All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

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

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Give Truth a Chance. Secure Your Access to Unchained News, Donate to Global Research.

***

First Published on June 9, 2024

“Colonialism is not satisfied merely with holding a people in its grip and emptying the native’s brain of all form and content. By a kind of perverted logic, it turns to the past of the oppressed people, and distorts, disfigures and destroys it” (Frantz Fanon)[1]

Uncomfortable Truths

In October 2003, late New York University professor and internationally renowned historian Tony Judt wrote an essay in The New York Review of Books (NYRB) entitled “Israel: The Alternative” [2]

The reaction to this outstanding article was swift and vicious and, in the case of the American response, verged on hysteria.

In effect, within a week of its publication, the editor of NYRB had received several thousand letters on Judt’s essay – more than on any in its history – and the Jewish Professor, who, up to then, had been widely respected for his core commitment to justice and intellectual honesty and loudly acclaimed for his lucid studies of 19^th and 20^th century social history, in particular his panoramic study[3] of Europe after World War II, became, almost overnight, the object of great furor, defamation and ostracism. 

Readers, among whom numerous renowned scholars and heads of Jewish organizations, accused him of belonging to the “Nazi Left”, of hating Jews, of denying Israel’s right to exist; distinguished professors at American universities canceled their NYRB subscriptions;

Andrea Levin, executive director of the “Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America” accused him of “pandering to genocide” and being “party to preparations for a final solution”; Alan Dershowitz of Harvard made the analogy with Adolf Hitler’s “one-state solution for all of Europe”, and David Jeffrey Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, charged him with advocating “genocidal liberalism”.  

Judt’s essay opened with the sentence:

“The Middle East peace process is finished. It did not die: it was killed”, followed by the notion that “The president of the United States of America has been reduced to a ventriloquist’s dummy, pitifully reciting the Israeli cabinet line”. 

He went on to contend that Israel “has imported a characteristically late-nineteenth-century separatist project into a world that has moved on, a world of individual rights, open frontiers, and international law. The very idea of a ‘Jewish state’, a state in which Jews and the Jewish religion have exclusive privileges from which non-Jewish citizens are forever excluded is rooted in another time and place. Israel, in short, is an anachronism”; that it

“remains distinctive among democratic states in its resort to ethnoreligious criteria with which to denominate and rank its citizens. It is an oddity among modern nations, not as its more paranoid supporters assert because it is a Jewish state and no one wants the Jews to have a state; but because it is a Jewish state in which one community, Jews, is set above others, in an age when that sort of state has no place”;

and that

“In a world where nations and peoples increasingly intermingle and intermarry at will; where cultural and national impediments to communication have all but collapsed; where more and more of us have multiple elective identities and would feel falsely constrained if we had to answer to just one of them; in such a world Israel is truly an anachronism. And not just an anachronism but a dysfunctional one”.

He also cited the prominent Labor politician Avraham Burg who wrote:

“After two thousand years of struggle for survival, the reality of Israel is a colonial state, run by a corrupt clique which scorns and mocks law and civic morality’[4]. Unless something changes, Judt declared, “Israel in half a decade will be neither Jewish nor democratic”. He then uttered the “anathema” that “the time has come to think the unthinkable”, that is “the bringing to an end of Israel as a Jewish state, and the establishment in its place of a binational state of Israelis and Palestinians”.

In his essay, Prof. Judt explained that, in one vital attribute, Israel is quite different from previous insecure, defensive microstates born of imperial collapse in so far as it is a democracy, hence its present dilemma due to its occupation of the lands conquered in 1967. Israel, he said, faces the following three “unattractive choices”:

• It can dismantle the Jewish settlements in the Occupied Territories, return to the 1967 state borders within which Jews constitute a clear majority, and thus remain both a Jewish state and a democracy, albeit one with a constitutionally anomalous community of second-class Arab citizens;
• It can continue to occupy “Samaria”, “Judea” and Gaza, whose Arab population added to that of present-day Israel will become the demographic majority, in which case Israel will be either a Jewish state (with an ever-larger majority of unenfranchised non-Jews) or it will be a democracy. But logically it cannot be both;
• It can keep control of the Occupied Territories but get rid of the overwhelming majority of the Arab population, either by forcible expulsion or else by starving them of land and livelihood, leaving them no option but to go into exile. In this way Israel could indeed remain both Jewish and at least formally democratic, but at the cost of becoming the first modern democracy to conduct full-scale ethnic cleansing as a state project, something which would condemn Israel forever to the status of an outlaw state, an international pariah.

As Judt put it, the historian’s task is precisely

“to tell what is almost always an uncomfortable story and explain why the discomfort is part of the truth we need to live well and live properly. A well-organized society is one in which we know the truth about ourselves collectively, not one in which we tell pleasant lies about ourselves”.

Driven by such a principled position, he reacted to the flood of criticism of his contradictors by reiterating his conviction that the solution to the crisis in the Middle East lies in Washington. On this, he said, “there is widespread agreement. For that reason, and because the American response to the Israel-Palestine conflict is shaped in large measure by domestic considerations, my essay was directed in the first instance to an American audience, in an effort to pry open a closed topic.

Many readers have castigated me for heedlessly engaging so volatile a subject without due regard for the sensitivities affected. I respect those feelings. But, like Yael Dayan, I am very worried about the direction in which the American Jewish community is moving; reaction to the essay suggests that this anxiety is well founded”.

