decamped to Pakistan, and most senior Taliban officials left Afghanistan to avoid being imprisoned by the U.S. military.

During the Spring of 2006, Al Qaeda helped the Taliban plan a spectacularly successful offensive in Afghanistan, according to Pakistani journalist Sayed Salem Shahzad, who had extensive contacts with Al Qaeda cadres and is believed to have been killed by Pakistan’s military intelligence agency. But Shazad also documented the process by which the two organizations came into fundamental conflict.

The al Qaeda leadership supported Pakistani extremists who declared war against the Pakistani regime and its military, on whose support the Taliban were dependent. They then established a new Al Qaeda-led political organization for Afghan tribesmen living on the Pakistani side of the border, the Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP), according to Shahzad.

Al Qaeda justified the TPP as a means of forcing the Pakistani military to abandon its support for the U.S. war in Afghanistan, and the new party continued officially to be loyal to Mullah Omar. Shahzad reported, however, that the party also aimed to draw support away from Mullah Omar and his commitment to jihad strictly for Afghan national independence.

In September 2008, Mullah Omar issued an Islamic holiday message describing the Taliban a “robust Islamic and nationalist movement” which “wants to maintain good and positive relations with all neighbors based on mutual respect.” He assured regional states that a future Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan would do nothing to “jeopardize” other states. That stance provoked a torrent of harsh criticism from commentators associated with Al Qaeda, prompting the Taliban’s house magazine to fire off a letter to the Shanghai Cooperation Conference reiterating Mullah Omar’s previous message.

The open political conflict between the Taliban and Al Qaeda was well known to U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials focusing on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Arturo Munoz, the supervising operation officer at the CIA Counter-terrorism Center from 2001 to 2009, who traveled to both countries frequently, told this writer in 2011, “The Taliban is a homespun Pashtun locally-based revolutionary movement with a set of goals that are not necessarily those of al Qaeda.”

Nevertheless, as the interventionist trifecta of Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen pushed President Barack Obama for 40,000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan over the course of 2009, they warned the Taliban would inevitably allow al Qaeda to plan and carry out terrorism against the United States if it was allowed to take power.

In 2016, when the top al Qaeda official in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, Farouq al-Qahtani, was killed in a drone strike, U.S. officials claimed he had been planning terrorist actions against the United States and Europe. But U.S. intelligence was unable to muster actual evidence of any such plans.

In a private 2015 interview, Gen. Michael Flynn, who had been in charge of intelligence for the U.S.-NATO command in Afghanistan, expressed serious doubt about the official claim.  “What he’s doing up there is not planning external operations,” Flynn commented, “He’s up there planning for a role in the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.”

Despite the private skepticism about official U.S. claims, the standard practice of the national security bureaucracy was still to assume that any senior Al Qaeda official in Afghanistan was planning a terrorist attack – even if there was no actual evidence, as Joshua Geltzer, the Obama administration NSC senior director counter-terrorism indicated in a 2018 interview.

The deceptions only intensified after the Trump administration negotiated a peace agreement with the Taliban in February 2020, under which the Taliban promised that it would not allow Qaeda or any other group to use Afghan territory to “threaten the security of the United States and its allies.”

At this point, national security officials began to insist that the deal required the Taliban to sever all relations with al Qaeda — despite the actual language that didn’t support the claim and the complete lack of evidence of any such al Qaeda plotting on Afghan soil over nearly two decades of war.

Driven by the interests of the U.S. national security bureaucracy, the campaign to undermine the Taliban now threatens to sabotage a goal shared by the U.S. and Kabul: eradicating the IS-K organization.

As early as September 1 – just days after the Islamic State attack on U.S. troops, JCS Chairman Mark Milley indicated it was possible the U.S. might cooperate with the Taliban against IS-K. If Milley’s proposal becomes U.S. policy, the tendentious corporate media propaganda that dominated coverage throughout August and September will fade into the past.

If the ahistorical narrative persists, however, it is safe to assume that the national security bureaucracy has blocked any such cooperation to protect its agenda.

*

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.

Gareth Porter is an independent investigative journalist who has covered national security policy since 2005 and was the recipient of Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2012.  His most recent book is The CIA Insider’s Guide to the Iran Crisis co-authored with John Kiriakou, just published in February.

Featured image is from The Grayzone

by Michel Chossudovsky

ISBN Number: 9780973714715

List Price: $24.95

click here to order

Special Price: $18.00

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky’s 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by “Islamic terrorists”.  Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

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.

***

Prof. Mattias Desmet is a Psychoanalyst and Psychotherapist. He is a lecturing Professor of Clinical Psychology at the Ghent University in Belgium. He has a Master’s degree in Statistics. Over the course of the pandemic, he has been taking the perspective of mass psychology in the explanation of data and statistics.

According to Prof. Desmet, “You need mass media to create a mass phenomena.”

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.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

According to the study, there are no microwave weapons associated with the alleged health ailments that caused the Trump administration to decide to dismantle its embassy in the Cuban capital. 

A State Department report declassified Thursday dismissed the theory of the causes behind the alleged acoustic attacks reported in 2017 by U.S. diplomats in Havana.

The document, which dismantles the political argument used by the administration of former President Donald Trump to reinforce the U.S. blockade against Cuba, was completed in 2018, but comes to light now to ratify what the scientific community already demonstrated.

Noises linked to a mysterious disease among U.S. diplomats in Cuba, dubbed the “Havana Syndrome,” were likely caused by insects rather than microwave weapons, the declassified report has revealed.

According to the study, there are no microwave weapons associated with the alleged health ailment that caused the Trump administration to decide to dismantle its embassy in the Cuban capital.

The scientific review was commissioned by the U.S. State Department and written by the independent science advisory group JASON.

The United States accused Cuba, without evidence, of an alleged deliberate attack against its diplomatic corps accredited in Havana, which the authorities of the island nation categorically denied from the outset.

A secret report found that microwaves didn't cause "Havana syndrome" incidents and concluded some diplomats heard crickets. https://t.co/RlY8TTWbRy

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) October 1, 2021

Last July, President Joe Biden ordered the State Department to examine the possibility of increasing the staff of its representation on the island in the midst of the long-promised review of the policy towards the largest of the Antilles.

In multiple scenarios, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez has reiterated that his country has never perpetrated nor will it perpetrate attacks of any nature against diplomatic officials or their families, without exception. He has also remarked that Cuba never allowed nor will it ever allow its territory to be used by third parties for such purposes.

This is in line with Cuba’s adherence to its obligations under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, with regard to the protection of the integrity of accredited officials on national soil, as well as their families.

Another declassified State Department report earlier this year suggested that Trump’s decision regarding the Havana embassy was, above all, a political response plagued by mismanagement, lack of coordination and procedural non-compliance.

The escalation of statements and actions by the Trump administration was mounted on the story of the health incidents and false accusations, according to Johana Tablada, who is the deputy director general for the United States at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Such actions “tightened the blockade and redoubled hostility against Cuba,” she warned at the time.

*

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: State Department’s declassified report claims noises linked to Havana Syndrome were likely caused by CRICKETS. | Photo: Twitter/@bobttwo

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.

***

President Joe Biden must issue the appropriate executive order in compliance with the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, and direct all government agencies/entities to make public and unredacted all complete files and records pertaining to the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy as directed by this Act. This information shall be transmitted to the National Archives for full public disclosure to be included in the Archives’ Collection and made available for public inspection and copying.

Here are two bipartisan letters from distinguished citizens imploring and requesting the president perform his constitutional duty and fully comply with federal law and declassify and publish these records before the October 26th deadline. Letter #1. and Letter #2.

There is an ever-growing scholarly consensus among presidential historians, distinguished political analysts, and JFK assassination researchers that on November 22, 1963, an insidious coup d’état by Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson and the highest echelons of the National Security State was accomplished with the brutal murder of President John F. Kennedy.

The official full 889-page report by the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, known unofficially as the Warren Commission, about the assassination of President John Kennedy on November 22, 1963, established the cover-up of this coup. Their landmark final report was presented to President Lyndon Johnson on September 24, 1964, and made public on September 27.

The “smoking gun” in the cover-up of the assassination is found in CIA Dispatch #1035-960 (available online). This was the crucial covert directive to the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird elite media assets to vigorously denounce critics of the Warren Commission Report as “conspiracy theorists.” This is when that particular derogatory term of denunciation and disinformation widely entered the national conversation in an attempt to marginalize, cut off and stifle informed debate on the president’s murder because the path of evidence would lead directly to those elements behind the sinister cover-up.

These facts are discussed in detail in Lance deHaven-Smith’s authoritative Conspiracy Theory in America (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press). Dr. Smith is a widely published scholar in peer-reviewed academic journals and is Professor in the Reubin O’ D. Askew School of Public Administration and Policy at Florida State University in Tallahassee.

What happened on that fateful Friday in Dallas fifty-eight years ago led to perhaps the single most important series of events affecting the subsequent history of our nation. It lies at the inner most depth, the dark clotted heart, of what observers now describe as the deep state.

Here are additional authoritative evidentiary resources to assist readers in examining this seminal event —  

• Rush To Judgment — Documentary and Book

This is the full length uncut version of Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane. Lane, one of the early critics of the preconceived conclusions of the Warren Commission, went to Dallas to do his own investigation and interview witnesses that were ignored by the Commission and others who expanded on their knowledge of the JFK assassination. Particularly crucial were the authoritative statements of eyewitnesses S. M. Holland, Lee E. Bowers, James Tague, and Mrs. Acquila Clemons, What is portrayed in this short critique offers a different picture from the one presented by the US government to the world. This film is a brief for the defense of Lee Harvey Oswald. Mark Lane’s pioneering best-selling book, Rush to Judgment, challenged the Warren Commission Report relating to Lee Harvey Oswald as the sole assassin of President John Kennedy.

Andrew Gavin Marshall has written an exceptional online summary article, “The National Security State and the Assassination of JFK” which builds upon the path-breaking research of author James W. Douglass in his widely-acclaimed book, JFK and the Unspeakable:Why He Died and Why It Matters.  These are the first analytical studies serious scholars should examine in depth, followed by the entire five volume series of Douglas P. Horne’s Inside the Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK.

