Novas armas estão a ser acrescentadas ao arsenal das políticas económicas e financeiras do Ocidente. A fim de compreender a sua natureza e alcance, é necessário partir das que foram utilizadas até agora: sanções – incluindo a mais pesada, o embargo – aplicadas principalmente pelos Estados Unidos e pela União Europeia contra Estados, empresas e indivíduos. É essencial compreender os critérios pelos quais são decididas: os EUA e a UE decidem, de acordo com o seu critério exclusivo, que um Estado ou outra entidade cometeu uma violação, estabelecem a sanção ou o embargo total e exigem que os Estados terceiros a cumpram, sob pena de retaliação. Em 1960, os Estados Unidos impuseram um embargo a Cuba que, ao libertar-se, tinha violado o “direito” deles (EUA) usarem a ilha como se fosse sua propriedade: o novo governo nacionalizou as propriedades dos bancos e das multinacionais norteamericanas que controlavam a economia cubana. Hoje, 61 anos mais tarde, o embargo continua enquanto as empresas americanas exigem biliões de dólares de reembolsos. Em 2011, na preparação da guerra USA-NATO contra a Líbia, os bancos norteamericanos e europeus apoderaram-se de 150 biliões de dólares de fundos soberanos investidos no estrangeiro pelo Estado líbio, a maioria dos quais desapareceu posteriormente. Goldman Sachs, o mais poderoso banco de investimento dos EUA, do qual Mario Draghi foi Vice Presidente, destacou-se neste grande assalto. Em 2017, na sequência de novas sanções dos EUA contra a Venezuela, activos no valor de 7 biliões de dólares foram “congelados” pelos EUA e 31 toneladas de ouro depositadas pelo Estado venezuelano no Banco de Inglaterra e foram apreendidas pelo Deutsche Bank, da Alemanha.
Neste contexto, está inserida a nova e colossal operação financeira lançada pela Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank e outros grandes bancos americanos e europeus. Aparentemente, espelhando a que é aplicada às sanções, não envolve restrições económicas ou a apreensão de fundos para punir países considerados culpados de violações, mas a concessão de financiamento a governos e outras entidades virtuosas que aderem ao “ESG Index: Environment, Society, Governance”. O objectivo oficial do Índice ESG é estabelecer normas para prevenir a iminente catástrofe climática anunciada pela Conferência de Glasgow, defender os direitos humanos espezinhados pelos regimes totalitários e assegurar a boa governação, segundo o modelo das grandes democracias ocidentais. São principalmente o Departamento de Estado dos EUA, o Fórum Económico Mundial, a Fundação Rockefeller e o Banco Mundial que estabelecem estes padrões, com algumas organizações da ONU a desempenharem um papel subordinado. A maior garantia para os direitos humanos é o Departamento de Estado dos EUA, cujo embargo ao Iraque com a aprovação da ONU, provocou em 1990-2003, um milhão e meio de mortes, incluindo meio milhão de crianças.
A operação financeira concentra-se nas alterações climáticas: a Conferência da ONU em Glasgow anunciou, a 3 de Novembro, que “as finanças estão a tornar-se verdes e resistentes”. Nasce a Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, à qual aderiram 450 bancos e multinacionais de 45 países desde Abril, comprometendo-se a “investir nas próximas três décadas mais de 130 triliões de dólares (130 triliões) em capital privado para transformar a economia em emissões zero em 2050”. O capital será levantado através da emissão de Obrigações Verdes e investimentos feitos por fundos mútuos e fundos de pensões, em grande parte com o dinheiro de pequenos aforradores que correm o risco de se encontrarem em mais uma bolha especulativa.
Não há agora nenhum banco ou empresa multinacional que não esteja empenhado em atingir emissões zero até 2050 e em ajudar os “países pobres”, onde mais de 2 biliões de pessoas ainda utilizam a madeira como seu único ou principal combustível. Também solenemente comprometida com as emissões zero está a companhia petrolífera anglo-holandesa Royal Dutch Shell que, após ter causado um desastre ambiental e sanitário no Delta do Níger, se recusa a limpar as terras poluídas. Assim, enquanto esperam por emissões zero, os habitantes continuam a morrer devido à água poluída pelos hidrocarbonetos da Shell.
First posted by Global Research on January 15, 2021
It’s NOT a vaccine. The mRNA COVID vaccine now being militarily deployed in many nations around the world, is NOT a vaccine. I repeat: it is not a vaccine. It is many things indeed, but a vaccine is not one of them. We have to awaken to the fact that the COVID scamdemic has rapidly accelerated the technocratic and transhumanistic aspects of the New World Order (NWO) to the point where people are blindly lining up to get injected with a “treatment” which is also a chemical device, an operating system, a synthetic pathogen and chemical pathogen production device. As covered in previous articles, this new COVID vax is a completely new kind of technology, potentially even more dangerous than your average toxic vaccine. In this article, we will explore in more depth what this mRNA vaccine is.
Doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits Expose How So-Called COVID Vaccine is Not a Vaccine
Listen to this short excerpt featuring doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits (who have both been very outspoken thus far in exposing the COVID plandemic) who are speaking with Robert Kennedy Jr. and lawyer Rocco Galati, who is representing a Canadian freedom group suing the government for the entire COVID scam. David Martin makes some extremely important points about how we can’t accurately label the device Moderna and Pfizer are pushing as a vaccine, because both medically and legally, is not a vaccine:
“This is not a vaccine … using the term vaccine to sneak this thing under public health exemptions … This is a mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine! Vaccines actually are a legally defined term … under public health law … under CDC and FDA standards, and a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both an immunity within the person receiving it, but it also has to disrupt transmission … They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop transmission. It is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities, because then people would say “What other treatments are there?”
The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable … because it actually is the sucker punch to open and free discourse … Moderna was a started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARS … if we said we’re going to give people prophylactic chemo for the cancer they don’t have, you’d be laughed out of a room, because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is! This is a mechanical device, in the form of a very small packet of technology, that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.
The only reason why the term [vaccine] is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobsen case that has been misrepresented since it was written. If we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device, that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within the cell. It is a medical device, not a drug, because it meets the CDRH [Center for Devices and Radiological Health] definition of a device.
It is made to make you sick … 80% of the people who are exposed to allegedly the virus [SARS-Cov-2] have no symptoms at all … 80% of people who get this injected into them have a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce a[n] immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick, and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.”
Judy Mikovits also chips in with this:
“It’s a synthetic pathogen. They’ve literally injected this pathogenic part of the virus into every cell of the body … it can actually directly cause multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease … it can cause accelerated cancer … that’s what the expression of that piece of virus … has been known to do for decades.”
The mRNA vaccine operating system “software of life”. Image credit: Moderna
COVID Vaccine is an Operating System, Says Moderna
The COVID mRNA Vaccine is an operating system which can program your DNA, and therefore program you, at your core essential blueprint level. Is this an exaggeration? No it’s not. Moderna states on their website that their mRNA technology platform is a “software of life” and “functions very much like an operating system on a computer.” This is straight from their website:
“It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”
The Game Plan: Making Every Human into a Digital Node on the Control Grid
We are fast moving into the world of transhumanism, where our natural biological bodies are hijacked and infiltrated with synthetic parts, starting at the nanoparticle level. The NWO controllers want to download some kind of Microsoft office system or software into your body and brain, and hook you up to the JEDI and/or Amazon-CIA cloud, so they can have direct access to your brain. Then, they can roll out “vaccines” which are not vaccines to continually update you, just like computer software gets regular updates. Viruses, real or not, and vaccines, real or not, are just means to achieve this goal.
Turning Humans into Commodities via Social Credit Currency
Alison McDowell sums up the current transhumanistic NWO path of highest probability below, which involves social credit, 5G, the Smart Grid and AI to induce planetary-wide compliance:
“Within the tech-no-logic system, total compliance will be demanded. Approved behavior becomes currency, tokenized on blockchain and monitored by sensors and AI. They are training us for a future where we compete with one another to see who is the best behaved, the most docile. Surviving will mean conforming to the strident terms of psychopathic financial agreements. To obtain the data needed to verify claims embedded in twisted “pay for success” deals, our mother, the earth, must be remade as a geo-fenced digital prison using 5G and satellite constellations. All of your data will be added to your “permanent record” to evaluate your value as human capital for investor portfolios. The billionaires envision a future where freedom is a privilege limited to themselves, their functionaries, and the robots they control. Be assured AI is already keeping tabs, and social credit scoring is well underway.”
It is a grim future, however it is not set in stone. I agree wholeheartedly with McDowell that we do NOT have to accept this as our fate or experience such a painful timeline IF we can wake up quickly and change. However, we must first accept this is the probable path we are on. Like it or not, this is the current trajectory. How do we change it? Firstly by looking within. To change ourselves, we must change our inner world and change our perception, and so therefore change our reality:
“This planned future, however, is NOT preordained. Totalitarian transhumanism is not a foregone conclusion. Trudell’s remedy? Change our perception of reality through active non-cooperation. Manifest in our hearts, minds, and actions the world we desire. Where they engineer disconnect, RECONNECT with intention; not only with one another, but with ALL our relations and the land and the spiritual beings that exist beyond our senses. We must synchronize to change the vibrational reality, and that power exists within us as children of the earth.”
This is not airy-fairy talk, but rather a realization that we are participating in co-creating a nightmare world by allowing our perception to be programmed to bring about the NWO. They are using our energy to do it! To reclaim our sovereignety, we must reclaim our perception by breaking down the programming that was inserted into us.
Final Thoughts: A Technocratic, Transhumanistic Tool
It is vital to know, and to tell others, that the current mRNA COVID vaccine is not a vaccine. This is not just because calling it a vaccine gives Big Pharma legal immunity from damages, but also for all the reasons listed above. These devices are designed to reprogram you at the fundamental level. They are not vaccines, they are not drugs, and in my opinion, they are not treatments or medicine. As scary as these terms are, I would go beyond just calling them chemical devices, operating systems, synthetic pathogens and chemical pathogen production devices, which are already illuminating terms and horrible enough. I would call them technocratic, transhumanistic tools to permanently change your genetics and transform you into a synthetic human. They are symbolic of just how swiftly the NWO agenda is being made manifest in our physical reality, and hopefully a wake-up call to everyone to strive harder to stop this dark, nefarious agenda while there is still time.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Featured image: NOT a Vaccine: the mRNA COVID vax is a chemical pathogen production device and a technocratic, transhumanistic tool to repgrogram you. Image credit: Jordan Henderson
Important article by John C. A Manley. First published in October 2020
“A group is suing Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum and Tulsa Health Department Executive Director Bruce Dart, saying the city’s mask mandate is harmful to healthy people,” reports Activist Post. [October 2020] The group includes business owners and two doctors who “are asking the city to immediately repeal the mask mandate which was passed by city council last month.”
“…the fear factor has got to step back. This idea that I don’t want to give you something that I don’t even know that I have is almost at the point of ridiculous. Let’s use some common sense.”
Dr. James Meehan, MD followed by warning that mask wearing has “well-known risks that have been well-studied and they’re not being discussed in the risk analysis.
“I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise.
“Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly… in a non-sterile fashion… They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off of their car seat, off the rearview mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.”
Dr. Meehan adds:
“New research is showing that cloth masks may be increasing the aerosolization of the SARS-COV-2 virus into the environment causing an increased transmission of the disease…”
In conclusion, Dr. Meehan states:
“In February and March we were told not to wear masks. What changed? The science didn’t change. The politics did. This is about compliance. It’s not about science… Our opposition is using low-level retrospective observational studies that should not be the basis for making a medical decision of this nature.”
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
John C. A. Manley has spent over a decade ghostwriting for medical doctors, as well as naturopaths, chiropractors and Ayurvedic physicians. He publishes the COVID-19(84) Red Pill Briefs – an email-based newsletter dedicated to preventing the governments of the world from using an exaggerated pandemic as an excuse to violate our freedom, health, privacy, livelihood and humanity. He is also writing a novel, Brave New Normal: A Dystopian Love Story. Visit his website at: MuchAdoAboutCorona.ca. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
This is among the best best presentations on the devastating health risks of the Covid-19 jab. The statements of Dr. Eads are carefully formulated and explained. “This is medical tyranny”. Life threatening infections.
…
Dr. Eads says the COVID injections and CDC protocols have already killed 500,000 people.
COVID itself does not exist, she says, but the misdiagnosis of COVID and the ensuing injection and CDC protocols are killing en masse.
HCQ, Ivermectin, Vitamin D etc. do effectively treat patients who present with ailments misdiagnosed as COVID.
Eads says the COVID jabs themselves are bioweapons since they progressively reduce immunity.
The first one by about 30%, and subsequent jabs even more.
The government COVID mandates and protocols are not about saving people (especially the old and frail), but rather about killing them.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
“Every year during the lead up to Remembrance Day on November 11, we honour those who have served Canada in times of war, military conflict and peace.” – statement from Veterans Affairs Canada website [1]
“Canadians of conscience should not help fund the reactionary Royal Canadian Legion. Nor should they promote the martial patriotism red poppies/Remembrance Day represents. To remember all victims of war support peace organizations’ white poppy campaign.”
Over the course of all of our lifetimes, we are asked to pay respect to the soldiers in our country’s military, show gratitude for them fighting for our freedoms and thank them for putting all their brains, gut and muscle into making the world safer for those who have attained or someday seek to attain democracy.
At the very least, each of us can set aside whatever we are doing at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month of the year, bow our heads and devote a moment of silence “to mark the sacrifice of the many who have fallen in the service of their country, and to acknowledge the courage of those who still serve.” [3]
A few problems exist with these sentiments. First off, it seems as if there is little regard in these events for the plight of dead or injured civilians, whether you blame “our boys” or not. Also, given the realities that the vast majority of wars being fought are not clearly justified as being for the higher moral ground, a point upheld by this website and series of radio podcasts. And of course war crimes are clear in every war, including the Second World War.
Most important of all, the origins of Remembrance/Veterans Day began as more of a peace event. In her recent essay for Common Dreams, H Patricia Hynes, a former Professor of Environmental Health from Boston University School of Public Health and current Chair of a peace and justice group explained that this day was a variation of Armistice Day. The Armistice Day Resolution of 1926, eight years after the end of the First World War called on Congress for:
“exercises designed to perpetuate peace through goodwill and mutual understanding…inviting the people of the United States to observe the day in schools and churches with appropriate ceremonies of friendly relations with all other peoples.” [4]
How did such a shift in emphasis take place? Well, it stands to reason that those institutions, such as the Canadian Forces, the U.S. Military, and various weapons and defense contractors would be better served by occasions that honour the military rather than people invoking peaceful ways. By taking charge of Remembrance/Veterans Day events, one can benefit from this long-standing tradition of “Saluting the Troops” as being not just positive, but symbols of reverence – and even a recruiting tool!
In this week’s chapter of the Global Research News Hour, we will do our best to get Canadians back on the original path of reversing the tide that has practically given up any pretense of ending deadly combat.
In our first half hour, we speak to veteran turned peace activist S. Brian Willson about his experiences in Vietnam that caused him to not only question the war, but see the U.S. effort as being driven by white supremacy and profit-making. And in our second half hour, Yves Engler returns elaborating on the theme of his latest book, Stand on Guard for Whom? A People’s History to the Canadian Military. This volume cites numerous examples of its record of abuse of workers, Indigenous Peoples, and peoples in parts of the world it claims to serve and liberate.
S. Brian Willlson is a Vietnam veteran, long-time peace activist, and writer. He has visited a number of countries studying the impacts of U.S. policy. His essays are posted on his website, brianwillson.com. He had been intentionally run over by a U.S. Government munitions train accelerating to over three times the 5 mph legal speed limit during a peaceful protest in California in 1987. He wrote a psychohistorical memoir, Blood on the Tracks: The Life and Times of S. Brian Willson (PM Press, 2011), and in 2018 wrote Don’t Thank Me for my Service: My Viet Nam Awakening to the Long History of US Lies(Clarity Press). Brian Willson possesses two honorary Ph.D.s and a Juris Doctor degree. he as a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)
Yves Engler is an activist and author of several books dealing with Canadian foreign policy, including his most recent work, Stand on Guard for Whom? A People’s History to the Canadian Military. As this podcast is being published he is on a book tour on Vancouver Island and Vancouver. A complete list is available now on the right hand side of his website: yvesengler.com/reviews/
CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.
WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.
Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.
CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am.
Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
On April 24th, two Bakersfield doctors, Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, help a press conference questioning the California’s stay-at-home order.
Erickson and Massihi said their facilities have tested over 5,200 patients for the coronavirus throughout the county, making up for over half of all testing in Kern. According to their data, the death rate of the coronavirus is similar in prevalence to the flu.
“Now that we have the facts,” said Dr. Erickson. “It’s time to get back to work.”
Erickson said he believes businesses could reopen and as testing continues, people could starting going back to work. In fact, Erickson suggests that staying at home too long could be even worse for people’s health.
Then on April 27th 23ABC received an email from YouTube giving the station notification the video had been taken down, citing YouTube’s “community guidelines.” 23ABC has appealed the ruling through YouTube.
23ABC News also reached out to YouTube regarding the notification and a company spokesperson issued a statement saying the video was pulled because the content contradicted the guidance of the local health authority.
“We quickly remove flagged content that violate our Community Guidelines, including content that explicitly disputes the efficacy of local healthy authority recommended guidance on social distancing that may lead others to act against that guidance,” said the statement. “However, content that provides sufficient educational, documentary, scientific or artistic (EDSA) context is allowed — for example, news coverage of this interview with additional context. From the very beginning of the pandemic, we’ve had clear policies against COVID-19 misinformation and are committed to continue providing timely and helpful information at this critical time.”
The video went viral, reaching over 5.46 million views, and sparked debate over recommendations to lift the shelter-in-place order. Even catching the attention of of SPaceX CEO Elon Musk.
You can still watch the entire press conference by clicking the photo 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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Citing Pakistan’s worsening human rights situation, particularly relating to the safety of minorities, women, and journalists, the European Union has raised concerns and put the country’s preferred trade status in question. Luis Garicano, a Spanish member of the European Parliament, recently visited Pakistan and met with top leaders and members of civil society.
“Just returned from a fascinating visit to Pakistan. The European Parliament is very concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation, which puts into question the continuation of the preferred trade status of the country (GSP+).”
During his visit to Pakistan, he met with the senior Trade Advisor, Foreign Minister, Trade and Justice Ministers, Attorney General, Speaker of the House, opposition leaders, journalists, civil society and religious minorities. Following the trip, Garicano explained that Europe has zero trade tariffs for many Pakistani goods in exchange for the country’s implementation of 27 human rights conventions. This status, which expires in December 2023 and is now up for revision, has led to 31% of all Pakistani exports going to the EU.
“The European delegation wanted to ensure that the Human Rights part of the deal advances. Only with respect to human rights can Pakistan prosper, extremism be defeated and the country attain the level of progress it deserves,” the MEP wrote in a follow up tweet.
Despite the constitution protecting minority rights, he highlighted that “this is not the reality due to blasphemy laws and civil rights suppression. Blasphemy laws are abused to keep minorities on the defensive-any mistake can result in years in prison after a false accusation of blasphemy.”
While talking about women’s rights, he said,
“There are huge concerns about forced marriages for young girls, often after forced conversion. Since Islam punishes apostasy with death, once a girl is forced to convert, it is impossible for her to divorce and come back to her home.”
Garicano warned that:
“Our message was clear: Pakistan should not take for granted its privileged trade status. The EU has done its part; Pakistan must fulfill its own part.”
Considering nearly a third of Pakistan’s exports are to the EU, threats against its privileged trade status could unravel the already struggling economy. Although Pakistan has a preferential trade status with the EU and is a major part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, particularly through the $62+ billion worth of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects, its economy is struggling and thus has hampered efforts to alleviate poverty, develop vital infrastructure outside of CPEC, and improve literacy and water access.
Pakistan has a bloated military budget that in 2019 accounted for 18.43% of the GDP. The vast military funding is needed to maintain Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, support terrorist organizations in Jammu and Kashmir, and for corrupt military leaders to siphon money. Despite this vast military spending, Pakistan still suffers from a poverty rate of nearly 40%, a literacy rate of only 60%, a ranking of 92 out of the 116 countries in the 2021 Global Hunger Index, and could “run dry” by 2025 as its water shortage is reaching an alarming level.
Although CPEC is intended to rapidly upgrade Pakistan’s infrastructure and strengthen its economy through the construction of a modern transportation network, numerous energy projects, and special economic zones, the benefits are yet to be felt by ordinary Pakistanis. One criticism levelled against CPEC is that although it is rapidly improving Pakistan’s transportation network, the majority of workers have been from China. In fact, the prevalence of Chinese workers is so-much-so that they have begun arming themselves to protect themselves from attacks by terrorist organizations and separatist groups like the Balochi militias. After a July 14 bus blast, in which nine Chinese people were killed, Beijing requested an increase in security for CPEC projects.
It was also recently reported that six major CPEC energy power projects worth $5 billion did not receive insurance cover from Sinosure, a Chinese insurance company. Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan urged his Chinese counterparts to ensure that Sinosure clears about $13 billion worth of insurance cover in energy and infrastructure projects in Pakistan.
In this way, Pakistan is nearly wholly reliant on a preferential trade status with the EU and on China developing the country under the CPEC banner. However, this exposes Pakistan to foreign influence and interference. In this way, Garicano is lambasting Pakistan for not adhering to the values of the European Union, thus making threats of reversing the country’s preferential trade status. At the same time, given Pakistan’s economic vulnerabilities, it submits to every demand made by China, including the limited use of local workers.
This also comes as Pakistan’s military budget remains bloated, thus limiting resources available for education and poverty alleviation. The economic meltdown is putting Imran Khan under immense pressure, especially as record inflation – the fourth highest in the world – pushed the price of sugar higher than petrol. The economic situation in Pakistan could become all the worse if they resist efforts by the EU to impose its liberal world view, something that Garicano is threatening to do.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
A video shot from a cell phone has surfaced of what appears to be an impromptu meeting between Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and Tedros Adhanom, the director of the World Health Organization, during the recent G20 Summit in Rome.
Present along with Bolsonaro was Brazilian Health Minister Marcelo Queiroga, and a translator who translated from Portuguese to English, as President Bolsonaro is asking his questions to Tedros Adhanom in Portuguese, while Adhanom replies in English.
The audio is difficult to hear, but someone has made a 2-minute clip with English subtitles, which we have uploaded to our Bitchute and Rumble channels.
In the clip, President Bolsonaro is complaining to Tedros Adhanom that the lockdowns have destroyed the economy and that people are having a hard time feeding themselves.
Tedros Adhanom replied that he didn’t think we needed more lockdowns.
President Bolsonaro then asked Adhanom if the WHO was going to mandate vaccine passports, to which Adhanom replied “not now,” because there were still many countries with a low vaccination rate, and to implement vaccine passports would amount to “discrimination.”
Next, President Bolsonaro asked why so many people who are fully vaccinated in his country are still getting COVID-19.
Tedros Adhanom gave the official response, which is that the vaccines are not even designed to stop transmission, but to prevent serious illness and death.
This well-known fact alone should be reason enough to stop mandating the shots, but the health authorities around the world along with the pharma-controlled corporate media continue lying to the public and stating that people just get the shots to stop transmission.
But they were never designed to do that!
As to the claim that they reduce death, President Bolsonaro stated: “In Brazil, many who got the second dose are dying.”
Tedros Adhanom admitted that this can happen, and blamed it on “comorbidities and underlying conditions.”
President Bolsonaro then said something very revealing, if we are to trust the English transcription, and that is that he was lamenting the fact that these shots were being given to children, but that he was powerless to stop them, because governors and mayors have more power than him to mandate the shots to children, due to “a decision of the judicial power.”
If this is an accurate translation, then I think we are seeing a pattern here where executive branches of government are being over-ridden by the judiciary in trying to stop vaccine mandates, as that is exactly what is happening here in the U.S. where some governors are trying to stop the mandates, but the courts are over-ruling them.
The next part is not clear, and there is a longer version of this conversation on YouTube here that is over 13 minutes long, but without English subtitles, and it seems that President Bolsonaro is mentioning the fact that the WHO does not recommend the shots for children, and he apparently wanted the WHO to make a stronger statement on this to prevent countries from injecting children.
But it seems, especially from the longer version, that Tedros Adhanom mainly just listens here, and does not really say anything about changing what the WHO says regarding children receiving the shots.
President Bolsonaro complains that anything they try to say about the vaccines is labeled as “fake news” by the media.
He clearly seems distressed that these shots are being mandated for children, and states:
The lives of the children are at stake and nothing better than to follow what Adhanom said, this determination of the WHO.
He is apparently asking Tedros Adhanom for help in stopping the mandates for children, but I seriously doubt he will get it.
President Jair Bolsonaro has been very outspoken criticizing the official COVID response, and he himself is apparently one of the only heads of state that has chosen to NOT get a COVID shot.
When he attended the UN General Assembly in New York this past September, he was forced to eat pizza out on the street as New York’s vaccine policy did not allow him to dine indoors without proof of vaccination. (Source.)
Not included in this two-minute clip with English subtitles (but included in the longer clip on YouTube) are apparently comments President Bolsonaro made about being the only head of state currently under investigation for “genocide” regarding his response to COVID-19.
MercoPress, an English publication based out of Montevideo, Uruguay, reported:
Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro was recorded telling World Health Organization (WHO) Director Tedros Adhanom he was the only head of state charged with crimes against humanity for his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. The conversation is said to have taken place on the sides of the G20 Summit in Rome.
An investigative committee made up of Brazilian Senators, known as CPI, has drafted a report accusing Bolsonaro of three crimes against humanity during the pandemic, an accusation that will be sent to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, as well as to local prosecutors.
“I am the only head of state in the world who is being investigated, accused of genocide,” Bolsonaro told Adhanom.
The informal dialogue is said to have taken place Sunday in Rome and it was recorded in a video quoted today by the daily Valor Economico.
Joining Bolsonaro and Adhanom was Brazilian Health Minister Marcelo Queiroga, who joined the conversation to say, laughing: ”I’m also going to go with him (Bolsonaro) to The Hague, to walk to The Hague.“ Queiroga is also accused by the parliamentary commission of alleged crimes committed while managing the pandemic. (Source.)
The clip ends with President Bolsonaro asking Adhanom “What is the origin of the virus?”
Adhanom replies with a smile: “We’re still studying it” which prompted chuckles from those there.
President Bolsonaro replies: “Good answer.”
Watch the full clip.
Politicians are Powerless to Stop the Genocide
This is more proof that politicians are powerless to stop the current genocide of injecting as many people as possible with these gene altering bioweapons to reduce the world’s population.
I applaud President Bolsonaro in seeking help in trying to stop this, but by not following the narrative now he is the one allegedly being tried as a criminal in the international court for “crimes against humanity,” while the real criminals go free.
Politicians are not calling the shots. They are following the script written for them by the Corporate Globalists, and when they choose not to follow that script this is what happens to them.
My guess is that President Bolsonaro’s life is probably in danger right now, similar to many of the African heads of state who all mysteriously died while in office if they questioned the official narrative to COVID.
It sounds like the situation in Brazil is similar to the U.S. where the judiciary is owned and controlled by the Corporate Globalists, ensuring that their plans are carried out.
The only way this can be changed is for massive resistance and defections from the military and law enforcement. Corrupt judges need to be removed from the bench, and replaced with honest ones who are not controlled by the Corporate Globalists, where justice is for sale to the highest bidder.
And that includes the Supreme Court in the United Sates.
Help will most certainly not come from the World Health Organization, because that is firmly in control of the Corporate Globalists, led by Bill Gates.
Bill Gates, either directly through his foundation or indirectly through other organizations, is the largest donor to the World Health Organization, outspending any single nation.
This is why I beat this message into the ground every opportunity I get: Right versus Left does not matter!
Because the politicians are not running the show, the Corporate Globalists are, and they are happy when the public is divided by partisan politics.
*
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.
Comments Off on Brazilian President Tells WHO Director “People Are Dying” after COVID Shots – Pleads with WHO to Publicly Not Recommend It for Children
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
They missed hundreds of serious adverse events that are more elevated than myocarditis. A new VAERS analysis done by Albert Benavides blows the doors off the “safe and effective” narrative.
The CDC and FDA have said the vaccines are “safe and effective.” They haven’t found any serious issues with the COVID vaccines. Zero. Zip. Nada. It was the DoD that found myocarditis.
The evidence in plain sight shows that they are either lying or incompetent. Or both. But of course, the medical community is never going to call them on this.
In a brand new VAERS data analysis performed by our friend Albert Benavides (aka WelcomeTheEagle88), we found hundreds of serious adverse events that were completely missed by the CDC that should have been mentioned in the informed consent document that are given to patients.
And we found over 200 symptoms that occur at a higher relative rate than myocarditis (relative to all previous vaccines over the last 5 years). All together, there were over 4,000 VAERS adverse event codes that were elevated by these vaccines by a factor of 10 or more over baseline that the CDC should have warned people about.
As of November 1, 2021, there have been more adverse events reported for the COVID vaccines than for all 70+ vaccines combined since they started tracking adverse events 30 years ago. That’s a stunning statistic, nobody can deny it, but nobody in the mainstream medical community (or mainstream media) seems to care much. It’s not even worth noting in passing. Wow.
The Pfizer 6 month trial showed the drug can save 1 life for every 22,000 people vaccinated. It also appeared from the trial that the drug killed more people than it saved (there were 20 deaths in the treatment group vs. 14 in placebo after unblinding). So we are “saving” fewer than 10,000 lives at the expense of over 150,000 deaths. In short, we kill 15 people to save 1. That’s incredibly stupid. But nobody in the Biden administration wants to meet with our team. They basically don’t want to hear the truth. Instead, they focus on deplatforming and censoring us which are techniques that are effective when the data doesn’t work out for you.
Both the FDA and CDC have proven inept in spotting safety signals. They can’t even compute the VAERS URF which is a number that is required for any serious risk-benefit analysis. So the FDA and CDC outside committee members are all flying blind in approving the vaccines. Even after this deficiency is pointed out in the public comments by yours truly (and direct emails to the committee members), it makes no difference. We are ignored. The CDC safety monitoring is so bad that they even admitted at the last ACIP meeting that it was the DoD that spotted the myocarditis signal. So the FDA and CDC have basically been batting .000 in terms of spotting safety signals that have been sitting in plain sight the entire time.
They can’t admit that they missed the signals now because that would be an admission they missed them before. So they will try to discredit this article with ad hominem attacks (this is a technique used to win an argument when you cannot win on the evidence).
The serious events we highlight below are all consistent with the mechanism of action that Robert Malone and I first described in the Darkhorse podcast. Namely, that the spike protein that is produced in response to the delivery of the mRNA is cytotoxic and results in blood clots, inflammation and scarring throughout your body which then creates a wider range of severe adverse events than any vaccine in human history.
The medical community is trained by the CDC to believe the vaccines are safe, so they interpret all the adverse events as not vaccine related. But if it wasn’t the vaccine that caused all these events, what was it? What’s worse is they tell their patients, “this is all in your head” or that “your baby died because you had a genetic defect.”
In general, patients believe their doctors and never figure out where to get a cytokine panel to discover that they are vaccine injured (go to www.covidlonghaulers.com to get the cytokine panel and IncellDx to get the spike protein assay). So people never learn how to rid their body of the spike protein either (see my article on vaccine treatment for the drugs they use to do this) which is the first step in the road to recovery.
The high adverse event rates aren’t “excess reporting.” It is due to excess events. For example, one neurologist had 0 cases of vaccine adverse events in her entire career, but this year, she has 2,000. Another physician I know has had 0 events in 29 years in his 700 patients. This year he needs to report 25 events. Physicians themselves have experienced stunningly higher incidence rates of reproductive, neurological, and cardiac events since the vaccines rolled in 2021. We couldn’t find a single cardiologist who actually had fewer cases of myocarditis after the vaccines rolled out as the members of the FDA and CDC claim.
The serious events are primarily centered around menstruation, blood clots, inflammation and scarring, cardiovascular damage, and neurological damage, just as we predicted in the podcast in June of 2021.
There are hundreds of serious adverse events that are caused by these vaccines. This of course is shocking to people since the CDC has repeatedly said you can’t ascribe causality to data in VAERS. Not true. The VAERS data analysis (temporal data, the dose dependency, and the elevated reporting rates compared to baseline) provide ample signal to enable us to show causality on all of these events using the five Bradford-Hill criteria applicable to vaccines.
Nicki Minaj was right to complain about elevated rates of testicular swelling, impotence (erectile dysfunction), and orchitis. Every world authority who opined on the matter belittled her and said she was wrong, but all the symptoms she talked about are strongly elevated as you’ll see from the data below. None of these so-called experts of course ever looks at the data; it’s all based on arguing from their belief system rather than the scientific evidence. And even if those authorities disagreed with the VAERS data, it was irresponsible not to have pointed out the raw data to people and then explain why they totally ignored the elevated signal in the VAERS data. Today, we do science based on our belief system rather than the old-fashioned way of looking at what the data actually says. Our team is old-fashioned.
There is a pretty good chance that the vaccines don’t really work at all and never did. We know the Pfizer Phase 3 trials were gamed in many ways. There is no doubt that the vaccines elevate antibodies, but it seems that it is quite possible that the immunity they confer is actually the result of killing off (or excluding as in the case of the trials) people with weaker immune systems. The people who are left are thus more resistant to the virus. Mathew Crawford will be coming out shortly with an analysis that makes a compelling case for this novel hypothesis. Subscribe to his substack here.
It is unlikely that anyone in the world will want to debate us publicly on any of the claims above (or on any of my articles or on any of Mathew’s articles), but if you are a prominent supporter of the false narrative and want a public debate, we are here for you. Our team would be thrilled to accept the challenge as we have no desire to spread misinformation. If we got it wrong, we are happy to correct our mistakes if you can explain to us clearly the mistake we made and the correction you suggest (e.g., the “right” answer). Yet even with multiple million dollar incentives (listed in this article), nobody seems to be interested in showing how we got it wrong. Everyone talks about how bad the vaccine misinformation problem is, but nobody is willing to do anything to show that we got it wrong. For example, I’ve asked any prominent scientist in America who disagrees with my analysis (showing eight different ways to validate that over 150,000 Americans have been killed by the vaccines) to let me see their “correct” analysis showing the “correct” number, but nobody will. They won’t even come on a recorded call to show us how we got it wrong. It’s baffling. They all want to do it in slow motion via documents because that way it’s easier to obfuscate the truth and they can avoid answering questions. The latter is key.
It’s really easy to tell who is telling you the truth here. John Su is the CDC expert on VAERS. If he’s wrong, the entire narrative falls apart. I personally attacked Dr. Su in a widely read article accusing him of being corrupt. I offered to publish his response in the article. He said nothing. I offered to debate him. No dice. TrialSiteNews tried to interview him. He refused to reply. Seriously? If the CDC gave us 2 hours to ask John Su questions, we would destroy his credibility and the credibility of the CDC. That’s why he’s not talking and that’s why the CDC will never let him talk to anyone on our team. Because we don’t ask softball questions like what John gets at the ACIP meetings. We play hardball.
What we found in the VAERS analysis below can be verified by anyone because it is all publicly accessible. Albert spent only a few hours to produce the tables. So the CDC should have been able to do the same work Albert did.
You can easily verify any entry yourself via manual queries to any VAERS interface (my favorite is MedAlerts, but others such as openvaers and the HHS site give the same results).
Before we get to Albert’s analysis of the VAERS data, let’s do a little background.
The Darkhorse Podcast
On June 10, 2021, my friend Robert Malone and I appeared on Bret Weinstein’s Darkhorse Podcast to tell the world what we had learned about the COVID vaccines. You can watch the 3 hour version here or the condensed 1 hour version here if you haven’t already seen it. I highly recommend the whole thing; I know a lot of people who watched it multiple times and raved about it.
Basically, we said the COVID vaccines were super dangerous, they had killed a lot of people at the time, the Pfizer bio-distribution data that Dr. Byram Bridle obtained from the Japanese government using a FOIA request showed the lipid nanoparticles delivered a very substantial dose of mRNA to female ovaries, and that the spike protein that is subsequently produced causes blood clots, inflammation, and scarring leading to a large number of cardiovascular and neurological symptoms, a number of which would be irreversible. Robert in particular noted that we had no clue about the amount, dose, and duration of the spike protein that is produced (we still don’t) because this testing was never done in animals (they looked only at the distribution of the nanoparticles which is not the same thing). Bret referenced a very long article I had written on May 25, 2021 for TrialSiteNews entitled “Should you get vaccinated?”
For reference, here is the bio-distribution graph that Bret showed in that podcast:
See anything wrong? Note that we deliberately omitted areas of the body where the vaccine was expected to accumulate in order to highlight areas of the body where it wasn’t supposed to go. Naturally, those supporting the mainstream narrative that the vaccines are safe and effective went into overdrive to suppress the episode and discredit what we said. They said we were dishonest not to include everything in the chart. YouTube censored the video after nearly 1M views. Wikipedia accused both of us of spreading misinformation and then blocked me when I tried to point out that the scientific evidence supported what I said. Wikipedia relies on fact checks for science.
We were right about everything we said in the podcast, and now, thanks to the work Albert did, it’s now easier to see we were telling the truth: the top elevated events were neurological, cardiovascular, and related to the female reproductive system, just like we said. I was stunned at the sheer number of menstrual events that made it to the very top of the list. That was a surprise to me.
Openvaers has been highlighting the damaging effects on both male and female reproductive systems for months with a page dedicated to reproductive health, but the medical community, Congress, and mainstream press wasn’t paying any attention at all. These event counts are not normal, but nobody really seems to care. President Biden not only doesn’t care; he wants to force all our kids to be vaccinated with the most dangerous vaccine in human history.