He added that

“Actually, Zionism has always been at war and its very identity is a function of conflict, struggle, and mutually exclusive claims on history. From the outset, and long before the Holocaust could be invoked in mitigation, the leaders of the Zionist project regarded the indigenous Arab population of Palestine as their enemy. More than a century ago, the Zionist writer Ahad Ha’Am[5] observed that the settlers ‘treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly on their territories, beat them shamelessly for no sufficient reason, and boast at having done so’. To the extent that little has changed, it is understandable that many readers would dismiss my reflections on a binational state as a crazy fantasy”. 

Until his death in 2010, Judt remained faithful to his principles. For him,

“an injustice was committed: How should we acknowledge this and move forward? Indeed, even the very existence of Palestinians was once hotly disputed. In the later 1960s, at a public meeting in London, I was tartly informed by Golda Meir, Israel’s future prime minister, that I could not speak of ‘Palestinians’ since they did not exist”.  

In the aftermath of Judt’s death, Mark Levine wrote an article[6] in which he expressed his sorrow for the scope of the loss, not just of the man, but of the type of scholarship, of the way Professor Judt taught those willing to learn about how to approach and utilize history. He pointed out that the historian’s willingness to tell “uncomfortable stories” was not embraced by US government, and informed that few politicians paid much attention to Judt or invited his counsel; no evidence is found of his ever having been called to testify before the US congress, and the White House made no mention of his passing, even though Barack Obama, the US president, has during his tenure invited well-known historians to the White House to help provide him with historical perspective on the numerous crises he faced. Levine concluded his piece by saying that Judt’s writings can inspire a new generation of scholars and activists in other cultures, including in the many societies of the global south:

“It is there, in Latin America, Africa, and the Muslim world, where the legacy of Judt’s call for a critically reflective social democratic political discourse might well be found. If American militarism, European myopia, corporate greed and the militant ideologies of numerous stripes do not doom them first”.

The Settler Colonialist and Ethno-Nationalist Roots of Zionism

An extensive examination of Theodor Herzl’s wittings and movement shows clearly that from its very beginnings to the politics and policies of the state of Israel today, Zionism thought has permanently and resolutely embraced the dominant European discourses of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, including anti-Semitism.

In his 1896 Der Judenstaat – “state ‘for’, or ‘of’ Jews” would be a literal and more accurate English translation – Theodor Herzl articulated his vision and blueprint for a future “Jewish state” in Palestine by highlighting his scheme as a venture beneficial to both the “current sovereign authority” – then embodied by the Ottoman sultan – and the European colonial powers “under whose protectorate” the new state would come into being and continue to exist: “If His Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine” he wrote, “we could offer to resolve Turkey’s finances. For Europe, we would form part of a bulwark against Asia there, we would serve as the advance post of civilization against barbarism”.

As recalled by Nora Scholtes in her thoughtful and thoroughly-researched study submitted for the Degree of Ph.D. in Postcolonial Studies[7], French Marxist historian and sociologist Maxime Rodinson is commonly said to be the first contemporary “Western” scholar to have re-placed Zionism/Israel within its colonial, and more specifically settler colonial, context. Rodinson recognized in Herzl’s propositions a clear manifestation of Zionism as a “colonialist phenomenon”:

“It would have been difficult to place Zionism any more clearly within the framework of European imperialist policies (…) The [Zionist] perspective was inevitably placed within the framework of the European assault on the Ottoman Empire, this ‘sick man’ whose complete dismemberment was postponed by the rivalries of the great powers but who, in the meantime, was subjected to all kinds of interference, pressures, and threats. An imperialist setting if there ever was one (…) The Europeanism of the Zionists made it possible for them to present their plan as part of the same movement of European expansion that each power was developing on its own behalf”.

Image: Statue of the founder of Zionism Theodor Herzl, unveiled in 2012 at the Mikveh Israel synagogue in Tel Aviv. It is called “Herzl meets Emperor Wilhelm II”

In effect, throughout his writings and speeches, Herzl never missed an opportunity to present the Zionist idea as a quintessentially colonial project, one that would also serve the interests of the Europeans, and more broadly the whole of the “civilized” world. In his Der Judenstaat he wrote:

“The world will be liberated by our freedom, enriched by our wealth, magnified by our greatness”, and in a speech he delivered in London in 1891, he declared: “We want to carry culture to the East. And once again, Europe will in turn profit from this work of ours. We will create new trade routes − and none will be more interested in this than England with its Asiatic possessions. The shortest route to India lies through Palestine (…) What could I, poor barbarian from the Continent, tell the inhabitants of England about these things [progress and industry]. They are our superiors in all technical achievements, just as their great politicians were the first to see the necessity for colonial expansion. That is why the flag of Greater-Britain waves over every sea (…) And so I should think that here in England, the Zionist idea, which is a colonial one, should be easily and quickly understood in England, and this in its most modern form”[8].

For Desmond Stewart, there is no doubt that “Herzl’s stencil for obtaining a territory and then clearing it for settlement was cut after the Rhodesian model”[9]. Mark Levene equally argues that Herzl “had an agenda that closely followed and sought to emulate the essential contours of European empire-building in Africa”[10]. 

It was thus within the context of Western colonialism in Africa that the idea of acquiring a territorial basis for the establishment of a “Jewish entity” was most contemplated, more precisely in the Uasi Ngishu plateau, near Nairobi, Kenya, and not in Uganda as is commonly reported. 