• Horne is the former Chief Analyst for Military Records for the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), established by the JFK Records Act of 1992, which was tasked with defining, locating, and ensuring the declassification (to the maximum extent possible under the JFK Act) of all Federal Records considered “reasonably related” to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Horne details the numerous anomalies and interrupted chain of custody and destruction of key evidence regarding the president’s body, in the autopsy report(s), the autopsy photo collection (particularly the JFK brain photographs), the deliberate alteration and forgery of the extant Zapruder film, and the supposed “magic bullet” found at Parkland Hospital in Dallas. Watch Douglas P. Horne’s definitive five part video documentary series which summarizes his exceptional research, Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK, Assassination Medical Evidence. Horne has also written the concise authoritative summary volume, JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated.
• JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence Part 1 – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence Part 2 – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence, Part 3 – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence, Part 4 – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence, Part 5 – Douglas P. Horne Documentary
• Final Report of the Assassinations Records Review Board
• National Archives’ Files of Douglas P. Horne
• Photographic Evidence of Bullet Hole in JFK Limousine Windshield ‘Hiding in Plain Sight’ — Douglas P. Horne article
• The AF1 Tapes and Subsequent Events at Andrews AFB on November 22, 1963  — Douglas P. Horne article
• The Two NPIC Zapruder Film Events: Signposts Pointing to the Film’s Alteration — Douglas P. Horne article
• The Zapruder Film Mystery — Documentary

While serving as chief analyst of military records at the Assassination Records Review Board in 1997, Douglas P. Horne discovered that the Zapruder Film was examined by the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center two days after the assassination of President Kennedy. In this film, Horne interviews legendary NPIC photo interpreter Dino Brugioni, who speaks for the first time about another NPIC examination of the film the day after the assassination. Brugioni didn’t know about the second examination and believes the Zapruder Film in the archives today is not the film he saw the day after the assassination. Drawing on Volume 4 of his book “Inside the ARRB”, Horne introduces the subject and presents his conclusions.

• Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet
• Libertarian Class Analysis: An Historical Survey
• Who Rules America: Power Elite Analysis, the Deep State, and American History
• JFK (Special Edition Director’s Cut) — Oliver Stone feature film
• JFK: The Book of the Film  – Book by Oliver Stone
• Where Angels Lightly Tread: The Assassination of President Kennedy, Volume 1— Book by John M. Newman;
• Countdown to Darkness: The Assassination of President Kennedy, Volume 2 — Book by John M. Newman;
•  Into the Storm: The Assassination of President Kennedy Volume 3 — Book by John M. Newman.
•  Dallas ’63: The First Deep State Revolt Against the White House  — Book by Peter Dale Scott
• Dallas ’63: A Brilliant Synthesis Regarding the November 22, 1963 Coup d’état — Charles Burris review article
• Deep Politics and the Death of JFK — Book by Peter Dale Scott
• The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government — Book by David Talbot
• The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War — Book by Stephen Kinzer
• The JFK Assassination — Jacob G. Hornberger 30 episode video presentation
• The JFK Autopsy 2 — Jacob G. Hornberger video presentation
• The Ongoing Kennedy Casket Mystery  — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• The “Legend” of Lee Harvey Oswald  — Charles Burris article
• JFK and the Deferentials — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• The Bay of Pigs and JFK’s Assassination — Charles Burris article
• The Mainstream Media’s Deference to Authority in the JFK Assassination — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• De Gaulle: The Deep State Murdered JFK — Charles Burris article
• No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963? — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• General Curtis LeMay and His War Against the Kennedys  — Charles Burris article
• The Deep State and the November 22, 1963 Coup d’état — Charles Burris article
• Regime Change: The JFK Assassination — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• JFK’s Embrace of Third World Nationalists  — Charles Burris article
• Limit CIA Role to Intelligence — Harry S Truman, December 22, 1963 article
• J.F.K: Contra-Camelot — Amazon book/DVD list
• Coup d’etat and Assassination: Business as Usual in America — Amazon book/DVD list
• The JFK Assassination Marked the End of the American Republic —  Interview with Martin Broeckers, author of JFK: Coup d’Etat in America
• LBJ Versus the Kennedys: Means, Motive and Opportunity Leading To November 22, 1963  — Charles Burris article
• The National-Security State’s Assassination of John F. Kennedy — Jacob G. Hornberger article
• Neocon Lies About JFK  — Charles Burris article
• JFK, McGeorge Bundy, and the Continuity of Government — Michael Swanson article
• The Killing of President Kennedy  — Charles Burris article
• The Fates of American Presidents Who Challenged the Deep State (1963-1980)  — Peter Dale Scott article
• “The Peace Speech” — JFK Commencement Address at American University, June 10, 1963
• President Dwight Eisenhower’s Farewell Address
• The National Security State and JFK Conference — Eleven Expert Speakers:

Jeffrey Sachs – “JFK’s Quest for Peace;”

Stephen Kinzer – “Regime Change: Roots of the Imperial Temptation;”

Michael Glennon – “Double Government and the ‘Best Truth’ about the Assassination;”

Douglas Horne —  “The National Security Establishment’s Obsession with Invading Cuba;”

Michael Swanson – “What Is The Purpose of the National Security State?”

Peter Janney – “JFK & Mary Meyer: Relationship as Redemption;”

Ron Paul – “Enemies: Foreign and Domestic;”

Jefferson Morley – “Angleton, Cuba, and Assassination;”

James DiEugenio – “Vietnam Declassified: Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon;”

Oliver Stone with James DiEugenio – “If JFK Were Alive Today;” and

Jacob G. Hornberger – “The National Security State: The Biggest Mistake in U.S. History”

***

• Who’s Who In The JFK Assassination: An A to Z Encyclopedia — Book by Michael Benson.

This is an excellent and invaluable resource. Comprehensive, accessible and unprecedented, Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination presents vital information on each of more than 1,400 individuals related in any noteworthy way to the murders of President John F. Kennedy, Dallas Police Officer J. D. Tippit and alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22 and 24, 1963. Based on years of research, a wealth of sources and a long study of the Warren Commission’s twenty-six volumes, this encyclopedic book includes: A-to-Z entries on virtually all the suspects, victims, witnesses, law enforcement officials and investigators.

Quick identification of each person followed by biographical facts, testimony, evidence and more. Detailed listings of sources. Explorations of the puzzling theories and countless sides of the case. Extensive cross-referencing of entries, allowing readers to follow their own investigations and construct their own conclusions. This all-new who’s who will prove an essential companion to the many best-selling books, documentaries and feature films about the JFK assassination.

Bound to be referred to again and again, it is the complete resource for anyone who wants to know more about– or wants to keep better track of– the key players involved in one of the most infamous chapters in American history.

• The Yankee and Cowboy War — Book by Carl Oglesby.

This is the first of several high-level political analyses motivated by a need to better understand the politics that led to both the JFK assassination and the Nixon Watergate Affair. It deploys as the primary theoretical model, C. Wright Mills “Theory of the Power Elite” and the framework in Carroll Quigleys book Tragedy and Hope. With these tools, Carl Oglesby posits an interesting thesis: that JFK’s assassination, instead of being a random act by a lone nut was in fact a carefully planned and professional executed ongoing coup d’ etat a la Americaine, a not so silent coup by the same forces responsible for the murders of JFK, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X and possibly the demise and eventual destruction of the billionaire Howard Hughes.

What all of these events had in common was that they were links in a chain designed to replace one set of power elite (members of the old moneyed “peace promoting” Northeastern Yankee Establishment) with another (the Nuevo Riche and newly arrived, “progress through war” Western Cowboys). Thus it is argued here that the events connecting Dallas, Memphis, Watergate and the demise of the Hughes empire, are but threads in a common fabric, growing and evolving directly out of the systematic corruption of American politics and out of contemporary political realities.

The late Murray N. Rothbard was particularly enamored with this pioneering book, remarking:

Carl Oglesby’s new book is not only exciting and thoroughly researched, it presents the only analytic framework — originated by himself — which makes sense of the violent events of the last decade and a half our recent political history, and puts them all into a coherent framework: the Yankee vs. Cowboy analysis.

The important question looms: why is it that Oglesby has been alone in coming up with this framework? I think the answer is that the methodologies of other writers and researchers have led them astray: the free-market economists who are critical of government actions never bother to ask who benefited from those actions and who were likely to be responsible for them; the Marxists are anxious to indict an abstract, mythical and unified ‘capitalist class’ for all evils of government, and believe that detailed research into concrete divisions and conflicts among power elites detract from such an indictment; those sociologists who have engaged in concrete power elite analysis have only examined structures (who owns corporation X, who belongs to what social club?) rather than the dynamics of concrete historical events; the one writer who has treated Yankees and Cowboys has been so blinded by particular hostility to the Cowboys that he virtually includes everyone living in the Sunbelt as part of a vast Cowboy conspiracy; and the various doughty investigators and reporters of Dallas or Watergate have struck to surface events because they lacked the overall coherent framework.

Carl Oglesby has surmounted all of these defects, and has therefore been able to make a giant breakthrough in explaining our recent history.

• Oswald in New Orleans: Case of Conspiracy With the CIA — Book by Harold Weisberg
• Harvey and Lee — Book by John Armstrong.
• Mary’s Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision For World Peace — Book by Peter Janney

The death of Mary Meyer left many Americans with questions. Who really killed her? Why did CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton rush to find and confiscate her diary? Had she discovered the plan to assassinate her lover, President Kennedy, with the trail of information ending at the steps of the CIA? Was it only coincidence that she was killed less than three weeks after the release of the Warren Commission Report?

Fans of The Murder of Mary Russell, JFK: A Vision for America, and other JFK books will love Mary’s Mosaic. Building and relying on years of interviews and painstaking research, author Peter Janney follows the key events and influences in Mary Pinchot Meyer’s life—her first meeting with Jack Kennedy; her support of her secret lover, President Kennedy, as he worked towards the pursuit of world peace and away from the Cold War; and her exploration of psychedelic drugs. Fifty years after the assassinations of President Kennedy and Mary Meyer, this book helps readers understand why both took place.

Author Peter Janney fought for two years to obtain documents from the National Personnel Records Center and the US Army to complete this third edition. It includes a final chapter about the mystery man who could be the missing piece to learn the truth behind Meyer’s murder.

• She Knew Too Much About JFK’s Murder — Jacob G. Hornberger article.

Focuses upon the intimate relationship between JFK and Mary Pinchot Meyer and their brutal murders.

• Medical Experts and the Kennedy Assassination — Dr. Gary Aguilar C-SPAN presentation
• Pursuing Truth on the Kennedy Assassinations — Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD
• Dr. Cyril Wecht on JFK’S Murder: A “Coup D’État in America.”