With the new analysis, the counts are much easier to interpret because instead of being just raw counts, they are no numbers relative to a baseline rate so we can instantly see what symptoms are “abnormal” meaning 10X or more higher than “expected.” The answer: over 4,000 adverse events.
The X factor analysis (November 7, 2021)
Before I give you the link to the spreadsheet of VAERS symptoms sorted by X factor, you need to know a few things to properly interpret the data.
First, let’s address the myth that is promoted by the FDA that the VAERS database is “over reported.” As we said above, there are more events this year than any previous year, so that’s why the events are up. But there still could be a component of overreporting as well, i.e., that people this year are more likely to make a report on an event compared to last year since everyone is so “highly aware” of the vaccines. Nice theory. No data to back it up. Nobody making that argument has ever included any data to back up their assertion. We call that a hand-waving argument. Doctor surveys we’ve done show that, if anything, they are less likely to report an adverse event this year for a variety of reasons (hospital frowns on it, no time, still too frustrating, too many events to report). The other way we can tell is to look at the rates of events that are not comorbidities or causal. We find that events like Musculoskeletal pain, Screaming, Head banging, Local reaction, Diet refusal, Croup infectious, Hepatitis A, Eyelid oedema, and more occur at pretty much the same rate this year as in previous years.
Now let’s tackle the columns:
Symptom
This is the VAERS symptom name. These are coded by HHS upon receipt of the report based on the contents of the report. Some of these symptoms are tests that are ordered. An elevation of a test is a good signal something is amiss. Other symptoms are not causal, but are comorbidities. For example, it might be that diabetes is there more often not because it makes diabetes worse, but because diabetic people are more likely to report symptoms. So for these symptoms, we have to be careful about the analysis.
But for many of these symptoms such as cancer, herpes zoster (shingles), diabetes and more, these are all exacerbated by the vaccine as we know from talking directly to doctors. Finally, some symptoms like “rib fracture” or “suicide” are elevated because they are caused by the vaccine. For example, the vaccine can make you lose consciousness and fall and fracture your hip. The vaccine can give you tinnitus which is so bad that you want to kill yourself. So we have to be extremely careful to examine each one of these symptoms carefully because in most cases, we’ll find that they are indeed caused by the vaccine. I’ve coded a bunch of symptoms red that I thought were serious/interesting. I’m not done yet, so the redness coding was only methodically done on the first 100 symptoms and sporadically after that. When I get more time, I’ll go through them and update the file. Note that myocarditis is located on row 274, i.e., way way down.
Also, when looking at deaths, we never look at a “symptom” of death since death is coded in a separate field. So the event count for the “death” symptom (6,487) is lower than the over 8,000 domestic deaths.
Guillain-Barre syndrome is only elevated by a factor of 6 from baseline, likely because other vaccines also elevate GBS; this vaccine elevates it even more.
C19 count
This is the raw number of VAERS events in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID vaccines for that symptom. The key here is that this count should be multiplied by 41 (known as the underreporting factor or URF to estimate the absolute number of events that occurred). See this article for how that is computed.
Baseline count
The baseline rate is the # of incidents occurring in a 5 year period from 2015-2019 for all vaccines given in that time period.
X-factor
The X-factor is the (C19 count*5/Baseline count). This is because the baseline is 5 years so we compare the COVID counts in a year vs. the average count in a typical year. So an X-factor of 10 or more would mean that the symptom is very likely to be caused by the vaccine since it is highly elevated from the “normal” rate.
Now let’s tackle the tabs. There are two tabs:
match tab
On the match tab are symptoms where the baseline count !=0
no match tab
On the “no match” tab are symptoms where the baseline count=0. So these are quite extraordinary since these symptoms are not typically seen even once in 5 years. So here, even a small value in the “count” field is very significant, e.g., 2 or more would be comparable to a 10X or more on the “match tab.”
Now here are some screenshots of the first page of the two tabs:
And the no match tab:
What the data tells us
Here are a few quick observations from the complete data set (see next section for downloading):
Female reproductive issues top the list. These are strongly elevated by these vaccines. Many of the top symptoms are all related to the menstrual process.
There are an enormous number of cardiovascular and neurological events that are strongly elevated, many of them serious.
Fibrin D dimer increased is #53 on the list, elevated by a factor of over 400x above baseline. Charles Hoffe discovered D-dimer was elevated in over 60% of the patients he measured. This is very serious as D-dimer is a lagging indicator of blood clots.
Troponin increased was #130, elevated by a factor of 205. Troponin indicates heart damage and it is elevated to extreme levels (10X heart attack levels or more) and can stay elevated for months at a time (with a heart attack, the levels start returning back to normal immediately after the incident)
Death as a symptom (which is pretty unusual coding since it isn’t a symptom), is #433 and elevated by 96X. Hardly a “safe” vaccine.
Brain herniation at #405 is elevated by a factor of 100X over baseline. However, this is not considered a big deal at the CDC (perhaps because many people there don’t use their brain).
Cardiac arrest at #450 is elevated by 93X. This is when your heart stops. This is a relatively serious condition since you don’t last for too long after that. It’s a bit surprising that the CDC missed that one. Perhaps because they don’t have a heart?
Pulmonary embolism #24 is elevated by 954 times normal. How the CDC can miss that one is simply astonishing! This was the cause of death of 2 of the 14 kids that the CDC looked at in their death analysis. Mainstream press will never ask them that question as to why the CDC would not find causality here. They wrote: “CDC reviewed 14 reports of death after vaccination. Among the decedents, four were aged 12–15 years and 10 were aged 16–17 years. All death reports were reviewed by CDC physicians; impressions regarding cause of death were pulmonary embolism (two), …” 954 times normal is hard to explain, isn’t it? So no causality? That’s hard to explain, so they didn’t. They just moved on as if there is nothing to see.
Intracranial haemorrhage (their spelling) is at #604 and is elevated by 79X. Two of the 14 kids from the CDC analysis died from that. How could that not be causal? They never explained that.
Tinnitus at #362 is elevated by 105X. This can be so bad that people can kill themselves from this alone. One of the people who work at Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (VSRF) had to talk a friend out of suicide.
There are many many more issues to be concerned with, but I wanted to get the list out quickly so there can be more eyes on this.
For months, I’ve offered to discuss our data and analyses to both the FDA and CDC outside committees as well as the CDC and FDA themselves, but nobody wanted to see it. Most hit delete on my emails. A few told me to wait for the public comment period and submit it then (which I’ve done). Nobody followed up.
The Excel file with the full results
I’m trying to increase the number of paying subscribers I have as this supports the substack community. All proceeds will go to paying the salaries of people working for the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (vacsafety.org) as well as buying ads so we can get the message out.
You can find the full Excel file and Albert’s analysis in this article.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Russian and Belarusian forces will carry out joint combat alert patrols along the Union State’s borders with Poland, the Baltic states and Ukraine, according to an agreement reached between Russia and Belarus, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said on Thursday, the presidential press office reported.
“…This ring around the Baltic states, Poland and Ukraine must be monitored by Russian and Belarusian servicemen,” Lukashenko said at a government meeting.
“We have agreed with Russia on that. There is no time for jokes. The situation is very serious there. The most serious thing is that they have departed from the accords. We do not know what they want,” Lukashenko said.
***
Russian strategic bombers were sent to Belarus on Thursday, he said.
“We must constantly monitor the situation on the border. Let them scream and cry. Yes, these are bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons. But we have no other way out. We must see what they are doing outside,” the head of state said.
The Belarusian Defense Ministry reported on Thursday that two Russian Tu-160 strategic missile-carrying bombers practiced training tasks in the republic’s airspace, including simulated bombing on an aviation training ground. The ministry also issued a statement, pointing to Poland’s inadequate behavior as the Polish authorities amassed 15,000 troops, the armor and air defense capabilities on the border with Belarus over the migration crisis.
As the Belarusian Defense Ministry pointed out, these moves more resemble the creation of a strike group and run counter to bilateral agreements between Warsaw and Minsk.
*
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.
Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko on Thursday threatened to take the drastic action of cutting off the Yamal-Europe natural gas pipeline at a moment the European Union is both preparing fresh sanctions on Minsk, and mulling closure of the EU border altogether with Belarus.
“We deliver heat to Europe, they still threaten us that they will close the border. And what if we cut off natural gas? Therefore, I would recommend that the Polish leadership, Lithuanians and other heedless people think before speaking,” Lukashenko told a meeting of his cabinet in Minsk.
Russian energy giant Gazprom operates the Yamal-Europe pipeline which runs across Russia, Belarus, Poland, and into Germany. The 2,600 mile natural gas transit line has significantly increased its volume to Europe in recent days, according to Lukashenko.
Countries border Belarus have this week declared states of emergencies while sending military reinforcements as thousands of mostly Middle Eastern migrants have sought to force their way through key crossings, particularly near northeast Poland.
Germany has been the latest country to join Poland in directly accusing the Lukashenko government of “trafficking” in migrants as a geopolitical weapon against Europe. Both Belarus and Russia have responded by accusing the EU of fueling the crisis in the first place, both through its foreign policy which destabilizes the Mideast-North Africa region, and its sanctions targeting Belarus.
Lukashenko in his Thursday comments strongly hinted he’s ready to escalate and that its the West that must back down if they hope to relieve the crisis of migrant pressure:
“But it is up to them. If they close it (the border) let them do it,” Lukashenko said. At the same time, he ordered the Foreign Ministry “to warn everyone in Europe: if they introduce additional sanctions that are ‘undigestible’ and ‘unacceptable’ for us, then we should respond.”
“How to respond, we agreed with you about it half a year ago,” the President of Belarus said.
Already the EU closure of at least on major crossing into Europe demonstrates what could happen to East European trade and transit if the whole border is shut to the ex-Soviet Republic.
Economy Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni was cited in the following Thursday respond to Lukashenko’s threats over the ordeal:
In addition to another round of EU sanctions, Poland closed one of the main border crossings with Belarus earlier this week. One of the remaining border points is reporting trucks have to wait more than 50 hours to cross.
“We should not be intimidated, of course, by Lukashenko’s threats,” Gentiloni told a news conference presenting the Commission’s new economic forecasts.
What’s essentially a pipeline blackmail threat as a frigid winter is approaching came on the heals of the defense ministers of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania describing “the security crisis unfolding on the Polish-Belarusian and Lithuanian-Belarusian border as very alarming.” It said Belarus is deliberately escalating, “which is posing serious threats to European security.”
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
There’s never been a time in human history when so many of the world’s species were vanishing before our eyes.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently declared 23 species extinct, from a tiny catfish and several colorful mussels to some of the world’s most spectacular birds. Without swift and powerful action, we risk losing a million more species in the coming decades to the wildlife extinction crisis.
Here are the stories of the Lost 23:
1. The last time anyone saw a Bachman’s warbler was in Cuba in 1981. For decades, though, it was considered one of the rarest songbirds in North America, living mostly in swampy forests of the Southeast. A Lutheran minister named John Bachman, a friend of John James Audubon, provided the first written description of the warbler in 1832 from a specimen found near Charleston, South Carolina. They were small, yellow and black birds with a charming, if monotone call, sometimes sounding like tsip or zee-e-eep. Extinction was due to logging and collection.
2. The Guam bridled white-eye was impossible to miss if you knew what to look for. It was a little green, yellow and white bird with a short beak and a distinctive white ring around its eyes. Known as the Nosa’ by the Chamoru people, it was considered one of the most common birds on the island in the early 1900s, inhabiting forests, grasslands and even swamps. The accidental introduction of the brown treesnake to Guam in the 1950s marked the beginning of the end for the bridled white-eye. The last individual of the subspecies was seen in 1983, one year before it was protected under the Endangered Species Act.
3. The little Mariana fruit bat wasn’t all that little, actually — it had a two-foot wingspan. And loved to dine on tropical fruits. Also known as a flying fox, this bat lived on the island of Guam and was noticeable for the gold on the side of its neck and yellowish-brown fur on its head. It was last seen in 1968, and went extinct because of habitat loss, invasive brown treesnakes and hunting.
4. In Ohio, there used to be a small, shy catfish called the Scioto madtom. By day, it hid under rocks and vegetation. At night, it came out to quietly feed along the stream bottom. Only 18 individuals were ever collected — so it was extremely rare. It was last seen in 1957 and went extinct because of agricultural runoff and silt that spilled into Big Darby Creek, where many endangered species are currently under dire threat from sprawl from the city Columbus, which is polluting this very special habitat.
5. So stunning was the ivory-billed woodpecker that it was sometimes referred to as the “Lord God Bird.” The third-largest woodpecker in the world, it once flew in the old-growth forests of 13 Southeast states. Often it could be seen picking beetles out of dead and dying trees or soaring through the forests with its 30-inch wingspan. It had a nasal-sounding call some compared to a tin horn or clarinet. The last verified sighting was in 1944 in an area known as the Singer Tract; pleas made to the Chicago Mill and Lumber Company, which owned the timber rights to the land, were ignored and the area was logged — driving the Lord God bird to extinction.
San Marcos River by WisdomFromIntrospect (CC BY-SA 3.0)
6. Small but mighty, the San Marcos gambusia made its home in a half-mile, slow-flowing section of the upper San Marcos River in Texas. It was only an inch long and earned its living eating insects. Unlike many other fish, the San Marcos gambusia gave birth to live young rather than laying eggs. It was already extremely rare by the time it was protected under the Endangered Species Act in 1980, and was last seen in the wild in 1983, driven extinct by people’s overuse of its water.
Kaua’i ‘akialoa specimen by Hiart, Bishop Museum, Honolulu
7. The Kauaʻi ʻakialoa was a Hawaiian honeycreeper that lived only on the island of Kauaʻi. It had an extraordinarily long, downcurved bill, which spanned about of a third of its body length and was used to obtain nectar and insects. Never very common, the ʻakialoa was last seen in 1967. It went extinct because of habitat loss and introduced mosquitos that spread avian diseases.
Kaua’i nukupu’u by John Gerrard Keulemans
8. The Kauaʻi nukupuʻu was a stout, short-tailed honeycreeper — extremely elusive but delightful to find. Males of the species were a stunning combination of bright yellow, olive and white, with a black mask and bill. The females were mostly olive-gray-white, with yellowish highlights in the face, wings and tail. Although there have been sporadic unconfirmed reports of it over the past century, this bird was likely extinct sometime shortly after 1899, the date of the last confirmed sighting. It was lost to clearing of its lowland forest habitats for agriculture.
Kaua’i ʻōʻō by John Gerrard Keulemans
9. The Kauaʻi ʻōʻō had a distinctive, bell-like call that cut through the forests of Kauaʻi. This small black-and-yellow songbird was common in the late 1800s and considered rare by the 1920s. It ultimately went extinct because of habitat destruction and the introduction of rats, pigs and mosquitos. The Kauaʻi ʻōʻō was the last surviving member of the Mohoidae family, a group of honey-eating birds, and represents the only complete extinction of an entire avian family in modern times. Its call was last heard in 1987.
kāmaʻo (top) by John Gerrard Keulemans
10. Kāmaʻo: In the 1880s, the kāmaʻo was the most common bird on Kauaʻi. Sometimes called the large Kauaʻi thrush, it lived mostly in the forest and feasted primarily on fruit and insects. It grew to be about 8 inches long with a brownish body and a gray belly. By 1928 it had mostly disappeared from the island’s outer forests and by 1980 there were just 24 left. The last one was seen in 1987. Extinction was mostly due to habitat loss and introduced mosquitos.
11. In former times, a keen listener on the island of Maui would recognize the lovely call of the Maui ākepa: a quivering whistle ending in a long trill. Already extremely rare by the early 1900s, this 4-inch, dusty-green songbird with a small cross bill was seen only once in 1970, the year it was protected — and just five times after that. The last sighting was 1988, the last hearing in 1995.
12. The Maui nukupuʻu was a small bird found in the wet, high-elevation forests of Maui. Tenacious, this bird used its inch-long bill to peck for insects in the bark of ʻōhiʻa lehua and koa trees. It was feared extinct by 1896, but there were unconfirmed sightings for decades, and a research expedition recorded seeing the bird in 1967 in the Kīpahulu Valley. It was protected in 1970 in the hopes that it might make a resurgence, but the last confirmed sighting is said to have been in 1996.
kākāwahie by John Gerrard Keulemans
13. Also known as the Molokaʻi creeper, the kākāwahie was a striking bird with bright orange or red feathers that some said resembled flames. In fact, Hawaiians traditionally used the kākāwahie’s bright plumage in the capes and leis of royalty. If that wasn’t enough, its call sounded like someone cutting wood. The bird largely vanished before it could be thoroughly studied. There were a few sightings in the early 1960s, with the last confirmed report in 1963. Extinction was due to mosquito spread disease, habitat loss and invasive species.
poʻouli by Hawai’i DLNR Division of Forestry and Wildlife
14. The poʻouli, or black-faced honeycreeper, was once thought to exist in the hundreds on Maui. It inhabited only the very wet, easternmost side of the island and was considered an extremely quiet bird. Extremely rare by the early 1900s, it suffered from habitat loss, disease and a decline in the native tree snails that served as a key food. In 2004 the last three poʻouli were brought into captivity in an effort to save them, but they didn’t survive.
15. On the Hawaiian island of Lānaʻi, there used to be a pretty flowering plant in the mint family that lived in steep, wet canyons. It had white flowers that were occasionally tinged with purple. It was so rare and barely noticed that it was only ever assigned a Latin name: Phyllostegia glabravar. lanaiensis. It was last seen in 1914.
flat pigtoe mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
16. The flat pigtoe mussel inhabited the Tombigbee River in Mississippi and Alabama. It had a preference for clean, fast-flowing water and tended toward shallow stretches of the river, where the bottom was silt-free. The flat pigtoe was just over a couple of inches across, with dark lines on the outer shell and blueish-white inner shells. It went extinct because of dams: The construction of the Tennessee-Tombigbee waterway lock and dam system, whose construction began in 1972, sealed its fate. It didn’t get protection under the Endangered Species Act until 1987, seven years after it was last seen.
green-blossom pearly mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
17. The green-blossom pearly mussel was an elusive species, spotted just a handful of times, mostly before 1918. It had an elliptical outer shell — smooth and shiny, with fine green rays — and its inner shell varied from white to salmon-red. Muskrat middens reveal that the green-blossom pearly mussel lived in the Clinch, Powell, Holston and Nolichucky rivers in Tennessee and Virginia. Dam building ruined some of its most important habitat in the headwaters of the Tennessee River; then pollution from coal mining drove it over the edge of extinction. It was last seen alive in the Clinch River in 1982.
southern acornshell mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
18. The southern acornshell mussel was small, smooth, shiny and yellow. It lived in freshwater stream riffles in Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee, mostly in the Coosa River system and the Cahaba River. It was identified as endangered in 1971, but its Endangered Species Act protection wasn’t finalized until 1993. Meanwhile extensive damming had already driven it to extinction.
stirrupshell mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
19. The stirrupshell mussel had a way of standing out in a crowd, with its bumpy and ridged shell with zig-zagging lines. It lived in Alabama in the fast-flowing waters of the Black Warrior and Alabama rivers, as well as in the Tombigbee River in Mississippi. Scientists put it on a list for Endangered Species Act protection in 1971, but it wasn’t protected until 1987, 7 years after the last live individual was encountered. Extinction was prompted by dams, river channeling and sedimentation that smothered its habitat.
female turgid-blossom pearly mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
20. The turgid-blossom pearly mussel was once relatively common in the clean, fresh waters flowing out of the southern Appalachian Mountains in Tennessee and Alabama and the Ozarks in Arkansas. It was yellow and fairly small, at 1.5 inches. The elliptical males were shaped so differently from the rounder females that scientists once thought they were separate species. It was protected under the Endangered Species Act in 1976, four years after it was last seen alive in the Duck River. These mussels could live to be 50 years of age but were driven extinct by dams that cut off the fast-flowing waters they needed to survive.
tubercled-blossom pearly mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
21. The tubercled-blossom pearly mussel was once widespread and abundant, making its loss even more tragic because it was known from more than 18 major rivers — it ranged from Ontario, Canada, through seven states south to Alabama. This 4-inch long bumpy mussel was wiped out due to dams and pollution from coal mining, logging, industry and agriculture. But it was last seen in 1969: The Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act came too late to throw it a lifeline.
upland combshell by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
22. The upland combshell rarely exceeded 2.5 inches and sometimes came in a shape described as “rhomboidal.” It had a tawny shell that was occasionally sprinkled with small green dots or broken green rays. The upland combshell was historically found in the Black Warrior and Cahaba river drainages in Alabama and the Coosa River drainage in Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee. Scientists identified it as endangered in 1971, but it wasn’t protected under the Endangered Species Act until 1993, five years after the last live individual was seen. Declining without protection, dams and pollution drove it over the edge.
yellow-blossom pearly mussel by Todd Amacker Conservation Visuals
23. The yellow-blossom pearly mussel made its home in shallow, fast-moving waterways in Alabama and Tennessee, including in the Cumberland and Tennessee River systems. It had an elliptical shell that was shiny and sometimes honey-colored. A lucky viewer might spot one with green rays shooting across its shell. Lost to dams and pollution, it was last seen in 1967 in the Little Tennessee River before it was protected under the Endangered Species Act in 1976.
We’re at a critical moment in stemming the global wildlife extinction crisis. It can be done but it takes leadership, courage, vision and action.
The best way to honor the Lost 23 is to get involved. Check out our plan for addressing the extinction crisis and how you can help Save Life on Earth.
*
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.
Alex Bonk is Digital Director, Center for Biological Diversity
Featured image: Bachman’s warbler by Louis Agassiz Fuertes (All images in this article are from Alex Bonk/Medium)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
U.S. President Joe Biden’s lamentable decision to unilaterally withdraw from Afghanistan is paving the way for the emergence of a new sharia-based alliance, including NATO member Turkey — theoretically a Western ally. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Islamist ambitions appear to be seeking an international role in post-U.S. Afghanistan in alliance with the Taliban, Qatar, Pakistan and Malaysia. The trouble is, Turkey, among the new sharia alliance in the making, is the only country with institutional ties to the West.
Turn now to SADAT, a Turkish military consultancy and training company, though hardly an ordinary one. There were claims that the Erdoğan government, through SADAT, sent arms shipments to Syria to help the jihadists. Critics, including opposition lawmakers, have been inquiring about SADAT’s activities, after suspecting its real mission may be to train official or unofficial paramilitary forces to fight Erdoğan’s multitude of wars, both inside Turkey and without.
SADAT is owned by retired general Adnan Tanrıverdi who was appointed in August 2016 as Erdoğan’s chief military advisor, but quit in 2020. In 1996, Tanrıverdi was forced to resign from the military due to “suspected radical Islamist activities.” In a 2009 speech, Tanrıverdi said:
“To defeat Israel, the country must be forced into defensive warfare, all of its forces must be engaged and the war must be prolonged.
“What should Turkey do? The resistance units in Gaza should be supported by anti-tank and low-altitude anti-aircraft weapons.
“Turkey, Iran, Syria, the Iraqi Resistance Organization and Palestine should form the nucleus of a defense structure. Within this context the formation of an Islamic rapid reaction force consisting of an amphibious brigade, an armored brigade and an airborne brigade should be encouraged.”
Recently, SADAT advocated the idea of Turkey supporting and helping the Taliban — a group it has called a resistance movement — to establish a sharia state in Afghanistan. A research piece published on September 13 by Ali Coşar, a retired colonel and board member of SADAT, advocated that Turkey help the new Afghanistan run by the Taliban in cooperation with Pakistan, Qatar and Malaysia.
Coşar dismisses the description that the Taliban is a terrorist organization: “They [the Taliban] are members of a resistance movement that fought against colonial America for 20 years to take over the government and establish a state that practices sharia. …” Just like Ottoman Turks who ruled conquered lands under sharia law, he reminded his listeners.
Biden has weakened himself and his country so badly that the superpower was reduced to the point of being blackmailed by NATO’s only Islamist member. Turkey’s Defense Minister Hulusi Akar has made it clear: “If the U.S. is to be in the Middle East, it must cooperate with Turkey.”
Seth J. Frantzman wrote in the Jerusalem Post in August:
“The victors in Kabul will be those who benefit from the Taliban taking power. They will also be those who benefit or cheer as the U.S. appears humiliated.
“Among those ‘winners’ are Qatar, Russia, China, Pakistan, Turkey and Iran. This can be seen in various ways. Most of these countries hosted the Taliban or tacitly backed them.”
Afghanistan is not Erdoğan’s only pro-sharia ambition after the U.S. withdrawal.
As the international community focused on the chaos unfolding in Afghanistan, Turkey ramped up its drone attacks on Yazidis in Iraq’s Sinjar district. The most recent strikes destroyed a medical clinic. Analyst Michael Rubin warned in the Washington Examiner.:
“The Turkish drone strikes increasingly threaten to undercut refugee repatriation inside Iraq and create space for the Islamic State to regroup, as the most effective Kurdish groups fighting ISIS are Sinjar’s grassroots Kurdish and Yazidi militias.”
Biden’s catastrophic miscalculation in Afghanistan will also have unwanted repercussions in Syria. In an interview with The Independent, Abu Mohammad al-Joulani, leader of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) terrorist group, commented on the Afghan situation: “The aftermath of the U.S. surprise withdrawal from Kabul will also have an impact on the Kurds [or, as he put it, ‘the US-backed enemies of the Syrian revolution’].”
HTS is a dominant jihadist power in the Idlib “de-escalation zone” in northern Syria. HTS has never been in direct confrontation with the Kurds. Al-Joulani’s words, however, highlighted his open hostility towards the Kurdish administration that, as he purports, is only able to control a huge swath of Syria and maintain relative stability thanks to the US support. As soon as the last U.S. plane takes off from the Syrian soil, according to al-Joulani, this Kurdish dream will crumble.
When combined in a simple analytical way, Erdoğan’s pro-sharia ambitions and the terrorist al-Joulani’s statements herald a new jihadist proxy army for Ankara fighting on Syrian soil. The unwritten deal looks too apparent: HTS fighting Turkey’s regional enemies, the Kurds and the Syrian regime, in return for tacit Turkish support for international recognition as a legitimate entity rather than as a terrorist one.
Erdoğan’s Islamist, neo-Ottoman ambitions are now taking a pro-sharia turn. That is bad news for the region to Turkey’s south and east. Worse, it is a slow-fuse time bomb for the West.
*
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.
Burak Bekdil, one of Turkey’s leading journalists, was recently fired from the country’s most noted newspaper after 29 years, for writing in Gatestone what is taking place in Turkey. He is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
As global condemnation rains down on the Israeli authorities for designating six well-respected Palestinian nongovernmental organizations as terrorist organizations and an investigation suggests they used military-grade hacking tools to spy on Palestinian activists, the Israeli Supreme Court is quietly playing its own part in shrinking the space for Palestinian civil society to operate.
In an October 27 ruling, the Supreme Court denied tax-exempt status to an Israeli-registered group running a school in the West Bank because the school educates Palestinian, not Israeli, children. The precedent-setting decision imposes financial burdens on civil society groups providing services to Palestinians, including groups that step in to fulfil responsibilities that the Israeli government, the occupying power in the West Bank and Gaza, has flouted.
The court’s ruling means that Israeli-registered groups operating in the West Bank will get tax breaks if they provide services to Jewish Israelis living in unlawful settlements, but not if they provide services to Palestinians living under military occupation in the same territory.
“The precedent-setting decision imposes financial burdens on civil society groups providing services to Palestinians, including groups that step in to fulfil responsibilities that the Israeli government, the occupying power in the West Bank and Gaza, has flouted”
These are the facts that arise from the court ruling: For the past three decades, the Society of Islamic Sciences and Cultural Committee has run schools in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, including in East Jerusalem. The Society submits regular reports to the Israeli nonprofit registrar. In 2004, as Israeli authorities built a barrier that cuts East Jerusalem off from the rest of the West Bank, the organization closed its Jerusalem schools and maintained just one school, in Bir Nabala, a West Bank Palestinian town inside an enclave surrounded by walls and fences.
The separation barrier severs Bir Nabala from East Jerusalem and requires residents to access the rest of the West Bank through gates in the barrier and tunnels dug underneath it. Major roads in Bir Nabala, formerly commercial arteries, now reach a dead-end in an eight-meter-high concrete wall. After closing its Jerusalem properties, the Society rented them out to another educational organization, for a contracted annual sum of about US$600,000.
Section 9(2) of the Israeli Income Tax Ordinance exempts nonprofit organizations from income tax if they perform a “public purpose,” such as education. The ordinance does not specify a geographical scope for those services, and organizations serving Jewish residents of unlawful Israeli settlements in the West Bank receive Israeli income tax and other tax benefits.
Israeli Supreme Court Justices Isaac Amit, David Mintz, and Alex Stein ruled unanimously that the Society must pay tax on its rental income because running a school for Palestinian children in the West Bank is not a “public purpose” that the Israeli government will indirectly subsidize through the tax exemption.
Although the international law of occupation and international human rights law obligate Israel to ensure that Palestinian children in the West Bank are able to get quality education, and although the Palestinian Authority has no jurisdiction in Area C, where the school is located, the court found that educational services in Bir Nabala have no “link” to Israel for purposes of the tax law.
Incredibly, the decision also rests on a determination that the Israeli government cannot effectively oversee the activities of non-governmental organizations in “areas that are not under its control,” even though Israeli authorities maintain exclusive authority over the school’s neighbourhood in Bir Nabala, including tightly controlling travel into and out of the area, policing, licensing and construction.
Israeli officials are committing the crimes of apartheid and persecution.
The court rejected the Society’s argument that its school in Bir Nabala also serves Palestinians from East Jerusalem who hold Israeli residency and thus are “Israelis,” finding that the group failed to prove that claim and even made a statement denying it.
Some Palestinians with Israeli residence – especially those whose spouses hold West Bank ID cards and thereby cannot enter Jerusalem without rarely issued permits – indeed live in Bir Nabala and send their children to school there. But no Palestinian Jerusalemite would provide the Israeli authorities with evidence that their children attend school in Bir Nabala, because doing so could jeopardize their residency status, a fact that the court has failed to take into account. Israel conditions that status on the person’s connections to Jerusalem, among other factors, as part of a policy to ensure Jewish demographic superiority in Jerusalem.
The court decision is a binding precedent and a departure from previous practices. It places a financial burden on Israeli-registered groups that serve Palestinians living under Israeli occupation and is the latest example of Israel’s highest court rubber-stamping discriminatory practices that contribute to the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution, under an overall policy to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians, even in matters of education.
*
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.
Sari Bashi is an Israeli lawyer and a special adviser at Human Rights Watch.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership was updated, aimed at guaranteeing that Kiev’s efforts against Russia will be encouraged to continue.
As per the document, the US plans to boost cooperation with Ukraine ‘in areas such as Black Sea security, cyber defense, and intelligence sharing, and countering Russia’s aggression.’
In the Black Sea this is immediately evident, as NATO reconnaissance activity immediately spiked on November 9th and onwards.
On November 10th and the previous 24 hours, the radars of the Russian Aerospace Force’s (VKS) air defense troops tracked a US Air Force E-8C airborne ground surveillance, command and control aircraft over the Black Sea.
In addition, a US RC-135 strategic reconnaissance aircraft took off from the airbase on the Island of Crete in Greece and approached the Russian state border. A US Navy P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane took off from the airbase on the Island of Sicily in Italy and also approached the border.
Two more aircraft – a French C-160G Gabriel reconnaissance aircraft took off from the airbase in Romania, as well as a US Air Force U-2 strategic reconnaissance aircraft that took off from UK territory. The former approached the Russian border, while the latter patrolled over Ukraine, before ultimately also approaching Kiev’s neighbor.
This all comes alongside the USS Mount Whitney amphibious command ship, the flagship of the U.S. 6th Fleet being in the Black Sea, as well as the USS Porter guided missile destroyer.
These actions are all likely a swift result of a letter by 15 congressmen, all members of the House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, which urged US President Joe Biden to increase pressure on Russia in response to alleged concentration of forces near the Ukrainian border.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) are seizing the opportunity to steadily increase aggression against the self-proclaimed republics in Eastern Ukraine.
Repeatedly on November 9th, 10th and 11th, the UAF shelled the outskirts of Donetsk city, and the Trudovskaya mine which is located there. Donetsk airport was subject to shelling.
Several villages, including Alexandrovka, Novaya Marievka, Zaitseve and Spartak were subject to shelling from 120-mm, 152-mm and other artillery.
According to information from the region, the presence of 31 Gvozdika and 24 D-30 self-propelled howitzers of the UAF was recorded at the Druzhkovka railway station. These weapons are not supposed to be anywhere near the contact line, and shouldn’t be used to shell civilian settlements.
The situation is reaching the boiling point, as Kiev is becoming more assertive in its actions and the government believes that the United States and NATO’s support means that the Western Bloc will follow it in whatever sort aggressive policy it pursues towards Russia.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Dr. Carrie Madej joined “The Stew Peters Show” with images that should shock the entire world, and should immediately be investigated by lawmakers.
We have to speak up. all us are at risk.
It’s humankind against a bigger threat.
This is not a humankind medicine.
The shots need to be stopped, IMMEDIATELY!
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee that voted 17-0 to approve the jabs for children as young as five was notified that the children’s formulation of the drug contains tromethamine (Tris), a chemical that reduces blood acidity and stabilizes people who have suffered a heart attack.
The last 7 Public Health England / UK Health Security Agency ‘Vaccine Surveillance’ report figures on Covid-19 cases show that double vaccinated 40-79 year-olds have now lost 50% of their immune system capability and are consistently losing a further 5% every week (between 3.9% and 8.8%).
UK lawyer and military veteran Anna De Buisseret urges us to have hope, “because we are going to win this.” Even in times of war, she explains, “you don’t get to experiment on Prisoners Of War.” And that is what our governments are currently doing by imposing experimental jabs and myriad “COVID measures” on domestic populations.
One of the fascinating aspects of the “attack” on the Capitol is that the “attackers” didn’t have guns. In fact, as far as I know, they didn’t even have any swords. To me, that’s one unusual “attack.” In fact, I’ll bet that there haven’t been many other “attacks” in history in which the “attackers” failed to use weapons to commit their “attack.”
The mandatory COVID lockdown and vaccine requirements are sold to the public as legitimate scientism perpetuated by a longtime government health institution once considered an independent watchdog. Instead, the CDC has a long history of offering politically inspired evidence as a facsimile for real science where the dilemma may rarely be settled.
What always impresses me about the Chinese concept of development is the vision for sharing – the intent of sharing wealth and prosperity. It fits typically the concept of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. This Chinese Vision on Common Prosperity is no different.
Taliban interim-Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi and Turkmen Foreign Minister Rashid Meredov got together to discuss a range of political and economic issues. Most importantly, they resurrected the legendary soap opera which in the early 2000s I dubbed Pipelineistan: the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline.
It relieves me immensely to have given my name and my artistic advice as an executive producer of the new film The Unspeakable. I also deeply respect the definitive film SEVEN about the “other” building so few know of that also, somehow, fell neatly, “smack straight into its own socks” that day. An impossibility in any way but one.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Iraq’s National Security Council formed a committee to investigate the assassination attempt on Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, who was targeted on early Sunday morning by three explosives-laden drones, two of which were intercepted.
Kadhimi appeared only lightly injured, wearing a bandage on his wrist, in a video soon after the attack on his residence in the Green Zone.
According to sources who spoke to Reuters on Monday, the attack was carried out by at least one Iranian-backed militia group and said the drones and explosives used in the assault were Iranian-made.
Two Iraqi security officials said that the powerful Kataib Hezbollah and Asaib Ahl al-Haq groups carried it out in tandem, while one militia source said that Kataib Hezbollah was involved and that he could not confirm the role of Asaib. It was reported Kadhimi had been threatened before the attack by Qais Al-Khazali of the Asa’ib Ahl Al-Haq militia.
The political wings of the Iraqi militias suffered heavy losses in October’s parliamentary elections and hundreds of supporters have protested outside Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone in recent days, with protests turning deadly on Friday where at least one protester was killed, with a further 120 injured.
Abu Ali al-Askari, the leader of the Kataib Hezbollah militia, denied his group’s involvement in the attack.
Iran and Iraq both have majority Shiite populations. The failed assassination attempt follows last month’s parliamentary elections, in which the Iran-backed militias were the biggest losers. Several activists, both Shiite and Sunni, were killed after calling for the end of Iranian interference in Iraq.
Kadhimi has warned of the dangers of allowing the development of a state within a state and has sought closer ties with Iraq’s Arab neighbors, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
The Commander of Iran’s Quds Force, Brig-Gen Esmael Qaani, flew to Baghdad on Sunday afternoon and met Kadhimi and President Barham Salih, according to two government officials. Iran has denied any involvement in the attack.
Maj. Gen. Tahsin Al Khafaji, Joint Operations Command spokesman, said Iraq’s security forces would “hunt down” those who undermine the country’s national security.
The attack has raised tension in Iraq after a general election was disputed by Iran-backed militias including Kataib Hezbollah and Asaib. The political parties that represent Iran-aligned paramilitary groups in parliament suffered crushing defeats at the polls on Oct. 10, losing dozens of the seats they have controlled for several years.
The State of Law bloc led by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki came third with 34 seats in parliament, followed by the Kurdistan Democratic Party with 32 seats, the results showed. According to the results, the Azem Alliance of Iraqi millionaire Khamis Khanjar won 12 seats, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan got 16 seats, the Al-Fatah Coalition won 17 seats, the Imtidad Movement and the New Generation Movement got 9 seats each, while independents won 40 seats. The election commission said turnout in the vote reached 43%.