Nevertheless, although Herzl did not exclude the option that “The Society”[11] would “take what it will be given under a charter” in what he called a “neutral land” in order to materialize his colonial-Zionist project – since Argentina was another country envisioned for a possible mass settlement for the Jews – he was convinced that Palestine would be the most powerful asset in attracting a Jewish mass following. As the Jews’ “ever-memorable historic home”, he writes in Der Judenstaat, “that name alone would be a tremendously stirring rallying cry for our people”. Furthermore, it is reported that when it was known that Herzl was wavering on the option of Palestine as a Jewish homeland in favor of East Africa or South America, he received a Bible from William Blackstone, an American Christian Zionist, in which every reference to “Israel” or “Zion” had been underlined in red, together with a letter urging him to insist Zionists settle only in Palestine[12].

Ultimately, the East-Africa scheme proposed by the British, which was indeed hotly debated during the 6^th Zionist Congress held in Basel on 23 August 1903, was rejected, both because of a lack of support by the critical mass of Russian Jews and because the British government faced a strong local opposition on the part of British settlers in its African territories to the idea of a Jewish colony in the area. 

And so, by the time of Herzl’s death the following year, the East-Africa and Argentina options had all but vanished from the agenda of the Zionist leadership. In a 1914 article of German newspaper Die Welt, a special issue on the tenth anniversary of Herzl’s death, Herzl’s East-Africa proposal is described by Bernstein as a “historical derailment”, a desperate and well-intentioned, but ultimately misguided attempt at providing emergency help to Eastern Europe’s persecuted Jews. Herzl, he indicated, “grasped the Uganda-straw immediately after the pogrom in Kishinev (…) He impatiently searched for a quick rescue (…) even if only in the form of a ‘night shelter’. It was the greatest sacrifice that Herzl has made for his people. He sacrificed, even if only for a moment, his life’s ideal”[13].

From that point onwards, the new leadership concentrated all its efforts on the implementation of the most preferred solution, that is the creation of a purely Jewish state in Palestine, mainly by way of ethnic cleansing. The terminology of “ethnic cleansing” only in recent times entered popular vocabulary. The concept used by Zionist thinkers was “transfer”, and Herzl’s true plans with regard to Palestine’s non-Jewish population are well-documented in his diary, where as early as 1895 he put forward this idea, writing: “We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country”.

The same can be said about David Ben-Gurion, the primary national founder of the State of Israel as well as its first prime minister. Indeed, in a letter[14] dated 5 October 1937 he sent to his son Amos – who appeared to be critical of his father’s decision to support a partition plan put forward by the Peel Commission – Ben-Gurion describes how he sees partition of Palestine and expulsion of Palestinians fitting into the Zionist movement’s long term goals:

“My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning (…) The establishment of a state, even if only on a portion of the land, is the maximal reinforcement of our strength at the present time and a powerful boost to our historical endeavors to liberate the entire country (…) We shall organize an advanced defense force – a superior army which I have no doubt will be one of the best  armies in the world. At that point I am confident that we would not fail in settling in the remaining parts of the country, through agreement and understanding with our Arab neighbors, or through some other means (…) We must expel Arabs and take their place (…) But if we are compelled to use force (…) in order to guarantee our right to settle there, our force will enable us to do so (…) Because of all the above, I feel no conflict between my mind and emotions. Both declare to me: A Jewish state must be established immediately, even if it is only in part of the country. The rest will follow in the course of time. A Jewish state will come”.

Maxime Rodinson asserts that the root cause of all of Zionism’s future failings is consubstantial with its very colonial founding vision:

“Once the premises were laid down, the inexorable logic of history determined the consequences. Wanting to create a purely Jewish, or predominantly Jewish, state in an Arab Palestine in the twentieth century could not help but lead to a colonial-type situation and to the development (completely normal, sociologically speaking) of a racist state of mind, and in the final analysis to a military confrontation between the two ethnic groups”. Gabriel Piterberg agrees with Rodinson’s early analysis: “From the moment Zionism’s goal became the resettlement of European Jews in a land controlled by a colonial European power, in order to create a sovereign political entity, it could no longer be understood just as a central or east European nationalism; it was also, inevitably, a white-settler colonialism”[15].

The unavoidable consequence of such a vision is what Ahad Ha’am warned against back in 1891 already:

“if the time comes when the life of our people in Eretz Israel develops to the point of encroaching upon the native population, they will not easily yield their place”[16]. A decade before Ha’am made his prescient comment, Palestine’s population was some 460,000. Of these, around 400,000 were Muslim Arabs; about 40,000 were Christian, mostly Greek Orthodox; and the remainder, Jews. 

How challenging these figures are to the falsehood of one of Zionism’s most cherished founding myths – that of “a land without people for a people without land”– and how shockingly ill-intentioned was Herzl’s omission of any reference to “Arabs” or “Palestinians” in his 30,000-word pamphlet!

Assuredly, Herzl’s dream of a national home for the Jews that would end both their own age-old insecurity within the diaspora and Gentiles’ anti-Semitism has inexorably transformed into a nightmare both for Jews and Palestinians and for the world which is still held hostage to their struggle, with no apparent solution in a completely transformed and blood-soaked “Holy Land”.

Nightmare is precisely the key word in the title of the brilliant book[17] Peter Rodgers, a former Australian journalist and ambassador to Israel, devoted to the tragic drama caused by the pursuit of Herzl’s dream by his Zionist followers, to the present day.