Dr. Cyril Wecht, for two decades the elected coroner of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (including Pittsburgh), is a nationally acclaimed forensic pathologist, and holds both a medical degree from the University of Pittsburgh (1956), and a law degree from the University of Maryland (1962). Forensic pathologists specialize in medically determining how and why someone died.

In criminal murder cases this function is absolutely vital in helping to determine the guilt or innocence of a suspect — in no case more so than in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Dr. Wecht, a very early critic of the Warren Commission, testified at the HSCA. At the annual JFK Lancer assassination research conference in Dallas, held in November, Dr. Wecht summarized the medical evidence against the lone-gunman hypothesis. At the center of Dr. Wecht’s examination is what has become known as the “single-bullet theory” — or the “magic bullet,” as it is known to its detractors: the theory that one bullet can account for the multiple wounds (besides the headshot) of both JFK and Governor Connally.

According to Dr. Wecht, the conclusions of the Warren Commission rest entirely on the single-bullet theory. If that theory fails, then there had to be more than one gunman. This, in turn, leads to questions about the history of the United States since 1963 that many people would rather not pursue. With both passion and meticulous attention to detail, Wecht dissects the Warren Commission’s conclusions.

Moving beyond the medical evidence, he then utters words unexpected from any former American elected official, and particularly powerful coming from a person with his credentials: “What we witnessed…my friends, in plain, plain English — was [a] coup d’état in America. The overthrow of the government. That’s what this case was all about.”

• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Coup d’etat — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Forces of Darkness — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Cover-Up — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Patsy  — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Witnesses — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Truth Shall Set You Free — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Guilty Men — Documentary
• The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Smoking Guns — Documentary
• John Judge on the JFK Assassination

Watch this classic eight minute YouTube clip of JFK Assassination researcher John Judge from the “JFK: Cinema as History” conference (January 1992) which appeared on C-SPAN. It reveals more about “the why” of the November 22, 1963 assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and the coup d’état following his murder than almost anything you have probably heard.

After quoting Thomas Jefferson on the importance of a free press to a republic, John Judge makes a disparaging reference to The Washington Post and The New York Times. He then pauses for a few seconds and is shown glaring at another panel member. This person (not shown in the clip) was Walter Pincus of The Washington Post, who had viciously attacked Oliver Stone’s movie JFK. The older man who is briefly shown in one momentary scene is the late Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty who served as chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff where he was in charge of the global system designed to provide military support for covert activities of the Central Intelligence Agency. In Oliver Stone’s highly acclaimed film, JFK, the mysterious character ‘X’ portrayed by Donald Sutherland was in fact Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, who assisted director Stone in the production and scripting of this historical epic.

Prouty had relayed the shocking information detailed in the movie to the actual New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (played by Kevin Cosner) in a series of communiques. Fletcher Prouty was the author of two excellent books, The Secret Team: The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World. and  JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy.

JFK: A Nation Betrayed. Narrated by Morgan Freeman, this film reveals new evidence how JFK embarked on secret back channel peace efforts with Nikita Khrushchev & Fidel Castro, determined to get out of Vietnam despite intense opposition inside his own government.

After his confrontational June 1961 Vienna Summit meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, later that year in September Kennedy under took a bold initiative and introduced at the Sixteenth General Assembly of the United Nations a Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.

Conversely the national security establishment (particularly the Pentagon’s Joint Chiefs of Staff and CIA) believed, not in disarmament but in a nuclear first strike policy against the Soviet Union, and that JFK was naïve and lacked determination and resolve in his opposition to this apocalyptic doomsday scenario. On March 13, 1962 the JCS submitted Operation Northwoods as a pretext for a Cuban Invasion.

This war between JFK and the military intensified following the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. Pentagon leaders such as Air Force chief of Staff General Curtis LeMay believed the peaceful resolution of the Crisis was not Kennedy’s finest hour but had been appeasement of the Soviets and the worst disaster in American history.

JFK proceeded to embark on secret back channel peace efforts with Nikita Khrushchev and Fidel Castro and was determined to get out of Vietnam despite intense opposition inside his own government.

“The Peace Speech” — JFK Commencement Address at American University, June 10, 1963.

To the deep state, this was treason.

It all came to an end on November 22, 1963, when an insidious coup d’état by Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson and the highest echelons of the National Security State was accomplished with the brutal murder of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas.

*

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 JFK Presidential Library and Museum

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 real story is much more than an adventure starring a Canadian hero.

A CBC story about an ex-Canadian soldier who helped dozens flee Afghanistan ought to have considered the role of the private security industry in the disastrous 20-year-long war in that central Asian country. The large number of private security companies (PSC) in Afghanistan received barely any media attention, leaving Canadians ignorant of a controversial element of the foreign occupation.

In “How a guy known as ‘Canadian Dave’ helped get 100 people out of Afghanistan in final days of Taliban takeover” Judy Trinh writes about David Lavery helping get some of those gathered near the Kabul airport on to flights. A founding member of elite special forces unit JTF2, Lavery coordinated with veterans in this country to get over 100 individuals with Canadian papers out of the country.

The widely circulated story mentioned that Lavery operated a PSC, Raven Rae Consultancy, with some 50 Afghan employees. But a broader look at Raven Rae and PSCs was omitted from the article and most media reports about Afghanistan. According to its site, Raven Rae entered Afghanistan in 2010. It was one of thousands of PSCs that entered Afghanistan during the US and NATO occupation. According to private security industry researcher Anna Powles, Afghanistan “has been a gravy train for the global private security industry for the past two decades.” The US, Canada and other NATO countries dished out billions of dollars to PSCs.

Some have suggested the Afghan military’s quick collapse was partly due to the withdrawal of PSC support. “It was their [PSCs] departure that led to the erosion of the capability of the Afghan Air Force elements, which were critical,” a former senior US commander in Afghanistan told Foreign Policy. “But how could they have been left behind when our forces that provided ultimate security for them were withdrawn?”

At the height of Canada’s 13-year military mission in Afghanistan Saladin, DynCorp and other PSCs had larger numbers of armed men than most of the NATO countries occupying Afghanistan. In 2008 Canadian Brigadier General Denis Thompson explained: “Without private security firms it would be impossible to achieve what we are achieving here. There are many aspects of the mission here in Afghanistan, many security aspects that are performed by private security firms that which, if they were turned over to the military, would make our task impossible. We just don’t have the numbers to do everything.”

The federal government spent tens, maybe hundreds, of millions of dollars on PSCs. They paid $10 million for private security to guard Canada’s “signature” $50 million aid project to repair the Dahla dam in Kandahar province. The federal government contracted Saladin to protect its embassy in Kabul. Saladin also helped secure Prime Minister Stephen Harper during a visit there in 2007 and protected forward operating bases in Kandahar province. Saladin has a troubling history. Its predecessor, KMS, trained and possibly equipped Islamic insurgents battling Russian forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s and it sent mercenaries into Nicaragua as part of the Iran Contra Affair.

Private security firms in Afghanistan were poorly regulated. Many Afghans believed PSCs participated in crime and the large numbers of armed men from different groups made them feel insecure. Afghans told Swiss Peace Foundation researchers that PSCs behaved in a “cowboy-like” manner. After a Canadian officer was killed by a PSC employee in August 2008, Canadian Major Corey Frederickson effectively concurred, explaining that the “normal contact drill [for PSCs] is that as soon as they get hit with something then it’s 360 [degrees], open up on anything that moves.”

As is the case with Lavery, many former Canadian soldiers owned or worked for PSCs in Afghanistan. “Founded in the mid-2000s by Canadian military veterans”, Tundra Group protected forward operating bases in Afghanistan. Toronto company Globe Risk Holdings had offices in Kabul and Kandahar. It hired former Canadian soldiers as did Vancouver’s Canpro Global, which also had an office in Afghanistan.

The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq helped propel Montréal based GardaWorld to be the world’s largest privately held PSC. In recent weeks hundreds of the Montréal company’s employees have been evacuated from Afghanistan.

With over 100,000 employees worldwide, Garda regularly advertises in Esprit du Corps calling on the magazine’s Canadian Forces readership to “translate your military skills into a Gardaworld career.” A number of former Canadian officers were in the upper echelons of Garda. The head of Garda’s Afghan operations, Daniel Ménard, previously commanded Canadian Forces operations in Afghanistan. Ménard had been court-martialled for having sexual relations with a subordinate in Afghanistan and recklessly discharging his weapon. While he worked for Garda, Ménard was also engulfed in controversy in Afghanistan. In 2014 he was jailed for allegedly smuggling guns. Two years earlier two other Garda employees in Afghanistan were caught with dozens of unlicensed AK-47 rifles and jailed for three months.

Garda was also involved in numerous violent incidents in Afghanistan. In 2019 three children were among a dozen killed when a minibus full of explosives crashed into a Garda SUV carrying foreign nationals in Kabul. The same year the Taliban attacked the complex where Garda’s offices were located in an incident that left 30 dead. The Kathmandu Post reported that Garda illegally shortchanged the family of a Nepalese employee killed in the attack.

There are few regulations constraining Canadian PSCs’ international operations. Unlike the US and South Africa, notes “Beyond the Law? The Regulation of Canadian Private Military and Security Companies Operating Abroad”, “Canadadoes not have legislation designed to regulate either the services provided by Canadian PMSCs [private military security companies] operating outside of Canada or the conduct of Canadian citizens working for foreign PMSCs.”Furthermore, Ottawa has not signed the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries and has been little involved with the UN Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the use of mercenaries.

The foreign military pullout and Taliban capture of Kabul has decimated the large PSC industry in the country. Yet most Afghans are likely happy to see the end of private mercenary forces and hired guns dominating their country. This development has gone largely unreported by Canadian media.

The CBC owes Canadians a discussion of the role private security forces played in Afghanistan.

*

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 Yves Engler

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

While the ruling party gathers for a swanky conference to celebrate its political successes, average Britons are struggling with fuel shortages, economic devastation and a deadly pandemic

One of the most striking features of contemporary politics is the scale of the gap that has opened up between elites and the people.

Let’s look at Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Britain on the eve of next week’s Tory party conference in Manchester. We are talking two parallel realities: on the one hand, the euphoric story of political triumph and economic success. On the other, economic degradation and looming social catastrophe.

The first reality can be found inside the heavily guarded conference centre by Manchester’s famous Midland hotel. Britain’s governing elite were already starting to gather there on Friday: Johnson, his freshly reshuffled cabinet, MPs still pinching themselves in disbelief after the 2019 election triumph, Tory donors on the lookout for contracts – all aided and abetted by a courtier class of client journalists and newspaper editors on a mission to pump out the Conservative message.