The polls saw 3,249 candidates representing 21 coalitions and 109 parties vying for seats in the assembly. The elections were originally scheduled for 2022 but were moved up following mass protests that erupted in 2019 against deep-seated corruption and poor governance.
Kadhimi has opened an investigation into violent protests against last month’s election, with at least four people killed on Friday after security forces opened fire to clear demonstrators in Baghdad.
The electoral commission began a recount and so far, the results have not changed, while people are increasingly frustrated at Iraq’s political system.
The elections held on Oct. 10 decided the Council of Representatives who will, in turn, elect the Iraqi president and confirm the prime minister. 25 million voters were eligible to take part in Iraq’s fifth parliamentary election since the 2003 US-led invasion.
The 2021 elections were conducted under a single non-transferable vote in 83 multi-member constituencies. Seats are divided by religious sect, ethnicity, and gender. The Commission reported voter turnout was 41.05%, based on 9,077,779 voters out of 22,116,368 eligible.
The Kurdistan Democratic Party, which ran independently rather than as part of a multi-party coalition list, won a total of 33 seats, making it Iraq’s single largest political party.
Iraq was destroyed politically, physically, and socially by the US attack on Iraq for the sole purpose of ‘regime change’. The country’s infrastructure has never been repaired, and many Iraqis do not have adequate electricity, water, food, or medicines. The political chaos in Iraq is a direct result of the sectarian system the US imposed on Iraq after the initial invasion in 2003. America has a secular government, where lawmakers are voted into office based on popularity, and not which religion they were born into. Iran is the Islamic Republic and is Iraq’s Eastern neighbor, while Syria sits to the West and is the only secular government in the Middle East. Syria also was attacked by the US-NATO war machine for ‘regime change’ starting in March 2011. However, Syria was able to resist the onslaught of Radical Islamic terrorists, formerly supported by the US, EU, and NATO. Iraq is in the middle, and the painful process of a fledgling democracy tainted by a sectarian influence.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The following research papers and studies raise doubts that Covid vaccine mandates are backed by science and good public-health practice. Anyone seeking to challenge these mandates should consult them carefully.
They demonstrate that these mandates provide no overall health benefit to the community and can even be harmful.
Instead, the decision to accept the vaccine should be made by individuals according to their own assessment of risks in consultation with informed medical professionals.
The model of Marek’s disease (‘leaky’ non-sterilizing, non-neutralizing vaccines that reduce symptoms but do not stop infection or transmission) and the concept of the Original antigenic sin (the initial priming of the immune system prejudices the immune response to the pathogen or similar pathogen life-long) may explain what we are potentially facing now with these mass mandates of COVID vaccines (immune escape, increased transmission, faster transmission, and potentially more ‘hotter’ variants).
In addition, such mandates result in the forced separation and segregation of society. They create hazards for people in their professional lives. For example, why would governments impose punitive career altering vaccine mandates on an unvaccinated nurse who is most likely already immune due to natural exposure? Mandates also represent an encroachment on freedom and liberties, and call into question the motives behind these mandates when the science shows no public benefit compared with the costs.
Below you can see the scientific evidence that call into question COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
“Found no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta.”
“No difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine “breakthrough” infections. Furthermore, individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections frequently test positive with viral loads consistent with the ability to shed infectious viruses…if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others…data substantiate the idea that vaccinated individuals who become infected with the Delta variant may have the potential to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.”
“Natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity… SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccines had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected.”…para 27 fold increased risk of symptomatic COVID and 8 fold increased risk of hospitalization (vaccinated over unvaccinated).
“Report on their study which shows that (cohort comprised 842,974 pairs (N=1,684,958), including individuals vaccinated with 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, mRNA-1273, or BNT162b2, and matched unvaccinated individuals) “vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 against infection waned progressively from 92% (95% CI, 92-93, P<0·001) at day 15-30 to 47% (95% CI, 39-55, P<0·001) at day 121-180, and from day 211 and onwards no effectiveness could be detected (23%; 95% CI, -2-41, P=0·07)” …while the vaccine provides temporary protection against infection, the efficacy declines below zero and then to negative efficacy territory at approximately 7 months, underscoring that the vaccinated are highly susceptible to infection and eventually become highly infected (more so than the unvaccinated).
“Qatar study which showed that the vaccine efficacy (Pfizer) declined to near zero by 5 to 6-months and even immediate protection after one to two months were largely exaggerated… BNT162b2-induced protection against infection appears to wane rapidly after its peak right after the second dose.”
Looks at transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated healthcare workers in Vietnam. 69 healthcare workers were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. 62 participated in the clinical study. Researchers reported “23 complete-genome sequences were obtained. They all belonged to the Delta variant, and were phylogenetically distinct from the contemporary Delta variant sequences obtained from community transmission cases, suggestive of ongoing transmission between the workers. Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.”
Barnstable, Massachusetts, July 2021 CDC MMWR study found that in 469 cases of COVID-19, there were 74% that occurred in fully vaccinated persons. “The vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated who were infected.”
“In conclusion, this outbreak demonstrated that, despite full vaccination and universal masking of HCW, breakthrough infections by the Delta variant via symptomatic and asymptomatic HCW occurred, causing nosocomial infections…secondary transmission occurred from those with symptomatic infections despite use of personal protective equipment (PPE).”
“The PPE and masks were essentially ineffective in the healthcare setting. The index cases were usually fully vaccinated and most (if not all transmission) tended to occur between patients and staff who were masked and fully vaccinated, underscoring the high transmission of the Delta variant among vaccinated and masked persons…this nosocomial outbreak exemplifies the high transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among twice vaccinated and masked individuals.”
Information on page 23 raises serious concerns when it reported that “waning of the N antibody response over time and (iii) recent observations from UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) surveillance data that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following 2 doses of vaccination.” Also shows a pronounced and very troubling trend, which is that the “double vaccinated persons are showing greater infection (per 100,000) than the unvaccinated, and especially in the older age groups e.g. 30 years and above.”
“Six months after receipt of the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, humoral response was substantially decreased, especially among men, among persons 65 years of age or older, and among persons with immunosuppression.”
“Examined the durability of immune responses to the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. They “analyzed antibody responses to the homologous Wu strain as well as several variants of concern, including the emerging Mu (B.1.621) variant, and T cell responses in a subset of these volunteers at six months (day 210 post-primary vaccination) after the second dose …“data demonstrate a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine.”
Reported that “in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors).”
Identified 969 patients who were admitted to a Yale New Haven Health System hospital with a confirmed positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2… “Observed a higher number of patients with severe or critical illness in those who received the BNT162b2 vaccine than in those who received mRNA-1273 or Ad.26.COV2.S.”
“Examined the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on Alpha & Delta variant transmission. They reported that “while vaccination still lowers the risk of infection, similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with Delta question how much vaccination prevents onward transmission… transmission reductions declined over time since second vaccination, for Delta reaching similar levels to unvaccinated individuals by 12 weeks for ChAdOx1 and attenuating substantially for BNT162b2. Protection from vaccination in contacts also declined in the 3 months after second vaccination…vaccination reduces transmission of Delta, but by less than the Alpha variant.”
“Reported on the resurgence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a highly vaccinated health system workforce. Vaccination with mRNA vaccines began in mid-December 2020; by March, 76% of the workforce had been fully vaccinated, and by July, the percentage had risen to 87%. Infections had decreased dramatically by early February 2021… “coincident with the end of California’s mask mandate on June 15 and the rapid dominance of the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant that first emerged in mid-April and accounted for over 95% of UCSDH isolates by the end of July, infections increased rapidly, including cases among fully vaccinated persons…researchers reported that the “dramatic change in vaccine effectiveness from June to July is likely to be due to both the emergence of the delta variant and waning immunity over time.”
“Examined the transmission and viral load kinetics in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with mild delta variant infection in the community. They found that (in 602 community contacts (identified via the UK contract-tracing system) of 471 UK COVID-19 index cases were recruited to the Assessment of Transmission and Contagiousness of COVID-19 in Contacts cohort study and contributed 8145 upper respiratory tract samples from daily sampling for up to 20 days) “vaccination reduces the risk of delta variant infection and accelerates viral clearance. Nonetheless, fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts.”
The viral load reduction effectiveness declines with time after vaccination, “significantly decreasing at 3 months after vaccination and effectively vanishing after about 6 months.”
*
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 Alexander holds a PhD. He has experience in epidemiology and in the teaching clinical epidemiology, evidence-based medicine, and research methodology. Dr Alexander is a former Assistant Professor at McMaster University in evidence-based medicine and research methods; former COVID Pandemic evidence-synthesis consultant advisor to WHO-PAHO Washington, DC (2020) and former senior advisor to COVID Pandemic policy in Health and Human Services (HHS) Washington, DC (A Secretary), US government; worked/appointed in 2008 at WHO as a regional specialist/epidemiologist in Europe’s Regional office Denmark, worked for the government of Canada as an epidemiologist for 12 years, appointed as the Canadian in-field epidemiologist (2002-2004) as part of an international CIDA funded, Health Canada executed project on TB/HIV co-infection and MDR-TB control (involving India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Afghanistan, posted to Kathmandu); employed from 2017 to 2019 at Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Virginia USA as the evidence synthesis meta-analysis systematic review guideline development trainer; currently a COVID-19 consultant researcher in the US-C19 research group.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Peter Koenig’s Presentation to an Event organized by Remin University, Beijing.
***
What always impresses me about the Chinese concept of development is the vision for sharing – the intent of sharing wealth and prosperity. It fits typically the concept of Socialism with Chinese characteristics.
This Chinese Vision on Common Prosperity is no different.
China is embarking on her vision of comprehensively building a modern socialist country, envisioning a future where prosperity is shared by everyone in the country.
And let me add – China’s vision of a shared prosperity goes way beyond her borders as shown by the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) – to mention just one gigantic initiative that aims at building a more equitable world by spreading not only the concept of “Common Prosperity” but also the notion of learning through physical work and organization in cooperation with countries around the globe.
Common Prosperity refers to affluence shared by everyone both in material and cultural terms, and should be advanced step by step. It should be emphasized that such prosperity does not cover only a few people or parts of the country. It aims at an equilibrium of wealth and prosperity throughout the country.
Common Prosperity should be attained through hard work and innovation, with chances for more people to become moderately prosperous.
Common Prosperity is a key element of socialism.
It is not just an equal distribution of goods and assets.
It is much more.
It involves people, working and engaging themselves on gaining knowledge to make Common Prosperity a sustainable objective, and to incite new ideas, for example, through education programs and interchange of experiences, as well as joint country-to-country projects with Technical Assistance (TA) through the Belt and Road Initiative.
In February this year, President Xi Jinping, addressed the nation on China’s achievements in eradicating poverty and to commend outstanding efforts by individuals. He said China stands for a people-centered development philosophy. China unwaveringly pursues improving people’s well-being and realizing Common Prosperity, being the essential requirements of socialism.
President Xi also stressed the importance of consolidating poverty alleviation achievements and rural vitalization, with the objective to work towards narrowing the wealth gap between urban and rural areas. This is the next step after eradicating extreme poverty last year.
China emphasizes Common Prosperity ever since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2012, when the country has gradually put Common Prosperity in a more prominent position.
A logical next step to poverty alleviation is sharing prosperity within the boundaries of China, bringing an improved equilibrium to well-being in the country, especially between the western parts of China and the industrialized East, with the goal of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects.
In addition to Common Prosperity for her country, China has favorable conditions to help bringing Common Prosperity to the rest of the world, especially to those nations still struggling under poverty and unfavorable economic conditions, often still the remnants of western colonialism.
China is also a Consultative Democracy, of which the distinctive feature is a People’s Democracy.
China’s social networks and information technology have made it possible for the widest range of public opinion to be better represented. These channels have become an important reference for democratic policymaking.
Part of this policy making process is the concept of “Shared or Common Prosperity”. Therefore, “Common Prosperity” is not just a top-down decision – it is a policy shared and supported by the people. Since it is people-supported, it is sustainable. It is a policy that gains momentum as it advances.
The very process of collaboration with people, with people even from other countries and different cultures – I mentioned before the Belt and Road Initiative – is a dynamic process. It brings about new ideas – a concept of building a world, envisioning Common Prosperity and a shared future for all.
Common Prosperity is a noble and worthy objective that helps connect the world in Peace and – yes – in Prosperity.
*
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 non-resident Sr. Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing. He is also a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
After almost two contentious years in the throes of the COVID pandemic that was speculative and problematic from the beginning, partisan loyalists, once known as socially conscious Democrats, continue to justify the unconstitutional lockdowns and its violations of humanity as “following the science.”
Those same “Democrats” have now morphed into an activist throng as the pandemic offers the perfect opportunity to distort “science” in order to accomplish the final malevolent chapter of the globalist cabal’s agenda of altering Homo sapiens into a transhumanist world order.
The mandatory COVID lockdown and vaccine requirements are sold to the public as legitimate scientism perpetuated by a longtime government health institution once considered an independent watchdog. Instead, the CDC has a long history of offering politically inspired evidence as a facsimile for real science where the dilemma may rarely be settled.
Thankfully, many medical professionals have stepped forward to pursue real science: an ongoing inquiry that raises doubt as it is tested with precise application, seeking analysis that develops through a rational examination of the facts based on reason, evidence, hypothesis, or collective investigation.
Today’s scientism has become a world of political regimentation and medical tyranny based on “trust the experts” as it shuts down debate and threatens those professionals who dare question government sanctions. In addition, the CDC has deceitfully appropriated itself as the official legal enforcer of arbitrary unscientific principles as if Americans were required to unquestioningly obey its every directive, with no validating justification. At the same time, scientism allows local dictatorial health departments to overstep their authority as the State concedes its legal influence to unelected bureaucrats.
Even once-revered “peer-reviewed” science, where expert peers vet a scientific breakthrough, may now be suspect and no longer trusted as the credibility of a once-reliable communication process has been tainted by politics.
Once elements of the American public were thoroughly duped into accepting a gradual series of onerous lockdown requirements, the inoculation of a pseudo-vaccine has proven to be more of a bioweapon foisted on the public as if scientifically authentic. From there, a full range of medical martial law would be more easily imposed on a compliant population.
First authorized by Congress to accept outside “donations” in 1983, the CDC Foundation was formally created in 1995 to “mobilize philanthropic partners and private-sector resources to support CDC’s critical health protection mission.” In other words, the CDC has been in collaboration with the private sector of individuals, philanthropies, and corporations to address public health challenges despite flagrant conflicts of interest. The foundation’s donor list reads like a who’s who in the world of Big Pharma, Fortune 500, and advanced bioscience research and technology.
The foundation’s statutory authority includes accepting gifts of real property and proceeds from wills and trusts as the CDC cashed in the “gifts” to launch over a thousand projects, with $740M raised as of 2017.
As identified by RFK, Jr, the CDC became little more than a “vaccine company” with “ownership of 56 vaccine patents as it buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which represents over 40% of its total budget.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics is also on the take, with approximately $25M in contributions from the pharmaceutical vaccine industry.
“[V]accines are liability-free and effectively compulsory to a captive market of 76 million children[.] … The four companies that make virtually all of the recommended vaccines are all convicted felons. Collectively they have paid over $35 billion since 2009 for defrauding regulators, lying to and bribing government officials and physicians, falsifying science, and leaving a trail of (incurable chronic illnesses) injuries and deaths from products they knew to be dangerous and still sold under pretense of safety and efficacy.” —Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
In this age of censorship and suppression, compromised quasi-medical government agencies will not tolerate public dissent and are beyond civilian or congressional control as if they were a branch of the military-intelligence complex, which reports to no one.
The most recent example of a misappropriation of science is the Biden administration’s renewed attack on American children when the FDA’s vaccine advisory panel asked “whether the benefits” of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine “outweigh its risks in the use of children five to eleven years.” There were seventeen votes of approval with one abstention.
Most alarming were comments by Dr. Eric Ruben, member of the panel and editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, who said, “We’re never going to learn how safe the vaccine is (to children) until we start giving it. … That’s just the way it goes.” In other words, American children are expendable as lab specimens in an untested, unproven program in the name of speculative scientific experiments.
In blue-leaning Colorado, 480,000 children between five and eleven years are targeted for vaccination by January 31 despite the fact that science has proven that American children, our most vulnerable and precious assets, are at little risk from COVID.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) stepped up and introduced legislation to block the federal government and school districts from requiring COVID-19 vaccination mandates for minors as well as strip federal funds from school districts that continue to mandate vaccinations.
As national resistance to Biden’s hideous COVID vaccinates escalates, it is reasonable to expect a new level of public outrage and a new cohort of political activism as parents protect their children from continued government encroachment.
*
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.
Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado; staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender; an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth; and a staff member of the U.S. House of Representatives in Washington, D.C. She can be found at [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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Yesterday, I was listening to a classical-music station when NPR came on with the news. Addressing the controversy surrounding former President Trump’s efforts to keep secret his records relating to the January 6 protests at the Capitol, the NPR reporter referred to the “deadly attack” on the Capitol.
I immediately thought to myself, “Well, that’s certainly an interesting use of language.”
When I hear the word “attack,” I think of weapons, specifically guns, grenades, or missiles that are intended to kill people. For example, when the Pentagon fired a missile at that family in Afghanistan shortly before exiting its 20-year war in that country, I would term that an “attack” — and a “deadly attack” at that, especially given that many innocent people, including children, were killed by that missile.
One of the fascinating aspects of the “attack” on the Capitol is that the “attackers” didn’t have guns. In fact, as far as I know, they didn’t even have any swords. To me, that’s one unusual “attack.” In fact, I’ll bet that there haven’t been many other “attacks” in history in which the “attackers” failed to use weapons to commit their “attack.”
What about words? Yeah, the Capitol “attackers” certainly employed a lot of words during the course of their “attack.” Maybe that is what NPR means when it describes what happened as an “attack” — that the “attackers” were engaged in a “word attack” on the Capitol. Imagine how frightening that “attack” must have been — with “attackers” hitting one victim with some particular word — maybe “Tyrant!” — followed by some other word, perhaps “Thief!”
Now, I think you would agree with me that that would be one scary “attack”!
In fact, it was so scary that one Capitol police officer shot and killed one of the “attackers” because he was so afraid that the “attackers” were coming to get him. He wasn’t the only one who was afraid. Many members of Congress were equally terrified of the Word-Attackers.
Hey, don’t judge these people too harshly. You don’t know how you would react if a bunch of Word-Attackers were coming after you and flinging and hurling nasty words at you.
Another interesting aspect of the NPR news broadcast was the reporter’s reference to the “deadly” attack on the Capitol. Now, when I hear that someone has engaged in a “deadly” attack, I immediately think that the attackers have killed people in the course of their attack.
Yet, here, the “attackers” didn’t kill anyone. Instead, the only person killed was one of the “attackers.” Her name was Ashli Babbitt. She was shot dead by that Capitol policeman who was terrified that Babbitt and the “attackers” were coming to get him and members of Congress. It’s still not clear why he didn’t fire a warning shot over her head. If he had done that, she undoubtedly would have backed off, especially since she was unarmed, well, except for words in her vocabulary.
For a while, the news media was reporting that Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick was beaten to death by the “attackers.” For example, the New York Times reported that he “was overpowered and beaten by rioters from the mob at the Capitol.”
Could that be what NPR is referring to when it cites the “deadly” attack on the Capitol?
I don’t think so because as things turned out, what the Times reported about Sicknick turned out to be incorrect. An autopsy revealed that Sicknick died of natural causes, to wit: strokes.
The New York Times also reported that a woman named Rosanne Boyland, who was one of the “attackers,” “appears to have been killed in a crush of fellow rioters during their attempt to fight through a police line.”
Alas, what appeared to be true wasn’t. An autopsy revealed that she died of a drug overdose, not trampling.
Two other “attackers” — Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips — died of a heart attack and a stroke.
Thus, five people died during the “deadly attack.” One “attacker “was killed by a terrified Capitol police officer. One Capitol police officer and two of the “attackers” died of natural causes. Another “attacker” died of a drug overdose.
Given the nature of those deaths, is it really proper to refer to the “deadly” attack on the Capitol? Doesn’t the use of the term “deadly” imply that the attackers deliberately shot or killed people as part of their “attack”?
Maybe NPR is saying that the words that the “attackers” were employing as weapons caused those people to have heart attacks, strokes, and drug overdoses. Maybe their words are what caused that police officer who killed Ashli Babbitt to become terrified.
Ironically, as far as I know, the Justice Department hasn’t charged any of the January 6 protestors with murder or even a massive conspiracy to initiate a “deadly attack” on the Capitol.What’s up with that? Those federal prosecutors need to start listening to NPR.
*
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.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.
Featured image is from The Future of Freedom Foundation
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The general state of chaos is spreading in northern Syria, with attacks in neighboring Iraq also being on the rise in recent days.
November 10th dawns with expectation for the long-anticipated Turkish operation in northeast Syria that never seems to come.
Military convoys of the Turkish-backed Ahrar al-Sharqiya group, one of the biggest factions of the so-called Syrian National Army (SNA) were spotted en route to al-Hasakah.
Militant deployments are also reported in the Ain Issa area in Raqqa governorate.
Reinforcements on the front lines are carried out under the pretext of joint exercises of the SNA and the Turkish Armed Forces.
However, the expectation of hostilities is getting to these militant factions, as fierce infighting broke out in the town of Afrin in Syria’s Aleppo governorate. Casualties were reported.
It is likely that the all Ankara-backed factions are on edge, expecting fighting to break out at any moment, and then all who are near the Kurdish areas of northeast Syria will have to participate, in one way or another.
Still the escalation is nowhere to be seen, as Ankara’s forces are giving their best to try and stir things up. On November 9th, a drone attack hit a car in the town of Qamishli in north-eastern Syria’s al-Hassakah governorate. Three people were killed, and there are rumors that the vehicle belonged to Mazloum Gilo, a commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). He was not one of the casualties.
The tension between the Kurdish groups and Turkey is also spilling into Iraq, as late on November 7, a rocket attack targeted a Turkish military base near the town of Zaylkan in Bashiqa district in the northern Iraqi province of Nineveh.
Ankara responded by sending its warplanes to attack alleged PKK positions in the Shladze area on November 8th.
On the following day, Turkish airstrikes hit northern Duhok province.
These attacks came shortly after an attempt to assassinate Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Baghdad with armed drones.
It is concerning for the local population that the operation against the Kurdish groups in northeastern Syria could also spill into Iraqi Kurdistan and cover a wider area.
Civilian populations and the environment have been severely impacted by the conflict. Thousands of acres of land have been scorched, and people’s houses and livestock have been hit. Several civilians have been killed and one family in Hirore is suffering from health problems following a suspected chemical attack.
No improvement in the situation in the region can be expected in the foreseeable future.
On the one hand, it seems that all parties involved into conflict have almost exhausted their local potentials, while on the other hand, the contradictions existing between them seem difficult to resolve peacefully.
As a result, it is unlikely to expect a pacification of the Middle East, and hence a reduction in the wave of refugees to Europe.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Tens of thousands gathered in front of Parliament House of Victoria in Protest against Premier Dan Andrews
Claire Woodley, daughter of Australian Singer-Songwriter, Bruce Woodley, of the hit folk anthem, I Am Australian led the crowd in a rousing mass performance of the song.
“I AM AUSTRALIAN” LYRICS
I came from the Dreamtime
From the dusty red soil plains
I am the ancient heart
The keeper of the flame
I stood upon the rocky shore
I watched the tall ships come
For forty thousand years I’ve been the first Australian
I came upon the prison ship
Bound down by iron chains
I fought the land
Endured the lash
And waited for the rains
I’m a settler
I’m a farmer’s wife
On a dry and barren run
A convict then a free man
I became Australian
I’m a daughter of a digger
Who sought the mother lode
The girl became a woman
On the long and dusty road
I’m a child of the Depression
I saw the good times come
I’m a bushy, I’m a battler
I am Australian
We are one
But we are many
And from all the lands on earth we come
We’ll share a dream
And sing with one voice
I am, you are, we are Australian
I’m a teller of stories
I’m a singer of songs
I am Albert Namatjira
And I paint the ghostly gums
I’m Clancy on his horse
I’m Ned Kelly on the run
I’m the one who waltzed Matilda
I am Australian
I’m the hot wind from the desert
I’m the black soil of the plain
I’m the mountains and the valleys
I’m the drought and flooding rains
I am the rock
I am the sky
The rivers when they run
The spirit of this great land
I am Australian
We are one
But we are many
And from all the lands on earth we come
We’ll share a dream
And sing with one voice
I am, you are, we are Australian
We are one
But we are many
And from all the lands on earth we come
We’ll share a dream
And sing with one voice
I am, you are
We are Australian
I am, you are
We are Australian
*
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.
November 11th, 2021 by Association of American Physicians and Surgeons
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
A committee of experts advising the Food and Drug Administration met on Oct 26 and voted 17 to 0, with one abstention, to recommend authorizing the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine for children 5 to 11 years old.
In response, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) issued a statement that anyone who administers the shot must first obtain fully informed, completely voluntary consent, without threats or inducements.
AAPS notes that testing in children was limited. Only 1,518 children received the shots, and 750 received a placebo. Follow-up was for only two months in one group and 2.5 weeks in another.
The shots are claimed to be 91% effective against symptomatic COVID in children, based on 16 cases of COVID in the placebo group and three cases in the vaccinated group. AAPS observes that this is an absolute risk reduction of only about 2%.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognizes a risk of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart) and is requiring after-marketing studies lasting five years in adults in its letter approving the BioNTech Comirnaty vaccine, which is similar to the Pfizer product but not yet available in the U.S. All other products are available only under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).
AAPS states: “We do not and cannot know the long-term effects on cancer, fertility, or autoimmune diseases.” However, committee member Dr. Eric Rubin states: “We’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes.”
AAPS concludes that “to give truly informed consent, parents need complete information about possible side effects, even if ‘extremely rare.’”
A committee of experts advising the Food and Drug Administration met on Oct 26 and voted 17 to 0, with one abstention, to recommend authorizing the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine for children 5 to 11 years old. The committee had received more than 140,000 public comments.
AAPS makes the following observations:
In the testing, only 1,518 children received the shots, and 750 received a placebo. This is far too few to see uncommon side effects, such as myocarditis/pericarditis, as Pfizer admits.
Follow-up was for two months in one group and only 2.5 weeks in another. The Pfizer application states that long-term sequelae of post-vaccination myocarditis/pericarditis in participants 5 to 12 years of age will be studied after the vaccine is authorized for children.
The children were not examined for mild, asymptomatic myocarditis, which might cause long-term damage, as by checking troponin levels or echocardiograms, or for blood clotting problems, as by checking platelet counts and D-dimers.
The only FDA-approved product, BioNTech’s Comirnaty (not yet available in the U.S.) is required to do studies on myocarditislasting 5 years.
Monthly safety report cards on the three available vaccines, which have different dosages, are supposedly required, but none have been produced or released.
The claim of 91% relative effectiveness against symptomatic COVID in children is based on 16 cases of COVID in the placebo group and three cases in the vaccinated group over the brief follow-up period. This is an absolute risk reduction of about 2%.
We do not and cannot know the long-term effects on cancer, fertility, or autoimmune diseases. “But we’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes,” stated committee member Dr. Eric Rubin, physician at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, immunology professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and current editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. The alternative to giving a product to most of an entire generation is animal studies or restricting use to a defined group most likely to benefit, with close follow-up.
The dosage for children is one-third the adult dose. Dosage in pediatrics is generally determined by weight. Not all children weigh the same, and their weight does not triple between age 11.9 and 12.0 years.
The COVID products are not shown to interrupt infection and transmission. Masking and distancing are still being recommended or required for adults. Thus, hopes for a return to normalcy once vaccinated are misplaced.
To give truly informed consent, parents need complete information about possible side effects, such as the outcome for Maddy de Garay, a 12-year-old whose public-spirited parents enrolled her in a trial. Post-shot, she experienced excruciating pain and a 2-month hospitalization, and is now in a wheelchair. Pfizer has not acknowledged a connection to the shot. The reaction may be “extremely rare,” but many would decline to take even a 1-in-1 million chance of this outcome.
Several Nordic countries have paused the use of COVID vaccines in persons under the age of 30. Persons at low risk for COVID complications are more likely to die from the shot than from COVID.
Dr. Harvey Risch, Yale epidemiologist, stated that he would home-school his children if public schools mandated this vaccine.
No one should administer a COVID shot to a child unless parents have given fully informed, completely voluntary consent, without threats or inducements.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Mt. Hebron Missionary Baptist Church in Garland, Texas, is reportedly participating with the U.S. Government by injecting young children with COVID-19 gene altering shots.
CBS 11 is reporting that the church sponsored a Halloween event where nurses were on site to inject young children, and this was even before the shots were given emergency use authorization for children ages 5 to 11.
Even worse, the FDA’s authorization is for smaller doses for this age group, but nurses at the church allegedly injected young children with the full adult dosage
It’s not uncommon to see vaccination opportunities at events around North Texas, but this weekend in Garland, a Trunk or Treat went very wrong.
Now, a family wants answers. Their 6-year-old son, and a neighbor’s 7-years-old son mistakenly received adult doses of the COVID-19 vaccine at a pop up clinic run by the City of Garland’s health department.
It happened Sunday, Oct. 31 at Mount Hebron Missionary Baptist Church when nurses running the clinic recommended the shot to the families of the two boys, claiming that they were eligible.
The families were then given a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine consent form, indicating the same.
Though on Sunday, the vaccine had yet to be approved by the CDC for children aged 5-11.
“They asked us our kids ages, and so we told them 4 and 6, and they said ‘the 6-year-old can obviously get it if you’d like to go ahead and do that,’ said Julian Gonzalez, the parent of the 6-year-old.
“Going off their confidence and what we read [on the form] we were all for it,” he said.
It wasn’t until Monday that the Gonzalez family, and the family of the 7-year-old, received a call from the Garland Health Department letting them know not only were the two boys not supposed to get the vaccine, but that they each received adult doses three times the recommended amount.
“We found out after the fact that the vials for the children’s vaccine should have been different, the needles should have been different…it should have been labeled specifically for kids so…where did that decision come from? Who was it that told them they could go ahead and offer it?” Gonzalez said.
The City of Garland released the following statement on the matter:
“The City of Garland Health Department (GHD) is reporting that two children under the age of 12 were administered doses of the Pfizer vaccine in error this weekend. GHD officials are in communication with the parents of the children involved, who are monitoring the children for side effects. GHD also has reported the incident to state health officials and are further investigating the circumstances leading up to the error. The safety and privacy of our patients is always our top priority. Due to patient privacy, we cannot share additional information at this time.”
Gonzales says his son experienced moderate side effects yesterday but today is feeling better.
Fortunately the family’s pediatrician says he will likely be okay, but for now they’re monitoring his condition.
The state of the other boy is unknown.
Still, Gonzalez said he’s frustrated and scared.
“We’re just on edge completely until we see this through.” (Source.)
Here is their video report that we have put up on our Rumble and Bitchute channels.
As I have been documenting since last year, the American Corporate Christian Church is thoroughly corrupt. And now many of them are working with the CDC and local health departments getting paid to run “vaccine clinics” right in their churches.
And your President Joe Biden truly appreciates all of these pastors and churches helping out as the White House just announced today that so far over 900,000 children between the ages of 5 and 11 have now been injected.
I am sure this never would have been possible without the cooperation of the American Christian Corporate Church and their pastors.
There is at least one Christian Church in Idaho, however, that is not doing their part and instead is being accused of spreading “misinformation” and has been labeled by the corporate media as “ultra-conservative.”
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
A newly released document shows that drug giant Pfizer added a “secret” heart attack drug to the children’s version of its Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee that voted 17-0 to approve the jabs for children as young as five was notified that the children’s formulation of the drug contains tromethamine (Tris), a chemical that reduces blood acidity and stabilizes people who have suffered a heart attack.
“Each dose of this formulation contains 10 ?g (micrograms) of a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (mRNA) encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 that is formulated in lipid particles and supplied as a frozen suspension in multiple dose vials,” the “vaccine formulation” page of the document explains.
“To provide a vaccine with an improved stability profile, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine for use in children 5-11 years of age uses tromethamine (Tris) buffer instead of the phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) as used in the previous formulation and excludes sodium chloride and potassium chloride.”
This “new formulation,” the document further reads, must be stored at a different temperature than the adult version of the injection.
Without so much as a second thought concerning this ingredient change, the FDA granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for this new drug to be administered to children as young as five.
This FDA briefing document was titled “EUA amendment request for Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for use in children 5 through 11 years of age,” and was given to the advisory committee prior to its vote.
FDA needs to be defunded and disbanded
Now, many want to know why Pfizer felt the need to replace PBS with Tris in the children’s version of its Fauci Flu jab. Does the company know that without it, “fully vaccinated” children will likely experience visible heart attacks? Is Tris being added to these children’s vials to try to cover up the cardiovascular events that they cause, or at least minimize them? Why is none of this being reported by the mainstream media?
There are many questions without answers. And since so few people are asking questions in the first place, there may never be any answers given unless the people start demanding them.
The FDA claims that it conducted a “thorough and transparent evaluation of the data,” but how can this be when the entire jab formula was changed under the cover of darkness?
According to The Exposé, there is “overwhelming evidence against the safety of the vaccine and now a change in the formula used in clinical trials EUA should never have been granted.”
Among the many side effects caused by Tris are respiratory depression, local irritation, tissue inflammation, injection site infection, febrile response, chemical phlebitis, venospasm (vein spasms), hypervolemia, IV thrombosis, extravasation (with possible necrosis and sloughing of tissues), transient decreases in blood glucose concentrations, hypoglycemia and hepatic necrosis with infusion via low-lying umbilical venous catheters.
These adverse events are far worse than a few COVID sniffles, assuming a child develops symptoms at all (spoiler alert: most children don’t).
“They are changing the jab recipe all the time, as it is experimental, for all age groups,” wrote one commenter at the Exposé. “If nobody can take legal action against the pharma companies then what is going to stop them? The answer is us.”
One person pointed out that Tris is a synthetic skin care additive that is considered to be an “irritant.”
“Sounds delightful,” that person joked. “Just what you want flowing around your body, through your heart, lungs and so on.”
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The most powerful private financial interests in the world, under the cover of COP26, have developed a plan to transform the global financial system by fusing with institutions like the World Bank and using them to further erode national sovereignty in the developing world.
On Wednesday, an “industry-led and UN-convened” alliance of private banking and financial institutions announced plans at the COP26 conference to overhaul the role of global and regional financial institutions, including the World Bank and IMF, as part of a broader plan to “transform” the global financial system.
The officially stated purpose of this proposed overhaul, per alliance members, is to promote the transition to a “net zero” economy. However, the group’s proposed “reimagining” of international financial institutions, according to their recently published “progress report,” would also move to merge these institutions with the private-banking interests that compose the alliance; create a new system of “global financial governance”; and erode national sovereignty among developing countries by forcing them to establish business environments deemed “friendly” to the interests of alliance members. In other words, the powerful banking interests that compose this group are pushing to recreate the entire global financial system for their benefit under the guise of promoting sustainability.
This alliance, called the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), was launched in April by John Kerry, US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate Change; Janet Yellen, US Secretary of the Treasury and former chair of the Federal Reserve; and Mark Carney, UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance and former chair of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada. Carney, who is also the UK prime minister’s Finance Advisor for the COP26 conference, currently cochairs the alliance with US billionaire and former mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg.
GFANZ Leadership; Source: GFANZ
On its creation, GFANZ stated that it would “provide a forum for strategic coordination among the leadership of finance institutions from across the finance sector to accelerate the transition to a net zero economy” and “mobilize the trillions of dollars necessary” to accomplish the group’s zero emissions goals. At the time of the alliance’s launch, UK prime minister Boris Johnson described GFANZ as “uniting the world’s banks and financial institutions behind the global transition to net zero,” while John Kerry noted that “the largest financial players in the world recognize energy transition represents a vast commercial opportunity.” In analyzing those two statements together, it seems clear that GFANZ has united the world’s most powerful private banks and financial institutions behind what it sees, first and foremost, as “a vast commercial opportunity,” the exploitation of which it is marketing as a “planetary imperative.”
GFANZ is composed of several “subsector alliances,” including the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAM), the Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance (NZAOA), and the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA). Together, they command a formidable part of global private banking and finance interests, with the NZBA alone currently representing 43 percent of all global banking assets. However, the “largest financial players” who dominate GFANZ include the CEOs of BlackRock, Citi, Bank of America, Banco Santander, and HSBC, as well as David Schwimmer, CEO of the London Stock Exchange Group and Nili Gilbert, chair of the Investment Committee of the David Rockefeller Fund.
Notably, another Rockefeller-connected entity, the Rockefeller Foundation, recently played a pivotal role in the creation of Natural Asset Corporations (NACs) in September. These NACs seek to create a new asset class that would put the natural world, as well as the ecological processes that underpin all life, up for sale under the guise of “protecting” them. Principals of GFANZ, including BlackRock’s Larry Fink, have long been enthusiastic about the prospects of NACs and other related efforts to financialize the natural world and he has also played a key role in marketing such financialization as necessary to combat climate change.
As part of COP26, GFANZ— a key group at that conference—is publishing a plan aimed at scaling “private capital flows to emerging and developing economies.” Per the alliance’s press release, this plan focuses on “the development of country platforms to connect the now enormous private capital committed to net zero with country projects, scaling blended finance through MDBs [multilateral development banks] and developing high integrity, credible global carbon markets.” The press release notes that this “enormous private capital” is money that alliance members seek to invest in emerging and developing countries, estimated at over $130 trillion, and that—in order to deploy these trillions in investment—“the global financial system is being transformed” by this very alliance in coordination with the group that convened them, the United Nations.