Whatever their historical or emotional attachment to the land they came to rule, Rodgers asserts, the Jews of Israel had supplanted another people, a people who would not forget. The making of one nationalist dream has indeed involved the unmaking of another. But for how long and for what price? 

The Aussie ambassador’s very well-researched study tells a story of sorrow and anger in a balanced manner – insofar as this is possible – which, obviously entails the risk of drawing fire from both Jews and Palestinians, but this, he says, is sadly part of the twisted logic of the conflict. The story told shows how little the dynamics of the conflict between Jew and Palestinian have changed; how eerily reminiscent today’s antagonisms and falsehoods are of yesteryear’s; how “modern” leadership is anything but; and how much today’s self-righteous intransigence owes to what went before. Furthermore, it poses the vital question: “have the nationalist dreams of both peoples been doomed by the determined refusal of Jew and Palestinian to contemplate what life must be like for the other?”

To epitomize the opposing views of the protagonists, Rodgers, in his concluding remarks, quotes Yasser Arafat as saying that “the womb of the Arab woman” is one of the Palestinians’ most potent weapons, and Shimon Peres, who, writing of a deepening chasm between Israelis and Palestinians, commented typically: “We are sorry but not desperate”. Rodgers reacted to these last words by saying: “He might perhaps have added wisely, not yet”.

*

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

Amir Nour is an Algerian researcher in international relations, author of the books “L’Orient et l’Occident à l’heure d’un nouveau Sykes-Picot” (The Orient and the Occident in Time of a New Sykes-Picot) Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2014 and “L’Islam et l’ordre du monde” (Islam and the Order of the World),  Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2021. 

Notes

[1] Frantz Fanon,“The Wretched of the Earth” (Original French version:“Les Damnés de la Terre”), François Maspero,1961. To read the book: https://archive.org/details/thewretchedoftheearth/The%20wretched%20of%20the%20earth%20%20%20/

[2] To read the full essay: https://archive.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/israel-palestine/2003/1025alternative.htm

[3] Tony Judt, “Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945”, Penguin Press, London, 2005.

[4] Avraham Burg is a former head of the Jewish Agency and Speaker of the Knesset, Israel’s Parliament, between 1999 and 2003. His essay first appeared in the Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot; it has been widely republished, notably in the Forward of 29 August: “A Failed Israeli Society Collapses While Its Leaders Remain Silent” (https://forward.com/news/7994/a-failed-israeli-society-collapses-while-its-leade/), the London Guardian of 15 September 2003: “The end of Zionism” (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/15/comment), and in French newspaper Le Monde of 11 September 2003: “La révolution sioniste est morte” (https://www.mafhoum.com/press5/159C73.htm).

[5] Ahad Ha’am, “Emet M’Eretz Yisrael” (Truth from Eretz Israel), originally published in 1891 in the Hebrew daily newspaper Hamelitz (St. Petersburg), and translated by A. Dowty, Israel Studies, 2000. 

[6] Mark Levine, “Tony Judt: An intellectual hero”, Aljazeera.com, 14 August 2010.

[7] Nora Scholtes, “Bulwark Against Asia: Zionist Exclusivism and Palestinian Responses”, University of Kent School of English, 2015.

[8] Quoted in Nora Scholtes, Op cit.

[9] Desmond Stewart, “Herzl: Artist and Politician”, Hamish Hamilton, London, 1974.

[10] Mark Levene, “Herzl, the Scramble, and a Meeting That Never Happened: Revisiting the Notion of an African Zion”, in: Bar-Yosef, E., Valman, N. (eds) “‘The Jew’ in Late-Victorian and Edwardian Culture: Between the East End and East Africa”, Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2009.

[11] In Der Judenstaat Herzl writes: “The plan, simple in design, but complicated in execution, will be carried out by two agencies: The Society of Jews and the Jewish Company. The Society of Jews will do the preparatory work in the domains of science and politics, which the Jewish Company will afterwards apply practically. The Jewish Company will be the liquidating agent of the business interests of departing Jews, and will organize commerce and trade in the new country”.

[12] Donald Wagner, “Dying in the Land of Promise”, Melisende, London, 2000.

[13] Bernstein, S., “Theodor Herzl im Lichte des Ostjudentums” (Theodor Herzl in the Light of Eastern Jewry), Die Welt, 3 July 1914: https://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/cm/periodical/pageview/3355506, cited by Nora Scholtes, op cit.

[14] This letter was first referred to by Ilan Pappé in his article entitled “The 1948 Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”, Journal of Palestine Studies, issue 141, Fall 2006. It was later translated from Hebrew into English by the Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut, Lebanon. To read the full translated letter: https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2013/04/06/the-ben-gurion-letter/

[15] Gabriel Piterberg, “Settlers and their States”, New Left Review, No. 62, March-April 2010: https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii62/articles/gabriel-piterberg-settlers-and-their-states

[16] Ahad Ha’am, “Truth from Eretz Israel”, op cit.

[17] Peter Rodgers, “Herzl’s Nightmare: One Land, Two Peoples”, Constable, London, 2005.

Note: This is the text of a lecture delivered at Henry Ford College in Dearborn, Michigan in honor of African American History Month on February 8, 2017. The program was sponsored by the campus African American Association, the Diversity Club and the Office of Student Activities. 

I want to extend my appreciation for this invitation to speak once again at Henry Ford College during African American History Month. This is by far one of the most diverse higher educational institutions in the southeastern Michigan and we need to work very hard to ensure that it remains as such.