Remember that next week’s Tory conference is not just a public affair. The British governing elite will back slap and strike deals behind the scenes at parties, restaurants and private dinners.

As for Johnson, he is guaranteed to receive a hero’s welcome when he steps onto the stage to deliver his leader’s speech.

Remember that this is the first Tory conference to meet physically (as opposed to online) since Johnson’s election victory in December 2019. There is a great deal of celebration to do, and the festivities will stretch well into the small hours – all the more so with Labour leader Keir Starmer well behind in the polls, and obsessed with stoking divisions inside his own party.

The second reality

Now let’s turn to the second reality, the one increasingly experienced by the majority of the British people. There are long queues outside petrol stations as Britain faces a fuel crisis hauntingly similar to the 1970s. Many petrol stations, including my local station, are actually closed.

Crops are rotting in the fields. Supermarket shelves are empty. Covid-19 is back on the rise, with deaths creeping steadily up. There are growing fears for the British economy, with inflation on the rise and public finances out of control. There’s talk of a winter of discontent, comparable to the chaotic winter of 1978-79, which created the conditions for Margaret Thatcher’s election victory the following spring.

Can the euphoric political/media bubble on display in central Manchester coexist with the grim realities of declining living standards and desperation outside? It is important to understand that so far, the Johnson government has been protected against the consequences of this pileup of economic disasters.

For all its horror, the coronavirus pandemic did the Johnson government a monumental political favour. It concealed the economic consequences of Brexit. For the last 18 months, it has been impossible to tell whether the pandemic or Brexit was responsible for Britain’s mounting problems.

Now, they are becoming obvious for all to see. There are no Eastern European workers to pick the crops; European lorry drivers are unavailable now that Britain has left the single market. On Thursday, Chancellor Rishi Sunak brought to an end the furlough scheme that protected workers against lost income because of the pandemic.

On Wednesday – by coincidence, the date Johnson is expected to deliver his conference speech – universal credit will be slashed by £20 ($27) a head, the biggest cut in the history of the welfare state. The move will plunge many people into poverty and desperation.

Media complicity

Crucially, Johnson has so far been able to rely heavily on the protection of the mass media. Britain’s big right-wing newspaper groups all backed Brexit, and they all supported Johnson when he ran for Tory leader.

They need him to succeed. If he fails, they will look stupid and lose credibility, and their readers will lose faith. Meanwhile, the supposedly impartial BBC, intimidated by government bullying, has failed to stand up to the government.

So, the mass media have largely averted their gaze from Johnson’s problems – and when they have been forced to pay attention, they have largely absolved the prime minister of blame. Anyone who doubts this analysis should contemplate the kind of media coverage that Jeremy Corbyn would have been receiving over the past few weeks if he had won the last general election.

It would have been gory. He would have been personally blasted for each and every disaster. He would have been mocked and humiliated in brutal front-page denunciations. There would be a campaign for him to quit.

Johnson, by contrast, is held up as a hero who successfully survived a brush with death after contracting Covid-19 to successfully lead Britain out of Europe and through the coronavirus crisis. Johnson’s political triumph is indeed remarkable. This weekend, he dominates the Conservative Party, having won an 80-seat majority in the House of Commons – and there will much talk of a snap general election and 10 more years of a Johnson premiership.

But this euphoria is based on lies, made possible only thanks to the complicity of a tainted mass media. Next week will be Johnson’s greatest moment of political triumph as Tory leader. He should enjoy it. Outside the Conservative Party bubble, life is getting harder, and the triumphalist media/political establishment cannot ignore this desperation for much longer.

*

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.

Peter Oborne won best commentary/blogging in 2017 and was named freelancer of the year in 2016 at the Online Media Awards for articles he wrote for Middle East Eye. He was also named as British Press Awards Columnist of the Year in 2013. He resigned as chief political columnist of the Daily Telegraph in 2015. His latest book, The Assault on Truth, was published in February 2021. His previous books include The Triumph of the Political Class, The Rise of Political Lying, and Why the West is Wrong about Nuclear Iran.

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 decision to keep secret the files relating to deaths caused by British army use of ‘baton rounds’ in the 1980s only augments the agony the victims’ families have suffered, writes RICHARD RUDKIN

Just when you think this Tory government couldn’t get any nastier, somehow they always seem pull something out the hat to prove us wrong.

It appears they have now blended in their Tory trademark of “heartlessness” along with a disturbing desire for “secrecy and cruelty” by denying a number of family’s access to vital historic files.

The files that are held at the National Archives at Kew could provide answers surrounding deaths caused by injuries sustained from plastic bullets, also known as baton rounds, during the “Troubles.”

One case in particular is Paul Whitter, who was just 15, when a plastic bullet fired in 1981 by a Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) constable in Derry struck Paul on the back of the head causing severe damage. Sadly, Paul died 10 days later.

In 2007, the Ombudsman report into his death criticised the police investigation and concluded that the firing of the baton round was wrong and unjustifiable. No attempt was made to arrest the boy, no warning was given and the bullet was fired from less than the permissible range of 20 metres.

Despite this, the family of Paul Whitters will have to wait until 2059 to access the files.

However, it is not just this family affected by this decision to deny access to files. The Pat Finucane Centre, which has performed outstanding work in helping families bereaved as a result of the conflict, has discovered that other files relating to deaths caused by the use of plastic bullets during the Troubles are to remain closed until 2071.

In a statement made to the BBC, a spokesperson for the Northern Ireland Office stated: “A very small proportion (of files) have to be kept closed because they relate to issues such as sensitive personal information, relations with other countries on National Security.”

Understandably, sometimes restricting access may be necessary, but in this case we are talking about a 15-year-old child. Moreover, it raises questions about why the government finds it necessary not just to restrict access but to do so for such a long period of time, thereby ensuring everyone connected to this and similar incidents, where death has occurred from a plastic bullet, will never be questioned on their statements.

Knowing this, it’s understandable that many people come to the conclusion that the decision to refuse access to these and other files such as Orgreave, Shrewsbury pickets and many others, including events from the Troubles, has the suggestion of “state collusion and cover-up” running through it like a stick of seaside rock.

What information could these files hold that may not only uncover the truth for the relatives but prove damaging to a government agency if declassified?

Is it possible the answer to the question could be found by comparing documents such as “the guidelines for recommended use of plastic bullets” against statements made by members of the security forces that fired them?

Could the files contain information regarding the condition of the “bullets fired?” Is there anything to suggest in the statements any bullets had been “doctored?”

Do the files contain eyewitness accounts that throw doubt that the victim was hit by accident or contradict statements made by the security forces?

These are just a few questions that the files could provide answers to.

Rubber bullets, if used correctly, are not as damaging as “live rounds,” but it is a myth to suggest that they were a “soft option.”

Manufactured from hard rubber, measuring approximately 150mm in length, 38 in diameter and weighing approximately 131 grams, they travelled at about 60 metres per second. Although intended to be a non-lethal alternative for use in riot control, used incorrectly, they could cause serious injury or death.

Surprisingly, this obvious danger never appeared to cross the minds to those in command — that is until 1971 when a British soldier committed an act of pure malice.

On a November morning in Belfast, 51-year-old mother of 11 Emma Groves was looking out the window as British soldiers carried out searches in adjoining houses.

Safely in her home, Groves expressed her right to peacefully protest by putting an Irish folk record on her player and turning the volume up loud.

As she returned to look out the window, a soldier standing outside, no more than eight feet away, possibly angered by the music, took aim and fired a rubber bullet that smashed through the glass hitting her in the face. The injury was so severe, Groves lost her sight in both eyes. Despite this, no action was taken against the soldier who fired the bullet.

Having learned nothing from the criminal action that blinded Groves, it was no surprise that just two years later 11-year-old Francis Rowntree would become the first person to be killed by a rubber bullet during the Troubles.

The rubber bullets that were used from 1970 were eventually replaced by plastic bullets in 1975.

Slightly smaller but of similar weight to its predecessor, the plastic bullet was seen as lower risk due to it not ricocheting like the rubber bullet, but this was only a cosmetic solution.

What really needed to change was the method of use. A clear demonstration of the perils of failing to do so occurred later in the same year when Stephen Geddis, aged 10, became the youngest person to die from injuries sustained from being hit by a plastic bullet

The use of rubber and plastic bullets took the sight of Groves and the lives of 17 people, with over half being children.

If a child’s life is lost due to an accident, it’s tragic, if it’s taken by an act of malice, it’s criminal and no government should be allowed to make a cruel decision that prevents the relatives from discovering which of the two it was.

If the relatives can’t obtain justice because they are denied the truth, how can they possibly find peace?

The answer is they won’t and that has to be wrong.

*

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: Rubber and plastic rounds Photo: Pic: lns1122/Creative 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.

***

Venezuela’s national currency has devalued by over a quarter as the government rolls out a monetary reconversion.

On October 1, the digital bolívar (BsD) replaced the sovereign bolívar (BsS), knocking out six zeroes from its predecessor (1 BsD = 1,000,000 BsS). The two legal tenders will coexist in the coming weeks as the newly minted bills from 5 to 100 BsD, as well as a 1 BsD coin, begin to circulate.

However, the imminent redenomination led to a currency speculation drive, with the black market rate going from 4 million to 4.8 million BsS, or 4.8 BsD, per 1 US dollar in the past week. The exchange value went up further to 5.14 BsD on its first day, meaning that the Venezuelan currency lost 28.5 percent of its value in ten days.

Social media users and analysts decried the speculative frenzy, with Economy Vice Minister William Castillo calling it a “political operation” and blasting opposition commentators who justify “attacks against the economy.”

With the bolívar redenomination, the Venezuelan government has prioritized the need to boost digital operations to facilitate transactions and minimize the risk of cash shortages.

Most bank platforms were up and running on Friday morning, with technical difficulties persisting for the Bank of Venezuela into the afternoon. The public bank, the country’s largest, was recently offline for several days due to what authorities denounced as a cyber-attack originating in the United States. The smaller Bicentenario Bank, also state-owned, suffered an alleged Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack on September 23 but had its services restored in hours.

Quarterly devaluation of the sovereign bolívar since its introduction. Venezuela’s currency has devalued almost entirely but the pace has slowed in recent months. (Venezuelanalysis w/ BCV data).

The new reconversion comes just three years after the introduction of the sovereign bolívar. In August 2018, the Nicolás Maduro government removed five zeroes and replaced the strong bolívar (BsF) as part of a broad set of economic reforms.