Proposing a Takeover
Details of GFANZ’s plan to deploy trillions of member investments into emerging markets and developing countries was published in the alliance’s inaugural “Progress Report,” the release of which was timed to coincide with the COP26 conference. The report details the alliance’s “near-term work plan and ambitions,” which the alliance succinctly summarizes as a “program of work to transform the financial system.”
The report notes that the alliance has moved from the “commitment” stage to the “engagement” stage, with the main focus of the engagement stage being the “mobilization of private capital into emerging markets and developing countries through private-sector leadership and public-private collaboration.” In doing so, per the report, GFANZ seeks to create “an international financial architecture” that will increase levels of private investment from alliance members in those economies. Their main objectives in this regard revolve around the creation of “ambitious country platforms” and increased collaboration between MDBs and the private financial sector.
Per GFANZ, a “country platform” is defined as a mechanism that convenes and aligns “stakeholders,” that is, a mechanism for public-private partnership/stakeholder capitalism, “around a specific issue or geography.” Examples offered include Mike Bloomberg’s Climate Finance Leadership Initiative (CFLI), which is partnered with Goldman Sachs and HSBC among other private-sector institutions. While framed as being driven by “stakeholders,” existing examples of “country platforms” offered by the GFANZ are either private sector-led initiatives, like the CFLI, or public-private partnerships that are dominated by powerful multinational corporations and billionaires. As recently explained by journalist and researcher Iain Davis, these “stakeholder capitalism” mechanism models, despite being presented as offering a “more responsible” form of capitalism, allow corporations and private entities to participate in forming the regulations that govern their own markets and giving them a greatly increased role in political decision making by placing them on an equal footing with national governments. It is essentially a creative way of marketing “corporatism,” the definition of fascism infamously supplied by Italian dictator Benito Mussolini.
In addition to the creation of “corporatist” “country platforms” that focus on specific areas and/or issues in the developing world, GFANZ aims to also further “corporatize” multilateral development banks (MDBs) and development finance institutions (DFIs) in order to better fulfill the investment goals of alliance members. Per the alliance, this is described as increasing “MDB-private sector collaboration.” The GFANZ report notes that “MDBs play a critical role in helping to grow investment flows” in the developing world. MDBs, like the World Bank, have long been criticized for accomplishing this task by trapping developing nations in debt and then using that debt to force those nations to deregulate markets (specifically financial markets), privatize state assets and implement unpopular austerity policies. The GFANZ report makes it clear that the alliance now seeks to use these same, controversial tactics of MDBs by forcing even greater deregulation on developing countries to facilitate “green” investments from alliance members.
The report explicitly states that MDBs should be used to prompt developing nations “to create the right high-level, cross-cutting enabling environments” for alliance members’ investments in those nations. The significantly greater levels of private-capital investment, which are needed to reach net zero per GFANZ, require that MDBs are used to prompt developing nations to “establish investment-friendly business environments; a replicable framework for deploying private capital investments; and pipelines of bankable investment opportunities.” GFANZ then notes that “private capital and investment will flow to these projects if governments and policymakers create the appropriate conditions,” that is, enable environments for private-sector investments.
In other words, through the proposed increase in private-sector involvement in MDBs, such as the World Bank and regional development banks, alliance members seek to use MDBs to globally impose massive and extensive deregulation on developing countries by using the decarbonization push as justification. No longer must MDBs entrap developing nations in debt to force policies that benefit foreign and multinational private-sector entities, as climate change-related justifications can now be used for the same ends.
BlackRock CEO and GFANZ principal Larry Fink talks to CNBC during COP26. Source: CNBC
This new modality for MDBs, along with their fusion with the private sector, is ultimately what GFANZ proposes in terms of “reimagining” these institutions. GFANZ principal and BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, during a COP26 panel that took place on November 2, explicitly referred to the plan to overhaul these institutions when he said: “If we’re going to be serious about climate change in the emerging world, we’re going to have to really focus on the reimagination of the World Bank and the IMF.”
“They are the senior lender, and not enough private capital’s coming into the emerging world today because of the risks associated with the political risk, investing in brownfield investments — if we are serious about elevating investment capital in the emerging world. . . . I’m urging the owners of those institutions, the equity owners, to focus on how we reimagine these institutions and rethink their charter.”
GFANZ’s proposed plans to reimagine MDBs are particularly alarming given how leaked US military documents show that such banks are considered to be essentially “financial weapons” that have been used as “financial instruments and diplomatic instruments of US national power” as well as instruments of what those same documents refer to as the “current global governance system” that are used to force developing countries to adopt policies they otherwise would not.
In addition, given Fink’s statements, it should not be surprising that the GFANZ report notes that their effort to establish “country platforms” and alter the functioning and charters of MDBs is a key component of implementing preplanned recommendations aimed at “seizing the New Bretton Woods moment” and remaking the “global financial governance” system so that it “promote[s] economic stability and sustainable growth.”
As noted in other GFANZ documents and on their website, the goal of the alliance is the transformation of the global financial system, and it is obvious from member statements and alliance documents that the goal of that transformation is to facilitate the investment goals of alliance members beyond what is currently possible by using climate change-related dictates, rather than debt, as the means to that end.
The UN and the “Quiet Revolution”
In light of GFANZ’s membership and members’ ambitions, some may wonder why the United Nations would back such a predatory initiative. Doesn’t the United Nations, after all, chiefly work with national governments as opposed to private-sector interests?
Though that is certainly the prevailing public perception of the UN, the organization hasfor decades been following a “stakeholder capitalist” model that privileges the private sector and billionaire “philanthropists” over national governments, with the latter merely being tasked with creating “enabling environments” for the policies created by and for the benefit of the former.
Speaking to the World Economic Forum in 1998, Secretary General Kofi Annan made this shift explicit:
“The United Nations has been transformed since we last met here in Davos. The Organization has undergone a complete overhaul that I have described as a ‘quiet revolution.” . . . A fundamental shift has occurred. The United Nations once dealt only with governments. By now we know that peace and prosperity cannot be achieved without partnerships involving governments, international organizations, the business community and civil society. . . . The business of the United Nations involves the businesses of the world.”
With the UN now essentially a vehicle for the promotion of stakeholder capitalism, it is only fitting that it would “convene” and support the efforts of a group like GFANZ to extend that stakeholder capitalist model to other institutions involved in global governance, specifically global financial governance. Allowing GFANZ members, that is, many of the largest private banks and financial institutions in the world, to fuse with MDBs, remake the “global financial governance system,” and gain increased control over political decisions in the emerging world is a banker’s dream come true. To get this far, all they have needed to do was to convince enough of the world’s population that such shifts are necessary due to the perceived urgency of climate change and the need to rapidly decarbonize the economy. Yet, if put into practice, what will result is hardly a “greener” world but a world dominated by a small financial and technocratic elite who are free to profit and pillage from both “natural capital” and “human capital.”
Today, MDBs are used as “instruments of power” that utilize debt to force developing nations to implement policies that benefit foreign interests rather than their own national interests. If GFANZ gets its way, the MDBs of tomorrow will be used to essentially eliminate national sovereignty, privatize the “natural assets” (e.g., ecosystems, ecological processes) of the developing world, and force increasingly technocratic policies designed by global governance institutions and think tanks on ever more disenfranchised populations.
Though GFANZ has cloaked itself in lofty rhetoric of “saving the planet,” its plans ultimately amount to a corporate-led coup that will make the global financial system even more corrupt and predatory and further reduce the sovereignty of national governments in the developing world.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Whitney Webb has been a professional writer, researcher and journalist since 2016. She has written for several websites and, from 2017 to 2020, was a staff writer and senior investigative reporter for Mint Press News. She currently writes for The Last American Vagabond.
Whitney Webb is a frequent contributor to Global Reaearch
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The last 7 Public Health England / UK Health Security Agency ‘Vaccine Surveillance’ report figures on Covid-19 cases show that double vaccinated 40-79 year-olds have now lost 50% of their immune system capability and are consistently losing a further 5% every week (between 3.9% and 8.8%).
Projections, therefore, suggest that 40-79 year-olds will have zero Covid / Viral defense at best, or a form of vaccine-mediated acquired immunodeficiency syndrome at worst, by Christmas and all double vaccinated people over 30 will have completely lost that part of their immune system which deals with Covid-19 within the next 13 weeks.
Then we have this chart which shows the comparison of cases of vaccinated and unvaccinated. Look at the last two columns for the 30 and over. It appears that the vaccinated are catching Delta at a greater rate than the unvaccinated by week 41.
The UK Government’s own data does not support the claims made for Covid-19 Vaccine Safety & Effectiveness, see this.
Double Jabbed die rate is Six Times higher than Unvaccinated, new data finds, see this.
Herland Report: Double Jabbed die rate Six Times higher: Recent data from the U.K. Office of National Statistics reveals people who have been double jabbed against COVID-19 are dying from all causes at a rate six times higher than the unvaccinated.
In the U.S., meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is propping up the official narrative with two manipulated studies — one suggesting the jab reduces all-cause mortality, and another claiming the shot is five times more protective than natural immunity.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
11/3/21 UPDATE: The mother of the 7-year-old mistakenly given an adult COVID vaccine dose, says her son is doing “okay” after getting the shot.
*
It’s not uncommon to see vaccination opportunities at events around North Texas, but this weekend in Garland, a Trunk or Treat went very wrong.
Now, a family wants answers. Their 6-year-old son, and a neighbor’s 7-years-old son mistakenly received adult doses of the COVID-19 vaccine at a pop up clinic run by the City of Garland’s health department.
It happened Sunday, Oct. 31 at Mount Hebron Missionary Baptist Church when nurses running the clinic recommended the shot to the families of the two boys, claiming that they were eligible.
The families were then given a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine consent form, indicating the same.
Though on Sunday, the vaccine had yet to be approved by the CDC for children aged 5-11.
“They asked us our kids ages, and so we told them 4 and 6, and they said ‘the 6-year-old can obviously get it if you’d like to go ahead and do that,’ said Julian Gonzalez, the parent of the 6-year-old.
“Going off their confidence and what we read [on the form] we were all for it,” he said.
It wasn’t until Monday that the Gonzalez family, and the family of the 7-year-old, received a call from the Garland Health Department letting them know not only were the two boys not supposed to get the vaccine, but that they each received adult doses three times the recommended amount.
“We found out after the fact that the vials for the children’s vaccine should have been different, the needles should have been different…it should have been labeled specifically for kids so…where did that decision come from? Who was it that told them they could go ahead and offer it?” Gonzalez said.
The City of Garland released the following statement on the matter:
“The City of Garland Health Department (GHD) is reporting that two children under the age of 12 were administered doses of the Pfizer vaccine in error this weekend. GHD officials are in communication with the parents of the children involved, who are monitoring the children for side effects. GHD also has reported the incident to state health officials and are further investigating the circumstances leading up to the error. The safety and privacy of our patients is always our top priority. Due to patient privacy, we cannot share additional information at this time.”
Gonzales says his son experienced moderate side effects yesterday but today is feeling better.
Fortunately the family’s pediatrician says he will likely be okay, but for now they’re monitoring his condition.
The state of the other boy is unknown.
Still, Gonzalez said he’s frustrated and scared.
“We’re just on edge completely until we see this through.”
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
In the wake of a weak earnings report that sent Moderna shares cratering last week, French health authorities have just released a new advisory recommending that people under 30 don’t get the Moderna vaccine, recommending that they choose the Pfizer-BioNTech jab instead.
The decision draws on recently released data showing that the risk of heart inflammation from Pfizer’s jab “appears to be around five times lesser…compared to Modera’s spikevax jab”, per an opinion published by the HAS.
Cases of myocarditis mostly manifest within 7 days of vaccination, typically after the second dose has been given. Most patients who experience side effects are typically men under the age of 30, according to the HAS, which cited research studies.
HAS acts as an advisor to the French health sector but it doesn’t have the power to ban medicines or vaccines. The recommendation will apply to first and second doses, as well as a any “booster shot” doses available while the agency awaits additional data.
For French men and women aged 30 and over, however, HAS says it sees no problem with administering Moderna’s Spikevax in this group, stating that its efficacy was slightly higher than Pfizer-BioNTech’s jab.
Tiny Iceland, meanwhile, has banned the Moderna jab from being used across the entire population.
Initially. Stockholm announced it would pause the use of Moderna for all of its population born in 1991 or after.
Helsinki followed suit, but halted the jabs for young, male Finns only based on a study involving Finland, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden which found that men under 30 had a slightly higher risk of developing heart inflammation. Oslo also suggested that young Norwegian men should consider choosing Comirnaty, the Pfizer jab, over Moderna’s or any of the other options.
The EMA, the EU’s medical watchdog, has acknowledged that inflammatory conditions like myocarditis and pericarditis, two different types of heart inflammation, should be added to a list of rare side effects from the vaccines that could be potentially harmful.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Something quite extraordinary happened in early November in Kabul.
Taliban interim-Foreign MinisterAmir Khan Muttaqi and Turkmen Foreign Minister Rashid Meredov got together to discuss a range of political and economic issues. Most importantly, they resurrected the legendary soap opera which in the early 2000s I dubbed Pipelineistan: the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline.
Call it yet another remarkable, historical twist in the post-jihad Afghan saga, going back as far as the mid-1990s when the Taliban first took power in Kabul.
In 1997, the Taliban even visited Houston to discuss the pipeline, then known as TAP, as reported in Part 1 of my e-book Forever Wars.
During the second Clinton administration, a consortium led by Unocal – now part of Chevron – was about to embark on what would have been an extremely costly proposition (nearly $8 billion) to undercut Russia in the intersection of Central and South Asia; as well as to smash the competition: the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline.
The Taliban were duly courted – in Houston and in Kabul. A key go-between was the ubiquitous Zalmay Khalilzad, aka ‘Bush’s Afghan,’ in one of his earlier incarnations as Unocal lobbyist-cum-Taliban interlocutor. But then, low oil prices and non-stop haggling over transit fees stalled the project. That was the situation in the run-up to 9/11.
In early 2002, shortly after the Taliban were expelled from power by the American “bombing to democracy” ethos, an agreement to build what was then still billed as TAP (without India), was signed by Ashgabat, Kabul and Islamabad.
The Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline route
As years went by, it was clear that TAPI, which runs for roughly 800 km across Afghan lands and could yield as much as $400 million annually in transit revenue for Kabul’s coffers, would never be built while hostage to a guerrilla environment.
Still, five years ago, Kabul decided to revive TAPI and work started in 2018 – under massive security in Herat, Farah, Nimruz and Helmand provinces, already largely under Taliban control.
At the time, the Taliban said they would not attack TAPI and would even provide their own security. The gas pipeline was to be paired with fiber optic cables – as with the Karakoram Highway in Pakistan – and a railway line from Turkmenistan to Afghanistan.
History never stops playing tricks in the graveyard of empires. Believe it or not, we’re now back to the same situation on the ground as in 1996.
The spanner in the works
If we pay attention to the plot twists in this never-ending Pipelineistan saga, there’s no guarantee whatsoever that TAPI will finally be built. It’s certainly a quadruple win for all involved – including India – and a massive step towards Eurasia’s integration in its Central-South Asian node.
Enter the spanner in the works: ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K), the subsidiary of Daesh in Afghanistan.
Russian intel has known for over a year that the usual suspects have been providing help to ISIS-K, at least indirectly.
Yet now there’s a new element, confirmed by Taliban sources, that quite a few US-trained soldiers of the previous Afghan National Army are incorporating themselves into ISIS-K to fight against the Taliban.
ISIS-K, which sports a global jihadi mindset, has typically viewed the Taliban as a group of dirty nationalists. Earlier jihadi members used to be recruited from the Pakistani Taliban and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). Yet now, apart from former soldiers, they are mostly young, disaffected urban Afghans, westernized by trashy pop culture.
It’s been hard for ISIS-K to establish the narrative that the Taliban are western collaborators – considering that the NATO galaxy continues to antagonize and/or dismiss the new rulers of Kabul.
So the new ISIS-K spin is monomaniac: basically, a strategy of chaos to discredit the Taliban, with an emphasis on the latter being unable to provide security for average Afghans. That is what underlies the recent horrific attacks on Shia mosques and government infrastructure, including hospitals.
In parallel, US President Joe Biden’s “over the horizon” spin, meant to define the alleged American strategy to fight ISIS-K, has not convinced anyone, apart from NATO vassals.
Since its creation in 2015, ISIS-K continues to be financed by the same dodgy sources that fueled chaos in Syria and Iraq. The moniker itself is an attempt to misdirect, a divisive ploy straight out of the CIA’s playbook.
Historic ‘Khorasan’ comes from successive Persian empires, a vast area ranging from Persia and the Caspian all the way to northwest Afghanistan – and has nothing whatsoever to do with Salafi-jihadism and the Wahhabi lunatics who make up the terrorist group’s ranks. Furthermore, these ISIS-K jihadis are based in south-eastern Afghanistan, away from Iran’s borders, so the ‘Khorasan’ label makes zero sense.
Russian, Chinese and Iranian intel operate on the basis that the US ‘withdrawal’ from Afghanistan, as in Syria and Iraq, was not a withdrawal but a repositioning. What’s left is the trademark, undiluted American strategy of chaos executed via both direct (troops stealing Syrian oil) and indirect (ISIS-K) actors.
The scenario is self-evident when one considers that Afghanistan was the precious missing link of China’s New Silk Roads. After the US exit, Afghanistan is not only primed to fully engage with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), but also to become a key node of Eurasia integration as a future full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).
To hedge against these positive developments, the routine practices of the Pentagon and its NATO subsidiary remain in wait in Afghanistan, ready to disrupt political, diplomatic, economic and security progress in the country. We may be now entering a new chapter in the US Hegemony playbook: Closet Forever Wars.
The closely connected SCO
Fifth columnists are tasked with carrying the new imperial message to the West. That’s the case of Rahmatullah Nabil, former head of Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS), “the Afghan intelligence service with close ties to the CIA,” as described by Foreign Policy magazine..
In an interview presented with a series of trademark imperial lies – “law and order is disintegrating,” “Afghanistan has no friends in the international community,” “the Taliban have no diplomatic partners” – Nabil, at least, does not make a complete fool of himself.
He confirms that ISIS-K keeps recruiting, and adds that former Afghan defense/security ops are joining ISIS-K because “they see the Islamic State as a better platform for themselves.”
He’s also correct that the Taliban leadership in Kabul is “afraid the extreme and young generation of their fighters” may join ISIS-K, “which has a regional agenda.”
Russia “playing a double game” is just silly. In presidential envoy Zamir Kabulov, Moscow maintains a first-class interlocutor in constant touch with the Taliban, and would never allow the “resistance,” as in CIA assets, to be based in Tajikistan with an Afghan destabilization agenda.
On Pakistan, it’s correct that Islamabad is “trying to convince the Taliban to include pro-Pakistan technocrats in their system.” But that’s not “in return for lobbying for international recognition.” It’s a matter of responding to the Taliban’s own management needs.
The SCO is very closely connected on what they collectively expect from the Taliban. That includes an inclusive government and no influx of refugees. Uzbekistan, for instance, as the main gateway to Central Asia for Afghanistan, has committed to participating in the reconstruction business.
For its part, Tajikistan announced that China will build a $10 million military base in the geologically spectacular Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region. Countering western hysteria, Dushanbe made sure that the base will essentially host a special rapid reaction unit of the Regional Department for Organized Crime Control, subordinated to Tajikistan’s Minister of Internal Affairs.
That will include around 500 servicemen, several light armored vehicles, and drones. The base is part of a deal between Tajikistan’s Interior Ministry and China’s Ministry of State Security.
The base is a necessary compromise. Tajik President Emomali Rahmon has a serious problem with the Taliban: he refuses to recognize them, and insists on better Tajik representation in a new government in Kabul.
Beijing, for its part, never deviates from its number one priority: preventing Uighurs from the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) by all means from crossing Tajik borders to wreak havoc in Xinjiang.
So all the major SCO players are acting in tandem towards a stable Afghanistan. As for US Think Tankland, predictably, they don’t have much of a strategy, apart from praying for chaos.
*
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.
Featured image: American-trained Afghan forces are defecting to join ISIS-K, in what increasingly looks like a US plan to subvert the war-torn country’s recovery. (Source: The Cradle)
UK lawyer and military veteran Anna De Buisseret urges us to have hope, “because we are going to win this.” Even in times of war, she explains, “you don’t get to experiment on Prisoners Of War.” And that is what our governments are currently doing by imposing experimental jabs and myriad “COVID measures” on domestic populations.
A report by Britain’s Independent confirms that health professionals are being obliged to either accept to be vaccinated or lose their job. This is happening in a large number countries simultaneously, the result of which is absolute chaos in the delivery of health care services. The pattern is similar in numerous countries.
Welcome to the Matrix (i.e. the metaverse), where reality is virtual, freedom is only as free as one’s technological overlords allow, and artificial intelligence is slowly rendering humanity unnecessary, inferior and obsolete.
The casualties and loss of life are nothing short of a nightmarish tragedy. Sadly, athletes who have received the injection are not spared either. Here is a list of some of the young athletes who have died or been hospitalized after being “vaccinated”.
While recent data from the U.K. Office of National Statistics (ONS) reveal people who have been double jabbed against COVID-19 are dying from all causes at a rate six times higher than the unvaccinated, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is propping up the official narrative with a “study” that came to the remarkable conclusion that the COVID shot unbelievably reduces your risk of dying from all causes, which includes accidents (but excluding COVID-19-related deaths).
There is value in examining the growing partnership between China and Russia with a view towards identifying what the latter half of 2021 will bring for these two great powers. Whereas 2020 will invariably be written about in the history books as the darkest year of the devastating Covid-19 pandemic, the arrival of 2021, which held more promise than perhaps any other year since the end of the Second World War, will likely be seen as a huge disappointment, with the pandemic continuing to ravage the world’s citizens and economies.
It has for a while been discussed that China has the World’s largest navy, with 355 ships. Chinese navy-vessels are on average smaller in tonnage than the US Navy – so measured in tonnage, the US Navy is for a short while still largest.
In these posts I try to highlight how our social, cultural and political structures are rigged to reflect the interests of an economic elite and maintain their power. Because the forces that shape those structures are largely invisible – we mainly notice the people and buildings inside these structures – the way power operates can be difficult to describe and to understand.
Over 7,200 physicians and medical scientists worldwide have signed the “Rome Declaration” to alert citizens about the deadly consequences of Covid-19 policy makers’ and medical authorities’ unprecedented behavior; behavior such as denying patient access to lifesaving early treatments, disrupting the sacred, physician-patient relationship and suppressing open scientific discussion for profits and power.
He discusses the 1967 CIA memo which told mainstream media to use the disparaging term “conspiracy theory” to quell all deviation from the official narrative, and how this propaganda technique has continued to function from JFK to 9/11 to Covid-19.
On July 10–11, 2021, regime-change demonstrations of the “colour revolution” type broke out in several cities across Cuba, turning violent in some instances. They were driven mainly by pro-US social media prompts, with some Cuban citizens joining in for legitimate reasons in the context of the current system and not against it.
The so-called “booster shots” for employees at the University Clinic in Münster (UKM) were stopped on Friday. The reason: an unusually large number of side effects were noted. Just hours earlier, the hospital had announced that it would give all 11 000 employees the third vaccination.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
UK lawyer and military veteran Anna De Buisseret urges us to have hope, “because we are going to win this.”
Even in times of war, she explains, “you don’t get to experiment on Prisoners Of War.” And that is what our governments are currently doing by imposing experimental jabs and myriad “COVID measures” on domestic populations.
Our governments and their agencies are committing genocide and crimes against humanity, she explains, and “silence is a crime”. You don’t get to say, “I was following orders.”
Despite the “military grade” psychological warfare that our governments are waging against us, she is confident that “we are going to win” this battle against authoritarian diktats and those amongst us who are guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity.
*
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.
November 10th, 2021 by International Alliance of Physicians and Medical Scientists
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
First published by Global Research on October 30, 2021
***
Over 7,200 physicians and medical scientists worldwide have signed the “Rome Declaration” to alert citizens about the deadly consequences of Covid-19 policy makers’ and medical authorities’ unprecedented behavior; behavior such as denying patient access to lifesaving early treatments, disrupting the sacred, physician-patient relationship and suppressing open scientific discussion for profits and power.
The Declaration was created by physicians and scientists during the Rome Covid Summit, and immediately catalyzed support from doctors around the world. These professionals, many of whom are on the front lines of pandemic treatment, have experienced career threats, character assassination, censorship of scientific papers and research, social media accounts blocked, online search results manipulated, clinical trials and patient observations banned, and their professional history and accomplishments minimized in both academic and mainstream media.
Though the declaration’s signatories are diverse in their specialties, treatment philosophies and medical opinions, they have risen up to take a collective stand against authoritarian measures by corporations, medical associations, and governments and their respective agencies. The objective of the declaration is to reclaim their leadership role in conquering this pandemic.
In concert with the declaration, the signatories have created a “Doctors – and Scientists-only” COVID information platform so that citizens can make informed decisions for their families without interruption, manipulation, politicization, or profiteering from external forces outside of the doctor-patient relationship.
Dr. Robert Malone, architect of the mRNA vaccine platform, reads the Rome Declaration:
Read the Rome Declaration below.
We the physicians of the world, united and loyal to the Hippocratic Oath, recognizing the profession of medicine as we know it is at a crossroad, are compelled to declare the following;
WHEREAS, it is our utmost responsibility and duty to uphold and restore the dignity, integrity, art and science of medicine;
WHEREAS, there is an unprecedented assault on our ability to care for our patients;
WHEREAS, public policy makers have chosen to force a “one size fits all” treatment strategy, resulting in needless illness and death, rather than upholding fundamental concepts of the individualized, personalized approach to patient care which is proven to be safe and more effective;
WHEREAS, physicians and other health care providers working on the front lines, utilizing their knowledge of epidemiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, are often first to identify new, potentially life saving treatments;
WHEREAS, physicians are increasingly being discouraged from engaging in open professional discourse and the exchange of ideas about new and emerging diseases, not only endangering the essence of the medical profession, but more importantly, more tragically, the lives of our patients;
WHEREAS, thousands of physicians are being prevented from providing treatment to their patients, as a result of barriers put up by pharmacies, hospitals, and public health agencies, rendering the vast majority of healthcare providers helpless to protect their patients in the face of disease. Physicians are now advising their patients to simply go home (allowing the virus to replicate) and return when their disease worsens, resulting in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary patient deaths, due to failure-to-treat;
WHEREAS, this is not medicine. This is not care. These policies may actually constitute crimes against humanity.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS:
RESOLVED, that the physician-patient relationship must be restored. The very heart of medicine is this relationship, which allows physicians to best understand their patients and their illnesses, to formulate treatments that give the best chance for success, while the patient is an active participant in their care.
RESOLVED, that the political intrusion into the practice of medicine and the physician/patient relationship must end. Physicians, and all health care providers, must be free to practice the art and science of medicine without fear of retribution, censorship, slander, or disciplinary action, including possible loss of licensure and hospital privileges, loss of insurance contracts and interference from government entities and organizations – which further prevent us from caring for patients in need. More than ever, the right and ability to exchange objective scientific findings, which further our understanding of disease, must be protected.
RESOLVED, that physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments.
RESOLVED, that we invite physicians of the world and all health care providers to join us in this noble cause as we endeavor to restore trust, integrity and professionalism to the practice of medicine.
RESOLVED, that we invite the scientists of the world, who are skilled in biomedical research and uphold the highest ethical and moral standards, to insist on their ability to conduct and publish objective, empirical research without fear of reprisal upon their careers, reputations and livelihoods.
RESOLVED, that we invite patients, who believe in the importance of the physician-patient relationship and the ability to be active participants in their care, to demand access to science-based medical care.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Declaration as of the date first written.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
A report by Britain’s Independent confirms that health professionals are being obliged to either accept to be vaccinated or lose their job.
This is happening in a large number of countries simultaneously, the result of which is absolute chaos in the delivery of health care services.
The pattern is similar in numerous countries.
Who is “advising” the governments?
Who is behind this engineered collapse of State supported health care services?
Michel C. Global Research, November 10, 2021
***
Excerpts from The Independent
Mandatory Covid-19 vaccines could drive out tens of thousands of NHS staff leading to pressure on services, the government has admitted.
A government analysis has predicted 73,000 NHS workers, and 35,000 care workers, will not have had their Covid-19 jab by the time mandatory vaccines come into force on 1 April next year.
It has warned, “any reduction in the numbers of health and social care staff may lead to reduced or delayed services. The health system is currently stretched with an elective waiting list of 5.72 million and high levels of vacancies.”
“If a proportion of staff decides to leave the NHS, this would put pressure on NHS services.”
Official estimates show it may cost the NHS £185 million to replace the healthcare workers lost as a result of the policy, while replacing care workers could cost £86 million.
All NHS staff will be required to have two jabs, under the new rules, but booster jabs will not initially be mandatory. Only staff who do not have face to face contact or have a medical reason are exempt. As of 4 November, 89 per cent of NHS staff had both doses of the Covid vaccine.
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The migrant situation along the Belarus-Poland border is getting heated.
On November 9th, thousands of migrants are sitting at the separation line, with Belarus authorities reportedly attempting to push them into their neighboring country.
Warsaw accused Minsk of trying to spark a major confrontation, with video clips showing hundreds of migrants walking towards the Polish border and some trying to breach the fence using spades and other implements.
Poland accused Belarus of “fully” controlling migrant groups who were attempting to enter Polish territory. Warsaw said they were used for hybrid attacks against the EU country.
Initially, the migrants began to set up tents along the border, showing that they are not going back, and are organizing a sit-in, until they are allowed to pass.
The group, estimated at between three and four thousand people, reportedly consists mostly of Iraqi Kurds.
Migrants attempted to cut a part of a barbed-wire fence, while others attacked the fence with a spade.
The Belarusian state border committee confirmed that many migrants and refugees were moving towards the Polish border. It also said Warsaw, which has stationed more than 12,000 troops in the region, was taking an “inhumane attitude”.
Belarus’ social system is incapable of supporting newcomers that are hoping to survive on social benefits rather than immediately find a job and start contributing. It is not surprising that these migrants want to move further West and not remain. At the same time, there are surely those who have decided to stay and set up shop and attempt to integrate.
Poland in this case is not the final destination of these migrants, but rather a midway point, it is the EU’s eastern border for them, and a way to reach Germany, and the other Western European countries. These are countries with larger communities where they could fit, and they can be taken care of, without the need to actually attempt to adequately integrate into society.
When in Belarus, they would have to adhere to Minsk’s rules, in which actions such as various harassments of local women or other incidents will not be taken as lightly as they are being taken in Germany, for example.
Warsaw is much more conservative, and its values are much closer to those of its eastern neighbor than to those of Western Europe.
The situation is similar in the other Baltic countries. Lithuania said it was moving additional troops to its border with Belarus to prepare for a possible surge in attempted crossings from the latter, while Latvia described the situation as “alarming”.
Finally, the governments are fully aware that offloading these migrants to Germany or other Western country is a feat in itself, as they, too, are beginning to understand the failure of the “multi-kulti” agenda.
After all, videos show that most of these migrants are clean, 20–30-year-old males who do not appear to be running from certain death, tattered from the long road to sanctuary. They have seen the example of a carefree life, free of responsibility and with a relative lack of any rules that they compatriots are enjoying in the EU. Germany and the other Western European countries are already disillusioned that workers are coming, it’s only more mouths to feed.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Do we want 5G antennas throughout our cities and next to homes, and hundreds of thousands of satellites polluting the heavens? Did we ask for a world where every person, “thing”, event, and moment in time is connected to the internet?
If we don’t want to be radiated, controlled and monitored 24/7, now is the time to Stop 5G.
Wired technologies are safe to us and other life forms with whom we share this precious planet.
Do we want 5G, the Great Enabler or Safe Wired Technology? The choice is ours.
If we don’t want to be controlled and monitored 24/7, now is the time to Stop 5G.
5G will bring unprecedented levels of wireless exposure 24/7 to our homes, communities, and to all living beings. Hundreds of scientists and public health experts are demanding a moratorium on the rollout of 5G. See why – read this and this.
As digitalization spirals out of control in an ever-expanding web of technology gone rogue, perhaps it’s time to consider whether the harms outweigh the hoped for, and hyped about benefits.
HEALTH: 5G is a massive biological experiment inflicted on the public without informed consent, with no prior safety testing, and with credible scientific evidence indicating this technology will prove harmful to health and potentially fatal to some.
WILDLIFE: Recently reported research shows current levels of artificial radiation are already interfering with navigation, breeding, food, migration, and survival.
EWASTE: With the Internet of Things, household items such as washing machines, mattresses, tea kettles, plant-waterers etc. join the ranks of e-waste. Will the Earth be able to “digest” this fast-growing volume of e-waste produced from both manufacturing and disposal? Also see, https://www.ourweb.tech/letters/
CONFLICT MINERALS: Nearly 6 million people have died in the Democratic Republic of Congo, due to our appetite for rare earth minerals used in all technology. “They’re digging in trenches and laboring in lakes, hunting for treasure in a playground from Hell. Hard enough for an adult man. Unthinkable for a child.” CBS News finds children mining cobalt for batteries in the Congo.
LIABILITY: Telecoms warn shareholders that revenues could be negatively impacted by health claims. No one wants to assume financial responsibility for loss of health, injury, or property devaluation
Microwaving Our Planet
In an effort to connect every “thing”, event, and place on the planet to the internet, plans are for launching over 100,000 satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to complement terrestrial 5G.
Dangers posed by satellites include space debris, collisions, depletion of the ozone layer; risk of devastating cyber attacks, pollution from rocket launches and from “dead” satellites burning up in the atmosphere; plutonium and uranium spills from nuclear-powered satellites and space vehicles; increase in already harmful levels of EMF radiation, permanent compromise of the night sky, interference with astronomical research and weather forecasting; effects on wildlife, yet more tracking, surveillance and erosion of privacy; vastly more energy consumption, and the “promise” of increasing the lethality of war.
There’s a safer alternative.
WIRED TECHNOLOGY: Wired technologies such as fiber or coaxial cable are faster, more reliable, resilient, energy-efficient, and more easily defended from cyber-attacks. Above all, wired technologies are significantly less hazardous to our health and would better ensure the survival of other life forms with whom we share this precious planet.
Or Maybe We Would Prefer a World Where…
The right to live safely in one’s home and neighborhood takes precedence over industry profits, and communities choose what infrastructure best suits their demographic.
Satellite deployment is halted, and we can once again partake of our common heritage – the unobstructed skies.
5G, 6G or any other “G” is replaced by safe technology that has undergone scrutiny to ensure the health and well-being of all life on the planet.
People are connected face-to-face and heart-to-heart, and not consumed by ubiquitous virtual connectivity?
We connect to the internet only when and where we choose, and primarily through hard-wired technology, not wirelessly through the air.
Digital orphans are reunited with their parents, and tech addiction becomes a relic of the past.
The increasingly frenetic pace of hyper-connectivity is slowed down so we can once again connect to our own humanity.
The pursuit of “faster”, “bigger” and “more” is replaced with contentment with “just enough”?
Respect for life takes precedence over corporate self-gain.
In short … a future that respects and protects all life on this planet.
It’s time WE decide what kind of world we wish to inhabit…and not telecom or nation states driven by an insatiable appetite for profit, power, and control.
We call on all those who truly desire Freedom to heed the growing voice of scientists, medical doctors, engineers, and others who warn we must halt the “race to 5G” and consciously chart a wiser and safer course into the future.
Stop5G International Declaration
We envision and seek to ensure a world where 5G, 6G or any other “G” is replaced by safe technology that has undergone scrutiny to ensure the health and well-being of all life on the planet.We envision and seek to ensure a world where respect for life takes precedence over corporate self-gain.We envision and seek to ensure a world where people are connected face-to-face and heart-to-heart, and not consumed by ubiquitous virtual connectivity.We envision and seek to ensure a world where the increasingly frenetic pace of hyper-connectivity is slowed down so we can once again connect to our own humanity.We envision and seek to ensure a world where the pursuit of “faster”, “bigger” and “more” is replaced with contentment from “just enough”In short … a future that respects and protects all life on this planet.We call on all world governments to heed the growing voice of scientists, medical doctors, engineers, and others who warn we must halt the “race to 5G” and consciously chart a wiser and safer course into the future.
In part 2 Kate offers resources and action items.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Welcome to the Matrix (i.e. the metaverse), where reality is virtual, freedom is only as free as one’s technological overlords allow, and artificial intelligence is slowly rendering humanity unnecessary, inferior and obsolete.
Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, sees this digital universe—the metaverse—as the next step in our evolutionary transformation from a human-driven society to a technological one.
Yet while Zuckerberg’s vision for this digital frontier has been met with a certain degree of skepticism, the truth—as journalist Antonio García Martínez concludes—is that we’re already living in the metaverse.
The metaverse is, in turn, a dystopian meritocracy, where freedom is a conditional construct based on one’s worthiness and compliance.
In a meritocracy, rights are privileges, afforded to those who have earned them. There can be no tolerance for independence or individuality in a meritocracy, where political correctness is formalized, legalized and institutionalized. Likewise, there can be no true freedom when the ability to express oneself, move about, engage in commerce and function in society is predicated on the extent to which you’re willing to “fit in.”
We are almost at that stage now.
Consider that in our present virtue-signaling world where fascism disguises itself as tolerance, the only way to enjoy even a semblance of freedom is by opting to voluntarily censor yourself, comply, conform and march in lockstep with whatever prevailing views dominate.
Fail to do so—by daring to espouse “dangerous” ideas or support unpopular political movements—and you will find yourself shut out of commerce, employment, and society: Facebook will ban you, Twitter will shut you down, Instagram will de-platform you, and your employer will issue ultimatums that force you to choose between your so-called freedoms and economic survival.