We are facing some of the most challenging times within the last two generations. The advent of the present administration in Washington, D.C. is merely a reflection of a much deeper crisis in how notions of representative government, democracy and the social contract are interpreted within United States society.

Since January 20, the U.S. and the international community have witnessed unprecedented opposition through demonstrations, rallies, commentaries and cultural expressions. Inevitably these protest actions will continue until either the people are convinced of their futility or that these manifestations can succeed in winning the objectives of a free and just system that can provide for the needs of the least fortunate among us.

The Significance of African American History

America has never been a great democratic country in its 240 years of existence. Prior to the Declaration of Independence in 1776, there were thirteen colonies controlled by the British.

Nonetheless, other European powers were also seeking dominance over what is now known as North America. France and Spain also had substantial colonies in this region of the Western Hemisphere where they sought to take control of the land and resources of the indigenous people of North America.

Of course the descendants of the British colonial system were victorious in driving out the direct agents of the Crown and establishing what they described as a “Democratic Republic.” However, this republic was never democratic. In its incipient phase during the late 18th and first decades of the 19th century, the displacement of the Native Americans proceeded with full force across the land. At the same time there was the rapid growth of the importation and enslavement of the African people.

The Contributions of Malcolm X and the Worldwide Struggle for Liberation

Our topic today deals with the contributions of Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik Shabazz) who lived from May 19, 1925 to February 21, 1965. We will examine Malcolm X within the context of the global forces that shaped his outlook and organizational direction.

Over twenty years ago a biopic feature film was released in the U.S. which did not bother to examine key aspects of the social and historical events which framed Malcolm X into one of the leading figures of the 20th century. It is important to recognize that Malcolm X and his siblings were born into a political environment.

Malcolm X’s parents, Earl and Louise Little, were both active members of the Universal Negro Improvement Association and the African Communities League (UNIA-ACL) founded by Marcus Garvey and Amy Ashwood Garvey in 1914 in the Caribbean island of Jamaica. Garvey had organized in the Caribbean, Central America and London prior to coming to the U.S. in 1916.

In 1919, the UNIA had held its annual convention in Montreal, Quebec (Canada). This is where Malcolm’s parents met. The 1919 UNIA-ACL conference was pivotal and represented a turning point in the rapid growth of the organization.

During this same year, racial turmoil had erupted across the U.S., which had been characterized as the Red Summer. The most violent of these outbreaks took place in Chicago. Battles raged between African American and white communities from July 27 to August 3. Order was finally restored after the deployment of the Illinois state militia and numerous people had lost their lives and much property was destroyed. It is estimated that 1,000 African Americans were burned out of their homes by racist whites during the disturbances.

The post-World War I period represented an era of profound transformation in the world situation. It was not until the final year of the war that the U.S. became directly involved in the monumental and unprecedented conflict which in actually was a struggle between emerging imperialist powers for the control of the world’s resources.

Malcolm X’s mother Louise Little wrote articles for the UNIA newspaper “The Negro World” which was founded in 1919. The paper was distributed throughout North America, the Caribbean, in Europe and on the African continent. Garvey’s influence continued to grow between 1919 and 1922, when he was indicted, prosecuted and convicted on bogus federal charges of mail fraud.

It was the attorney general of New York state and the-then Bureau of Investigation (later known as the FBI) which concocted the case against the Pan-Africanist leader. After his conviction in 1923, Garvey spent several weeks in Tombs prison and was then let out on bond pending appeal. He continued to organize for the UNIA-ACL until 1925 when he was placed in prison for two years. Later in 1927, he was deported from New Orleans back to Jamaica, never to return to the U.S. again.

Racism and Colonialism Continues

Segregation and institutional racism was the law of the land in the U.S. during the 1920s in both the South and the North. Nonetheless, it was during this period that a massive movement was initiated in the political, economic and cultural spheres.

Popularly known as the “Harlem Renaissance,” African Americans engaged in mass migration from the rural South to the urban North and West; joined the UNIA in the millions; wrote pamphlets, books, plays and musical compositions; created and grew mass organizations and literary societies; entered left-wing politics in the Socialist and Communist Parties; and vigorously fought the widespread lynching and racial violence levelled against them on a daily basis.

Malcolm X was born in Omaha, Nebraska in 1925. He said that his parents’ home was burned down by the Ku Klux Klan due to his father’s activism in the UNIA. The family later moved to Milwaukee, Wisconsin and eventually to Lansing, Michigan.

Earl Little had repeated clashes with the white authorities in the Lansing area. He sought to build a home in a neighborhood where African Americans were prohibited. His home was burned down again by whites. Later he was killed and found dead on street car tracks in 1931. The family believed that he was murdered by the Ku Klux Klan or the Black Legion, which was a para-military group funded by local industrialists, seeking to prevent African American advancement and labor organizing.

The Little family faced hardships during the 1930s when the U.S. was in the depths of the Great Depression. Louise Little was driven into insanity and later institutionalized. The family was broken up and Malcolm stayed in foster homes for many years.

In 1941 Malcolm went to Boston to live with his older sister Ella Collins, the offspring of Earl Little with a previous wife. It was hear that he worked menial odd jobs eventually falling into criminal activity.

During World War II he worked as a waiter on the train routes along the East coast. He was deemed unfit for military service after telling the selective service agents that he could not wait to get his hands on a rifle so he could kill the first white person that he saw.

However, by 1946, Malcolm and his friend Malcolm Jarvis, along with two young white women, were implicated in a burglary ring. Malcom and Jarvis were convicted and sent to state prison in Massachusetts.