At the time, Venezuelan authorities hoped to tackle runaway inflation in the midst of a years-long economic crisis. But the devaluation-inflation spiral continued unabated after a few weeks of stability, forcing the Venezuelan Central Bank to twice introduce new, higher denomination bills. Liberal overtures such as the lifting of currency exchange controls slowed down devaluation but not entirely.

In contrast to 2018, the digital bolívar rollout has not come alongside other economic measures. The price of subsidized fuel reportedly jumped by 100 percent without any official announcement. Nevertheless, filling a 40L tank costs a mere 0.4 BsD, or US $0.08. Privately run gas stations continue to sell gasoline at $0.50 a liter.

The Venezuelan economy has been mired in a years-long crisis that was significantly worsened by wide-reaching US sanctions. GDP has contracted by more than 65 percent, though some forecasts have the country registering growth in 2021 for the first time since 2013.

The Maduro executive has looked to kickstart the economy by offering increasingly favorable conditions for private investment through tax exemptions and deregulation. But legislative initiatives such as the Anti-blockade Law and Special Economic Zones have faced controversy, with Chavista groups and intellectuals arguing that the measures endanger the country’s sovereignty and break with former President Hugo Chávez’s socialist project.

*

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: Despite inflation slowing down in recent months, Venezuela is rolling out a second monetary reconversion in three years. (Archive)

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 Kingdom of Morocco is a place of hope and promise of honest attempts to make strides commensurate with the humanistic journey. It recognizes in its Constitution, laws, policies, and programs that community participation is the essential ingredient for achieving optimal outcomes, including sustainability and ever-deeper satisfaction among the people.

The premise of the nation’s family code is rooted in not just centuries but millennia, calling for justice and equity in regard to women and men and our gender-based experiences. Morocco has also determined—based on its own historically informed outlook, but also from lessons around the world drawn over time—that concentrating the power of decision-making and control over the affairs that matter the most to people ought to rest among them and in the public administrative tier closest to them. This is also a matter of recognizing human dignity: distant determinations which are imposed are rarely as appropriate as those that people make for themselves and their families alongside their neighbors and community members.

The national commitment for renewable energy is also among the nation’s flagship efforts for a society that lives in balance, not just with each other as a diverse people but also in regards to the relationship with the natural environment. Morocco’s global noteworthy commitment to renewable energy, backed by financial and political will, is indeed inspiring. It is part and parcel of Morocco’s transformational intent in the other vital sectors of society and growth.

Nonetheless, as incredibly major as the country’s opportunities are, the difficulties and inadequacies of their implementation can, at times, be stark and real. Morocco deserves enormous credit for its honesty. One need not look any further than the Special Report for the New Development Model (spearheaded by H.M. the King of Morocco) for the truth in regard to both the promise and its painful lack of fulfillment, concluding with the urgency to chart a recalibrated course of action.

The national commitment to decentralization—or regionalization—that is captured in Article 1 of the Constitution is essential; it provides a system by which localities can identify and implement related projects in keeping with their own priorities. Such community movements occur, particularly in partnership with public and private sectors, the more these channels of cooperation in reaching decentralization can be effective.

Decentralization will remain stalled or will flourish to the extent that communities comprising the country’s municipalities are vibrant and energized in their collaborative course, implementing the development they most seek. The unsatisfactory level of community actions in this regard is the primary reason that decentralization is not providing an empowering structure and necessary difference for the country.

Renewable energy projects, no matter their impressive prominence even with Morocco’s sincere dedication, has not been integrative of community voices, evaluations, and, arguably, benefits—in a manner felt by the local people.

The High Atlas Foundation and its domestic and international multi-stakeholder partners all hold high hopes and expectations for Morocco’s commitment to decentralized renewable energy. They are taking the course that we must first provide opportunities for harnessing empowerment among intended beneficiaries and also engage in participatory planning of initiatives that they most want. We will then see areas where integration of renewable energy can take place within the pathway to development determined by the communities.

As in all genuine, empowering local movements, it begins with an invitation by the community members expressing their desire to fully engage and give the time and energy needed to achieve successful outcomes. Many invitations in our program’s experience are forthcoming, and we decided to focus in the Youssoufia province with a village community in the Jnane Bouih municipality because of circumstances that they face, including severe scarcity of water and evident vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

Women and men prioritized clean drinking water and a nursery of different endemic fruit-bearing trees and medicinal plants as part of the fulfilling future that they seek. As of today, with the initial phases of empowerment workshops implemented, the registration of their cooperative, and a source of sweet and nourishing water found at a depth of 200 meters, we remain steadfast in the completion of their individual and collective dream.

These local development experiences, viewed comparatively and in the aggregate, reveal the commonality of needs: the difficulty of accessing resources to create change, the gender-based differences in objectives, and the desire to remain in rural communities and not migrate to cities for the sake of bread alone. Experiences examined in these and in other informative ways can actually be helpful in reforming policy. The power of decentralization is not only in its concentration of capacity among the people who drive their own futures and possibilities but also in its ability to bring forward new approaches and policy frameworks that are more commensurate with what people actually want and pursue.

Our experiences in Youssoufia and elsewhere are, in fact, revelatory in that they spotlight the adjustments and programs that can more effectively release the endless energy that people have for improving their lives. The Youssoufia experience is about the immediate needs of its residents. But, it is also about understanding the needs that transcend the countryside and that, when sincerely listened to, can bring about laws backed by resources ushering in the Moroccan promise for all its 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.

Dr. Yossef Ben-Meir is president of the High Atlas Foundation in Morocco.

Featured image: Imagine women’s empowerment session in Youssoufia (High Atlas Foundation, 2021)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On May 7, 2021, during the peak of India’s Delta Surge, The World Health Organization reported, “Uttar Pradesh (is) going the last mile to stop COVID-19.”

The WHO noted, “Government teams are moving across 97,941 villages in 75 districts over five days in this activity which began May 5 in India’s most populous state with a population of 230 million.”

The activity involved an aggressive house-to-house test and treat program with medicine kits.

The WHO explained, “Each monitoring team has two members who visit homes in villages and remote hamlets to test everyone with symptoms of COVID-19 using Rapid Antigen Test kits. Those who test positive are quickly isolated and given a medicine kit with advice on disease management.”

The medicines comprising the kit were not identified as part of the Western media blackout at the time. As a result, the contents were as secret as the sauce at McDonald’s.

The WHO continued, “On the inaugural day, WHO field officers monitored over 2,000 government teams and visited at least 10,000 households.”

This news story was published on the WHO Official Website in India. The website details the WHO’s work against COVID-19 in India, including a discussion about their “Online course for Rapid Response Teams.”

Such teams are the very government teams discussed above assigned to conduct the house-to-house test and treat program in Uttar Pradesh. In discussing the role of the Rapid Response Team (RRT), the WHO site reports,

“RRTs are a key component of a larger emergency response strategy that is essential for an efficient and effective response…WHO has produced and published this course for RRTs working at the national, sub-national, district, and sub-district levels to strengthen the pandemic response with support from the National Center for Disease Control, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India, and the U.S. Centers for Disease  Control and Prevention.”

The Rapid Response Teams derive support from the United States CDC under the umbrella of the WHO. This fact further validates the Uttar Pradesh test and treat program and solidifies this as a joint effort by the WHO and CDC. See this.

Perhaps the most telling portion of the WHO article was the last sentence, “WHO will also support the Uttar Pradesh government on the compilation of the final reports.” See this.

None have yet been published.

Just five short weeks later, on June 14, 2021, new cases had dropped a staggering 97.1 percent, and the Uttar Pradesh program was hailed as a resounding success. According to ZeeNews of India, “The strategy of trace, test & treat yields results.”

“The Yogi-led state has also been registering a steep decline in the number of Active COVID Cases as the figure has dropped from a high of 310,783 in April to 8,986 now, a remarkable reduction by 97.10 percent.”

By July 2, 2021, three weeks later, cases were down a full 99 percent. See this.

On August 6, 2021, India’s Ivermectin media blackout ended with MSN reporting. Western media, including MSN, finally acknowledged what was contained in those Uttar Pradesh medicine kits. Among the medicines were Doxycycline and Ivermectin. See this.

On August 25, 2021, the Indian media noticed the discrepancy between Uttar Pradesh’s massive success and other states, like Kerala’s, comparative failure. Although Uttar Pradesh was only 5% vaccinated to Kerala’s 20%, Uttar Pradesh had (only) 22 new COVID cases, while Kerala was overwhelmed with 31,445 in one day. So it became apparent that whatever was contained in those treatment kits must have been pretty effective.

News18 reported, “Let’s look at the contrasting picture. Kerala, with its 3.5 crore population – or 35 million, on August 25 reported 31,445 new cases, a bulk of the total cases reported in the country. Uttar Pradesh, the biggest state with a population of nearly 24 crore – or 240 million – meanwhile reported just 22 cases in the same period.

Two days ago, just seven fresh positive cases were reported from Uttar Pradesh. Kerala reported 215 deaths on August 25, while Uttar Pradesh only reported two deaths. In fact, no deaths have been reported from Uttar Pradesh in recent days. There are only 345 active cases in Uttar Pradesh now while Kerala’s figure is at 1.7 lakh – or 170,000.” See this.

“Kerala has done a much better job in vaccination coverage with 56% of its population being vaccinated with one dose and 20% of the population being fully vaccinated with a total of 2.66 crore – or 26.6 million – doses being administered.

Uttar Pradesh had given over 6.5 crore – or 65 million – doses, the maximum in the country, but only 25% of people have got their first dose while less than 5% of people are fully vaccinated. Given the present COVID numbers, Uttar Pradesh seems to be trumping Kerala for the tag of the most successful model against COVID.”

This author reviewed the reasons behind Kerala’s failed treatment model in two articles, “The Lesson of Kerala” and “Kerala’s Vaccinated Surge.”

See this and this.

By September 12, 2021, Livemint reported that 34 districts were declared COVID-free or had no active cases. Only 14 new cases were recorded in the entire state of Uttar Pradesh. See this.

On September 22, 2021, YouTube hosted a video by popular science blogger Dr. John Campbell detailing the Uttar Pradesh success story. He gave a breakdown of the ingredients and dosages of the magical medicine home treatment kit responsible for eradicating COVID in Uttar Pradesh. The same kit was also used in the state of Goa.