This is exactly how Corporate America plans to groom us for a world in which “we the people” are unthinking, unresistant, slavishly obedient automatons in bondage to a Deep State policed by computer algorithms.
Science fiction has become fact.
Twenty-some years after the Wachowskis’ iconic film, The Matrix, introduced us to a futuristic world in which humans exist in a computer-simulated non-reality powered by authoritarian machines—a world where the choice between existing in a denial-ridden virtual dream-state or facing up to the harsh, difficult realities of life comes down to a blue pill or a red pill—we stand at the precipice of a technologically-dominated matrix of our own making.
We are living the prequel to The Matrix with each passing day, falling further under the spell of technologically-driven virtual communities, virtual realities and virtual conveniences managed by artificially intelligent machines that are on a fast track to replacing human beings and eventually dominating every aspect of our lives.
In The Matrix, computer programmer Thomas Anderson a.k.a. hacker Neo is wakened from a virtual slumber by Morpheus, a freedom fighter seeking to liberate humanity from a lifelong hibernation state imposed by hyper-advanced artificial intelligence machines that rely on humans as an organic power source. With their minds plugged into a perfectly crafted virtual reality, few humans ever realize they are living in an artificial dream world.
Neo is given a choice: to take the red pill, wake up and join the resistance, or take the blue pill, remain asleep and serve as fodder for the powers-that-be.
Most people opt for the blue pill.
In our case, the blue pill—a one-way ticket to a life sentence in an electronic concentration camp—has been honey-coated to hide the bitter aftertaste, sold to us in the name of expediency and delivered by way of blazingly fast Internet, cell phone signals that never drop a call, thermostats that keep us at the perfect temperature without our having to raise a finger, and entertainment that can be simultaneously streamed to our TVs, tablets and cell phones.
Yet we are not merely in thrall with these technologies that were intended to make our lives easier. We have become enslaved by them.
Look around you. Everywhere you turn, people are so addicted to their internet-connected screen devices—smart phones, tablets, computers, televisions—that they can go for hours at a time submerged in a virtual world where human interaction is filtered through the medium of technology.
This is not freedom. This is not even progress.
This is technological tyranny and iron-fisted control delivered by way of the surveillance state, corporate giants such as Google and Facebook, and government spy agencies such as the National Security Agency.
So consumed are we with availing ourselves of all the latest technologies that we have spared barely a thought for the ramifications of our heedless, headlong stumble towards a world in which our abject reliance on internet-connected gadgets and gizmos is grooming us for a future in which freedom is an illusion.
Yet it’s not just freedom that hangs in the balance. Humanity itself is on the line.
If ever Americans find themselves in bondage to technological tyrants, we will have only ourselves to blame for having forged the chains through our own lassitude, laziness and abject reliance on internet-connected gadgets and gizmos that render us wholly irrelevant.
Indeed, we’re fast approaching Philip K. Dick’s vision of the future as depicted in the film Minority Report. There, police agencies apprehend criminals before they can commit a crime, driverless cars populate the highways, and a person’s biometrics are constantly scanned and used to track their movements, target them for advertising, and keep them under perpetual surveillance.
Cue the dawning of the Age of the Internet of Things (IoT), in which internet-connected “things” monitor your home, your health and your habits in order to keep your pantry stocked, your utilities regulated and your life under control and relatively worry-free.
By the end of 2018, “there were an estimated 22 billion internet of things connected devices in use around the world… Forecasts suggest that by 2030 around 50 billion of these IoT devices will be in use around the world, creating a massive web of interconnected devices spanning everything from smartphones to kitchen appliances.”
As the technologies powering these devices have become increasingly sophisticated, they have also become increasingly widespread, encompassing everything from toothbrushes and lightbulbs to cars, smart meters and medical equipment.
Between driverless cars that completely lacking a steering wheel, accelerator, or brake pedal, and smart pills embedded with computer chips, sensors, cameras and robots, we are poised to outpace the imaginations of science fiction writers such as Philip K. Dick and Isaac Asimov. (By the way, there is no such thing as a driverless car. Someone or something will be driving, but it won’t be you.)
These Internet-connected techno gadgets include smart light bulbs that discourage burglars by making your house look occupied, smart thermostats that regulate the temperature of your home based on your activities, and smart doorbells that let you see who is at your front door without leaving the comfort of your couch.
Nest, Google’s suite of smart home products, has been at the forefront of the “connected” industry, with such technologically savvy conveniences as a smart lock that tells your thermostat who is home, what temperatures they like, and when your home is unoccupied; a home phone service system that interacts with your connected devices to “learn when you come and go” and alert you if your kids don’t come home; and a sleep system that will monitor when you fall asleep, when you wake up, and keep the house noises and temperature in a sleep-conducive state.
The aim of these internet-connected devices, as Nest proclaims, is to make “your house a more thoughtful and conscious home.” For example, your car can signal ahead that you’re on your way home, while Hue lights can flash on and off to get your attention if Nest Protect senses something’s wrong. Your coffeemaker, relying on data from fitness and sleep sensors, will brew a stronger pot of coffee for you if you’ve had a restless night.
Yet given the speed and trajectory at which these technologies are developing, it won’t be long before these devices are operating entirely independent of their human creators, which poses a whole new set of worries. As technology expert Nicholas Carr notes, “As soon as you allow robots, or software programs, to act freely in the world, they’re going to run up against ethically fraught situations and face hard choices that can’t be resolved through statistical models. That will be true of self-driving cars, self-flying drones, and battlefield robots, just as it’s already true, on a lesser scale, with automated vacuum cleaners and lawnmowers.”
Moreover, it’s not just our homes and personal devices that are being reordered and reimagined in this connected age: it’s our workplaces, our health systems, our government, our bodies and our innermost thoughts that are being plugged into a matrix over which we have no real control.
It is expected that by 2030, we will all experience The Internet of Senses (IoS), enabled by Artificial Intelligence (AI), Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), 5G, and automation. The Internet of Senses relies on connected technology interacting with our senses of sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch by way of the brain as the user interface. As journalist Susan Fourtane explains:
Many predict that by 2030, the lines between thinking and doing will blur. Fifty-nine percent of consumers believe that we will be able to see map routes on VR glasses by simply thinking of a destination… By 2030, technology is set to respond to our thoughts, and even share them with others… Using the brain as an interface could mean the end of keyboards, mice, game controllers, and ultimately user interfaces for any digital device. The user needs to only think about the commands, and they will just happen. Smartphones could even function without touch screens.
In other words, the IoS will rely on technology being able to access and act on your thoughts.
1: Thoughts become action: using the brain as the interface, for example, users will be able to see map routes on VR glasses by simply thinking of a destination.
2: Sounds will become an extension of the devised virtual reality: users could mimic anyone’s voice realistically enough to fool even family members.
3: Real food will become secondary to imagined tastes. A sensory device for your mouth could digitally enhance anything you eat, so that any food can taste like your favorite treat.
4: Smells will become a projection of this virtual reality so that virtual visits, to forests or the countryside for instance, would include experiencing all the natural smells of those places.
5: Total touch: Smartphones with screens will convey the shape and texture of the digital icons and buttons they are pressing.
6: Merged reality: VR game worlds will become indistinguishable from physical reality by 2030.
This is the metaverse, wrapped up in the siren-song of convenience and sold to us as the secret to success, entertainment and happiness.
It’s a false promise, a wicked trap to snare us, with a single objective: total control.
Orwell’s masterpiece, 1984, portrays a global society of total control in which people are not allowed to have thoughts that in any way disagree with the corporate state.
There is no personal freedom, and advanced technology has become the driving force behind a surveillance-driven society. Snitches and cameras are everywhere. And people are subject to the Thought Police, who deal with anyone guilty of thought crimes.
The government, or “Party,” is headed by Big Brother, who appears on posters everywhere with the words: “Big Brother is watching you.”
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
This is one of several reports of vaccinated athletes developing serious health problems.
Below the article and compilation by Dr. Marc Trozzi
What is worth noting is that none of the media reports regarding the athletes have raised the issue of the vaccine.
***
For our well-informed reader who knows that the Covid-19 experimental biologics are not safe, it’s no surprise that many people have died or suffered life altering damages after being coerced into being injected.
The casualties and loss of life are nothing short of a nightmarish tragedy.
Sadly, athletes who have received the injection are not spared either. Here is a list of some of the young athletes who have died or been hospitalized after being “vaccinated”.
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Recent data from the U.K. Office of National Statistics reveals people who have been double jabbed against COVID-19 are dying from all causes at a rate six times higher than the unvaccinated
In the U.S., meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is propping up the official narrative with two manipulated studies — one suggesting the jab reduces all-cause mortality, and another claiming the shot is five times more protective than natural immunity
Both studies are of questionable quality and have several problems, including selection of time and date ranges that allow them to pretend that the COVID shots are safer and more effective than they really are
According to all-cause mortality statistics, the number of Americans who died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 16% higher than 2018 (the pre-COVID year with the highest all-cause mortality) and 18% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019. Did COVID-19 raise the death toll despite mass vaccination, or are people dying at increased rates because of the COVID jabs?
CDC data reveal that while the number of hospitalized patients with natural immunity fell sharply over the summer, when the delta variant took over, the number of vaccinated people being hospitalized soared, from three per month on average during the spring to more than 100 a month in late summer. Since these vaccinated patients were less than six months from their second dose, they should have been at or near maximum immunity
*
While recent data from the U.K. Office of National Statistics (ONS) reveal people who have been double jabbed against COVID-19 are dying from all causes at a rate six times higher than the unvaccinated,1the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is propping up the official narrative with a “study”2 that came to the remarkable conclusion that the COVID shot unbelievably reduces your risk of dying from all causes, which includes accidents (but excluding COVID-19-related deaths). As reported by CNN Health, October 22, 2021:3
“The research team was trying to demonstrate that the three authorized Covid-19 vaccines are safe and they say their findings clearly demonstrate that. ‘Recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Janssen vaccines had lower non-COVID-19 mortality risk than did the unvaccinated comparison groups,’ the researchers wrote in the weekly report4 of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The team studied 6.4 million people who had been vaccinated against Covid-19 and compared them to 4.6 million people who had received flu shots in recent years but who had not been vaccinated against coronavirus.
They filtered out anyone who had died from Covid-19 or after a recent positive coronavirus test … People who got two doses of Pfizer vaccines were 34% as likely to die of non-coronavirus causes in the following months as unvaccinated people, the study found.
People who got two doses of Moderna vaccine were 31% as likely to die as unvaccinated people, and those who got Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen vaccine were 54% as likely to die …”
Two key takeaways from those paragraphs are 1) the researchers admit they intended to demonstrate that the shots are safe and effective, and stats can be manipulated to find what you want to find, and 2) people who got the Janssen shot did in fact have a higher death rate than the unvaccinated (54% likelihood, compared to the unvaxxed).
Are the Shots Reducing All-Cause Mortality?
The researchers hypothesize that people who get the COVID jab may be healthier overall than those who abstain, and have healthier lifestyles. In my view, this is classic Orwellian doublespeak, as most of the brainwashed don’t understand the fundamentals of healthy behavior.
I suspect their new propaganda has more to do with the fact that they only looked at data through May 31, 2021. By mid-April, an estimated 31% of American adults had received one or more shots.5As of June 15, 48.7% were fully “vaccinated.”6 So, we can assume that by the end of May, somewhere in the neighborhood of 45% of eligible Americans were double jabbed, give or take a couple of percentage points.
The reason I suspect statistical tomfoolery is because this is precisely how the CDC invented the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” myth, where they claimed 99% of COVID-19 deaths and 95% of COVID-related hospitalizations were occurring among the unvaccinated.7
To achieve those statistics, the CDC included hospitalization and mortality data from January through June 2021, a timeframe during which the vaccinated were still in a minority.
Here, we again see them use a seven-month span of time when vaccination rates were low. More importantly, however, is that the chosen cutoff date also obscures a rapid rise in vaccine-related deaths reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).
Look at the graph below, obtained from OpenVAERS mortality reports page.8 As you can see, reports of deaths following the COVID jab peaked right at the beginning of April 2021, then dropped down again during the month of April. Interestingly enough, the study notes that the daily vaccination rate has declined by 78% since April 13, 2021.
However, while the daily vaccination rate has plummeted since April, reported deaths have remained high and relatively steady. Could this be a hint that people are dying from shots they received earlier in the year?
As of January 1, 2021, only 0.5% of the U.S. population had received a COVID shot, so comparing death rates of the vaxxed and unvaxxed in December 2020 and January 2021 may not be all that fruitful. Why not include July, August and September in the analysis instead?
As you can see, reported deaths were significantly elevated during these months, compared to December and January. And, while not shown in that graph, between September 3, 2021, and October 22, 2021, the total cumulative reported death toll shot up from 7,6629,10 to 17,619.11 In other words, it more than doubled in about seven weeks — a timeframe that was not included in the CDC’s analysis.
What’s more, while the study was large and sociodemographically diverse, the authors admit that “the findings might not be applicable to the general population.”
Also, recall they changed the definition of “vaccinated” to include someone who is two weeks past their second dose (for two dose regimens). This would obfuscate the truth as there were tens of millions that received one jab or more but were not considered “vaccinated.”
Why Is All-Cause Mortality Higher in 2021?
According to all-cause mortality statistics,12 the number of Americans who died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 16% higher than 2018, the pre-COVID year with the highest all-cause mortality, and 18% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019. Adjusted for population growth of about 0.6% annually, the mortality rate in 2021 is 16% above the average and 14% above the 2018 rate.
The obvious question is, why did more people die in 2021 (January through August) despite the rollout of COVID shots in December 2020? Did COVID-19 raise the death toll despite mass vaccination, or are people dying at increased rates because of the COVID jabs?
In a two-part series,13 Matthew Crawford of the Rounding the Earth Newsletter examined mortality statistics before and after the rollout of the COVID shots. In Part 1,14 he revealed the shots killed an estimated 1,018 people per million doses administered (note, this is doses, not the number of individuals vaccinated) during the first 30 days of the European vaccination campaign.
After adjusting for deaths categorized as COVID-19 deaths, he came up with an estimate of 200 to 500 deaths per million doses administered. With 4 billion doses having been administered around the world, that means 800,000 to 2 million so-called “COVID-19 deaths” may in fact be vaccine-induced deaths. As explained by Crawford:15
“This does not even include vaccine-induced deaths that have not been recorded as COVID cases, though I suspect that latter number is smaller since the only good way to hide the vaccine mortality signal is to smuggle deaths through the already-established COVID death toll.”
Corroborating Crawford’s calculations are data from Norway, where 23 deaths were reported following the COVID jab at a time when only 40,000 Norwegians had received the shot. That gives us a mortality rate of 575 deaths per million doses administered. What’s more, after conducting autopsies on 13 of those deaths, all 13 were determined to be linked to the COVID jab.16
Is the COVID Jab Responsible for Excess Deaths?
Crawford goes on to look at data from countries that have substantial vaccine uptake while simultaneously having very low rates of COVID-19. This way, you can get a better idea as to whether the COVID jabs might be responsible for the excess deaths, as opposed to the infection itself.
He identified 23 countries that fit these criteria, accounting for 1.88 billion individuals, roughly one-quarter of the global population. Before the COVID jabs rolled out, these nations reported a total of 103.2 COVID-related deaths per million residents. Five nations had more than 200 COVID deaths per million while seven had fewer than 10 deaths per million.
As of August 1, 2021, 25.35% of inhabitants in these 23 nations had received a COVID jab and 10.36% were considered fully vaccinated. In all, 673 million doses had been administered. Based on these data, Crawford estimates the excess death rate per million vaccine doses is 411, well within the window of the 200 to 500 range he calculated in Part 1.
Another interesting data dive was performed by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund. In the video “Vaccine Secrets: COVID Crisis,”17 he argues that VAERS can be used to determine causality, and shows how the VAERS data indicate more than 300,000 Americans have likely been killed by the COVID shots.18 Anywhere from 2 million to 5 million have also been injured by them in some way.
In a September 18, 2021, interview with The Covexit podcast, Jessica Rose, Ph.D., who holds degrees in applied mathematics, immunology, computational biology, molecular biology and biochemistry, also discussed what the VAERS data tell us about the safety of the COVID shots.
Rose covers issues such as the magnitude of the side effects compared to other vaccination programs, the problem of under-reporting, and how causality can be assessed using the Bradford Hill Criteria. You can find a PDF of the slide show that Rose presents here.19 Here’s a summary of some of the key points made in this interview:
Between 2011 and 2020, the number of VAERS reports ranged between 25,408 and 49,412 for all vaccines. In 2021, with the rollout of the COVID shots, the number of VAERS reports shot up to 521,667, as of September 3, 2021, for the COVID shots alone. (Fast-forward to October 22, 2021, and the report tally for COVID-related adverse events has ballooned to 837,593.20)
Between 2011 and 2020, the total number of deaths reported to VAERS ranged between 120 and 183. In 2021, as of September 3, the reported death toll had shot up to 7,662. As of October 22, 2021, the death toll was 17,619.21
Cardiovascular, neurological and immunological adverse events are all being reported at rates never even remotely seen before.
The estimated under-reporting factor (URF) is 31. Using this URF, the death toll from COVID shots is calculated to be 205,809 as of August 27, 2021; Bell’s palsy 81,747; herpes zoster infection 149,017; paresthesia 305,660; breakthrough COVID 365,955; myalgia 528,457; life threatening events 230,113; permanent disabilities 212,691; birth defects 7,998.
The Bradford Hill Criteria for causation are all satisfied. This includes but is not limited to strength of effect size, reproducibility, specificity, temporality, dose-response relationship, plausibility, coherence and reversibility.
CDC Claims COVID Jab Beats Natural Immunity
If you think the CDC’s claim that the COVID jab lowers all-cause mortality is a low point in its irrational vaccine push, prepare to let your expectations sink even lower, with even more egregious Orwellian doublespeak implementation. October 29, 2021, the CDC released yet another study, this one claiming the COVID jab actually offers five times better protection against COVID-19 than natural immunity. As reported by Alex Berenson in an October 30, 2021, Substack article:22
“Yesterday the Centers for Disease Control, America’s not-at-all-politicized public health agency, released a new study purporting to show that vaccination protects against COVID infection better than natural immunity. Of course, a wave of stories about the benefits of mRNA vaccination followed.
To do this, the CDC used some magic statistical analysis to turn inside raw data that actually showed almost four times as many fully vaccinated people being hospitalized with Covid as those with natural immunity — and FIFTEEN TIMES as many over the summer. I kid you not.
Further, the study runs contrary to a much larger paper from Israeli researchers in August. As my 2-year-old likes to say, How dey do dat? Well, the Israeli study drew on a meaningful dataset in a meaningful way to reach meaningful conclusions.
It counted infections (and hospitalizations) in a large group of previously infected people against an equally large and balanced group of vaccinated people, then made moderate adjustments for clearly defined risk factors.
It found that vaccinated people were 13 times as likely to be infected — and 7 times as likely to be hospitalized — as unvaccinated people with natural immunity. In contrast — how do I put this politely? — the CDC study is meaningless gibberish that would never have been published if the agency did not face huge political pressure to get people vaccinated.”
Data Manipulation Is Apparently a CDC Specialty
Berenson goes on to dissect the study in question, starting with its design, which he calls “bizarre.” The CDC analysts looked at data from 200,000 Americans hospitalized with “COVID-like” illness between January and August 2021 in nine states. Two groups were then compared:
Those who had confirmed COVID at least 90 days before and received another COVID test at the time of their hospitalization
Those who had been fully vaccinated for at least 90 days, but not more than 180 days, before their admittance and received another COVID test at the time of their hospitalization
Berenson points out what I stressed earlier, which is that choosing certain time or date ranges will allow you to make the shots appear a whole lot better than they actually are. Here, by choosing a 90- to 180-day inclusion range, they’re looking at a best-case scenario, as we now know the shots quit working after a handful of months. So, they’re only looking at that short window during which the COVID shots are at maximum effectiveness.
The 90-day criterion also ends up excluding the vast majority of patients hospitalized with COVID-like illness, both vaccinated and unvaccinated. While Berenson doesn’t address the vaccinated, few if any could have been fully vaccinated for at least 90 days prior to March, so why include January and February? Just about everyone was by definition unvaccinated at that time.
As for those with natural immunity, only 1,020 of the 200,000 patients hospitalized between January and August had a previously documented COVID infection. As noted by Berenson:23
“Given the fact that at least 20% of Americans, and probably more like 40%, had had COVID by the spring of 2021, this is a strikingly small percentage — and certainly doesn’t suggest long COVID is much of a threat.”
Of the 1,020 with natural immunity, only 89 tested positive for COVID, while 324 of the 6,328 vaccinated patients who met the study criteria tested positive. Of note here is two things:
1) There were more vaccinated patients hospitalized for COVID-like illness than those with natural immunity; this despite including months when vaccination rates were in the fractional and single digits, and
2) A greater number of vaccinated patients tested positive for breakthrough infection than patients with natural immunity
Hospitalization Rate Among Vaccinated Is Soaring
Berenson continues:24
“And the CDC didn’t have, or didn’t publish, figures on how many people were actually in the two groups … Instead it compared the PERCENTAGE OF POSITIVE TESTS in the two groups. But why would the percentage of positive tests matter, when we don’t know how many people were actually at risk? …
[A]mazingly, the statistical manipulation then got even worse. The natural immunity group had an 8.7% positive test rate. The fully vaccinated group had a 5.1% positive test rate. So the natural immunity group was about 1.7 times as likely to test positive. (1.7x 5.1 = about 8.7.)
With such a small number of people in the natural immunity group, that raw ‘rate ratio’ may well have failed to reach statistical significance. (We don’t know, because the CDC didn’t provide an unadjusted odds ratio with 95% boundaries — something I have never seen before in any paper.)
Instead, the CDC provided only a risk ratio that it had adjusted with a variety of factors, including ‘facility characteristics [and] sociodemographic characteristics.’
And finally, the CDC’s researchers got a number that they could publish — hospitalized people who had previously been infected were five times as likely to have a positive COVID test as people who were fully vaccinated. Never mind that there were actually four times as many people in the second group. Science!
By the way, buried at the bottom of report is some actual data. And it’s bad. The CDC divided the hospitalizations into pre- and post-Delta — January through June and June through August.
Interestingly, the number of hospitalized people with natural immunity actually fell sharply over the summer, as Delta took off. About 14 people per month were hospitalized in the winter and spring, compared to six per month from June through August. (Remember, this is a large sample, with hospitals in nine states.)
But the number of VACCINATED people being hospitalized soared — from about three a month during the spring to more than 100 a month during the Delta period. These vaccinated people still were less than 180 days from their second dose, so they should have been at or near maximum immunity — suggesting that Delta, and not the time effect, played an important role in the loss of protection the vaccine offered.”
Perhaps Rep. Thomas Massie said it best when he tweeted:25
“What do ‘road kill’ and a CDC sponsored COVID paper have in common? By the third day, they’re so picked apart they’re unrecognizable. This CDC Director is shameless for fabricating junk science with findings that stand in stark contrast to every credible academic study.”
Massie goes on to point out some obvious flaws and questions raised by the study, including the following:
The authors failed to verify recovery among those with previous infection, so any number of these “reinfections” may actually have been long-COVID.
The fact that more than 6,000 hospitalized for COVID symptoms were vaccinated, compared to just 1,000 with previous infection, counters the claim that 99% of COVID hospitalizations are unvaccinated.
The number of vaccinated people hospitalized for COVID symptoms correlate negatively with the time since vaccination; 3,625 were hospitalized within 90 to 119 days of vaccination, 2,101 within 120 to 149 days, and 902 within 150 to 179 days of vaccination. “Could initial hospitalizations be due to vaccine adverse effects or due to a temporarily weakened immune system from the vaccine?” Massey asks.26
The study only considered those with natural immunity who ended up in the hospital, and not the ones who didn’t get sick. “Natural immunity helps prevent hospitalization!” Massey says.27
Massie also notes that this paper, which is only six pages long, has an astounding 50 authors, and at least half a dozen of them disclose Big Pharma conflicts of interest. What’s more, seeing how Congress gave the CDC a cool $1 billion to promote the COVID jab, isn’t working for the CDC a conflict of interest as well?
Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist in the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, also critiqued the study in a tweet, saying:28
“This CDC study has a major statistical flaw, and the 5x conclusion is wrong, it implicitly assumes that hospitalized respiratory patients are representative of the population, which they are not. Trying to connect with authors.”
Natural Immunity Is the Best Answer
Try as the CDC might to twist the data, there’s really no question that natural immunity is superior and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity. This is also a long-held medical fact that has been tossed aside as too inconvenient to matter in COVID-19.
For some undisclosed reason, the government wants everyone to get the COVID injection, whether medically warranted or not. The sheer lunacy of that is cause enough to be leery and hold off on getting the risky jab. I can tell you one thing, this policy has nothing to do with safeguarding public health, because it’s driving public health in the wrong direction.
It’s quite clear that the way out of this pandemic is through natural herd immunity, and at this point, we know there’s no reason to fear COVID-19. Overall, its lethality is on par with the common flu.29,30,31,32,33 Provided you’re not in a nursing home or have multiple comorbidities, your chances of surviving a bout of COVID-19 is 99.74%, on average.34
Additionally, we also know there are several early treatment protocols that are very effective, such as the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance I-MASK+35 protocol, the Zelenko protocol,36 and nebulized peroxide, detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper37 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms.
The reported rate of death from COVID-19 shots in VAERS, on the other hand, exceeds the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years, and if you are injured by a COVID shot and live in the U.S., your only recourse is to apply for compensation from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP).38
Compensation from CICP is very limited and hard to get. You only qualify if your injury requires hospitalization and results in significant disability and/or death, and even if you meet the eligibility criteria, it requires you to use up your private health insurance before it kicks in to pay the difference.
There’s no reimbursement for pain and suffering, only lost wages and unpaid medical bills. Salary compensation is of limited duration, and capped at $50,000 a year, and the CICP’s decision cannot be appealed.
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
A source close to California Gov. Gavin Newsom today told The Defender the governor experienced an adverse reaction to the Moderna COVID vaccine he received Oct. 27, the last day he was seen in public.
A source close to California Gov. Gavin Newsom today told The Defender the governor experienced an adverse reaction to the Moderna COVID vaccine he received Oct. 27.
The source, who asked not to be identified, said Newsom’s symptoms were similar to those associated with Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS), a known side effect of many vaccines.
GBS is a neurological disorder in which the body’s immune system mistakenly attacks part of its peripheral nervous system — the network of nerves located outside of the brain and spinal cord — and can range from a very mild case with brief weakness to paralysis to leaving the person unable to breathe independently.
The governor has not been seen in public since he was photographed Oct. 27 getting his COVID booster.
On Oct. 29, Newsom’s office issued a statement referring to unspecified “family obligations” as the reason the governor canceled his scheduled appearances, including his planned meetings at the global COP 26 climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland.
A local ABC News outlet reported that when “the surprising announcement was made,” a spokesperson said Newsom planned to participate virtually in the climate conference. However, Newsom’s name was removed from the schedule and he did not participate.
The Defender reached out to Newsom’s office today by phone and email, but the office did not respond before publication.
According to Fox News, Newsom’s wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, on Sunday tweeted — then quickly deleted — a message urging people to “stop hating” while her husband has been out of the public eye.
Commenting on the situation, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, today said he “prays for Newsom’s family” and wishes him a quick recovery.
Kennedy added:
“However, if it’s true the governor has suffered debilitating neurological injuries following vaccination, it raises grave ethical questions about his seemingly dishonest efforts to conceal his injuries while implementing aggressive policies to force the children and working people of California to endure similar risks.”
Newsom has been an outspoken advocate of COVID vaccines and mandates. On Oct. 1, he announced California’s schoolchildren will be required to get the COVID vaccine once it is fully approved by the FDA. It’s the first such mandate in the country.
In a Nov. 3 press release, the governor’s office said California was launching a “robust” vaccination program for 5- to 11-year-olds. The governor has allocated more than 1.2 million vaccines for the 5-11 age group and is setting up 4,000 vaccine sites throughout the state.
According to Times of San Diego, Newsom got the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID vaccine in April 2021 when his age group became eligible. In July, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration added a warning to the J&J COVID vaccine noting the vaccine had been linked to GBS.
The latest data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System show that between Dec. 14, 2020, and Oct. 29, 2021, there were 705 reports of GBS following COVID vaccines, with 41% of cases attributed to Pfizer, 31% to Moderna and 28% to J&J.
In April, The Defender reported on a teen who was diagnosed with GBS after his first dose of a COVID vaccine. And last week, The Defender reported on a 63-year-old cancer survivor diagnosed with GBS after her second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
GBS is included as a possible risk for many vaccines including Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Vaqta and Varivax.
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Edward Curtin returns to discuss deep politics and what links the assassination of JFK, 9/11, and Covid-19.
No president since Kennedy has dared to buck the Military-Industrial-Complex, including Trump, who is part of the same system that produced both Obama and Biden.
He discusses the 1967 CIA memo which told mainstream media to use the disparaging term “conspiracy theory” to quell all deviation from the official narrative, and how this propaganda technique has continued to function from JFK to 9/11 to Covid-19.
Many of the same actors involved in the MIC and 9/11 continue to be involved with the drug companies, CDC, WEF, WHO, Gates Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. It’s very obvious, but the story is so frightening people don’t want to do any homework.
Too many people think there is this war going on between the right and the left, in the larger frame of reference there is no difference, it’s the warfare state against the regular people, the rich versus the poor.
The 4IR is an effort for total political and economic control of peoples all over the world. He believes the purpose of the vaccine mandate is for political control. Ultimately, we are in a spiritual war.
*
Edward Curtin is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Most serious students of Sino-Russian relations are well aware that the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation, a twenty-year strategic treaty that was signed by the leaders of the two countries in July 2001, was set to expire in February of 2022. However, the end of this formal agreement between China and Russia did not appear to be on the radar of most (supposed) regional experts – nor, seemingly, of Western mainstream media organizations – until it was announced on June 28th during a video call between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping that the treaty would be extended for another 5 years.
There is value in examining the growing partnership between China and Russia with a view towards identifying what the latter half of 2021 will bring for these two great powers. Whereas 2020 will invariably be written about in the history books as the darkest year of the devastating Covid-19 pandemic, the arrival of 2021, which held more promise than perhaps any other year since the end of the Second World War, will likely be seen as a huge disappointment, with the pandemic continuing to ravage the world’s citizens and economies. As we now (finally?) begin to emerge from lockdowns and learn to live again, and as the United States reasserts itself internationally, the Dragon and the Bear will likely be looking for opportunities to hunt together, as evidenced (at least in part) by the formal renewal of their strategic partnership.
To be clear, emerging from the societal and economic ruin wreaked upon a large swath of the globe by the coronavirus pandemic will prove an immense challenge for even the most resilient of the world’s societies and economies.
China and its people suffered immensely during the early days of the pandemic, but by the latter half of 2021, it has become evident that while China is still facing structural challenges and a number of trade disputes, the country will likely be among the first in the world to fully recover from the ill effects of the pandemic.
In contrast, the long-term effects on Russia’s economy, and the prospects of an eventual recovery, are far less clear at this point, though most will agree that Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, will not allow his country to suffer unnecessarily, and will do whatever is needed to rescue his country’s economy. What do these divergent paths to recovery mean for the relationship between these two countries as they seek to renew a strategic treaty between them signed twenty years ago, when nobody could have foreseen the events of the past twenty months?
To start, it had seemed unlikely that a treaty extension would be signed between China and Russia – primarily because one is not needed. While more than merely a symbolic entente, the treaty itself is largely inconsequential to the continuance or development of economic cooperation between the two countries, particularly within the context of China’s insatiable demand for energy and raw materials and plans for economic modernization. Articles of the treaty centering on defense and military cooperation could have been maintained pragmatically so long as both sides agree that they remain beneficial, and Russia’s stance in relation to Taiwan (i.e. that it remains a part of China) is unlikely to change. In addition, the economic and military co-dependencies that existed when the treaty was signed have shifted so dramatically in the past twenty years that the renewal of the treaty was unlikely to be viewed as necessary other than to serve some symbolic need in the face of growing Western aggression. As noted by Jonathan E. Hillman, Senior Fellow, Economics Program, and Director, Reconnecting Asia Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), in discussing four dimensions of China-Russia connectivity (1):
“Collectively, these factors reveal a partnership of unequals that will become even more lopsided in the future. China already towers over Russia in nearly every dimension, and if it can navigate its own domestic challenges, it will loom even larger in a decade. During that period, Beijing will need Moscow’s help, or at least its acquiescence, to continue expanding westward. No country is positioned better than Russia to spoil China’s overland ambitions. But isolated from the West, Russia has few alternatives to deepening economic ties with China.”
Hillman accurately notes that while the relationship between China and Russia will continue to skew in China’s favour, the two strategic partners will not stop needing each other to accomplish their respective goals, both domestically and on the world stage. And while this reality is particularly evident from an economic standpoint, it is also clear that China and Russia have much to gain from their ongoing alliance in countering the influence of Western powers such as the United States, the EU and NATO. Going it alone against such formidable foes (however weakened the latter may have become in recent years) is far less appealing than having a reliable partner in one’s corner.
How much China is willing to spend to support Russia with the latter’s post-pandemic recovery – both in terms of actual dollars and cents (or, more accurately, yuan), as well as in political capital – will be a telling indicator of how much the two countries will be willing (and able) to continue marching arm-in-arm in the same direction as the world emerges from the pandemic. However, while Russia will invariably have the most to gain from the “partnership of unequals”, China, though a master in its own right at wielding “sharp” power abroad, is still engaged in a trade dispute with a U.S. President who is proving (at least in some respects) to be as skeptical and critical of China as his predecessor, and can potentially learn a trick or two from Russia about how to get what it wants without needing to break the bank. After all, if there’s one thing that Russia has been able to prove over the past few years, it’s that there is more to leveraging influence than simply who has the most money or the biggest aircraft carriers.
There is little doubt that, in 2022 and beyond, the strategic partnership between China and Russia will continue to evolve beyond the stipulations set forth in the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation. What remains to be seen is how each partner will seek to maximize its respective returns on investment in the relationship – and ultimately, which partner will be most successful in leveraging those gains to accomplish its goals. As most of the world is desperately waiting for the pandemic to take its final breaths, the Dragon and the Bear have perhaps the most to look forward to in the year ahead.
*
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.
Nicholas Meyers writes with a focus on Russian and Eurasian issues, and draws on his military background to provide a unique perspective on geopolitics. Nicholas can be reached at [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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Cuban Version of the Violent Barricades in Venezuela?
Amplifying November 15 Internationally
A “Leftist” Feature of Archipiélago and Annexationism: Is This Possible?
The Left in North America: Where Does It Stand?
15N: What Are Cubans at the Grass-Roots Level Presently Saying?
On July 10–11, 2021, regime-change demonstrations of the “colour revolution” type broke out in several cities across Cuba, turning violent in some instances. , They were driven mainly by pro-US social media prompts, with some Cuban citizens joining in for legitimate reasons in the context of the current system and not against it. Since then, the same forces, operating under a new banner and a private, two-month-old Facebook group named Archipiélago, are gathering for a second round of demonstrations to take place on November 15. To delve into it, I applied to become a member and was eventually (and surprisingly) accepted.
Peaceful?
Several points stand out. Despite what they profess, Archipiélago is far from being a peaceful organization. This Facebook group of supposed “pacifists” features a riot in which a vehicle was overturned.
Even more explicitly, they ask below, “If violence is not the way to demand justice… why is it the way to establish ‘order’?” Reading between the lines, is this a barely veiled justification for the use of violence?
Furthermore, the following post calls for “a peaceful monthly march, if the people have no breathing space, the dictatorship will have none either.”
The incitement to chaos is evident as they stir up hatred, with a group member pleading in a comment: “Monthly is too long to wait, weekly is better as they will die more quickly.”
However, the incitement to simple individual violence also gives way to a collective genocidal policy. In response to the US threat to sanction Cuba if the Cuban government interferes in the planned November 15 march, Archipiélago ups the ante by demanding that “the sanctions not be limited to insignificant individuals” – that is, by calling for more sanctions “against the regime.” This in effect would further punish the Cuban people as part of the drastic tightening of the blockade from Trump to Biden.
We must recall here the genocidal basis of the US blockade against Cuba as expressed in the 1960 Memorandum from the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Mallory) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Rubottom): “denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”
“Peaceful” Miami-Based Exiles?
During the course of a special edition of the popular Cuban TV program Mesa Redonda, Rogelio Polanco Fuentes, the head of the Ideological Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba, released a recording of a telephone conversation between Ramón Saúl Sánchez and Archipiélago coordinator Yunior García Aguilera.
Who is Ramón Saúl Sánchez? This is a very abbreviated list of his terrorist activities:
“[He was] born in 1954 in Cuba, at the age of 13 he went to live in the US.
Several declassified FBI reports outline the dangerousness of this terrorist. One of them, reports that in December 1980, hours after the explosion of a bomb at the Cuban consulate in Montreal, the alleged perpetrators were arrested on the Canada-United States among them Ramón Saúl Sánchez Rizo.
Another 1982 FBI report deals with an attempted attack against the Cuban ambassador to the UN, detonating a bomb in his car, states: ‘Ramón Saúl Sánchez built the remote-controlled bomb with the help of others members of Omega 7.
Omega-7 came to be considered by the FBI as ‘the most dangerous terrorist organization in the United States.’
In 1984, Ramón Saúl was sentenced to a four-year prison sentence for refusing to appear before a North American grand jury in New York that tried to clarify the activities of Omega-7.
He was a protagonist in the sinking of the fishing boats near the Bahamas, injuring two fishermen, as well as promoting the kidnapping of people in Venezuela, México and the US.