Malcolm Little was converted to Islam while serving his sentence in prison. It was his brothers who worked to bring him into the Nation of Islam headed at the time by the Hon. Elijah Muhammad. The NOI was founded in Detroit by W.D. Fard Muhammad in 1930. Fard left the city in 1934 creating a power struggle for control of the organization. Elijah Muhammad eventually settled in Chicago and was able to build an organization with followers in several U.S. cities including Detroit.

After leaving prison in 1952, Malcolm X, by then, came to live in Inkster and Detroit. He was appointed to be the Assistant Minister over Temple Number One in the city.

He worked at several jobs including a salesperson at a furniture store and in an automobile factory. In his spare time he recruited heavily for the NOI. He later was sent to Boston in 1953 to become the minister over the Temple in that city. In 1954 he was appointed as the minister of Temple 7 in Harlem.

Post-World War II and the Anti-Colonial Uprisings

It was after the conclusion of World War II that the struggle against imperialism erupted in full force. Numerous territories in Asia, Africa and Latin America witnessed the growth of national liberation movements, several of which were led by communist parties.

In Vietnam and Korea, communist parties in alliance with other progressive forces took power in 1945. Later in October 1949, the Communist Party of China took control of that highly-populated Asian state.

Also in 1949, Kwame Nkrumah and his comrades formed the Convention People’s Party (CPP) in the West African British colony of the Gold Coast. Within a matter of two years Nkrumah, who had been imprisoned by the colonialists in 1950, was released and entered a coalition government heading towards independence in 1957.

Nkrumah declared on March 6, 1957, at the Ghana Independence Day ceremony, that “The independence of Ghana was meaningless unless it was linked up with the total independence of the African continent.” This Pan-Africanist outlook permeated the entire African world influencing Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam along with the Civil Rights Movement.

Two important developments took place just two years prior to the independence of Ghana: the Bandung Conference in Indonesia and the Montgomery Bus Boycott in Alabama. These events signaled the rising consciousness and desire for unity among the nationally oppressed peoples both inside the U.S. and internationally.

Malcolm X was struck by the Bandung Conference which brought together the newly emerging independent states in Africa and Asia. He often referred to this historic gathering as being instructive in relationship to the plight of the African American people.

The Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955-56, catapulted Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to national and world prominence. The unity exemplified by the African American population in Montgomery portended much for the future of what became known as the Civil Rights Movement.

By the late 1950s, Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam along with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) co-founded by Dr. King represented in a general sense the two wings of the African American liberation movement. King maintaining a commitment to nonviolent struggle against segregation and for integration of public accommodation in the U.S. while Malcolm X, Elijah Muhammad and the NOI advocated self-reliance, independent statehood and self-defense. Although the NOI was labelled as violent by the corporate media and the federal government, they never engaged in the advocacy of mass rebellion or armed struggle to achieve its objectives.

The NOI during the late 1950s and early 1960s, continued to insist that it was a religious group and not a political organization. King and the SCLC saw itself as a social movement seeking to influence the political order in a progressive direction.

By 1960, the student sector within the African American community moved to the vanguard of the struggle with the formation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in April of that year. SNCC grew out of the sit-in movement beginning on February 1, which spread rapidly throughout the South and the North. Youth sought to engage in civil disobedience to break down legalized segregation noting that the legalistic approach of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which played a pivotal role in the Brown v. Topeka case of May 1954, that struck down the separate but equal rulings justifying segregation in public accommodations since the Plessy v. Ferguson of 1896.

SCLC was led by Southern African American ministers although women such as Virginia-born Ella Baker, who had served initially as its executive director and Septima Clark, the voter education pioneer from South Carolina, played an instrumental role in the organization. It was Baker who had encouraged the youth at the SNCC founding conference at Shaw University in North Carolina to form its own independent and autonomous organization.

By 1961, SNCC had established a field staff to work full time on Civil Rights. The organization took over the Freedom Rides in the spring of that year after the Congress on Racial Equality (CORE) was forced to withdraw due to repression in the South.

Malcolm X and Dr. King had been impressed by the role of the students. They had entered areas of the South where racial terror was fostering inertia and fear. In rural counties in Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee, SNCC sought to encourage and organize local people to become leaders of the struggle against segregation and the denial of the franchise.

Although Malcolm X praised the courage of the student leaders he questioned their tactics as well as urging them to clarify the overall objectives of the movement. In a 1961 debate with James Baldwin, the novelist, essayist, playwright and public intellectual over WBAI in New York City, Malcolm X parenthetically said that if the aim of the sit-in movement is freedom, justice and equality for African Americans then he was sympathetic. Malcolm X went to say that if integration can bring freedom, justice and equality then he could support this work. Nonetheless, he later emphasized that he did not believe that integration could liberate African American people and if it could not, then people needed to leave it alone.

Similar comments were made during a lecture at Brown University on May 11, 1961 when Malcolm X stressed that: “No, we are not anti-white. But we don’t have time for the white man. The white man is on top already, the white man is the boss already … He has first-class citizenship already. So you are wasting your time talking to the white man. We are working on our own people.” (Associated Press, Feb. 5, 2012)

Malcolm X’s nationalism and internationalism was reflected in the early editions of Muhammad Speaks newspaper which published its first issue in May 1960. Initially entitled “Mr. Muhammad Speaks”, the subheading for the paper read: “Militant Monthly Dedicated to Justice for the Black Man”.