Dr. John Campbell broke India’s Ivermectin Blackout wide open on YouTube by revealing the formula of the secret sauce, much to the dismay of Big Pharma, the WHO, and the CDC. Readers will want to watch this before it is taken down. See mark 2:22.

Each home kit contained the following: Paracetamol tablets [tylenol], Vitamin C, Multivitamin, Zinc, Vitamin D3, Ivermectin 12 mg [quantity #10 tablets], Doxycycline 100 mg [quantity #10 tablets]. Other non-medication components included face masks, sanitizer, gloves and alcohol wipes, a digital thermometer, and a pulse oximeter. See mark 2:33.

Campbell reports that the exciting things in the kit that grabbed his attention were: Zinc, Vitamin D3, Ivermectin, and secondary antibiotic treatment. “Interesting, that’s what the government decided to give.” See mark 3:40

John Campbell has reviewed repurposed drugs for COVID before. He has interviewed both Dr. Tess Lawrie and Dr. Pierre Kory. Repurposed drugs hold the potential for benefitting many conditions, not the least of which include viruses and cancers. See this.

Dr. Campbell noted that there had been no recent cases in 59 Uttar Pradesh districts. In addition, out of 191,446 tests completed in the previous 24 hours, only 33 samples were positive for a test positivity rate of only 0.01%. Dr. Campbell called this low number “staggering.” See mark 5:05.

By September, cases had fallen dramatically. Out of the entire state of 200 million plus inhabitants, only 187 active cases were left compared to the peak in April of 310,783 cases. See mark 5:41.

Dr. Campbell attributes their success to many factors, including early detection and early treatment with kits costing a mere $ 2.65 per person. See mark 6:20.

Notice that Dr. Campbell does not mention a single person who had any toxicity from those ten 12 mg pills of Ivermectin – in the entire state of over 200 million. Not one poisoning was reported. No Indian poison control articles or telephone calls were reported. Out of millions of distributed medicine kits, each containing 120 mg of Ivermectin, not one person in Uttar Pradesh was reported to have had a problem with the drug.

Notice that Dr. Campbell at no time criticizes the medicine kit as “fringe” or ineffective. After all, it would be improper to accuse a WHO-sponsored program such as the Uttar Pradesh test and treat – coordinated by WHO – of being “fringe.” See this.

Contrary to what little we receive – at great expense – from the government in the United States, these kits are efficient and contain gloves, a thermometer, and an oximeter. The last time I purchased an oximeter some ten years ago, it cost some $200.00. This entire kit – including the oximeter – costs only $2.65.

And notice that a government can purchase over one thousand home treatment Ivermectin containing kits for the price of one course of Remdesivir. Remdesivir runs $3,100, and it is an impractical drug as it must be given late in the disease during hospitalization. Moreover, it is a drug that does not save lives.

See this and this.

On the other hand, the Ivermectin kits are highly correlated with eliminating COVID-19 in Uttar Pradesh. Indeed with less than 11% of their population fully vaccinated, the Uttar Pradesh model of test and treat is superior not only to Kerala, with a much higher percent vaccinated. Uttar Pradesh beats the UK, the US, and nearly everywhere else in the world in terms of the lowest active COVID cases.

See this and this.

Rather than turning a blind eye to Uttar Pradesh, perhaps it is time to analyze its success. It is time for all to realize that far from being dangerous, Ivermectin is safer than hand sanitizer or plain Tylenol, judging from the number of United States poison control calls.

See this.

Now is precisely the moment to point out that Dr. George Fareed, Dr. Peter McCullough, and Dr. Harvey Risch were correct in their U.S. Senate Testimony on November 19, 2020. They advised that early outpatient treatment was essential and would save hundreds of thousands of American lives if adopted. It wasn’t.

See this.

Now is the right moment to notice the onslaught of United States poison control articles attempting to smear Ivermectin, a drug proven safe and effective in the Uttar Pradesh test-and-treat program administered under the auspices of both the WHO and CDC.

It is appropriate to remind the reader that the WHO and CDC possess direct and recent knowledge of Ivermectin use for COVID-19 in India. Moreover, they know better than anyone the colossal effectiveness and overwhelming safety of Ivermectin used in those millions of Uttar Pradesh test and treat kits.

Perhaps it is also time to ask why exactly Dr. Tess Lawrie’s peer-reviewed meta-analysis was given an Altimetric score of 26,697, making it number eight out of some 18 million publications.

See this.

This rank is far better than the top 1%, which would only need a ranking of 180,000 for it to rank in the top 1%. It would only need 18,000 for it to rank in the top .1%. Ranking in the top .001% would mean #180. Therefore, at number eight, it is 8/180 of the top .001% or roughly the top 4.4% of the top .001%. This article ranks in the top 5% of the top .001%!

In other words, only seven articles in the world out of those 18 million are ranked higher.

This peer-reviewed paper is one of the most cited of medical references of all time – period. That should alert any reader – immediately – to its historical significance. Dr. Tess Lawrie is a 30-year veteran WHO evidence synthesis expert. Her conclusion is every bit as meaningful as the article’s rank. Here are those words,

“Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using Ivermectin. Using Ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that Ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.”

See this.

Maybe it is time to ask why Dr. Pierre Kory’s peer-reviewed narrative review of Ivermectin ranks #38 out of the same 18 million publications.

He concludes, “Finally, the many examples of Ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality reduction indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.”

See this.

If Dr. Lawrie’s paper is ranked in the top 5% of the top .001% of all such published medical articles of all time, then Dr. Kory’s is not far behind.  His is 38/180 of the top .001% or the top 21% of the top .001%

Thus, both articles would rank in the rarified atmosphere of nearly one in a million.

Therefore, the reader must now ask why two magnificent independent reviews from two different continents, coming to the same conclusion, are both ignored by our world’s medical leaders?

Uttar Pradesh is one such population that experienced a considerable drop in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality months AFTER Dr. Kory’s article was published on April 22, 2021. Therefore, one must ask that if Ivermectin so predictably and safely eradicates COVID-19, then why is it not being systematically deployed over all the world, as Dr. Kory and Dr. Lawrie suggest?

Perhaps every reader needs to ask themselves this question – Why is it that BOTH Dr. Lawrie’s and Dr. Kory’s supremely-rated expert review articles, published in the medical literature on PubMed, the National Library of Medicine, are BANNED from Wikipedia?

See this.

Although India’s Ivermectin victory over COVID  may have been lost on bent-on-vaccinating-everyone Big Pharma and Big Regulators, the message seems to have gotten through to the man on the street. If Google Trends is any indicator, interest in Ivermectin is exploding, and for good reason. We are all being systematically deceived by influential organizations in the name of profits.

See this and this.

A daily onslaught of media propaganda bombards us with messages attempting to steer us away from the safest and most effective treatments.

See this.

Interest in Ivermectin and India is only increasing and has now reached an all-time high. India’s conquest of COVID-19 is concealed no longer. The secret is out. And perhaps, at long last, that much-anticipated WHO Final Report detailing the most successful Pandemic campaign of any place on earth will be published.

See this.

*

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

Featured image is from The Desert Review

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.

***

Exclusive report from Global Research’s Correspondent Carla Stea at United Nations headquarters in New York City

***

On September 23, 2021, at the Permanent Mission of Venezuela to the United Nations, the Foreign Ministers and other representatives of Algeria, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Cambodia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, Russia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria and Venezuela met at 8:00AM and adopted a Political Declaration.  Perhaps the most crucial point of this Declaration is expressed in point “4.” which states:

Image on the right: DPRK Ambassador Kim Song

“We express our serious concern at the growing resort to unilateralism, in detriment not only of multilateralism, but also of international cooperation and solidarity, which must be deepened now more than ever, including in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, in order to forge collective, inclusive and effective solutions to the common challenges and threats of a Twenty-First Century of interconnectedness.   Hence, while renewing our firm commitment with a reinvigorated multilateralism that shall have the United Nations at its centre, we convey our support to nations and peoples subjected to unilateral and arbitrary approaches that violate both the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the basic norms of international law, and renew our call for the full respect to the inalienable right of peoples to self-determination, as well as the territorial integrity and political independence of all nations.”

Perhaps it is inevitable that this Declaration was conceived by the nations in synchronization with the principles of Venezuela, birthplace of Simon Bolivar, the great liberator of Latin America from Spanish Imperialism, and now inspiring some of the most powerful and progressive member states of the United Nations to form an alliance to liberate the United Nations from the unilateralism which is crushing it, and rendering it impotent.  This seems to be inherent in point “5” of this Declaration of September 23, which states:

Image below: Venezuelan Ambassador

“We invite those members of the international community that are committed with the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, with the prevalence of legality over force, with the values of dialogue, tolerance and solidarity, as well as with an effective and inclusive multilateralism, in joining our Group of Friends and/or endorsing this Declaration at their earliest convenience, as part of our common efforts to advance our common agenda and to ultimately keep delivering on the promise of the Charter of the United Nations and ensuring that no one is left behind.”

Reading of the Declaration: Venezuelan foreign minister and ambassador

Stealthily, the United Nations “Public-Private Partnerships” are increasing private corporate control of the United Nations, with the corporate “elite” partners exerting exponentially greater influence over United Nations programs, facilitating multiple methods of covertly imposing neoliberal development models through United Nations agencies often disguised as “humanitarian interventions” but indistinguishable from “color revolutions.”

This usurpation of United Nations agencies has vastly increased often suffocating unilateral control over the  United Nations member states, the majority of which are often targets of this agenda.

Group photo with Syrian DFM Jafaari at the back

This new “Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations” offers an alternative option to vulnerable targeted member states, and the inclusion of China and Russia in this new organization seeking to re-create balance in “Defense of the United Nations Charter” promises a formidable alternative of hope, and, indeed, power for the increasing number of United Nations member states threatened with subjugation by Western capitalist dominance.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister

*

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.

Carla Stea is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research’s Correspondent at UN headquarters, New York. 

All images in this article are from the author; featured image is Venezuelan foreign minister

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.

***

Although Boris Johnson has pledged to “liberate” the UK from “anti-GM rules” by ditching the European Union’s precautionary stance, it’s important to understand that the deregulatory moves his government has just announced on gene-edited crops apply to England, and England alone.

That’s because, as the BBC reports below, “the issue is devolved and governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland can make their own decision”, and to date every part of the UK with a devolved administration has opposed any growing of GM crops on their territory.

And in response to the Westminster government’s new policy announcement, Scotland and Wales have made it crystal clear that they have absolutely no intention of following England’s unilateral move to deregulate the gene editing of crop plants. Given Northern Ireland has effectively remained within the EU’s single market for goods, it’s almost impossible to see how it could follow England’s unilateral move either.