He is the leader of the terrorist organization Jóvenes de la Estrella, a group with which he carried out a dynamite attack at the Miami airport on October 17, 1975.
Second in command of CORU, which carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks against Cuban facilities in various countries, including within the United States itself, the most notable being the blowing up of the Cubana de Aviación plane over Barbados, where 73 people died.
He was a very active element among those who promoted fundraising to help Luis Posada Carriles and the rest of the terrorists arrested in Panama for planning an attack against the Cuban president (Fidel Castro) during the X Ibero-American Summit.”
Here is the full transcript translated from Spanish between Ramón Sánchez (RS) and Yunior García (YG).
“RS: Yunior?
YG: Yes?
RS: This is Ramón Saúl, how are you?
YG: Hi, how are you, Ramón? So, I don’t know if you saw the announcement we made to move it up to the 15th.
RS: We, the Movimiento Democracia and the Movimiento de Opositores por una Nueva República, are a hundred percent in agreement with what Archipiélago is saying, with what you are saying. So we are with you. One question: Do you think it would be fruitful, or would it be counterproductive, if we managed to shine the freedom lights from offshore of Cuba on that day?
YG: It’s complicated, I think that has to be thought through. I do agree that we need the support of the whole exile community, wherever they are.
RS: We are with you one hundred percent. We have great admiration for you and Otero Alcántara [another star dissident.] We have very good access to the media. So, anything you want to publicize, send it over here and we’ll take care of getting the word out. Or anything else where you think we could be useful. I feel proud to be able to support what you guys are doing.” (Emphasis added)
Yunior had to respond to the leaked telephone conversation. In an interview with a dissident media outlet in Spanish, 14yMedio, he complained that there were “missing parts of the conversation,” but does not (English version) say what was missing. However, he did not deny the most important part of the recorded conversation, namely when he said they “need the support of the whole exile community.” Furthermore, Archipiélago actually takes a stand in favour of working unconditionally with the exile community by saying in the post below, “When exiles contribute to the cause it is not mercenaryism, we are all Cubans, they are part of the same nation and have the right to contribute to the cause.”
Cuban Version of the Violent Barricades in Venezuela?
In Polanco’s Mesa Redonda presentation, he referred to “his personal experience in Venezuela, a country where he served as a diplomatic official. In this sense, he recalled that in 2013, 2014 and 2017 the so-called guarimbas [barricades] were developed. These were violent actions by representatives of opposition sectors in Venezuela to overthrow the Bolivarian government that caused innumerable economic and human damage to society.” (Below is a scene from the guarimbas in Venezuela posted as a “model” by the Cuban Archipiélago.)
Polanco continues:
“There is a report from the Venezuelan state, ‘The truth of Venezuela against infamy: data and testimonies of a country under siege,’ published in September 2020 that has elements that are related to the actions that are intended to be carried out in our country. This report states that the total number of deaths during the violent protests in February 2014 was 43 people, while in the protests from April to July 2017 the Public Ministry registered 121 deaths and 1958 injured, however, in relation to the protests of 2014 the then Secretary of State of the United States John Kerry issued a statement in which he affirmed that ‘the demonstrations were peaceful and accused the Venezuelan government of confronting peaceful protesters by force,’ he said.”
“A detailed examination, says the report, of the events that occurred reveals that most of the demonstrations provoked and promoted by opposition leaders between April and July 2017 were carried out in violation of current national and international legislation. These demonstrations led to actions of extreme violence characterized by the use of firearms, Molotov cocktails, mortars and homemade weapons, the placement of barricades, death traps on public roads, damage to institutions, schools, health centres, and siege against military and police facilities. There were three unprecedented practices in the recent history of the country: setting fire to people designated as supporters of the government, using children and adolescents to prepare firebombs, guarding barricades and attacking the security forces, as well as the combination of high levels of violence with religious and patriotic symbols.”
Regarding the well-known NED and USAID funding of state subversion, Polanco explained that among those organizations born in Latin America is CADAL (Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America), which is part of a wide network of non-governmental organizations that the United States uses to channel financing for its political operators through NED and USAID. The links between the United States and its political operators in Cuba are obvious.
He revealed that two Cuban citizens are part of the generous beneficiaries of the funds of these US organizations: Manuel Cuesta Morúa and Yunior García Aguilera, signatories of the documents delivered to the Cuban authorities regarding the intention to carry out marches in various cities of the country. Both, he explained, travelled to Argentina in 2018 to participate in a CADAL promoted event pushing for subversion in Cuba by the Armed Forces (a pipe dream if ever there was one).
Polanco denounced the fact that both CADAL and its director, Gabriel Salvia, have been very active in supporting the provocations leading up to 15N in Cuba.
“In 2019, Cuesta Morúa and García Aguilera continued their preparations in a workshop sponsored by the Universidad San Luis Campus Madrid. There they received lessons from Richard Youngs, an expert on public protests as a method of political change.”
As Youngs points out, riots are increasingly a major route through which ordinary people seek to achieve social, political and economic transformation. “Protesters must make tough decisions, do they just disengage from politics or build new kinds of civic campaigns? Do they join existing political parties or do they move away from mainstream politics altogether?”
The official [Rogelio Polanco] also highlighted how the report itself acknowledged with concern the fact that the media intended to present these events as peaceful demonstrations. ‘Some here are beginning to look for so-called non-violent methods of struggle to obtain advice and carry out some of these actions in Cuba.’”
In fact, during the July 11 protests, we actually witnessed the inception of what the US and its allies would like to happen all over Cuba and on a sustained basis. A riot occurred in Cárdenas with the use of projectiles, rocks, the overturning of a car, looting, yet the media persisted in portraying this as “peaceful protests” while highlighting the Cuban government “crackdown.
“Peaceful” was the keyword used in July as part of the narrative to blame Cuba for the arrest of those violent elements. Yet, as we head toward November 15, it is no accident that the Miami press has been all over the fact that a car was overturned in Cárdenas on July 11. The mainstream media knows full well that erecting barricades and weaponizing objects such as cars constitutes a key ingredient in destabilizing the state and creating chaos, injuries and even deaths, as occurred in Venezuela. Thus, it delights in reporting that a “large crowd of people overturn a car in a protest.”
Yunior García Aguilera is clearly an agent of the US playing out the role he was trained for by the US. Here is further information released on November 1.
On that day, Dr. Vázquez González, a Cuban who for more than 25 years has been the agent Fernando of the Cuban State Security Organs, came out in public after having infiltrated the counterrevolutionary groups.
Dr. Vázquez González confirmed what Polanco asserted regarding the meetings abroad in which “agent Fernando” participated along with Yunior García, his collaborator Manuel Cuesta Morúa and others, including two non-Cuban army generals. “Agent Fernando” revealed photos and videos as the iron-clad proof of Yunior directly working with the US over a period of several years. “Agent Fernando” indicates that the playwright Yunior perfectly fits the role of promoter for the provocative march on November 15. In a new video, “agent Fernando” explained that the:
“strategy is not new, since Yunior García Aguilera tries to reissue an event from three decades ago, when on a similar date playwright Václav Havel, defender of the hegemonic purposes of the US administration, addressed the public in Prague, the capital of then Czechoslovakia. On the night of November 26 of last year [2020], prior to his presence in front of the Ministry of Culture, Yunior published on his Facebook wall the question ‘Cuba, and what should we do now?’ [Similar to] Havel’s statement: ‘Something must be done,’ during the Prague protests. It was that November 27, 2020, when Yunior appeared as an agent of change, a role rehearsed by the United States in the color revolutions. Dr. Vázquez González added that what is sought is to cause chaos, disobedience in society, so that international organizations apply sanctions and that this then leads to military intervention and the imposition of an alternative government in our country.”
The Archipiélago post below: “Communism fell in Prague. So must it be in Cuba!”
Vaclav Havel saluting a huge crowd in Wenceslao Square in Prague on December 10, 1989.
The overall narrative on the “peaceful” Cuban protests is presented courtesy of The Washington Post in its Editorial Board publication on October 15, “Opinion: Cuba’s peaceful opposition mounts a comeback.” Irrespective of what happens on November 15, the script has already been worked out. The “protesters” are the victims while the government is at fault. Thus, buzzwords such as “peaceful protests” or “pro-democracy protests” are completely arbitrary, based on the objectives of the US and its allies.
If a movement anywhere in the world is against a government not to the liking to the US, it is dubbed a “pro-democracy movement,” thus justifying any means used by its perpetrators. On the other hand, any movement that is in defense of an “anti-US government” is dubbed “terrorist” or “extremist.” The most glaring example of this false dichotomy is in the US itself. No matter how many millions of people demonstrate in the US against the antidemocratic and racist nature of the US state, they are never called “pro-democracy movements.”
Thus, people should be aware, and not be fooled by the cacophony of the “peaceful protests” mantra that is bound, in one way or another, to accompany the events of November 15 and their aftermath.
Amplifying November 15 Internationally
A key ingredient of the Archipiélago destabilization effort is to internationalize it. Members maintain a regularly updated chart which indicates where pro-November 15 marches are to take place outside Cuba. Almost all of them are located in North America and Europe where the Cuban exiles are located.
The goal is now to build on July 11, thus making for a caustic mix of local incidents within Cuba to be amplified outside the country using the hashtags #15NovCuba or #15Nov (which, by the way, can be used by supporters of the Cuban government to attract attention while nevertheless opposing the counterrevolutionary forces).
The counterrevolution has experience going back many years with links in Cuba, the US and elsewhere. For example, one of the key players, Manuel Cuesta Morúa, is a close collaborator of Yunior. He was one of a select group of dissidents who met with then President Obama during his trip to Cuba in March 2016. In the picture, Cuesta Morúa is seated on Obama’s left.
One of the specialities of Cuesta Morúa in the current situation is to amplify 15N to the Miami counterrevolutionary press, which supports any type of terrorist activity. For example, here he retweets a post that thanks ADN Cuba, one of the main US-based and funded counterrevolutionary outlets, for giving visibility to the work of Archipiélago and the upcoming 15N.
Here is Cuesta Morúa’s retweeted thank-you note to USAID-funded CubaNet, another US-based outlet amplifying the 15N march:
US-based and fundedDiario de Cuba (DDC) also gets the nod from Cuesta Morúa when it declares, following July 11, that the “Cuban government can no longer speak in the name of the Cuban people.” While it may seem to be an innocuous comment, this is how the US and its allies act: based on this false narrative, they float an “alternative” government as the real representative of the people, as they do in Venezuela, and justify interference, including military intervention, to back up their choice.
A “Leftist” Feature of Archipiélago and Annexationism: Is This Possible?
This is not the only feature that Cuesta Morúa and his collaborators learned from their training in Argentina and Spain with CADAL. He possibly learned from CADAL the need to portray their movement as not openly right-wing but rather as pseudo left. Believe it or not, he has picked up the popular #DefundThePolice slogan in some Western capitalist countries and applied it to the so-called violence of the Cuban police.
If readers believe that the attempt by the counterrevolution to provide a “left” image to the movement is an exaggeration, below is an Archipiélago post that quotes Fidel Castro’s famous statement that “Revolution is to change everything that needs to be changed.”
The quote is almost verbatim from Fidel, minus the words “Revolution is…” Nonetheless, one should not take this lightly. After all, Cuesta Morúa and Yunior were probably trained to use “left”-sounding phrases to recruit sections of Cuban society, especially intellectuals.
Sadly, the fact is that some “pro-Cuba” intellectuals and artists in Cuba also use this Fidel phrase to push for their interpretation of change such as capitalist reforms, a multi-party system and a more “open” Cuba policy toward the US, as if the decades-long Cuba-US standoff is the fault of both the US and Cuba. Every indication is that these elements are already indirectly on board with the colour revolution by “both siding” the events: they are opposed to the violence of the colour revolution and that of the Cuban government.
These Cuban intellectuals living in Cuba are not ashamed to complain that the current post-July 11 period is plagued by “two extremes” – the Cuban government (which they now casually describe as a “regime”) and the agitators, with no room for a “reasonable perception.” They also promote the November 2020 San Isidro Movement that arose out of a wide-open debate and polemic in Cuba regarding Decree 349 on the Cuban government’s policy on culture and involved in November 15.
Junior was featured in this San Isidro Movement along with other US-supported individuals. It was the forerunner of July 11 as, and according to some intellectuals, a “made in Cuba opposition.” Of course, in order to remain in the good books with the elites in the West, the intellectuals abundantly use the buzzwords “cracking down hard” and “repressive violence” in reference to the Cuban government.
For a very precise analysis of how these intellectuals operate in Cuba and abroad, see the video presentation in a recent Geopolitical Economy Research Group webinar on Cuba by Cuban revolutionary blogger Iroel Sánchez, with English subtitles. This 15-minute YouTube is worth viewing in its entirety, as Iroel is not one of the “go to” Cubans sought after by the mainstream media and academia. The exact portion where he deals with these intellectuals is from 5:03 to 5:15.
Furthermore, in carefully diving into the pages of the Archipiélago Facebook group, one notices, for example, that it features some out-of-context left quotes from Martin Luther King. Furthermore, its main spokesperson Yunior said in an interview with the Miami Herald, “I am calling on the left worldwide, which is usually complicit and unfortunately usually behaves in a hypocritical way, to tell them that there are no left or right dictatorships, good or bad, there are dictatorships, and we must oppose them all.”
Why does Yunior feel confident in appealing to the left? Does the adage “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire” apply? Are some on the left – and not only abroad but also in Cuba –sympathizing with the Archipiélago movement? Yes, indeed, we have seen above how some Cuban intellectuals on the island have quite an affinity with colour revolution. However, how does anyone reconcile being “progressive” and “left” while hobnobbing with those whose policies favour Cuban annexation to the US?
Every country must be analyzed on its own merits. For Cuba, being left or, more precisely, being communist, or pro-communist or respecting Fidel Castro and his legacy is based solidly among not all but the majority of the population since the early 1960s. Thus, it does not matter how much the Archipiélago folks scream anti-communist slogans, flash “down with the dictatorship” placards or grossly insult their leaders past and present. Not only does this go over like water off a duck’s back for the majority of Cubans, but it actually consolidates and deepens their appreciation of their ideological/political outlook, which they see as the safeguard to maintaining Cuba’s precious sovereignty, patriotism and dignity.
Hard facts and figures speak volumes. For example, in the 2019 constitutional referendum vote, which included a clause to safeguard the ultimate goal of communism (on the insistence of the grassroots), here are the results:
Thus, of those voting, over 86% voted in favour or their economic/political “communist” system. This ratio coincides with my own experience living in Cuba for extensive periods of time on and off since 1997: not all, but the vast majority of the population supports and works for their system. Even though the Archipiélago will not admit it, they must deal with this situation. Thus, at times, they must attack the system from the “left,” as Yunior does above and Cuesta Morúa also with his #DefundThePolice.
Is it an exaggeration to extrapolate from the Archipiélago pages and Yunior’s interview with the Miami Herald to claim that they use left rhetoric to cover up their goals of pro-US regime change? It does not seem to be a fabrication. However, readers can come to their own conclusions. On October 30 (appropriately the day before Halloween), in another attempt to explain his telephone conversation with the terrorist Ramón Saúl, Yunior dressed up as a virtual “firebrand leftist.”
In chameleon-like fashion, he said in the above recording that he was against “savage capitalism” as an option for Cuba. At the same time, he asserted that there is “no socialism” in Cuba but rather a “primitive, ferocious state capitalism.” To make himself even more palatable to some of the left in Cuba and abroad, he stated that he had signed a petition to President Biden demanding the lifting of the blockade. (Notes taken by the author from the El Toque recording and translated into English.)
This latter revelation is not very impressive. First, in the interview with the Miami Herald cited above, he said that “they always complain about the ‘blockade, he said, referring to the U.S. embargo. ‘There is no worse blockade than the internal blockade on every Cuban citizen in this country.’” Second, as we have seen above, an Archipiélago post called on Biden to increase the blockade sanctions.
To add to his “left credentials,” Yunior said in the same recording that he is “against apartheid.” Okay, but where? In the US racist state, or in Israel, perhaps? No, in Cuba as he refers to its “ideological apartheid” that prohibits thinking outside the official ideology. (Notes taken by the author from the same audio interview with El Toque, one of the main subversive outlets and, of course, fully involved in 15N, as can be seen below, where it is promoting Archipiélago and its coordinators such as Yunior.)
El Toque proudly provides the faces of Archipiélago on the right of the post.
However, while it is increasingly difficult to get people inside and outside of Cuba to swallow the “left” narrative, who comes to the rescue to provide Yunior with “left” credentials? The CNN Havana correspondent on November 4 provided him with the ultimate certification as a “left-leaning playwright.” This is not all. We see in the report based on an interview with Yunior in his home with his bookcase in the background, the two volumes by Fidel Castro, The Strategic Counter Offensive, detailing the epic struggle in the Sierra Maestra leading to the January 1 victory.
We do not know if the playwright, with a natural flare for drama, placed the Fidel volumes there to impress CNN in order to buttress the usual narrative of turn coats being former “supporters” of the Revolution but later “disaffected by the outcome.” One such example of betrayal is Samuel Farber, born in Cuba and having participated in the anti-Batista movement, emigrated to the US in 1958. For quite some time, from the “left,” he is supporting the US narrative against the Cuban leadership by writing among others for a “left alternative” pro colour revolution outlet in Cuba, La Joven Cuba.”
In any case, in the course of scouring Yunior’s Facebook group Archipiélago, one of the most important recurring features of the “left-leaning” Yunior is the utter disdain and hatred for Fidel accompanied with the most insulting cartoons and photos, surpassing anything that can be seen – even in the extremist hard-core anti-Castro Miami press.
The Yunior posture of being “neither left or right,” also known as the “end of ideology,” is a particular minority feature in Cuban political culture. It rears its head at every important turning point in Cuban history in recent decades. My 2017 article titled “The End of Ideology in Cuba?” on this controversy is more relevant than ever. I wrote, “Objectively, this so-called neutrality against extremes consists in throwing a life jacket in support of capitalism. The real defiance is against socialism.”
We have touched on the role of the “left face” of Cuban subversion. What about annexation to the US? Likewise, each country must be analyzed on its own, as we have briefly done above with regards to socialism and communism. Now, with regards to US projects to dominate countries in Latin America, for example, the US is threatening the sovereignty of Venezuela and Nicaragua, Bolivia and Peru.
However, for obvious geopolitical reasons, outright annexation is not part of their plans in these countries. The situation that Cuba faces is very different. Think of Puerto Rico. Given Cuban historical ties to the US since the 19th century, even when it was fighting Spanish colonialism, annexation to the US was a secondary part of the political culture on the island and it still exists today. Thus, while Archipiélago does not openly advocate annexation, the movement it is fostering does indeed lead to some kind of 21st-century Cuban “annexation” to the US.
In fact, among the Miami terrorist groups it solicits help from, annexation is still a goal, as they dream of another Playa Girón-like invasion, but one that succeeds in order to convert Cuba into another Puerto Rico. Furthermore, the Archipiélago trove contains innumerable photos comparing in a favourable light the situation that existed before the Revolution compared with today. What was the US–Cuba relationship before 1959, especially in the 1950s under Batista? Cuba’s neocolonialist status was as close as possible to actually being “annexed” to the US. In fact, while painfully navigating through Archipiélago, one cannot help but notice how it is so impregnated with sycophantic pro-US prejudices, that it reminded me of what José Martí said regarding his long exile in the US just before being killed in action in Cuba in 1895: “I have lived in the monster and I know its entrails.”
Controversy arose from my article cited above (“The End of Ideology in Cuba?”) around this statement:
“I have always maintained that the most dangerous opposition to the Cuban Revolution comes from the so-called left, and not from the openly right-wing annexationists.”
Most readers praised the article, while many others participated in the serious debate. Only a few strongly objected to it, mainly singling out that sentence about the “most dangerous opposition.” In responding to detractors, my second piece was penned in Spanish as a columnist for Cuba’s Prensa Latina (and published in English, titled Cuban “Left” Opposition and Annexationists: Two Wings of the Same Eagle).
This piece created more controversy, as well as complaints, and thus in the third installment of this trilogy, I wrote:
“Their common main complaint has been that my articles do not name individuals. Some of their social media accounts even try to dictate to me in referring to the dissidents’ posts. They ‘are asking for names’; ‘Name names!’ they demand. They are oblivious to the fact that by so doing they name themselves and that they do not, and cannot, in any way shame me into citing names. Perhaps the most remarkable proof that there is no need to name names, since worms will surface after rain, comes from Miami. On Feb. 2, 2017, the US-financed CUBA NET published a front-page article on the controversy provoked by my two columns.”
See the screenshot below, for my original Spanish version of the piece published in La Pupila Insomne, edited by Cuban blogger Iroel Sánchez. Perhaps the best example of the boomerang effect is the attack by the CIA-financed and extreme right-wing Miami-based CubaNet against my person and articles, while defending the Cuban “left,” titling their piece: “The Annexationist Left: Arnold August Is the New Agent of Castroism,”.
Thus they inadvertently prove my point that Cuba’s “Leftists” and Annexationists are two wings of the same eagle, and why, as can be read here: I do not name them.
The concern about the ideological/political annexationist war being waged against Cuba in the current period goes back to at least 2016, as my piece in Black Agenda Report points out:
“What does it mean when American flags appear on the streets of Havana? Is President Obama winning his war against Cuban socialism by non-military means? Obama confirmed once again that the US is dispensing with openly antagonistic tactics, in favor of diplomatic tactics that he hopes will attain the goal of snuffing out the Cuban Revolution. The Cuban people, themselves, are engaged in a great debate about their future – and ours.”
The Left in North America: Where Does It Stand?
Given the fully documented proof that, despite all the rhetoric, the 15N is not peaceful but is in fact US-driven – even to the point of threatening a military intervention – what can we do to defend Cuba?
The left in the US must be applauded. Virtually all the left alternative independent web-based media in the US has unconditionally opposed the US narrative on Cuba, including Black Alliance for Peace, Black Agenda Report, MintPress News, People’s Dispatch, The People’s Forum, Code Pink, Lee Camp – Redacted Tonight, The Socialist Program, BreakThrough News, The Grayzone, Popular Resistance, CounterPunch and others.
The only major holdout is the North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA), which serves as the virtual official organ of regime change in Cuba. A guide to the alternative left can be found here. NACLA is not listed, yet it is not clear if it is because of its right-wing swing toward Latin America. In any case, it is good thing it is not included.
Here in Canada, we are not blessed with this situation. In fact, the contrast with the US is startling. Only a very small number of outlets stand unconditionally against the US “colour revolution” narrative, while the vast majority either buy into the US agenda or are ominously silent on one of the most important issues for the left today: the Cuban Revolution. Is there a reason for this? Is it perhaps due to Liberal poster boy Justin Trudeau’s barely concealed support for colour revolution in Cuba, which was so appreciated by Archipiélago. Trudeau: “Cuba deserves democracy and freedom?”
It proudly displays the latest feather in its cap, listing Canada among its supporters along with other countries such as Colombia, US, Sweden, Germany, Uruguay and Spain. The article was taken from “Radio and Television Martí,” the US-funded subversive media based in the US. This position by Justin Trudeau, given the current US-led subversive context, is perhaps one of the most right-wing reactionary statement taken by any Canadian government on Cuba since 1959.
It is far from being “ambiguous,” as some Trudeau apologists would have it. The US-trained Yunior and company have possibly been trained in capturing dog-whistle diplomacy, that is, hearing what music to their ears is, amplifying it while discarding the rest. Not one member of the Canadian Parliament – all the parties, including the social democratic New Democratic Party (NDP) – has yet to take a public stand against Trudeau encouraging colour revolution for Cuba.
After the July 11 event, the first out of the gates against the Cuban government was Canadian Dimension. The Canada Files produced an extended YouTube video based on my presentation at the August 29 panel on Cuba, organized by the Geopolitical Research Economy Group. We completely deconstructed the two Canadian Dimension articles written by Cuban dissidents and its related Trudeau position. Since then, Canadian Dimension has largely stayed clear of Cuba after publishing these two hit pieces. This is hardly a positive step in light of those dangerous precedents. A “left” publication that is neutral at a time that the Cuban Revolution is under attack, more than ever since 1959, is not encouraging. More on that below, as this Canadian disease of “neutrality” is rampant.
In any case, two other “Canadian left” media outlets picked up the baton from Canadian Dimension to try outracing each other, as to which one could cross the anti-Cuban Revolution finish line first.
First, there is Rabble. In a July 19, 2021 article, readers were confronted with several key pro-US regime change stereotypes:
“As a result of horrific conditions there and very likely [emphasis added] American provocation (the U.S. spends tens of millions annually on anti-government media and on-the-ground and social media campaigning), Cubans are demonstrating en masse against the government… They are blaming the Cuban government for the country’s state of affairs, claiming it is caused by Cuban leaders who are enriching themselves at the expense of the public… There are many things not to like about Cuba’s government. It isn’t democratic and there is widespread corruption, but other countries with un-democratic or corrupt governments are not bullied and starved by the U.S … I personally know people who can’t feed their families regularly, who stand in lines in the hot sun for hours every day to meet basic needs, who can’t rely on their excellent health care system anymore and who now fear absolute chaos. An orderly transition to some form of democratic government is impossible to imagine. Chaos is more likely, with widespread poverty, inequality and insecurity.”
Rabble may not realize it, but this “chaos and failed state” mantra was applied to Cuba by Biden, but ripped to shreds in The Canada Files YouTube mentioned above.
In another Rabblearticle, dated July 23, 2021, the litany of nonsense goes shamelessly beyond the pale by comparing Haiti to Cuba.
“Cuba, you might say, has in recent days had the same problem [as Haiti] – dissent – but in a very different setting [mild concession to Cuba]… Like its sheer longevity: despite a crippling US economic blockade, it has lasted as a one-party communist state, for only about a decade less than the Soviet Union did. Health care and education have been impressive, including a COVID-19 vaccine, though production is hampered by the blockade. Its flaws are many, among them repression of dissent – including the unprecedented current rallies and marches. The government says all economic trouble is due to the blockade, and protests are down to U.S. plots.
Now, one may be tempted to excuse Rabble for this, as this second one was reprinted from one of Canada’s flagship corporate media outlets, the Toronto Star. On the other hand, if Rabble can reprint from the Toronto Star, why did it not attend the two Geopolitical Economy Research Group (GERG) webinars on Cuba, on July 26 and August 29, to report on them and/or republish reports on them? The Rabble accusation above of Cuba as being guilty of “repression of dissent” rings somewhat hollow as our “dissenting voices” against the mainstream narrative on Cuba right here in Canada is repressed. Unless, of course, Rabble knuckles down in the future and reprints articles from TheCanada Files on Cuba. Nothing yet.
Moreover, on November 1 it carried an article encouraging Canadian tourism to the island to be inaugurated on November 15. It did this without mentioning the US-led November 15th attempt to disrupt just that. Nor did it take a stand against the Canadian government’s treacherous stand lending credibility to the US-backed colour revolution narrative.
In addition to Rabble, The Breach outdid them all in an October 22 article:
“Well, I don’t think people like Blair and Clinton deserve any kind of left label. The people who understand themselves as being on the left, who are actively part of left campaigns, and who’ve really accepted an End of History narrative, are I think those people who don’t believe we can do any better than the defense of states like China, Syria, Cuba, and sometimes even North Korea, as building blocks in a feeble global antagonism against the overwhelming dominance of American power… When workers in Cuba are concerned about a year of economic brutality caused by both the imperialist American blockade and the collapse of tourism revenues – because of COVID and by mismanagement by a bureaucratic elite that lives a more luxurious life than ordinary Cubans – they can only be imperialist agents… So we oppose, for example, the American blockade on Cuba, but we don’t oppose it in the name of defending the state that these imperialists oppose. Instead, we oppose it in the name of supporting a politics of human freedom against imperialist power, above all, but also against those perverted and deflected forms of supposedly socialist politics that are bureaucratic states.”
However, the supposed rebuttal to this from what amounts to the “left” of Canadian Dimension, Rabble and The Breach is that it is wrong to lionize a leader simply because they are being attacked by the U.S. These words, paternalistically warning people in the North against glorifying Third World leaders, may fly under some of the left radar. It is very convenient for the middle-of-the-roaders.
Thus far, they refuse to purge themselves of the White Man’s Burden complex or US-centric notions that stop them from taking an unconditional stand in favour of leaders who are actually leading their peoples in fighting US imperialism, such as Miguel Díaz-Canel in Cuba.
This “left” seems to be incapable of bringing itself to overcome the ingrained superiority of the “left” in the comfortable North, which cannot refrain from being “father knows best” for the leaders in the South. Thus, their difference with The Breach’s stark anti-communist, or anti-revolution stance, is just a matter of degree: how far can each of them go to avoid differentiating themselves from the leaders in the South who are vilified by the mainstream media, while maintaining the veneer of being “leftists”?
Is this exaggerated? Not so. How else can one explain that the current three most important Canadian left media – Canadian Dimension, Rabble and The Breach – have all taken stands in favour of a colour revolution in Cuba, while The Tyee and Ricochet have not yet carried any post-July 11 articles on Cuba at all.
On the other hand, The Georgia Straight, L’aut’journal in Quebec and The Canada Files (leading the way by a long shot) have carried favourable articles on Cuba. Aside from The Canada Files, not one of the independent “left” media outlets has taken a stand against Trudeau’s pro-colour revolution statement. Let that sink in: Cuba is being bled by the US now more than ever, and some “leftists” cannot take a stand? However, it is not too late. Now is the time, as the US and its allies are preparing a major offensive for November 15 against Cuba, as my recent article in The Canada Files points out. It is not too late. As Howard Zinn indicated, “You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train.”
15N: What Are Cubans at the Grass-roots Level Presently Saying?
Even if we show without a shadow of doubt that 15N is being US-driven and supported, in recent telephone conversations with some of my Cuban colleagues, they all say that the situation is complicated. Let these Cubans speak for themselves on 15N:
Havana:
1) “Some think it is not US manipulation but rather coming from the base. Others are of the opinion that it is planning destabilization and change in government. I do not think that it will succeed. Last July was a surprise, not now, the government is prepared.”
2) “Many people ask questions, and they are not those who take to the streets to protest or shout offenses against revolutionaries but rather working men and women who see no future anywhere, and brother, they feel they are being let down.”
3) “All those who reside here (a two-generation household) say that regarding all those involved (in 15N), we have already accumulated enough ‘merits’ for them to be detained and accused of collaborating with a foreign power, punishable by our laws. I think we all agree on that here in the house. I really do not know ‘what card’ we will have up our sleeve to face these provocations if in the end they decide to take to the streets. And in these things, as Fidel always did, you have to be one step ahead, not act or riposte blindly. And I do not think that everything that we disseminate here on TV and others, the acts of reaffirmation, etc., have the repercussion that we need them to have outside of Cuba, because I think the propaganda outside is very strong, and people believe everything that the media says.”
4) “There must be a different preparation by the leadership of the country (for 15N) and I think that people were also a bit surprised about 11J. What worries me are the actions to face 15N.”
5) “One member of the family says that they should not be imprisoned now, because they would start a campaign against us, but I think that the campaign to bring them to court will take place at any time convenient for us; the measures should be taken that politically WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE THEM.”
6) “We were not prepared for 11J. However, for 15N we are. Let us see how it unfolds.”
7) “Hi Arnold, I haven’t heard anyone talk about 15N in my neighbourhood. It is not a matter of concern. Today I was in a queue to buy oil, and the neighbours commented on the length of the queue…Chicken is available, and that there is mincemeat for the month’s quota at the butcher shop. However, I saw everyone in their daily routine, as if there is an event to celebrate and that it’s the day (15N) that the students will resume face-to-face classes in the schools [in-person school attendance was suspended as a result of COVID-19]. And that is happiness for everyone.
8) Since the latest revelations on November 1 by agent Fernando proving without a shadow of doubt that Yunior and Archipiélago are a of creation of the U.S. to foment violent regime change, some Cubans are asking: “if it may be true that some people were confused and joined in the July 11 anti-government protests, will they be confused on 15N?
Just in from Santa Clara and elsewhere on the island:
9) “Taking into account the complaints that have been made public, including the uncovering of a Cuban security agent Fernando who was infiltrated in that group, I believe that if there was someone confused with the true objectives of the supposed ‘march’, it has already been clarified and I do not believe that they can manage to deceive many people to continue with their plans. If they continue, they will be accumulating crimes for which they can be prosecuted and convicted in Cuba according to the law.”
10) “Characters like these have no opportunity to carry out their subversion plans in Cuba, even if their trolls, influencers and bots on social networks want us to believe otherwise. The reality is that it is our revolutionary organizations can mobilize thousands of people in a short period to come out in defense of the Revolution.”
11) “These people are either paid, or they are fascists, or they are not really Cubans. I will never understand the hatred they have for us when we only want the best for all humanity.”
12) (It is no secret, in general terms, how the supporters of the Revolution act in a situation such as November 15.) Several sources across the island, especially in Havana, indicate for example that “the Cuban government is well informed about the activities of the counterrevolutionary media activists, the most known of whom is Yunior in Havana. The CDRs (Comités de Defensa de la Revolución- neighborhood committees) are organized with the intention of following them if they leave their houses, so that any action would immediately have revolutionaries on the streets to outnumber the counterrevolutionaries.” It confirms what other sources have stated as quoted above: “our revolutionary organizations can mobilize thousands of people in a short period to come out in defense of the Revolution.”
*
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.
Arnold August is a Montreal-based author and journalist whose articles are published in web sites across North America, Latin America, Europe and the Middle East in English, Spanish and French. He is a Fellow at the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute.
He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
All images in this article are from The Canada Files
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Last Thursday, the flagship of the US 6th Fleet, USS Mount Whitney, entered the Black Sea as NATO forces prepared for large-scale military exercises in the Mediterranean. USS Mount Whitney joined the guided missile destroyer USS Porter that was already present in the area to conduct a “routine patrol” – over 8,000km away from the North American continent.
Later, the Russian frigate Admiral Essen conducted exercises simulating a response to an enemy air attack. The Russian fleet said in a statement that “during the exercises, the [Admiral Essen] frigate’s air defense team fixed the targets in their crosshairs and destroyed them by firing anti-aircraft missiles.” The exercise was a clear demonstration that Russia is fully prepared to defend its sovereignty in the Black Sea. This was perfectly encapsulated by an image of what appears to be the Admiral Essen frigate monitoring the actions of USS Porter, USS Mount Whitney and Bulgaria’s BGS Gordi in the Black Sea.
The Russian warship is one of the three frigates from Project 11356 that is operating in the Black Sea. The ships in this series have a displacement of about 4,000 tons, a speed of 30 knots and an autonomy of 30 days. Admiral Essen is equipped with Kalibr cruise missiles, the Shtil-1 anti-aircraft defense system and 100mm caliber artillery batteries, among other things. In short, by using the Admiral Essen frigate, Russia is sending a powerful message to NATO that it is taking the defense of its maritime space seriously, especially since the June debacle of Britain’s HMS Defender is still fresh in the memory.
Russia has repeatedly warned NATO that the bloc’s growing activity near Russian waters could result in unwanted incidences. By sending warships to the Black Sea, Washington is not contributing to stability in the region. On the contrary, the US is trying to push regional Black Sea countries, such as Bulgaria and Georgia, towards confrontational policies against Moscow.
Washington wants the global community to get used to the idea that the Black Sea is in its sphere of influence. Due to the US’ attempts to assert its authority over the Black Sea, the location of several Russian ice-free ports and the country’s only direct access to the Mediterranean Sea, tensions are developing.
Russia already demonstrated its resolve in defending its sovereign territory when HMS Defender was humiliated after attempting to violate Russian maritime space. Knowing that Russia takes its security seriously, Washington is provoking tensions between two nuclear powers. There is an impression that the US is providing psychological support to Ukraine and other peripheral NATO partners like Georgia. However, as was demonstrated during the 2008 South Ossetia War and the 2014 Donbass War, the US is willing to embolden and encourage these countries into wars that will involve Russia, but leave them abandoned and isolated when faced against the Russian military.
It is worth noting though that the Russian exercise is not a direct response to the presence of American warships, but rather because Russian forces in the Black Sea area need constant training as the region is becoming more tense. The latest Russian exercise occurred just as American warships entered the Black Sea. It is common for an American ship to appear in the Black Sea on a rotating basis. What makes the current situation with the USS Mount Whitney and USS Porter different is that this time two ships entered at the same time. This is alarming, especially if it will become a regular trend to see multiple American warships in the Black Sea.
Due to this escalation, Russia needed to respond in one way or another, and its latest exercise in the Black Sea aligned with the rare entrance of multiple US warships in the Black Sea. By responding in such a way, even if it was an accidental alignment, the US and its NATO allies will always need to consider what the Russian response will be if the Atlantic bloc decides to engage in hostilities.
Despite Britain’s humiliation in June, US-led NATO forces have evidently not given up their challenges against Russia at sea. It is recalled that in October, the US Navy destroyer USS Chafee tried to violate Russia’s national border in the Sea of Japan, but was forced to withdraw under pressure from Russia’s large anti-submarine ship Admiral Tributs. Although the US is undoubtedly pulling its resources to focus on opposing China in the Pacific region, it does not mean that the US has completely withdrawn from challenging Russia elsewhere. In fact, by sending USS Mount Whitney and USS Porter to the Black Sea simultaneously, the US has only escalated tensions and made its intentions clear.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
The so-called “booster shots” for employees at the University Clinic in Münster (UKM) were stopped on Friday. The reason: an unusually large number of side effects were noted. Just hours earlier, the hospital had announced that it would give all 11 000 employees the third vaccination.