Inside this issue there is an extensive article on the trip taken by the Hon. Elijah Muhammad to several African and Middle Eastern states in 1959. Malcolm X had accompanied Muhammad on the tour that included visits to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Ghana and Egypt. The paper said the tour disproved the lies circulated in the U.S. that the NOI and African Americans in general were not accepted or recognized in Africa and the Middle East.

Another important report entitled “Garvey Foresaw Today” chronicles the work of the UNIA-ACL leader during the 1920s and then points to the anti-colonial movements that were raging throughout Africa. Photographs of Kwame Nkrumah and Marcus Garvey appear in the sharply worded article.

In yet another article entitled “Africa Moves Toward Freedom”, subtitled “Originals Revolt; Colonials Disturbed”, a survey of the various national liberation struggles during a five year period is outlined. Discussions on the situations in Cameroun, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Benin, Upper Volta, Sudan, Mauritania, Senegal, Mali and other territories are reviewed.

Linking the independence movements with the plight of the African American people was made evident in an article on police brutality. The report covers a civil trial involving the New York police beating of Johnson Hinton in 1957. This incident had the potential of sparking a rebellion in the city. Malcolm X’s intervention in removing 2,000 members of the NOI and other nationalist organizations off the streets was credited with averting unrest.

Later the following year there was another incident involving the New York police in East Elmhurst where Malcolm X and John X, the-then two high-ranking Muslims in the city, had their home raided by law-enforcement officers. The wives of the two men were briefly detained while other NOI members living in the downstairs section of the building were subjected to an unlawful invasion and beatings.

Under a section of the report entitled “Police Brutality Exposed” on page 13, Malcolm X is quoted as saying: “Where else and under what other circumstances could you find a situation where inhuman police can freely invade private homes, religious offices, breaking down doors, smash windows and furniture, and threaten the lives of pregnant women and children, endangering their lives by shooting their way into the house. This could happen nowhere else on earth but here in America in a Negro neighborhood.”

Threats were made by the police against Malcolm. One section of the same article indicates that Harry Buffins testified in the civil trial surrounding the 1957 case that a police officer looked at Malcolm and said “we should break that bastard’s head since he is the leader.”

Consequently, threats against Malcolm from law-enforcement personnel were well established by the late 1950s. Other incidents involving police brutality against NOI members took place not only in New York. One of the most widely publicized of such situations occurred in Los Angeles in April 1962 that resulted in the death of the Mosque No. 7 Secretary Ronald Stokes. The incident brought Malcolm X to Los Angeles to organize a mass response to the killing of Stokes, the wounding and injuries of other NOI members as well as the imposition of false criminal charges.

A groundswell of support from broad segments of the African American community served to enhance the influence of the NOI and Malcolm X. The coroner’s inquiry declared the death of Stokes at the hands of the police as justifiable. Malcolm was outraged and wanted to fight the decision through civil action in the courts in California. Later he was recalled from Los Angeles by Elijah Muhammad.

It was these differences of approach and style of work that further exacerbated tensions between Malcolm and the Chicago headquarters of the NOI. By December 5, 1963, Malcolm X was silenced by Muhammad for ninety days due to remarks that he made surrounding the death of President John F. Kennedy. Malcolm noted in a question and answer period at the Manhattan Center on December 1 that the U.S. had been involved in the assassination of other leaders giving the example of Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba who was killed at the aegis of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in January 1961. Malcolm said that the death of Kennedy was a case of the “chickens coming home to roast.”

By March 1964, Malcolm X announced his formal departure from the NOI. He then formed the Muslim Mosque, Inc. and later the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU), after he returned from Hajj in Mecca and an extensive tour in several African and Middle Eastern states. In Ghana, during May 1964, Malcolm addressed a huge audience at the University in Legon, praising the political leadership of President Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and calling for the unity of Africans and African Americans.

After returning to the U.S. in late June 1964, the OAAU was launched at the Audubon Ballroom in the Washington Heights section of Upper Manhattan. Malcolm soon left the country again in July to make a direct appeal to the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Second Summit held in Cairo, Egypt.

In an eight-page memorandum circulated to the OAU heads-of-state in Cairo, Malcolm X said: “Since the 22 million of us were originally Africans, who are now in America, not by choice but only by a cruel accident in our history, we strongly believe that African problems are our problems and our problems are African problems. We also believe that as heads of the independent African states you are the shepherds of all African peoples everywhere, whether they are still at home here on the mother continent or have been scattered abroad.”

He continued in the same document saying: “Some African leaders at this conference have implied that they have enough problems here on the mother continent without adding the Afro-American problem. With all due respect to your esteemed positions, I must remind all of you that the Good Shepherd will leave ninety-nine sheep who are safe at home to go to the aid of the one who is lost and has fallen into the clutches of the imperialist wolf. We in America are your long-lost brothers and sisters, and I am here only to remind you that our problems are your problems. As the African-Americans ‘awaken’ today, we find ourselves in a strange land that has rejected us, and, like the prodigal son, we are turning to our elder brothers for help. We pray our pleas will not fall upon deaf ears. We were taken forcibly in chains from this mother continent and have now spent over three hundred years in America, suffering the most inhuman forms of physical and psychological tortures imaginable.”

Implications of the Legacy of Malcolm X for the 21st Century

Of course it was the combined efforts of the OAAU in both accelerating the national liberation struggle of the African American people in the U.S. along with a rigorous attempt to internationalize the movement for total freedom, which set the plot to assassinate him in motion. In many historical appraisals of the assassination of Malcolm X the allegations of responsibility lead directly to disgruntled leaders of the NOI.