It’s also worth noting that a majority of people in Scotland and Northern Ireland voted against Brexit and the devolved administrations in both Scotland and Wales are strongly opposed to Boris Johnson’s Tory Party. And, of course, the public consultation on deregulation showed it was highly unpopular among individuals and businesses UK-wide.

That, of course, isn’t the end of the story, because the deregulation of gene editing is a globally coordinated campaign by lobbyists and so there is pressure on the EU to loosen its regulations on gene editing. The EU Commission has begun a process to review its regulatory framework in that light. But there is a lot of anti-GM sentiment in many parts of the EU, as well as in the European Parliament, so despite all the lobbying, the Commission is likely to have a tough fight on its hands to get any deregulatory moves accepted.

1. Disappointment at Defra’s ‘unilateral’ move on gene editing

By The Newsroom

The Scotsman, 29 Sept 2021

[excerpt only]

After weeks of build-up and hints of major changes to the UK’s regulatory framework on the use of gene editing breeding techniques, Westminster will today reveal that its plans will currently be limited to research and development.

However, the Scottish Government, which has previously stated its reservations on the commercialisation of such technology, expressed disappointed at England’s unilateral move on the issue, stating that it would continue to engage with Defra, Wales, and Northern Ireland to ensure that devolved competences were respected in charting the country’s future direction.

[…]

Commenting recently on the issue, the Scottish government’s environment minister, Màiri McAllan said: “Scotland’s policy towards GMOs has not changed, and we have no plans for a similar review.

“As for gene-editing, we are disappointed Defra would choose to move unilaterally on this…the Scottish Government is committed to keeping aligned with the EU, and we are monitoring the EU’s position closely.”

2. Gene-edited crops: ‘No plans’ to relax rules in Wales

BBC News, 30 Sept 2021

[excerpt only]

There are no plans to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops in Wales, the Welsh government has said.

Under UK government plans rules will be eased to allow gene-edited crops to be tested and assessed in England in the same way as other varieties.

But the Welsh government says it will maintain its “precautionary approach towards genetic modification”.

It will continue to view products produced by gene editing as genetic modified, it said.
The changes are possible because the UK no longer has to follow European Union regulations.

But the issue is devolved and governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland can make their own decision.

[…]

European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

The Welsh government say they have no plans to revise the regulations.

“Unlike the UK government, we will continue to view products produced by gene editing as genetically modified as set out by the European Court of Justice in 2018,” a spokeswoman 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.

Featured image is from GMWatch

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.

***

Dr. Carrie Madej: First U.S. Lab Examines “Vaccine” Vials, Horrific Findings Revealed

By Dr. Carrie Madej and Stew Peters, October 03, 2021

Dr. Carrie Madej joined Stew Peters today and appeared obviously shook by what she had seen after examining Moderna and J&J “vaccine” vials.

CDC Allows Hospitals to Classify Dead Vaxxed People as “Unvaccinated”

By Crack Newz, October 03, 2021

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have devised a set of rules pertaining to the classification of infectious disease and death. These rules simultaneously inflate the number of covid cases in the unvaccinated and allow hospitals to classify dead vaccinated people as “unvaccinated” deaths.

People are Dying Worldwide: “Foreign Aid” to Finance 1.8 Billion Vaccine Doses. Western Governments, Billionaires and Big Pharma Come to the “Rescue of the Poor Countries”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 03, 2021

The mRNA “experimental” vaccine was launched in mid to late December 2020. In many countries, there was a significant and immediate shift in mortality following the introduction of the Covid-19 vaccine.

The Entire Korean Peninsula as an American Satrapy?

By Kim Petersen, October 02, 2021

Foreign Affairs (FA) magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, has recently published some articles on taking advantage of economic challenges faced by North Korea.

“Big Money” and the “Water Barons”: A New Water Source That Could Make Drought a Thing of the Past

By Ellen Brown, October 03, 2021

Lack of fresh water is now a global crisis. Water shortages mean food shortages, with hunger creating death tolls substantially exceeding those of the current Covid-19 crisis.

Army Physician and Aerospace Medicine Specialist Calls on Pentagon to Order All Pilots Who Have Received COVID-19 Vaccine to be Grounded

By J. D. Heyes, October 01, 2021

A U.S. Army doctor who is also a specialist in aerospace medicine has made an unprecedented call to Pentagon leaders, asking them to ground all pilots in all services who have gotten a COVID-19 vaccine.

“We Are on the Edge of an Abyss—And Moving in the Wrong Direction.” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres

By Carla Stea, October 03, 2021

At the opening of the 76 session of the United Nations General Assembly, 20 September, 2021, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres delivered  a forceful and terrifying speech, which could only lead to the conclusion that, short of a Herculean global effort to reverse course, planet earth and the human species are on the verge of extinction.

Forced Vaccinations Get Worse – Louisiana Health System Now Requires Spouses of Employees to Get Vaccinated, or Pay a Non-Compliance Penalty for Vaxx Violations Every Pay Period

By Sundance, October 03, 2021

Ochsner Health is now requiring the spouses or domestic partners of all employees be vaccinated, or the employee will pay a $100 per pay period penalty.

Woman Injured by COVID Vaccine Pleads with Health Agencies for Help, as Local News Agency Kills Story after Pressure from Pfizer

By Megan Redshaw, October 03, 2021

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Kristi Dobbs recounted how she’s spent nine months pleading with health agencies to research the neurological injuries she developed after Pfizer’s vaccine, and how she and others are trying to get the word out about the vaccine’s potential risks.

Video: ‘You Sir, Are the One Ignoring Science’: Rand Paul Battles Becerra over COVID-19 Rules

By Sen. Rand Paul, October 03, 2021

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) grilled HHS Sec. Xavier Becerra during a Senate Health Committee hearing on Thursday.

How a Time Bomb Was Set to Usher in a Great Reset. And What to Do About It: 1923, 1929 and Today

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, October 02, 2021

Months before COVID19 was sprung onto the world, warnings of a “financial Armageddon” and calls for a “global hegemonic synthetic currency” were being made by leading figures running the WEF and Bank of England.

Destroying the Narrative: Twenty More Reasons Why a COVID-19 Pandemic Never Existed

By Jesse Smith, October 02, 2021

While the world has been set on fire with the flames of vaccine mandates, food and supply shortages, hyperinflation, unemployment, and police state crackdowns, the global cabal sitting atop this wide-reaching catastrophe is steadily implementing plans to reshape and reset the world to their advantage.

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.

***

Tensions recently spiked between Azerbaijan and Iran after the latter commenced military drills close to their border accompanied by harsh rhetoric from its officials. This includes Supreme Leader Khamenei’s Twitter account posting such messages as:

“The security of a country is the fundamental infrastructure for all activities for progress. Those who think that by relying on others they can ensure their security should know that they will soon be struck a blow for entrusting their security to foreigners.”

“The issues concerning Iran’s northwestern neighbors should be resolved wisely by relying on nations, through the cooperation of the armies of neighboring countries & by avoiding the presence of any foreign military forces.”

“In issues concerning the northwest of Iran, the Iranian Armed Forces act with authority & wisdom. It’s good for others to act wisely too & not permit the region to face problems. ‘Those who dig a hole for their brothers will be the first to fall into it.’”

Observers generally agree that four factors explain Iran’s recent moves:

• Azerbaijan’s continued de facto alliance with Iranian rival “Israel”
• The prospective Zangezur Corridor reducing the importance of Iran for facilitating Azerbaijani-Turkish trade
• Azerbaijan’s detainment of Iranian truckers transiting its newly liberated territory en route to Armenia
• Recent trilateral military drills in Azerbaijan with Pakistan and Turkey which Iran fears militarizes the region

What these factors have in common is that Iran is increasingly concerned that its national security interests are at stake. The Islamic Republic is now caught in a security dilemma with Azerbaijan following the outcome of last year’s Karabakh War in spite of politically supporting Baku during that conflict.

Azerbaijan perceives each of these four factors in the following way:

• It has the sovereign right to partner with whoever it wants and this isn’t aimed against any third countries
• Azerbaijan aims to position itself at the crossroads of Eurasia’s North-South and East-West trade routes
• Iranian truckers must comply with Azerbaijani law in the newly liberated territories
• Multilateral military drills are regionally stabilizing, predicated on peace, and Azerbaijan’s sovereign right

From the Iranian viewpoint:

• “Israel” is using Azerbaijan as an intelligence springboard for destabilizing northern Iran
• Iran doesn’t want the Zangezur Corridor fully replacing northern Iran’s role along East-West trade routes
• Azerbaijan is arbitrarily detaining Iranian truckers due to zero-sum motivations vis-a-vis Armenia
• Iran should have been invited to participate in those drills in order to reassure it of those countries’ intentions

In response, the Azerbaijani retort might be that:

• Iran is paranoid and thus possibly playing the “Israeli” card for self-serving domestic reasons
• It’s not Baku’s fault that the northern Iranian economy can’t replace that East-West trade route’s role
• Iran is sympathetic to Armenia and might be secretly arming it under the cover of regular trucking
• Iran wasn’t invited because those three countries don’t fully trust it for reasons that are solely Iran’s fault.