According to a media report, the suspension was confirmed by a spokeswoman for the UKM after a request from the Münster radio station. Only hours earlier it had been announced that all 11 000 employees would be given an “offer” for the “booster vaccination” by the end of the year.
The onset of these adverse “vaccination reactions” must therefore have been correspondingly alarming and rapid.
According to a report in the Westfälische Nachrichten, these booster gene jabs for the staff working in the intensive care units were temporarily suspended in view of the long weekend. “That was too much for us,” commented the UKM’s nursing director to the newspaper.
They had feared that because of side effects it would have been impossible to maintain the work roster. However, they want to catch up on the “boosters” in a “coordinated” manner later. For this purpose, the hospital has set up its own vaccination center for the third shots, as can be seen on the UKM website.
The German medical president Klaus Reinhardt stated on Saturday that there was currently no scientific evidence for the necessity of the booster for everyone, reported a daily newspaper.
Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder (CSU), Germany’s vaccine salesman, is however calling for more antibody tests and booster vaccinations for all age groups.
In Austria, several hundred employees from the care and health sector have started a Facebook page #soschautswirklichaus to campaign against vaccine mandates. They protest against compulsory vaccination and bullying in the workplace against those who do not want to be injected. Many of them fear losing their jobs.
One medical staff member noted that she had worked in a Corona ward for a year. The “experiences do not correspond to the image in the mainstream media,” she revealed.
*
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: In Upper Austria nurses and doctors campaign against forced jabs. Their “experiences do not correspond to the image in the mainstream media”. (Source: Facebook/FWM)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Sesame Street’s Big Bird is making headlines today after tweeting he had received the COVID vaccine.
The fictional children’s character is supposed to be 6 years old, which if he were real, means he became eligible for the COVID vaccine last week when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for emergency use in children ages 5 through 11.
Big Bird’s endorsement of the COVID vaccine for children isn’t an isolated incident — it’s just the latest example of Sesame Street endorsing federal health agencies’ COVID messaging for young children, with the help of corporate media.
But the announcement was met with backlash from elected officials and media pundits who accused the character of spreading government propaganda.
On Nov. 6, Sesame Street and CNN collaborated on a special the news outlet described as, “Familiar faces from Sesame Street and experts from CNN and across the country will be ready to answer children’s questions about the Covid-19 vaccine and staying healthy, and coping with big feelings as they continue to face unprecedented challenges in their young lives.”
The program featured Sesame Street muppet Rosita, who after getting her first COVID shot, told CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Sesame Street viewers, “My mommy and my papi said that it will help keep me, my friends, my neighbors, my abuela all healthy.”
Commenting on the use of popular children’s characters to promote vaccines, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, today said:
“The use of trusted and beloved figures in this propaganda assault to induce children into submitting as guinea pigs to injections with an experimental high-risk zero-liability medical product with no proven benefits for kids is unconscionable and revolting.
”Big Pharma has turned Big Bird into a child predator.”
The Nov. 6 program is the most recent example of the CNN and Sesame street collaboration that began early on in the pandemic.
In October 2020, Sesame Street collaborated with CNN to create pandemic-centered content for children by producing a 10-part series, “The ABC’s of COVID.” The series featured Elmo, Big Bird, Cookie Monster and other Sesame Street characters.
In several episodes of the series, Dr. Leana Wen, former Baltimore health commissioner, is a guest who fields COVID-related questions from fictional Sesame Street characters and children.
When the news broke that the FDA authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for emergency use in children, Wen described it as “fantastic news” that “gives much needed peace of mind to so many parents who want additional protection for their kids.”
Wen, an advocate for stricter vaccine mandates, national digital proof-of-immunity certificates, is a Young Global Leader at the World Economic Forum, and a fellow at the Brookings Institute, a think tank heavily funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — potential conflicts of interests she does not disclose in her media appearances.
During an Oct. 20, 2020, episode of “ABC’S of COVID,”CNN’s Gupta stressed the importance to Sesame Street viewers of “wearing a mask outdoors.” When a child asked Gupta if they can go to the store with their mom if they have a mask, Gupta said no, saying “it’s important to just stay home.”
Dr. Amy Acton, director of health at the Ohio Department of Health, told Elmo “wearing a mask makes you a superhero.”
Episode 5 introduced the idea of death-by-COVID to the young children by presenting a collage of people who supposedly died from the virus. “There are people getting very sick and sometimes the people who got sick are no longer with us,” Gupta told Big Bird.
In Episode 6, Gupta is asked by a child if they can go back to school without a COVID vaccine. Underscoring that children will in fact be getting the shot eventually, Gupta responds by saying the “COVID vaccine is certainly going to help [go back to school]…”
In the series finale, the featured guest was none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci, who facilitated a child-oriented conversation around COVID vaccines. Fauci told children not only do they need a COVID vaccine to stay safe, but it’s possible they will need a shot every year because “we don’t know how long protection lasts.”
Fauci then told Sesame Street viewers the COVID vaccine is the reason they’re getting Christmas presents this year.
“I took a trip up to the North Pole and vaccinated Santa Claus myself,” Fauci said. “So now he can come down the chimney and safely leave the presents.”
Sesame Street’s corporate leadership and their fictional characters have been featured on The World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset Podcast,” where Sesame Street’s Grover sat alongside Sesame Workshop’s President of Global Impact, Sherrie Westin, as she told listeners that the “pandemic has created a [financial] opportunity” for investors.
Sesame Street’s private foundation of the co-founder and permanent board director, Joan Ganz Cooney, is funded by those with a direct vested interest in the uptake of COVID vaccines. The foundation, called Sesame Workshop’s Joan Ganz Cooney Center, receives “generous funding” from The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and from the philanthropic foundation of pharmaceutical behemoth Johnson & Johnson.
*
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.
Jeremy Loffredo is a freelance reporter for The Defender. His investigative reporting has been featured in The Grayzone and Unlimited Hangout. Jeremy formerly produced news programs at RT America.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”. There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.
You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.
Today, the Marine Corps Commandant blames ‘disinformation‘ for the fact that 12,500 marines are still refusing the vaccination and may end up departing military service if they do not comply. The essential ranks once again defined as non-essential over their healthy and free choice not to take an experimental vaccine for a virus that poses no significant threat.
VIA NBC – Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger cited “disinformation” as the reason there are thousands under his leadership who have not yet been vaccinated for the coronavirus.
[…] Each Marine must be vaccinated by Nov. 28, but troops are not considered fully vaccinated until two weeks after the final dose of a two-shot vaccine or that same time period after a one-shot dose. This means the final shot will actually have to be given by this Sunday. “We have to be ready to go every day, all the time,” Berger explained. “We are the ready force. We have to be ready to go.”
If the vaccination rate of the Marines remains the same until the deadline, it would leave more than 12,500 Marines unvaccinated, according to Military.com. (read more)
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
For too many Americans, turning on their faucets for a glass of water is like pouring a cocktail of chemicals. Lead, arsenic, the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS and many other substances are often found in drinking water at potentially unsafe levels, particularly in low-income and underserved communities.
From the lead contamination crisis in Flint, Mich., to widespread radium pollution in Brady, Texas, the perils of unsafe water are finally prompting lawmakers and regulators to weigh how to act.
What’s needed is major new federal funding to improve drinking water quality, pay for much-needed lead line replacements, help disadvantaged areas and start to tackle the widespread PFAS problem that has made headlines across the country.
EWG’s landmark Tap Water Database shows how polluted drinking water can be, and why the efforts to fix it at the source are vital. The database collects mandatory annual test reports from 2014 to 2019, produced by almost 50,000 water utilities in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
It reveals that when some Americans drink a glass of tap water, they’re also potentially getting a dose of industrial or agricultural contaminants linked to cancer, brain and nervous system damage, fertility problems, hormone disruption and other health harms.
And those risks likely increase in underserved communities, particularly those with higher Black or Latino populations. EWG’s research finds that people living in such areas might have a greater collective risk of cancer from the contaminants in their drinking water supplies than people in other parts of the country.
Why does this unacceptable situation persist? One reason is that there is not enough funding to help replace lead pipelines and clean up our drinking water. Another is that federal water safety standards aren’t keeping pace with the latest science on contaminants – some regulations haven’t been updated in more than 50 years, and the Environmental Protection Agency is not moving fast enough on new drinking water rules.
Ambitious efforts to safeguard the water we drink must achieve that goal for every American.
It’s easy to be pessimistic about whether that idea is realistic, given that Flint is in its seventh year of the lead catastrophe. Yet an increased focus by Congress on drinking water funding, the rising and necessary role of environmental equity, and firm commitments for improvements by those with the power to make them happen all provide reason to be hopeful.
Tackling historic inequities in drinking water supplies
A growing number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers are advocating for legislation that would significantly boost funding to improve the quality of drinking water and end long-running pollution problems. Such spending would be an important move toward correcting a historic wrong – the fact that marginalized and low-income communities have the least access to safe drinking water.
A recent report by the Environmental Policy Innovation Center that analyzed the EPA’s drinking water funding program from 2011 to 2020 found that drinking water systems serving smaller communities and communities with greater numbers of people of color were less likely to receive assistance through the program. And without the resources to improve water quality, their systems will continue to suffer.
Flint, a majority-Black city of roughly 100,000 people, may be the most prominent of many recent examples of people suffering with dirty drinking water.
This type of situation occurs when water systems don’t get the funds they need to replace harmful lead pipes.
It happens when people living in these areas have no option other than to buy filters to achieve cleaner water, even though they might not be able to afford them.
It happens when rural communities have no choice but to drink polluted water from wells fouled by industrial agriculture – because there are no resources that provide safe drinking water supplies.
It happens when pollution emergencies occur and communities are told to use bottled water. But this is not a long-term solution. And bottled water can contain contaminants and costs hundreds of times more than tap water.
This means these communities are the ones that suffer most from the harmful effects of consuming unsafe drinking water.
Fixing the situation requires a new approach – ensuring that much-needed aid is prioritized for underserved areas, so all communities can benefit from safer water.
Just because the scale of the problem is vast does not mean it can’t be solved. Newark, N.J., took almost five years to replace 20,000 lead lines following detection of high lead levels in the city’s drinking water supplies. But the work is almost done, and just because it requires time and money is no reason not to do it.
Disadvantaged communities that have shouldered an unfair burden of some of the most-polluted drinking water in the country must finally get the help they need, and only a major federal funding boost can achieve community-level improvements.
But achieving true water equity also requires stricter safety standards to ensure that drinking water supplies no longer have pollution levels harmful to human health.
Ensuring water safety standards are adequate and enforceable
The EPA and states do have some standards in place to protect drinking water supplies, but these limits on specific pollutants are often too weak to make the water safe to drink. Even when the standards are sufficiently stringent, a lack of resources to enforce the limits means the water remains unsafe, or that drinking water systems can’t fund the upgrades necessary to clean their supplies.
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act , or SDWA, has helped to improve U.S. water quality. Enacted in 1974 and updated in 1986 and 1996, it established EPA standards for some contaminants, such as arsenic, copper and lead. But progress on regulating pollutants has stalled instead of keeping up with current science.
The last time the EPA set a new legal limit for a drinking water pollutant was in 2000, when the agency took steps to lower uranium levels in tap water. Since then, Americans have continued to suffer from widespread drinking water contamination, particularly from emerging contaminants.
This inaction at the federal level continues to exempt from adequate regulation PFAS, hexavalent chromium and more than 160 other unregulated contaminants that pollute tap water. Millions of people are exposed to unsafe drinking water as a result.
For some other chemicals, the EPA’s maximum contaminant levels, or MCLs – the upper limit on a pollutant legally allowed in drinking water – haven’t been updated in 50 years.
Yet there is extensive scientific research to justify the agency’s pursuit of much more stringent MCLs. The legal federal standard for nitrate, for example, is based on a recommendation from 1962, even though studies support lowering the current MCL by several orders of magnitude to protect against the risk of cancer.
Drinking water standards are often based too heavily on cost concerns and political considerations. That’s why EWG, focused solely on what’s necessary to protect public health within an adequate margin of safety, has suggested stricter standards for several contaminants that would truly protect public health.
Here’s the well-kept secret about existing drinking water standards: Legal doesn’t necessarily mean safe. The vast majority of the nation’s drinking water supplies get a passing grade from federal and state regulatory agencies. But many of the 324 contaminants detected by local utilities’ tests are found at levels that may be legal under EPA’s SDWA standards or state regulations – though they far exceed levels authoritative scientific studies have found to pose health risks.
Even for chemicals that are regulated, the legal limit is often hundreds of times higher than the health standards recommended by scientists and public health agencies. Too often, legal limits are based more on what can be achieved in terms of treatment costs, and less on public health.
And water treatment facilities in many communities, especially in rural areas, are outdated, overloaded or underfunded, as urgently needed investments in water infrastructure get postponed year after year.
But even here, there’s reason for optimism. The EPA has announced plans to initiate a rulemaking to regulate a limited number of industrial PFAS discharges. It falls far short of what’s needed to truly tackle these forever chemicals, but it’s a move in the right direction that shows some regulators can act when needed.
A common purpose: Safe drinking water for everyone
Polluted tap water is not and should not be a partisan issue; it affects everyone. And finally, it appears that the regulators and lawmakers with the power to address drinking water safety on a community-wide level are starting to listen.
But far more resources are needed from the federal government to thoroughly address all forms and sources of drinking water contamination.
The EPA also needs to consider drinking water quality as one of the metrics it uses to decide how to distribute its drinking water program funds more equitably, so the worst-affected areas receive the most help.
The quality of U.S. drinking water remains uneven across America. For many, access to safe tap water has been an impossibility for too long.
But with more funding, stronger federal safety standards and a greater focus on helping historically disadvantaged areas, the state of American drinking water can eventually be strong in every community.
There are challenges when it comes to delivering safe drinking water to millions of families who currently don’t have it. But they can be solved when the public and our elected officials come together around a common purpose: the right of every American, regardless of race, region or income, to have clean water.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
While the United States continues to rule the global arms trade, Australia is pushing to increase its role in the deadly industry. Yemenis are paying the price.
‘You’ve got to…get your hands covered in blood if you want to be one of the big 10’ was the warning for Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull when he announced Australia’s goal to become a top global weapons exporter. ‘[You’ll]…be selling to Saudi Arabia, to the United Arab Emirates…to these very authoritarian countries…engaged in major conflict…in places like Syria…in Yemen. You’ve really got to get your hands dirty.’
That warning came from Andrew Feinstein, one of the world’s foremost experts on the arms trade, interviewed on ABC radio in early 2018. He was soon proved correct.
Australia had already been doing secret arms deals with the countries fighting the catastrophic Yemen war, despite large numbers of civilian casualties and mounting evidence of war crimes. News of the deals emerged publicly in late 2018: Australia had approved dozens of military export permits to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the key nations fighting in Yemen. By March 2021, Australian military export approvals to these two nations had topped 100: eighty to the UAE, twenty-three to Saudi Arabia.
Australia’s Yemen war
The ongoing Yemen war is now widely known to have caused the world’s biggest current humanitarian catastrophe. But even as early as October 2016 the UN was warning of likely war crimes and calling for nations to stop supplying weaponry to the countries fighting there: ‘Since the beginning of this conflict in Yemen, weddings, marketplaces, hospitals, schools—and now mourners at a funeral—have been hit, resulting in massive civilian casualties and zero accountability for those responsible’.
The world was aware of the horror being inflicted on Yemeni civilians by the Saudis and the UAE by the time Christopher Pyne, as Australia’s new defence industry minister, flew to both countries in late 2016 to spruik Australian weaponry. Just months later, Pyne returned to the UAE for further talks. While in Abu Dhabi, he attended the Middle East’s largest weapons expo, the International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX). Pyne said he was discussing a possible $1 billion worth of arms deals with the UAE, adding that Australian companies could finalise hundreds of millions of dollars in sales at IDEX 2017.
His prediction came to pass when, in early 2018, Canberra-based weapon-maker Electro Optic Systems (EOS) announced a $410-million contract with an unnamed customer for EOS’s remote weapons systems. The secret customer was later exposed as the UAE, and the deal size increased to $450 million. In October 2017, Pyne again flew to the Middle East, for more meetings in Riyadh.
Cosying up to repressive regimes
In August 2018, a Saudi-coalition missile strike on a school bus in Yemen killed forty children and eleven adults and injured dozens more. Despite this atrocity, the Australian government wanted to get closer to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
The following month the Saudi assistant minister for defence visited Australia and attended one of Australia’s largest weapons expos, Land Forces. Pyne had just been appointed defence minister. During Land Forces 2018, Pyne said Australia was looking at signing new formal ‘defence industry’ agreements with the UAE and Saudi Arabia. It was startling news that Australia was considering locking itself into arms-supply arrangements with these two repressive regimes.
In October 2018 the question of arms sales to Saudi Arabia erupted as a global issue. The gruesome murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul dominated headlines for weeks. On this subject, Australia’s new prime minister found a moral voice. ‘We are appalled beyond description by what has happened’, said Scott Morrison.
In the wake of Khashoggi’s murder, Foreign Minister Marise Payne said ‘all options are on the table’ when asked whether Australia would follow the lead of several European countries and stop exporting weapons to Saudi Arabia. Defence Minister Pyne said future military exports to the Saudis would be assessed with regard to the ‘deplorable’ events.
Meanwhile, Pyne tried to distance himself from the Saudis by perpetuating the myth that Australia can dictate what Saudi Arabia does with Australian-supplied weapons. Pyne was reported as saying that strict export controls ‘prevent’ our equipment being used in the ongoing conflict in Yemen. But Australia’s ‘strict export controls’ can prevent no such thing. In weapons deals with Saudi Arabia or the UAE the only point of strict control is the decision on whether to approve the export. If we want to be strict, Australia can say, ‘No’. Once an export is despatched, the chance of Australia exercising control over how those weapons are used plummets to virtually zero.
Military export applications
A freedom of information request by this author revealed that Defence has denied three applications for military exports to Saudi Arabia since 1 July 2019 and approved six. Before that date it had not denied any applications for military exports to Saudi Arabia since the Yemen war started. Twenty-three Saudi applications were approved from mid-2015 to the end of March 2021. No applications for military export permits to the UAE have been denied; eighty were approved.
Illegal weapons transfers
Governments routinely attach ‘end-user certificates’ to military exports that prohibit the retransfer of the weapons to third parties without approval. Despite this, unauthorised third-party transfers occur regularly. There are rarely any repercussions for offending nations.
A German public broadcaster partnered with the Jordan-based Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism in 2018 to investigate weapons transfers into Yemen. The investigation found, ‘No penalties have ever been levied for breaching end user agreements’.
During the year-long investigation, Egyptian journalist Mohamed Abo-Elgheit uncovered hundreds of examples of weapons and military vehicles supplied by Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium and others either being used in Yemen by al-Qaeda and other non-state armed groups or offered for resale, still brand new, on the black market. Western governments had sent the weapons and equipment to Saudi Arabia and the UAE with ‘strict’ end-user agreements in place supposedly preventing transfer to third parties.
The investigation found:
armoured vehicles supplied to the UAE and Saudi Arabia by the United States being used by non-state armed groups (one later added to a terrorist watch list) in Yemen, some draped in UAE flags. The United States said it would investigate.
large armoured vehicles the United Kingdom had supplied to Saudi Arabia were also found in use by armed groups in Yemen, one being driven by a known fundamentalist Islamist leader. The UK government refused to engage with the journalist, saying the investigation was politically motivated.
Germany initially claimed it would investigate breaches, but, when provided with serial numbers and photographs of German weapons for sale on the black market, it stopped responding to the journalist.
the Austrian government did not respond to evidence of hundreds of its rifles supplied to Saudi Arabia being used in Yemen, some by children, others for sale in markets.
Swiss grenades supplied to the UAE were filmed in the hands of Yemeni fighters. Switzerland said it would investigate.
Does the Australian government have a greater ability than any of these countries to exert control over the Saudis and the UAE as to how Australian weapons and other military exports are used? Can Australians trust bland assurances from the defence department that Australia’s ‘strict export controls’ prevent the illegal use or transfer of Australian weapons?
Flouting international law
After the launch of Australia’s Defence Export Strategy, Pyne gave a commitment that Australia would only authorise military exports to countries ‘like ourself who support the rules-based international order’. He’d broken this commitment before he even made it. Or, to put it more plainly, he lied.
On top of extensive documented breaches of international law in Yemen by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi Arabia, the UAE is widely known to be illegally arming and supporting rebel Libyan forces trying to overthrow Libya’s internationally recognised government, in defiance of a UN arms embargo. Following repeated breaches over many years by multiple countries, including the UAE, the UN has labelled the embargo ‘totally ineffective’. Regardless, Australia has continued selling weapons and other military equipment to the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
‘Australia’s actions in approving arms exports to countries that are known to be committing serious violations of human rights, and its failure to be transparent about this, are inconsistent with its obligations under international law’, says former Australian politician and international lawyer Melissa Parke, who is now one of the UN’s group of experts on Yemen. ‘Having signed up to…these international laws, the Australian government can’t just cherry pick what aspects it’s going to abide by, especially when it…lectures other countries, such as China and Russia, about the importance of the international rule of law.’
Is there another way?
Nearly 2.3 million children under the age of five in Yemen will suffer acute malnutrition this year and 400,000 could die if they do not receive urgent treatment, said UNICEF in February. Save the Children says 1.71 million children are in displacement camps in Yemen, and 90 per cent of these children don’t have sufficient access to food, clean water, or education. ‘Yemen is the world’s worst humanitarian disaster’, says Philippa Lysaght, humanitarian policy and advocacy adviser at Save the Children Australia. ‘To think that Australia is somehow complicit in this catastrophic war is horrifying. It is time to stop the war on children.’
Bruce Riedel from prestigious US think tank The Brookings Institution has called the Yemen war ‘America’s war’. He says Barack Obama could have stopped the war right at the start in 2015 by cutting off military, diplomatic and intelligence support for the Saudi-led coalition. Riedel notes the huge proportion (86 per cent) of Saudi Arabia’s weaponry supplied by the United States and the United Kingdom and says, ‘It is time to stop the carnage in Yemen and stop fueling the arms race in the Middle East’. America’s loyal ally Australia should do the same.
Arms-trade campaigner Ann Feltham is succinct: ‘The arms trade fuels war, exacerbates regional tensions, gives succour to human rights abusers, and squanders resources’. Earlier this year, Australia confirmed it would not ban arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
German newspaper Berliner Zeitung has published a report seeking to answer why an “unusually large number of professional and amateur soccer players have collapsed recently.”
Headlined ‘Puzzling heart diseases in football,’ the report begins by highlighting the case of FC Barcelona’s Sergio Agüero, the 33-year-old striker who recently had to be withdrawn from a match after 41 minutes suffering from dizziness and breathing difficulties.
The article lists a large number of recent cases of footballers who have had heart problems or collapsed on the field, in some cases leading to death.
That list is republished here:
As we previously highlighted, other professional athletes have also recently suffered similar health problems, including 24-year-old Slovak hockey player Boris Sádecký, who tragically died after collapsing on the ice during a match last Friday.
28-year-old bodybuilder Jake Kazmarek also died “unexpectedly” four days after taking the COVID jab.
The Berliner Zeitung article doesn’t speculate as to whether reactions from COVID vaccines had anything to do with the rash of collapses and heart problems.
However, it does note that “heart muscle inflammation (myocarditis)” can “already occur in the course of banal virus infections” and lead to “life-threatening cardiac arrhythmias.”
A “small number” of vaccinated people have suffered heart inflammation problems as a result of the vaccine, according to a Wall Street Journal report.
Researchers are now investigating reports that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines “are likely causing the inflammatory heart conditions myocarditis and pericarditis.”
*
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).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
It has for a while been discussed that China has the World’s largest navy, with 355 ships.
Chinese navy-vessels are on average smaller in tonnage than the US Navy – so measured in tonnage, the US Navy is for a short while still largest.
This greater US tonnage is largely due to the super-heavy aircraft carriers of the US. China is building her 3rd carrier, the Type 003 which will be around 80% the tonnage of a US carrier, and China is already preparing her 4th carrier Type 004 which will have nuclear propulsion, electric catapults for accelerating the aircraft, and will be fully comparable to the newest and heaviest US carriers.
Aircraft carriers are, however, beginning to look like dinosaurs. Carriers are vulnerable to long range “carrier killer” missiles and instead of carriers, long range aircraft like the Su-35 on distributed bases can do the job. Which is why I propose that a country like India contemplates to not build more carriers and instead invest in super long-range combat aircraft for sea command.
Notably – measured in naval missile tubes, China’s PLA Navy has been referenced to have 90% as many launch tubes as the US Navy. This means, that in stand-off firepower, the surface navies of the two countries are largely equal. This gives China a decisive theatre advantage out to Guam both in naval force and land based Chinese theatre missiles and aircraft launched long-range missiles.
Qualitatively, China is also closing in, but in subsurface warfare the US still has a large lead. Which makes the USS SN-22 “Connecticut incident” more conspicuous, since this is the stealthiest and most advanced US ”Seawolf” attack submarine class, of which even the US only has three. Now, China has probably been able to locate and decapacitate one unit – or one third – of the ”Seawolf” fleet of the most advanced US subs. Really a huge Chinese achievement, if this is the case, which it most likely is.
Even more importantly – China has the World’s largest ship-building output – also in naval vessels.
This is very interestingly confirmed in a report, which states that the PLA Navy will presumably grow to 460 ships in less than 10 years, by 2030.
The US is a loser
Since Obama, the US has feverishly and vainly tried to make up for China’s superior naval program.
First was Obama’s “pivot to Asia” – concentrating a larger percentage of US global navy assets to encircle China around Taiwan and the South China Sea.
Second, and simultaneously, for the past many years, the US has in a frenzy tried to increase the operational tempo and up-time of their US Navy ships – effectively running the US Navy vessels down due to over-use and cut-downs in time for maintenance. We see the result in US Navy accidents.
Thirdly, the US Navy has every year lobbied for building a larger US Navy – the US Navy has hoped for something in about 15 years on the order of 350 US naval ships – which China already has. And in 15 years, China (ref. link above) will have have surpassed the expected 460 ships for 2030.
Fourthly, the US is calling upon its vassals, the UK, France (before the US put dirt on France, like the US often does with even its partners), Australia, and Japan to join the US Navy to encircle China. Each of them only contribute marginally. For instance, the once mighty UK Navy could only contribute with one single feeble mini-carrier, the Queen Elizabeth II with a small contingent of the short-range F-35B. Ridiculous in the long-range theater of the Western Pacific.
The UK even did not have ships enough to supply its own escort fleet for the QE II propaganda-tour to Asia, so the US and even the small Netherlands had to supply escort ships to protect the helpless Queen Elizabeth II. France is the same thing, wanting to patrol both the Indian Ocean and the French colonies in the Pacific with a single French basket-case carrier. Germany sent a frigate to “frighten China” – yes, so low can you go. Australia will only have new submarines in such a long-distant future day that doomsday will be long over. Only Japan is doing something serious, but far from decisive, mostly annoying China.
Fifthly, the US is trying to recruit India. India’s problems with China in the Himalayas is very much due to this, and due to India’s abrogation of Kashmir’s autonomy. India’s problems with China are to a large degree self-made. The US does not care about India’s problems in Himalaya – or about India per se at all. All the US talk about “democracy” is just to please the Indians. For the US, it is all about recruiting the Indian Navy as a subsidiary force into the naval game of the US.
All this maniac US ado is in vain for the US.
The US cannot keep up.
Taiwan will go to Beijing – and US global power will go to the bottom.
*
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.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.
Featured image:PLA Navy – Karsten Riise and Stiven Sanchez, Unsplash CC0
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
In the lead up to the February 25, 1990 elections, President George H.W. Bush told the Nicaraguan people that the U.S. would keep funding the Contras (counter-revolutionaries recruited, funded and directed by President Reagan, the State Department and the CIA in 1980s illegal war), block loans and maintain the brutal economic blockade where Nicaragua couldn’t even get medicine or parts for an x-ray machine.
Although half a million people came out to show support for the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) days before the vote, the FSLN lost to the U.S. hand-picked candidate, Violetta Chamorro, because of the blackmail and coercion.
With the election result, Nicaragua turned over power effectively, to the U.S., which imposed 17 years of neoliberal austerity. Just about everything was privatized, leading to a reversal of social gains like the glass of milk for children program.
Thousands of people joined the ranks of the unemployed, tried to migrate to the U.S., or went to the cemetery before their time.
This is exactly what the U.S. has again attempted: Brutal sanctions in the form of the 2018 Nica act; and days before the election the State Department pushed a new package of sanctions called RENACER through Congress—screaming to the Nicaraguan people: “you vote Sandinista and we will make your lives hell.”
U.S. agents inside and outside Nicaragua and foreign leaders like the president of Costa Rica, Carlos Alvarado Quesada, told Nicaraguans to boycott Sunday’s election and not to vote.
This message came through to Nicaraguans on all the media created and funded by the United States since the Sandinistas returned to the presidency in 2007. In the weeks and months before the November 7 vote, the U.S. government and its media echo chamber continued to spread misinformation about Ortega and the FSLN to create the idea that the vote would not be fair.
Ballot [Source: Courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
Polling place board President explains the ballot in Sunday’s election in the Barrio Guadalupe, Leon. [Source: Photo Courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
On Monday, the results of the election were announced: the FSLN won by a landslide with 75.92% of the vote. Voter turnout was 65.23% of all eligible voters, higher than in the last U.S. election where voter turnout is measured by registered, not eligible voters.
The Constitutional Liberal Party placed second, like in the 2016 elections, with 14.15%; the rest of the vote was spread among the other four parties.
[Source: Courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
The Sandinistas (2.1 million card-carrying in a country of 6.3 million) danced in the streets all night long throughout the country to celebrate their victory.
[Source: Courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
Polling Station minutes were pasted on the wall of the school, so people know the results almost immediately.
Polling Station Board President looks for voter’s name and picture on that polling station’s voter role. [Source: Photo courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
Previously, Blinken had accused Ortega of orchestrating a “sham election” and seeking to establish with his wife, Rosario Murillo, an “authoritarian dynasty.”
In 2018, the U.S. used cyberwar to launch a coup against the FSLN—through bott farms in Miami and El Salvador.
In the first few days of the coup attempt, millions of messages saying the government and police were repressing students flooded Facebook—total lies.
When protests erupted, the first three deaths were caused by the opposition—a policeman, a young Sandinista defending the Tipitapa mayor’s office and a passerby.
Since then, many Sandinista citizens have learned well how to use social media to defend the truth about the advances of their revolution.
So, the State Department joined forces with META—the company that owns Facebook, Instagram, and others. They disappeared the personal accounts of nearly 1,000 Sandinistas as well as dozens of pages of digital communicators.
This was to silence the Sandinistas in the last days before the election and turn people against the FSLN. Dr. Timothy Bood, who covered the elections in Nicaragua, was blocked from Facebook for three days for giving his opinion about the U.S. attempted coup in 2018:
[Source: courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
I am one of 67 international journalists covering the elections. There are also 165 people from 27 countries accompanying the elections. We went to Nicaragua’s 15 departments and 2 regions.
I was in León—one of the historic colonial cities which houses the country’s first university and its most famous cathedral.
Cathedral in León. [Source: Photo courtesy of Nan McCurdy]
I visited some 70 polling stations in 5 Voting Centers—all schools. Election day was a very peaceful day—kids were in the parks—and young adults were playing basketball. The police didn’t report even one violent incident in the whole country.
Nicaragua’s electoral process is very well organized with about 245,000 people volunteering to make the elections come off without a hitch. Every party has the right to have a poll watcher—a party election observer—in every one of the 13,459 polling stations.
Each station has a voting board of three people (president, first and second member) from different parties who run the election on the micro level. A voter enters, shows their official ID card—they find her on the voting rolls, then they find her on another page with her name and picture and she signs there.
They explain the ballot to her and she goes to mark the ballot behind a cardboard divider, then folds the ballot and puts it in the ballot box—a process that takes about 6 to 10 minutes. At the end her thumb is stained with ink that takes about three days to come off.
As we were leaving one of the Voting Centers, I started talking to two young men who told me that together with two other friends they made a Facebook Page called La Consigna. Their page was eliminated a week before the elections.
They have been able to re-establish it—unlike many people who tell me that they have not been able to make new accounts. Writer Roger Harris was with me and he asked if they are paid by the government—they cracked up!
They explained that after the attempted coup they wanted to establish a page to defend the revolution and share all the advances the county has in health, education, recreation, food sovereignty, infrastructure, etc.
I asked them what they did for a living—Yasser Hermida is an agro-ecologist and Ricardo García is a graphic designer who teaches at the university
When I looked for La Consigna on Facebook; I scrolled down and they had a picture of our group of U.S. journalists and others covering the elections!
As we left they asked us to tell people in the U.S. that Nicaraguans just want to be left alone to live in peace.
Secretary of State Blinken claims the Sandinistas have no mandate to govern—however the voter turnout rate of 65 percent on Sunday was much higher than the total for the U.S. election—and the 76% victory tally much higher than the vote garnered by the Democratic Party.
It’s hard to imagine in fact how a government could have a greater mandate!
Just after voting himself, late on election day President Ortega said “Today, November 7, … we are holding these elections and we are sure that in this battle, which is a historic battle where we have to decide between … confrontation, war or peace, we are sure that regardless of the political, ideological, religious thought of each one, there are different parties to choose from, and in this way we are burying war and giving life to peace.”
On November 7, most Nicaraguans voted to continue with the amazing advances they have enjoyed since 2007, building a country that has become a very good example for others—despite the ongoing U.S. bullying and war through sanctions.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Nan McCurdy works for the United Methodist Church of the U.S., currently in the state of Puebla, Mexico. She lived in Nicaragua more than thirty years. Nan can be reached at [email protected].
Notes
1. For a classic account of this campaign, see Holly Sklar, Washington’s War on Nicaragua(Boston: South End Press, 1999).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
In these posts I try to highlight how our social, cultural and political structures are rigged to reflect the interests of an economic elite and maintain their power. Because the forces that shape those structures are largely invisible – we mainly notice the people and buildings inside these structures – the way power operates can be difficult to describe and to understand.
To use a familiar analogy, we are like a fish that cannot see the water in which it is submerged. Water completely orders its life: how it swims, that it swims, the limits of where it can swim, and so on.
Power orders our lives similarly. The difference is that the way power is organised in our societies is not natural – “the normal order of things” – in the way water is for a fish. A wealth elite engineers our environment to perpetuate itself and sustain the power structures on which it depends.
My latest: Power needs to be rid of Sanders, just as it earlier rid itself of Corbyn, because they are not chained to the current power paradigm. By refusing to serve the power-cult like most politicians, they threaten to shine a light on its true nature https://t.co/Um9t170547
It is because we are largely blind to this engineered environment that we don’t get out of bed each morning determined to overthrow our governments for maintaining financial systems that tax nurses and teachers at a higher rate than they do transnational corporations; or that protect private, usually inherited, wealth parked offshore; or that reward corporations for “externalising” their costs– that is, offloading them in ways that destroy the environment and the future of our children.
Resignation – our assumption that this is just the way things are – is made possible only because every day we face endless propaganda: in our schools, in our places of higher education, in the workplace, and most especially from the so-called “mainstream” – code for billionaire-owned or state-run – media.
Our minds are battered each day into submission, so much so that fairly quickly our childhood exuberance, curiosity and wonder, and our sense of fairness and justice, is crushed into a soulless technocrat’s ideas of order, efficiency and pragmatism. We are sidetracked into, at best, debates about how we can improve the status quo, rather than whether the status quo works or, even more usefully, whether the status quo is dangerous and eco-cidal.
A pandemic caused either by our pillage of natural habitats or by our meddling with viruses. And a solution to the pandemic that further ravages nature with our plastic waste.
The propaganda system tightly constrains our understanding of political and ideological realities to make them dependent on the economic priorities of the ultra-rich. We become unconscious lobbyists for the lawless and immoral activities of corporations and billionaires.
This ideological capture was neatly illustrated by one liberal analystwho bewailed the danger posed by those who seek to challenge the status quo:
If you want to replace the current system of capitalism with something else, who is going to make your jeans, iPhones and run Twitter?
The layers of ideological protection around this system – the degree to which our intellectual and cultural life is entirely captured by the billionaire class – was highlighted, inadvertently as ever, in an exclusive report this week in the Guardian.
Under the headline “Watchdog stopped ministers breaching neutrality code in top BBC and BFI hires”, we get an insight into how our “watchdogs” operate – not primarily to protect our interests from high-level corruption, but to preserve the existing system of power by preventing it from being discredited.
The Guardian report is based on the response from the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments to a Freedom of Information request. That response reveals that Peter Riddell, who served until last month as the Commissioner overseeing public appointments, blocked efforts by the government of Boris Johnson to rig the system to make it even easier for Tory party donors and cronies to head the UK’s most important public bodies.
Image of democracy
Riddell was appointed to the Commissioner’s position in 2012 by the Conservative government of David Cameron.
Riddell is a former journalist, and one, it should be noted, who is about as establishment as they come. He worked his way up through the economic elite’s house journal, the Financial Times, for 20 years. Then he joined the Times, the political elite’s house journal, where he spent a further two decades, first as a political commentator and then as assistant editor.
Riddell was an early member of the secretive Gibson inquiry that was supposed to investigate British complicity in the US-led torture and rendition programme. The inquiry, with its tightly delimited remit, didn’t even manage to reach the level of a whitewash. It failed to get to grips with the most pressing issues around systemic law-breaking by the UK and US, and what modest findings it did reach were quietly shelved by Cameron’s government.
Riddell has also held senior roles at the Hansard Society and the Institute for Government, both elite institutions concerned with strengthening the substance and image of parliamentary democracy in the UK to avert growing criticism of its glaring deficiencies.
So Riddell – who was honoured by the Queen in 2012 as a Commander of the British Empire (CBE) for his services to journalism – is very much integrated into the establishment that runs the country for its own benefit. But he is also on the wing of it that is most anxious about the masses getting restless if the failures inherent in a system designed to uphold the establishment’s power become too apparent.
Carefully selected
Riddell’s ostensible job as Commissioner for Public Appointments is to assess whether appointments to the bodies that control or regulate public life in the UK are being properly conducted – from the BBC to the various regulatory Of-bodies, cultural institutions like the British Film Institute, the commission that regulates charities, the health and safety executive, museums and galleries, and education oversight bodies like the Office for Students.
Riddell was an ideal person for the job, as Cameron doubtless understood, because he cares deeply about the image of elite institutions.
The candidates for these public bodies – including, of course, Riddell himself – have already been carefully filtered for ideological sympathy to elite goals. The vast majority, like Riddell, have attended private schools and/or gone on to elite universities such as Oxbridge. Like Riddell, they have then typically served in the status-quo adoring, advocacy-trained elite professions, as lawyers or journalists, or they have spent decades working in the various temples to late-stage capitalism, such as banks, investment firms and fund management companies.
Traditionally, the ideological pluralism represented by those appointed to public bodies has varied from a moderate, gently reformist identification with turbo-charged capitalism (neoliberalism) to a complete, dog-eat-dog identification with neoliberalism. Riddell is on the more moderate wing of that already narrow spectrum.
The appointments system has always been heavily rigged – as one would expect – to maintain class privilege. Cliques have no incentive to invite in outsiders, those who might disrupt the financial and ideological gravy train the elite has been growing fat on. The appointments system, by its very nature, is deeply conservative.
Crony appointments
Any challenges to the status quo come not from the left – or so rarely from the left that they can be quickly snuffed out with corporate media-led propaganda-vilification campaigns, as happened with Jeremy Corbyn – but from the right. Which is why the system has a consistent tendency to shift rightwards, even as reality moves leftwards, in the sense that the failure of financial institutions and the collapse of environmental support systems become ever harder to conceal or ignore.
That is the context for understanding the “exposure” of Riddell’s concerns about “interference” by Boris Johnson’s government in the appointments system.
The system Riddell oversees is supposed to ensure that one member – and one member only – of the selection panels that decide who will head the bodies influencing our cultural, intellectual and environmental spaces is “independent”.
The charade of this should be obvious. Riddell’s job is to make sure that, even though the rest of the panel deciding, for example, who gets to run the BBC can be packed with Boris Johnson’s cronies, one member of the panel must be “a non-political senior independent panel member”. They even have an acronym for this sticking plaster: a SIPM.
What does “independent” mean in this case? Only that these solitary figures on the appointments panels should not be “politically active” in public – perhaps to encourage us to imagine that, in secret, there are lots of socialist bankers and hedge fund managers who pick the people who head our most important public bodies. And that, unlike the other panellists, the “independent” one should have some minimal technical understanding of the principles of making public appointments.
In other words, Riddell’s role is to make sure there is one person like him on these selection panels – a moderate apostle for neoliberalism – rather than only dog-at-dog cheerleaders for neoliberalism. And the reason is as cynical as it looks: that it benefits the system that not too many overtly dog-eat-dog candidates get appointed to our most important, visible and cherished public bodies.
Feeble rules
Riddell earnt his place as Commissioner for Public Appointments after a lifetime of working to salvage the image of establishment structures – persuading us that inherently corrupt institutions are basically respectable and well-meaning.
The Guardian fulfils the same role. In its report on the public appointments system, it highlights a supposed battle to maintain the system’s already non-existent integrity – as though Riddell serves as a check on government power over regulatory bodies in the same way the Guardian claims to act as a check on the rest of the billionaire-owned corporate media.
In reality, both are trying to stop real scrutiny of out-of-control power structures that are ultimately destroying economic health and environmental health on a global scale.
The Guardian report summarises Riddell’s actions in its introductory paragraph:
A watchdog had to prevent ministers breaching a strict code on political neutrality and independence during the search for new chairs for the BBC and the British Film Institute (BFI), the Guardian can reveal.
What does this “prevention” amount to in practice? In the main cases cited, Riddell insisted on onemember of the appointments board not being someone who trumpets their allegiance to Boris Johnson’s brand of politics.
Riddell compares the Johnson government’s rule-breaking with the situation under Johnson’s predecessor: the much blander, rightwing Conservative leader, Theresa May. He says of her: “May was, as you would expect, rather correct [enforced the “senior independent panel member” rule] and she was concerned with getting good people to do things. She was quite robust on that.”
This is what we are supposed to be excited about? This is what we are supposed to champion as proper regulation? And given how low expectations are – from Riddell, from the Guardian and from us the public – the Johnson government’s efforts to break this feeble rule are presented as some kind of special threat to good governance.
Human warehousing
Riddell and his principles of good governance actually make no substantial difference to the appointments process he is supposed to oversee – as is apparent from the results.
Even though Riddell insisted on an “independent” member on the panel that picked the chair of the BBC, the winner was Richard Sharp, a major donor to the Tory party and former adviser to Johnson’s Chancellor, the billionaire former banker Rishi Sunak. Sharp’s business ventures include funding a firm accused of “human warehousing” – stuffing benefit recipients into “rabbit hutch” flats to profit from a Conservative government scheme.
New BBC chair Richard Sharp is not only a major donor to the Conservative party but he helped to fund a firm accused of 'human warehousing', stuffing benefit recipients into 'rabbit hutch' flats to profit from a Conservative government scheme https://t.co/nR4wOeZozv
The man appointed – under Riddell’s ultimate oversight – to head the Office for Students, which regulates higher education in England, is James Wharton. He is a senior figure drawn from the inherently corrupt world of corporate lobbying whose only qualifications for the job are that he is a Conservative peer and served as Johnson’s campaign manager.
The problem here is not the one Riddell or the Guardian are peddling. Johnson’s government is indeed a threat but not in the way they are highlighting. There is no system of transparent, honest governance and regulation Johnson is undermining and that Riddell and the Guardian are seeking to protect.
Through his clownish incompetence, Johnson is threatening to expose the system’s corruption by making it even more corrupt – so corrupt, in fact, that its corruption can no longer be concealed from the public. Johnson is threatening to make a system designed to covertly maintain elite privilege explicitly do so. He threatens to discredit it, to bring it into disrepute.
To make us, like the fish, aware of the water all around us.
Sticking plaster
The Guardian and Riddell are waging a battle – one presented as critically important – to ensure that the sticking plaster continues to stick.
We are being sidelined into trivial debates about upholding rules over panels having one, solitary “independent” member. That “independent” panellist, let us note, has no influence over the shortlist of candidates. He or she has no meaningful influence over who gets picked. And more importantly still, the “independent” panellist is not even independent – they are selected, as were Ridell and the editor of the Guardian, precisely because they have spent a lifetime identifying with establishment priorities.
Riddell personifies the only permitted struggles going in our political, cultural and economic spaces.
On one side are those who have grown so confident in the elite’s ability to rig the system to its advantage that they are contemptuous of those outside their own class and no longer care how bad the system looks.
And on the other side are those who fear that, if the system’s corruption becomes too gross, to offensive, the masses may turn on the elites and end their privileges just as revolutionaries sent the French elite to the guillotine nearly 250 years ago.
Appointments to public bodies are critically important. The leaders of them shape our cultural, intellectual and social lives. But let us not pretend that anything Riddell or the Guardian are doing will bring pluralism to our public bodies or protect democracy. They will simply maintain the veil a little longer over the charade that is elite privilege masquerading as the pubic good.
*
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.
Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net.
Comments Off on “The Propaganda System”, “Ideological Capture”: Economic Elites Buy Us Off with Trivial Protections – While They Raid the Common Wealth
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
There is so much scientific communication published on the non-mainstream media, pointing repeatedly and again and again to the absolute lack of justification for vaccinating children, for vaccinating adults, there is simply no justification for vaccination. Period. And this especially not with an experimental mRNA-genome altering injection – there is no justification for the entire criminal Covid hoax, period.
Covid’s mortality rate is about 0.07%, or less. Anything else is a lie.
The very Dr. Anthony Fauci said so in a peer-reviewed paper, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), “Navigating the Uncharted”, March 2020.
Yet the steamroller bulldozes on, rolling over all the scientific evidence, and since the steamroller pays and corrupts the media, the media keep lying and corrupting people, and the governments keep corrupting, threatening, blackmailing, coercing certain vulnerable scientists into continuing with the lie despite their better knowledge.
Deceit-propaganda has no end with a narrative that is a total lie. The steamroller consists of the governments and their corrupted media, the entire UN system, in particular WHO and this powerful elitist cult, whose members are not be named, but are generally known.
This is all fact.
Repeating the “non-justification” over and over again — that it is unconstitutional, that it is illegal, that it is criminal, that it is against human rights, that it is not justified by any science that holds its ground – is useless. As only the converted will listen. While the steamroller doesn’t listen, rolls on, rolls over everything, over any opposing opinion, doesn’t even seek dialogue. The steamroller is right – by sheer crushing any opposition, and forcing them into tyranny.
Some may spread the truth. But we see what damage has already been done in the course of less than 2 years — millions, perhaps tens of millions have died — not from Covid, but from the poison that is called Covid vaccine. Yet, the steamroller ignores all that… never mentions this fact, just forces more and more people into getting the poison jab. And it rolls on over all the evidence, lying to you, to us, that’s what the very governments, elected and paid for by us, the people, are doing – all of them, all 193 UN member countries.
The few honest and transparent ones (most of them in Africa, one in Haiti), they were punished by death, through poison, by strangulation, by guns — they are to be deterrents for others, who may possibly want to follow in their footsteps and defy the Big Crime UN Agenda 2030.
This has to be said.
This has to be known by the people.
It’s not just a question of vaccination or not vaccination.
YOU must understand what is behind the false vaccination, to understand that it is much more than believing the governments nice-talk of protecting your health – all these governments have sold themselves to the devil, to hell, to say it bluntly, because they all know the true agenda behind this UN Agenda 2030, that started with the midnight gong of entering 1 January 2020 – not by accident. The vaxx agenda is a question of life and death.
No pandemic starts at once worldwide…. except when it had been prepared by a long hand before, through several publicly known events, but not disseminated by the bought mainstream media, such as the 2010 Rockefeller Report, Event 201 of 18 October, 2019 in NYC sponsored by the Gates Foundation, by Rockefeller funded Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and by – who else – the all-commanding NGO – the World Economic Forum, the WEF.
Believe it or not, the WEF is an NGO of the elite, of the richest of the rich, of the Wall Street heads, Corporate Heads, Hollywood Heads – and some other heads. Yes, the WEF is an NGO that orders the UN to behave and to tell lies they (the WEF) want them (Guterres and his UN clan) to tell the world, and to repeat the lies over and over again.
And the real agenda is:
1) Massive population reduction – as part of the Gates, Rockefeller, Kissinger, et al eugenist agenda. That’s their number one goal. That’s why you are not getting a true vaccine, but a killer vaccine, it undermines your immune system, it results in mortality and morbidity. Deaths and injuries may occur within 2 to 3 years, so that strong believers in the vaccine, and deniers of the truth, will never accuse the vaccine, or the vaccine manufacturers, or WHO, of your or your relative’s death – that’s part of the plan, because the consequences of the “vaxx” are multiple but some of their main characteristics are:
i) the substances in the injection attack the human reproductive systems, male and female, often by cancer, miscarriages and more;
ii) they cause blood clots – that lodge mainly in the lungs, impairing your breathing capacity, but they can and often do migrate to the heart, causing heart strokes, or heart embolies, or heart attacks, or they move to the brain, where they may cause a brain stroke, or death;
iii) they may attack — and often do — your immune system through the overproduction of Spike proteins created by the “vaccine”, so you may fall for any infectious disease, that otherwise you would have resisted by your natural immune system.
2) They convert your body through the graphene oxide in the injection into a magnetic field that will respond to 5G and soon 6G ultra-microwaves’ commands, converting your brain into a computer and converting you, Humans, into robots or Transhumans, that can be surveyed and controlled by every step “it” takes – no longer you but the transhuman. If not behaving according to orders, it, the transhuman, may also be extinguished, by remote-control.
Sounds too fantastic to be true? Read Klaus Schwab’s book, “Covid-19: The Great Reset“, and watch his 2016 interview (less than 2 min) with the Swiss French TV (see also first segment in video below), where he intimates and predicts that by about 2025 humans will be chipped, so they can receive commands from 5G / 6G waves, and, he literally adds, will become Transhumans.
3) The fabricated Covid crisis is bankrupting as many small and medium and even large enterprises as possible around the globe, creating untold unemployment and misery and leaving a stock of bankrupted assets to be transferred for a penny on the dollar – or less – to the top elite, to those who are engineering the biblical crime we are experiencing since almost two years.
This is not conspiracy, these are facts, facts which we, the People, still may stop if we wake up NOW and act in solidarity.
Getting back to the beginning, where the point is made, that it is no good to keep endlessly repeating the illegality of the “Covid measures”, the unconstitutionality of the Covid passes, or the Green Passes, or the vaxx-passes, or all that is stored in the infamous QR-code, for now on your cell phone, soon to be implanted under your skin, already predicted in 2016, by Klaus Schwab.
Repeating what those of us, who do not follow the mainstream have captured long ago, is no good, unless you also explain the whole story, namely that Covid and the vaxx hoax around it, is but an instrument for a much larger agenda, of which the number one goal is massive population reduction, and you may be part of it. Knowing what the eugenists real goal is, you might faint. Let it suffice to say that their objective is reducing the world population by considerably more than half. And that beginning by the rich western world, where most unrenewable resources are used, where most capital can be stolen and transferred to the top elitist cult-clan, so that you, surviving citizen, may be happy with a basic income, that allows you to survive.
Or, as Klaus Schwab says: “You will own nothing and be Happy.”
Unless you are aware of this entire background, not only of the unconstitutionality of the fake and deadly “vaccine”, you will just roll over in your comfort zone, letting it happen, being tyrannized, without noticing – and at the end, when it is too late, you will wake up and say “nobody told me” — exactly. Doesn’t that sound familiar? As familiar as to almost believe that Hitler’s Nazi Germany and the ensuing WWII was just a trial run for what is unfolding in front of our eyes – as UN Agenda 2030.
Be aware. We can stop it. If we want to. We are many. They are few.
We still have 9 years to go. But once you have been jabbed – you have lost a fair amount of your capacity to resist, of your autonomy, as you may die, or become incapacitated. So, don’t get vaxxed, don’t accept tyranny, don’t accept a discriminating vaxx- certificate. Say NO – to the covid crime being committed by “our” authorities upon us, the People.
And talk to the police, the military. They should also know. Because in the end, they are sitting in the same boat as we, the People, especially since their constitutional role is defending the people, not the tyrants at the head of governments. Talk to them. Peacefully – with reason. As they are also being lied to.
Stop it NOW.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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.
To access the archive of his Global Research articles, click Peter Koenig.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
“I think it’s highly likely that the next phase will involve death on a scale which will dwarf the claims of “covid-19 deaths” to date.” Dr. Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer Vice President
Question– Why is mortality in Scotland higher in 2021 than 2020?
Answer– Because more people are dying. And the reason more people are dying is because more people have been vaccinated. In other words, there’s a link between rising mortality and the Covid-19 vaccine.
Question– You can’t prove that.
Answer– You’re right, I can’t. The evidence is all circumstantial. But it is compelling, all the same. For example, rising mortality isn’t just happening in Scotland. It’s happening in many of the countries that launched mass vaccination campaigns earlier in the year. They’re all seeing a significant uptick in all-cause mortality. Why is that? What are they doing differently in 2021 than they did in the years before?
Question– I can see what you’re getting at, but I still don’t think you have enough evidence to make your case.
Answer– Okay, then you tell me: Why are more people dying in 2021 than 2020? And, keep in mind, all-cause mortality isn’t just up a bit; it’s smashing the five-year average. Check out this recent post from Alex Berenson at Substack:
Scotland is 87% adult vaccinated; weekly deaths are now 30% above normal
Oct 14, This is from the Public Health Scotland’s Covid-19 Daily Dashboard:
“The 315 excess deaths logged last week represents a 30% increase on the five-year pre-pandemic average for this time of year. This marks the 20th consecutive week with excess deaths above the five-year average and the highest since the week ending January 10, 2021.”
Question– But how can you build a case on data from just one country? It’s ridiculous.
Answer– But it’s not just Scotland. The same rule applies to many of the countries that launched vaccination campaigns earlier in the year. Here’s more from Berenson:
Add Germany – Europe’s most populous nation – to the countries seeing unusually high all-cause mortality that is NOT Covid-related.
In September, Germany reported almost 78,000 deaths, more than 10 percent higher than the expected figure, German government demographers said earlier this week.
And then there’s this is from Data Analyst’s Twitter account (check out the charts):
Data Analysis @Data_is_Louder
Oct 26
COVID mystery Denmark, Finland and Norway excess deaths are higher than in their worst Covid outbreak. These mysterious excess deaths happened in time conjunction with vaccination rollout.
Denmark ––“5 months is a row 2021 has broken the 10-year record of people dying from all causes…..Covid-19 deaths close to zero during the same period.”
The same is true in Ireland, UK and Israel. Take a look at England (Ages 10 to 59 years old.)
What’s so disturbing about this chart is that it shows how the vaccines target the young. “While the COVID death toll has been largely confined to the elderly… it’s the young who are bearing the brunt of vaccine injury. According to VigiAccess, the adverse event database for the World Health Organization, 41% of the more than 2.4 million vaccine injuries reported so far are among those under age 44, and just six percent are among people over age 75.” (“The real pandemic has just begun, and it’s COVID shot-induced heart attacks in the young”, Lifesite News)
That’s something you’re not going to read in the media, and for good reason, too. Because it would undermine their lethal objective to continue hyping the vaccine.
Here’s more from quantitative analyst Joel Smalley:
Weekly deaths update from the CDC. “Despite” being over 80% fully vaccinated, since 24-Jul, over 65s deaths in Florida are 14% higher than same period last year. “Despite” at least 50% full vaccination in the under 65s, deaths are up 46% and will rise as reporting catches up.
The examples are everywhere across the Internet. You don’t have to look very far. Wherever mass vaccinations took place, there, too, morality has risen. And–once again–these are not Covid deaths. These are mainly heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, circulatory diseases and neurological issues; the same vaccine-induced ailments we were warned about by the physicians and scientists who’ve been telling us the truth from the start. Turns out they were right after all.
Simply put, the vaccines are increasing fatalities, not reducing them. They are making matters worse not better. They are perpetuating the crisis not ending it. And that is why the red line in the chart is pointing upward. It’s an indication that the death toll will continue to rise as long as we continue to do what we are doing now, inoculating millions of people with a cytotoxic pathogen that triggers blood clots, inflammation and autoimmunity. Here’s another chart of Scotland with a short comment from The Daily Skeptic:
“…. the presence of a Covid epidemic was not seen in summer 2020, but is seen in summer 2021. What differs between the two years? The glaringly obvious answer is the rollout of COVID-19 vaccination. There was no COVID-19 vaccination programme in 2020, but there was rollout of Covid vaccinations in a sequential way to increasingly younger age groups in 2021, a pattern that we see in the manifestation of excess deaths. …. The Yellow Card adverse events reporting system,…. has already recorded over 1,700 deaths in the U.K. population associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. There is therefore a prima facie case for COVID-19 vaccination being a contributing factor to the dramatic rise in summer excess deaths in Scotland in 2021.”
(“Are Vaccines Driving Excess Deaths in Scotland, a Professor of Biology Asks”, The Daily Skeptic)
Have you noticed how the media is trying to cover-up the sudden surge in mortality? Here’s a good example from an article at the UK Telegraph:
“While focus remains firmly fixed on Covid-19, a second health crisis is quietly emerging in Britain. Since the beginning of July, there have been thousands of excess deaths that were not caused by coronavirus. According to health experts, this is highly unusual for the summer. Although excess deaths are expected during the winter months, when cold weather and seasonal infections combine to place pressure on the NHS, summer generally sees a lull.
This year is a worrying outlier.
According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), since July 2 there have been 9,619 excess deaths in England and Wales, of which 48 per cent (4,635) were not caused by Covid-19.
So if all these extra people are not dying from coronavirus, what is killing them?
Data from Public Health England (PHE) shows that during that period there were 2,103 extra death registrations with ischemic heart disease, 1,552 with heart failure, as well as an extra 760 deaths with cerebrovascular diseases such as stroke and aneurysm and 3,915 with other circulatory diseases.” (“Thousands more people than usual are dying … but it’s not from Covid“, Telegraph)
So, according to the article, there were:
24% more heart failure deaths than baseline
19% ischaemic heart disease
16% cerebrovascular disease (strokes)
18% other circulatory diseases
All of these cerebrovascular, cardiac and circulatory ailments didn’t suddenly drop from the sky in 2021. They are vaccine-generated injuries. Can you see that?
And they are all linked to the spike protein which is the “biological mechanism of action” that “damages blood vessels, organs, and causes blood clots, and that can kill a human being?” (Quote: Dr Peter McCullough)
Have you wondered why more people died this year of Covid than in all of 2020? According to Johns Hopkins, Covid killed 353, 000 people in the United States in 2020. But in just 10 months in 2021, 390,000 people have died. How can that be? After all:
Many of the extremely vulnerable have already died
The experts say Delta is not as lethal as the original Wuhan infection
100 million people (according to the CDC) have already survived Covid and now have natural immunity
And 190 million people have been double-vaxxed
These are four reasons why deaths should be decreasing. But they’re not decreasing, they’re increasing.
Why?
The vaccine, that’s why.
And why are the countries with the highest Covid-19 death rates, also the most vaccinated countries?
But don’t take my word for it. Check it out for yourself. Do your own research.
Just recently, Professor Norman Fenton at Queen Mary London University sifted through the government’s statistics (ONS) to see if he could “determine the overall risk-benefit of Covid-19 vaccines” by comparing “the all-cause mortality rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated in each age category.”
His thinking on the matter was simple:
“If Covid is as dangerous as claimed – and if the vaccine is as effective as claimed – we should by now have seen many more Covid related deaths among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated….(and) If the vaccine is as safe as claimed, then there should have been very few more deaths from causes unrelated to Covid among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated (in each age group). So, the count of all-cause deaths should be higher among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated (in each age group), confirming that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.” (Discrepancies and inconsistencies in UK Government datasets compromise accuracy of mortality rate comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated”)
Simple, right? In other words, if the vaccine is so great, then it should be clear from the data. But that’s not what Fenton found. What he found was the opposite. He found that all-cause mortality is higher among vaccinated people than the unvaccinated. (And depending how you interpret the data, it could be significantly higher.) Fenton hoped that his analysis would impact the debate on the ongoing vaccination program, but instead, he’s been viciously denounced as a right-wing extremist, which is what happens to anyone who dares to to challenge the official narrative. Here’s more from NPR:
“Inside the emergency department at Sparrow Hospital in Lansing, Mich., staff members are struggling to care for patients who are showing up much sicker than they’ve ever seen. Tiffani Dusang, the emergency room’s nursing director, practically vibrates with pent-up anxiety, looking at all the patients lying on a long line of stretchers pushed up against the beige walls of the hospital’s hallways. “It’s hard to watch,” she says in her warm Texan twang.
But there’s nothing she can do. The ER’s 72 rooms are already filled.
“I always feel very, very bad when I walk down the hallway and see that people are in pain or needing to sleep or needing quiet.”
Even in parts of the country where COVID-19 isn’t overwhelming the health system, patients are showing up to the ER sicker than they were before the pandemic, their diseases more advanced and in need of more complicated care.
Months of treatment delays have exacerbated chronic conditions and worsened symptoms. Doctors and nurses say the severity of illness ranges widely and includes abdominal pain, respiratory problems, blood clots, heart conditions and suicide attempts, among others.” (“ERs are now swamped with seriously ill patients — but many don’t even have COVID”, NPR)
Repeat: “abdominal pain, respiratory problems, blood clots, heart conditions.” In other words, the overcrowding in Emergency Rooms could as easily be linked to vaccine-induced injuries as they could to “delayed treatments”. And notice how the author seems genuinely concerned about the burgeoning ERs but never once mentions the elephant in the room; the vaccine. Was that just a slip-up on his part or was his real intention to bamboozle his readers from the start?
Then, there’s this gem in the New York Post that tries to prepare the public for the onslaught of “thromboembolic” disorders we’ll be facing in the very near future. The article is appropriately titled “The little-known heart attack that’s striking ‘fit and healthy’ women as young as 22.” Here’s a clip from the article:
“When you think of a heart attack, you immediately picture someone who is older and might already have underlying health issues. But experts have warned that women as young as 22 could be struck down by a little-known condition.
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) happens when a tear forms in a blood vessel in the heart, the New York Post reports. It can slow or block blood flow to the heart, causing a heart attack, abnormalities in heart rhythm or sudden death, experts at the Mayo Clinic say.
In general, it’s an uncommon condition, but doctors are urging women to push for a diagnosis and care when it comes to the symptoms. The condition is most common in women ages 30 to 60 – but experts have warned that it is reaching fit and healthy women as young as 22.” (The little-known heart attack that’s striking ‘fit and healthy’ women as young as 22, New York Post)
Got that? So –according to the Post– it’s perfectly normal for a fit 22 year-old to be struck-dead by a heart attack. Do you think, perhaps, the author is trying to soften attitudes towards vaccine-induced injuries before they hit us like a ton of bricks? Indeed, he is, just like the article in the Times of India about celebrity superstar and fitness nut, Puneeth Rajkumar, who died just days ago from cardiac arrest. He was 46. According to The Times of India:
Rajkumar’s sudden death has once again highlighted the perils many in their 30s and 40s are facing today, which is the increasing risk of heart ailments and cardiac arrests….(Rajkumar) suffered from a massive cardiac ailment while he was exercising in the gym. Known to be overtly fit and healthy, Rajkumar used to workout often…
There’s been a shocking rise in the number of cardiac arrests being observed amongst those in their early ages, or even their 20s. While heart ailments and cardiac arrests were generally taken to be an ‘old people’s condition’, that’s no longer the case, and now a warning sign doctors urge people to be critically aware of. …
Can you see what’s going on? These cookie cutter articles were all concocted with the same goal in mind, to hoodwink the public into believing that the extraordinary wave of deaths among healthy young people is completely normal. (“Nothing to see here. Move along.”) But, of course, none of this is normal. It’s all appallingly weird and shocking which is why we are so focused on excess deaths and all-cause mortality. Because, we think, these will provide the evidence we need to show that the vaccine is a critical part of the elite’s depopulation agenda aimed at slashing global population by billions of people. We still believe that’s what’s really going on. The big money guys have decided to eradicate a few billion of us cockroaches so they have more room to park their Learjets. As it happens, they settled on the vaccine as a “less messy” alternative to mowing us down in the streets with machine guns. Not that they’d lose any sleep over it.
So, how’s the plan going, you ask? Check it out:
“According to all-cause mortality statistics, the number of Americans who have died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 18% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019.”
And here’s a clip from an article that extracted its data from more divers reseach. Take a look:
“Is the COVID Jab Responsible for Excess Deaths?…
Matthew Crawford of the Rounding the Earth Newsletter, examined mortality statistics before and after the rollout of the COVID shots… Crawford goes on to look at data from countries that have substantial vaccine uptake while simultaneously having very low rates of COVID-19. This way, you can get a better idea as to whether the COVID jabs might be responsible for the excess deaths, as opposed to the infection itself.
He identified 23 countries that fit this criteria, accounting for 1.88 billion individuals, roughly one-quarter of the global population….. Crawford goes through a number of adjustments to remove outliers that might skew the data sets,(but) after removing nations with more than 100 COVID deaths per million before their vaccination program, he came up with 13 countries with a combined population of 354 million.…
Remarkably, though, the number of COVID deaths in these 13 countries is 11.61 times higher post-vaccination, compared to before the jabs were rolled out. In five of the 13 countries, a whopping 90% of their COVID-19 fatalities have been logged after their vaccination campaigns began.
“On face, these results reinforce the case that the experimental vaccines are killing people,” Crawford writes. “At the very least, this is one more dramatic safety signal that should spur authorities who care about our health to come to the table for a discussion about how to refine the data they’re not analyzing to anyone’s knowledge …” (“Are The COVID Jabs Responsible For Rising Mortality Trends?” Mercola.com)
Interesting, eh? So, if you take the countries where there’s not much virus, and inoculate a ton of people anyway, then you can really see how many people are being killed by the vaccine. At least 10-times as many!
In contrast– in countries where there’s alot of viral spread– the damaging effects of the vaccine are much less visible. But no matter how you cut it, the spike protein erodes the body’s vital infrastructure weakening the vascular system, killing healthy cells and mitochondria, depleting the killer lymphocytes, and short-circuiting the immune system. The knock-on effects of this ferocious attack can be any of the myriad ailments that inevitably evolve from a pathogen-ravaged circulatory system, including cardiac arrest, stroke, pulmonary embolism, autoimmunity and a host of others. At present, heart attacks appear to top the list. Check out this brief post by Dr Peter McCullough:
The world is now witnessing a pandemic of N-STEMI heart attacks caused by blood clots
A certain type of heart attack is on the rise around the world. Healthcare professionals in Scotland have seen a sharp uptick in a potentially fatal type of heart attack called an N-STEMI attack. This condition is the result of partially blocked arteries that cut off the blood supply to the heart. It presents less tissue damage than a regular STEMI attack but can be equally fatal…. Cases of STEMI attacks have remained stable for years, (but) have recently spiked… Over the summer, the hospital had to increase its number of cardiology beds by 44 percent, as front line healthcare workers dealt with an increased demand of heart attack patients….
A pandemic of heart attacks that is brought on by a cytotoxic injection that inflicts damage on its victims whether they die or not. Is that an accurate summary of the Covid-19 vaccine?
It is. Here’s more from The Expose:
“Data available from the Centre for Disease Control in the USA shows that since the Covid-19 vaccination programme got underway in the US, deaths due to ‘abnormal clinical findings not elsewhere classified’ have increased exponentially compared to pre-Covid-19 vaccination levels…
Deaths in this category include cases for which no more specific diagnosis could be made…or symptoms were hard to determine… or cases were referred elsewhere.)
“…the number of deaths due to abnormal clinical findings … maintained a steady average of just over 1,000 a week since February 2020, and was also at these levels prior to the alleged pandemic hitting the USA. However, around the end of March / early April 2021 there was a sudden uptick in the number of abnormal deaths registered per week, suddenly climbing … to over 7,000 a week by the middle of September, representing a 600% increase on the average seen every week prior to the start of the Covid-19 vaccination roll-out.
The question of course is, why?
…The one thing that millions of people have in common since abnormal deaths began to rise against the expected average, is that millions of people have been given an experimental injection, for which there is no long term safety data to know what the consequences of that will be.
The article is consistent with the many stories we have heard from nurses reporting on patients presenting with unusual ‘oddball’ symptoms that elude traditional diagnosis. This should not be surprising given the unique properties of the spike protein whose stealthy attack on the vascular system has already touched off a tsunami of cardiovascular, neurological and immunological diseases unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. All of these deaths can be traced back to a “poison-death shot” that is relentlessly pushing all-cause mortality higher while killing people that are younger and younger. If you doubt this, then take a look at how many athletes are dropping dead shortly after they’ve been injected. It’s a story that’s bound to depress the hell out of any normal human being.
Also, check out this illuminating 2-minute video dealing with cardiac arrest and our phony vaccine injury reporting system. (VAERS)
Dr. Mike Yeadon summarized recent developments in a comment he posted on the Morningstar Channel just last week. He said:
“There’s no logical end game … but totalitarian tyranny… and mass depopulation… Some colleagues agree with the tyranny part, but balk at depopulation. (But) The evidence points firmly to it.”
Indeed, it does.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Michael Whitney, renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
On November 7th, the people of Nicaragua went to the polls to reaffirm the commitment to their democratic project, a project that began in 1979 when the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) defeated (the) a vicious regime of Anastasio Somoza that was put in power by the United States only to have those efforts reversed by a U.S. imposed counterrevolutionary war that resulted in the electoral defeat of the FSLN in 1990.
With the return of the FSLN to power in 2007, it once again became a target for U.S. aggression and electoral subversion. The U.S. and its European allies questioned the legitimacy of the FSLN despite its overwhelming electoral victories that the U.S. characterized as fraudulent.
Ahead of the Nicaragua Election, The Black Alliance for Peace deployed an Observatory Committee to travel to Nicaragua in an effort to provide keen oversight into the electoral process and clear the pathway for the people of Nicaragua to establish a more sovereign, self-disciplined democratic process, devoid of U.S. interference.
Both Netfa Freeman and Margaret Kimberley, Co-Coordinator(s) of Africa Team and Coordinating Committee member have accompanied the Nicaragua Delegation as well and will be readily available for press inquiries beginning November 9, 2021, 1pm – 6pm EST.
*
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.
Although Moscow and Beijing potentially stand to gain from the humiliating U.S. retreat by pushing for an inclusive government in Kabul, the rebranded Pashtun-based group must first be removed as a designated terrorist organization.
Absolutely bombshell and major reveals on what is in the vaccines, with use of electron and other kinds of microscopy from original research by Dr. Robert Young and his team, confirming what the La Quinta Columna researchers found — toxic nanometallic content with cytotoxic and genotoxic effects as well as an identified parasite.
A highly organized Covid testing apparatus was established. The mandate was Test Test Test. The flawed PCR-RT test (which does not identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus) was used Worldwide to generate millions of erroneous Covid positive cases. These in turn were used to sustain the illusion that the alleged pandemic was Real and that the Covid disease was spreading to all major regions of the World.
What is presented by the CDC regarding myocarditis is but the tip of the iceberg. It concludes with a contradictory statement calling for “everyone aged 12 years and older get vaccinated for COVID-19″ intimating that the “known risks” of Covid-19 far outweigh the “potential risks” of myocarditis.
The Biden vaccine mandate appears to be falling apart before it’s even in place. From first responders to truck drivers to everyone in-between, the message is clear: many thousands are willing to be fired from their jobs rather than be forced to take a medical procedure they do not want.
In 2017, following new U.S. sanctions against Venezuela, assets worth $7 billion were “frozen” by the U.S. and 31 tons of gold deposited by the Venezuelan state at the Bank of England and Germany’s Deutsche Bank were seized.
Leading experts on flawed U.S. COVID policy issued an urgent warning at a summit Saturday: Young children will be harmed in an ill-advised rush to vaccinate a population with very little chance of severe infection from the virus.
Through Trump’s Operation Warp Speed, a covert backdoor deal was made in 2020 with the Big Pharma giants to maintain secrecy of the money trail. Making billions, by mid-December 2020, Pfizer’s first Covid-19 vaccine needles were jabbed into unsuspecting arms of anxious Americans desperately seeking safety from the big bad pandemic wolf.
Barbarossa’s intelligence details were also poorly worked out. Nazi estimates on Soviet military capacity were based more on guesswork than reliable information, and this underestimation of the enemy would come back to haunt them.
The current collapse of post-pandemic merchandise traffic and the brutal rise in energy and fuel prices could end up weighing down the incipient and fragile global economic recovery and lead to scenarios of secular economic stagnation (secular stagnation), since the phenomenon of economic globalization has ensured that all rational elements of the economy are interrelated with each other due to the consolidation of oligopolies, technological convergence and tacit corporate agreements.
Justin Trudeau lurched into yet another minority government following the recent federal election. In spite of his failure to win even the popular vote, let alone a majority of seats in the House of Common, Trudeau continues to rule as Vaccination Czar of a totalitarian regime.
COP26 has been sold as a conference where world leaders will finally tackle climate change. But for its corporate sponsors, the conference is an opportunity to greenwash their practices of polluting for profit.
An Australian Horror Story
High Recorded Mortality in Countries Categorized as “Covid-19 Vaccine Champions”. The Vaccinated Suffer from Increased Risk of Mortality compared to the Non-vaccinated
Excess Deaths from the “Vaccine” Point to a Depopulation Agenda
Video: Graphene, Aluminum, Lipid Nanoparticle (LNP) Capsids, Parasite in Four Vaccines: Dr. Robert Young
Video: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon
57 Top Scientists and Doctors Release Shocking Study on COVID Vaccines and Demand Immediate Stop to All Vaccinations
Video: The Vaccine is More Dangerous than COVID-19: Dr. Peter McCullough
2,433 Dead Babies in VAERS as Another Study Shows mRNA Shots Not Safe for Pregnant Women
The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”
Athletes Suffer Cardiac Arrest, Myocarditis, Blood Clots, Hospitalized after COVID Injections
The Covid-19 Pandemic Does Not Exist
Do Not Give Up Your Rights. Dr. Julie Ponesse’s Remarkable Speech
Video: Legal Action Is Happening. Have Hope Because We Are Going to Win this.
We’re Not in a ‘Pandemic of the Unvaccinated,’ Peter Doshi Explains During COVID Panel
Fake Mortality Data: Italian Institute of Health Reduces Official Covid Death Toll from 130,000 to 4,000.
Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity
Video: Exclusive Photos of Graphene Oxide Found in Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Sinovac Vaccines
The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society
Great News: Biden’s Vaccine Mandate Is Falling Apart!
There Is a Direct Link Between JFK, 9/11 and COVID-19: Edward Curtin
A Letter to the Unvaccinated
Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed: CDC Hits New Lows with Two Manipulated Studies
The Final Solution. Full Digitization. “The QR Codification of the World”
Thousands of Physicians and Medical Scientists Sign “Rome Declaration” in Protest, Launch New Information Platform
The Kids Are Dropping from the Murder Vaccine