The expected Iranian position would be that:

• “Israel” is a credible threat to Iran and Azerbaijan’s close military cooperation with it raises serious suspicions
• Nobody predicted the Zangezur Corridor so Iran didn’t have time to adapt to this new connectivity corridor
• Iran pursues a regionally balanced policy and politically supported Azerbaijan despite some domestic pressure
• Iran’s ties with those three neighbors are complicated and it isn’t entirely to blame for the resultant distrust

If these mutual suspicions persist, the following far-reaching consequences are expected for Eurasia:

• The North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) will become politically unviable
• The Astana peace process might be adversely affected if Iran believes that Turkey is emboldening Azerbaijan
• Iran might stir up anti-Taliban trouble in Afghanistan in order to spite Pakistan by proxy
• China and Russia’s complementary Eurasian integration visions will struggle to be fulfilled

Azerbaijani-Iranian tensions aren’t expected to recede due to the following reasons:

• Both sides believe they’re acting within their sovereign rights in pursuit of their national security interests
• Their preexisting and partially resolved security dilemma has been revived due to recent events
• Both sides believe that the other is trying to pressure them and force concessions that’ll lead to a loss of face
• External actors like “Israel” and the US might seek to fan the flames of distrust for divide-and-rule purposes

There is no realistic solution to these tensions because:

• Their actions are consistent with their geopolitical identity and the regional outlook of their leaderships
• Tensions and mutual distrust have been boiling for a while already and were bound to spill over eventually
• Each side has a need to look strong for their domestic audiences and not compromise on any issue right now
• These tensions are mostly manageable since neither side wants war as it won’t achieve their objectives

To expand upon the last point, this is because:

• Formal hostilities will reinforce each side’s negative perception of the other
• An Azerbaijani-Iranian conflict will likely result in Turkey and possibly even “Israel” directly supporting Baku
• The threat of a wider war is contradictory to all regional stakeholders’ interests apart from “Israel’s”
• Azerbaijan will only double down on the policies that Iran is so concerned about after any possible war ends

Presuming an indefinitely extended period of regional tensions, the following workarounds are possible:

• The NSTC can become more multimodal through trans-Caspian connectivity to cut out Azerbaijan
• China’s W-CPEC+ vision can be replaced by the “Persian Corridor” to account for Iranian-Pakistani tensions
• Iran is mostly sidelined from Astana as it is and might even be on its way out of Syria in the coming future
• China can simultaneously manage complementary East-West corridors through Azerbaijan and Iran

In the meantime, it would be best if:

• Responsible regional stakeholders like China and Russia reaffirm their hopes that tensions can be managed
• Irresponsible stakeholders like “Israel” and the US avoid fanning the flames with divisive rhetoric
• Azerbaijani and Iranian officials tone down their rhetoric
• Both sides unofficially claim victory for domestic political reasons then avoid worsening tensions afterwards

Altogether, it’s clear that Azerbaijani-Iranian tensions will have far-reaching consequences for Eurasia, though they’ll hopefully remain manageable barring the unlikely scenario of a war by miscalculation. Their problems prove that the common cause of Eurasian integration is a lot more difficult to achieve than to discuss.

*

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

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

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.

***

Governments in certain countries, with the support of Big Pharma and the media, are mandating that citizens must vaccinate or be denied the right to enjoy public amenities in society, such as restaurants, cinemas, night clubs, museums, sporting events, etc. Those who wish to travel may be barred by not having documentation of being fully vaccinated. Probably worst of all, people are being fired from their jobs for refusing vaccination. These people who are fearful of the vaccines, in particular the mRNA vaccine, are being denigrated by calling them anti-vaxxers.

First, is the mRNA vaccine even a vaccine? The World Health Organization (WHO) says,

Vaccines train your immune system to create antibodies, just as it does when it’s exposed to a disease. However, because vaccines contain only killed or weakened forms of germs like viruses or bacteria, they do not cause the disease or put you at risk of its complications.

The mRNA vaccines do not contain “only killed or weakened forms of germs like viruses or bacteria.” Even worse, reports of adverse reactions to the mRNA purported vaccines are on the increase, even causing death. So if the mRNA “vaccine” is not by definition a vaccine, then people opposed to being injected with the experimental mRNA “vaccine” can not truthfully be labeled anti-vaxxers.

Second, even if mRNA “vaccines” were accepted to be vaccines, is it still proper to call vaccine skeptics anti-vaxxers?

Is the ad hominem truthful? Assuredly many, if not most, of the people opposed to being jabbed with the mRNA “vaccines” and other experimental vaccines have been willingly vaccinated previously to protect against other infections, among them whooping cough, chicken pox, measles, smallpox, rubella, tetanus, mumps, and perhaps others. Having received so many vaccinations, and having agreed to their children being vaccinated, then how accurate is it to demean these people as anti-vaxxers?

Third, are the vaccine skeptics opposed to others who of their own volition receive vaccines? Vaccine skeptics take action to protect their bodily sovereignty; they do not force others to receive or refuse vaccination. So they are not anti-vaxxers.

Fourth, the vaccines are STILL experimental. On 29 September, Globaldata Healthdcare reported, “Currently, there are over 2,000 COVID-19 clinical trials recruiting patients, with 16% being for vaccines and 84% for therapeutics.” One cannot ethically be mandated to take part in an experiment. Informed consent is required.

Are some people opposed to being vaccinated by any vaccine for COVID-19? Sure, some are.

Others are just opposed to having an experimental mRNA “vaccine” injected into their body.

They have heard that these mRNA “vaccines” are not genuine vaccines; many would, however, accept a traditional vaccine that has been demonstrated experimentally to be safe and effective. These vaccines tend to be most prominent in China, and their usage in the West would cut into the mega-bucks that western pharmaceutical companies are currently reaping. Yet China has declared its COVID-19 vaccines a global public good and has donated its vaccines to various developing countries.

There are many reasons to doubt the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines. Many vaccine skeptics are aware of several physicians and scientists cautioning against taking the vaccines.

Dr Gérard Delépine, an oncologist, orthopedic surgeon, and statistician at the Raymond Poincaré Hospital in Paris analyzed the pre- and post-vaccine trends for 14 countries and found overwhelming evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are correlated with new infections and mortality.

In other words, the vaccines appear to be killing people who are getting vaccinated, sadly ironic since people became vaccinated so they wouldn’t suffer or die.

There are reports of vaccinations being associated with blood clots causing death, Bells palsy, central nervous system disorders, eye disorders, menstrual irregularities, etc. There are the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports of tens of thousands having died after receiving being vaccinated.

Some people think the dangers of COVID-19 are overhyped. For example, when examining the data for winter-burden all-cause mortality prior to and since the appearance of COVID-19, there has been no significant difference in deaths from previous years.

People are leery of the information surrounding vaccinations. Is there a cover up? For instance, reporting deaths or injury to VAERS after vaccination can get you fired.

Corporate/state media have been criticized for censoring medical experts who question the vaccine safety, saying “the COVID jabs are causing the proliferation of toxic spike proteins throughout the vascular systems of injection recipients.”

Given all this, is it any wonder that some people are fearful of the COVID-19 vaccines?

And the fear is not limited to the mRNA “vaccines” because vaccine trials are still ongoing, although emergency use authorization had sped up the roll out of vaccines.

The vector vaccine Oxford-AstraZeneca usage was stopped in several countries, especially in Europe; in Canada the National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommended provinces stop using AstraZeneca.

The vector vaccine Janssen/Johnson & Johnson also received emergency use authorization and it has had its problems. In particular, a pause in its use occurred to “investigate whether the vaccine triggers a rare but serious side effect — the development of diffuse blood clots, even though the few individuals who developed the condition had low platelet levels.”

Are the Establishment’s vaccine experts speaking ex cathedra or are they presenting the scientific evidence to support their stance?

Since many of us non-experts are barraged by contradictory information surrounding COVID-19, it is incumbent upon people to do their own research to ascertain the verisimilitude of the reports.

Apply open-minded skepticism. Scrutinize the credentials and expertise of the person(s) reporting, but more so the factually accuracy of their pronouncements along with the morality and logic applied thereto. Are the reports in peer-review science journals or tabloid newspapers? More important than the source, however, is the actual information. Ask is the evidence solid, are the facts accurate, is the logic coherent, and are the conclusions proffered credible? And always ask cui bono? Should anyone be profiting exorbitantly from the ill health of other people?

The venerable professor Noam Chomsky spurns the pejorative use of the term anti. Chomsky promotes vaccination, but doesn’t call people resistant to vaccination anti-vaxxers. Nonetheless, he does depict them as people who are “willing to be a danger to the community.”

Another means of demeaning a group is to accuse them of being deniers.

There is a contingent of people who are skeptical that Earth is succumbing to global warming. They are disparaged as climate deniers rather than stating that they are climate skeptics.

Some people have provided a serious scientific rationale for their skepticism; others are not so well versed in science but have listened to or read accounts of why people need not fret an imminent and catastrophic climate change. [1]

And there is the hot-button issue of abortion. Both sides seek to describe themselves as pro-. On the one hand, those who support the woman’s right to choose whether or not to undergo a procedure to terminate the fetus will label themselves as pro-choice (they will steer clear of describing themselves as pro-abortion). The pro-choice people will argue that it is the woman’s body, and she has sovereignty over her body. On the other hand, those who are against terminating a fetus will label themselves as pro-life (they will not describe themselves as anti-abortion). They seek to protect a nascent life form.

If one applies the rationale of the pro-choice crowd, then they should support the right of vaccine skeptics to enjoy dominion over their body and, if the vaccine skeptics so choose, accept their unwillingness to being jabbed.

The vaccine skeptics, however, are in the minority it seems. This is unsurprising given the government, corporate media nexus that pushes for vaccination. Nonetheless, being in the minority is sometimes the best place to be. In the 1960s, the psychologist Stanley Milgram carried out a study into obedience. The subjects were assigned the role of a teacher. They were introduced to a confederate, the learner, who they met outfitted with attached electrodes. During the experiment, the learner would be on the other side of a partition, out of sight of the teacher. The teacher’s job was to give the learner an electric shock each time a mistake was made. The shocks were increased for each mistake, eventually reaching a zone marked danger and finishing in a 450-volt zone marked XXX. An experimenter in a lab coat would prod the teachers to continue administering shocks until the end of the test despite learner hesitancy to shock the obviously distressed learner who was heard moaning, and this prodding continued even after the learner failed to respond. Roughly two-thirds of teachers obeyed the experimenter right through 450 volts. Such is the nature of human obedience — at least, for two-thirds of humans. [2]

Today, people are not only being encouraged to be vaccinated, but those that resist are being coerced. Nowadays, Milgram’s experiments would encounter difficulty receiving permission from a human research ethics committee; regardless, the audacious and draconian force the Establishment employs against the unvaccinated minority poses a grave ethical scenario.

The state actors say the science supports them, but the data they present is scarce. If the science is that strong, then there is no need to silence doctors, scientists, professors, and intellectuals who have reached different conclusions. Bring the two camps together and present the science, data, and evidence in an open and fair debate that allows people to reach an informed and fact-based conclusion. Otherwise, people who resist vaccination have a reasoned right to their skepticism, and are undeserving of ad hominem directed against them. An information war shouldn’t be mired by invective.

*

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

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

Notes

1. To be clear, this writer has noted a definite uptick in heat waves year after year, an increased incidence of storms, reports of glaciers melting, flooding and such events that point to a global warming trend.
2. See Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (New York: Harper & Row, 1974).

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.

***

Dr. Carrie Madej joined Stew Peters today and appeared obviously shook by what she had seen after examining Moderna and J&J “vaccine” vials.

*

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.