Nevertheless, thousands upon thousands of FBI documents illustrate the degree to which Malcolm X remained under surveillance by the U.S. government from the time of his leadership within the NOI to his founding of both the MMI and the OAAU. Consequently, the authorities would have been not only aware of any conspiracy within the NOI to assassinate him and therefore placing this agency in a position to halt it and prosecute the perpetrators.

Other factors involved in this scenario is the claim by Malcolm at a press conference held at the Audubon on February 15, 1965, less than two days after his home was bombed in the early morning hours of February 14. Malcolm noted that several members of the NOI had come to him over the years with confessions of being police informants and officers. He said that “the Black Muslim movement was full of cops.”

These lessons from the 1950s and 1960s have tremendous bearing on the political situation we are facing today as African Americans, oppressed peoples in North America and the working class as a whole. The capitalist system has exhausted its capacity to provide a decent standard of living for tens of millions of people. This reality of the Trump administration and its ideological racism and sexism is a manifestation of the inability of the ruling class to accommodate the growing populations of peoples of color who are demanding full political rights and economic equality.

However, poverty is increasing inside the U.S. and wealth is becoming even more concentrated at the upper echelons of society. There are no expressed intentions on the part of either of the corporate-oriented capitalist political parties to redress the imbalance in wealth and social status in the present period. Both failed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and the Electoral College victor Donald Trump were loathed by millions in the country.

Millions of people have taken to the streets in the first few days of the Trump administration with thousands blocking airports in response to a ban on people from seven states in Africa and the Middle East. The issue has moved into the realm of the federal courts where a judge in Washington State placed a temporary restraining order on the Trump administration’s executive order banning guests and even permanent residents from entering the U.S.

These events are taking place in conjunction with an escalation of racial tensions in the country involving unresolved killings by law-enforcement and vigilantes of African Americans. The blatant acts of police repression have resulted in several urban rebellions and thousands of mass demonstrations since 2013. Reaching the level of political upheaval, the unrest in Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, Milwaukee and Charlotte serve as warnings of greater degrees of social conflict. The escalation in racial turmoil took place under the previous administration of President Barack Obama where the specific and special oppression of African Americans was routinely ignored. Various newspaper editorials published in Europe and other geo-political regions observed that America is by no means a post-racial society.

There has been yet another surge in the internationalization of the movement against racism and neo-fascism. In Britain demonstrations have taken place in opposition to a possible state visit to the country by Trump. The issue has even been debated within the British parliament with the Speaker objecting to a potential visit to the building.

The problems of race relations and the failure of migrant integration in the European Union (EU) were clearly perceived over five decades ago by Malcolm X when he visited both Britain and France in 1964 and 1965. In France he was barred from entering the country in early 1965. Malcolm said that the implications conveyed to him by French customs personnel were that this was being done at the aegis of the U.S. government under Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson.

U.S. imperialism through its economic and military warfare against the peoples of Africa and Asia has created the worst humanitarian crisis of displacement in world history. Up to 75 million people have been dislocated due to the wars of occupation and genocide carried out against the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Palestine.

The plight of the Palestinian people has been conveniently taken off the global radar in favor of largely irrelevant discussions about the proliferation of Jewish settlements and the relocation of the capital of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. How can there be any genuine peace in the Middle East absent of the liberation of Palestine, the occupied territories of the Golan Heights in Syria and the halting of the imperialist policies of the Pentagon and NATO which have resulted in the deaths of millions in the last four decades.

The domestic campaigns against racism, sexism and national discrimination must be connected to the antiwar and anti-imperialist movements. There can be no compromise with the Pentagon war machine despite the false promises of jobs and business opportunities made by successive administrations to the people of the U.S. This war budget has drained the resources of the working families for the last half century or more. From Vietnam to the present “permanent wars” in the Middle East, Central Asia and the African continent take resources away from solving the social problems which are worsening in America.

In addition, the wars of destruction, occupation and genocide breed greater hatred towards the ruling classes of the various imperialist states in Western Europe and North America. The future of the world cannot realize stability unless the drive for global domination by imperialism is overthrown. Trump’s attacks on people from African and Middle Eastern states are clearly a continuation of the war mongering that has left societies broken with genuine development stifled and reversed.

The awareness and activism of people inside the U.S. must be harnessed into a movement committed to fundamental transformation of the exploitative and oppressive system. Consequently, those who must take leadership in the present conjuncture are the social classes and oppressed nations that have the most to gain from revolutionary change.

These are the issues that we must grapple with in the coming weeks and months. Studying the life and ideas of Malcolm X can shed light on what is needed in 2017 and beyond. Youth, students and intellectuals have to remain engaged in the present era. Let us move forward with the necessary optimism and scientific inquiry and practice required for total victory.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

First published on January 28, 2023

***

 

 

 

Historical Analysis of the Global Elite:
Ransacking the World Economy Until ‘You’ll Own Nothing.’

 

By Robert J. Burrowes

 

---

About the Author

 

Robert has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a geopolitical analyst since 1971. Since becoming a nonviolent activist in 1981, he has been involved in many nonviolent action campaigns and been arrested for nonviolent acts of conscience about 30 times. He is the author of The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach and ‘Why Violence?’

His email address is [email protected] and his website is here.

He is a regular contributor to ‘Global Research’.

 

---

Table of Contents

 

Preface

Acknowledgments

Introduction

Chapter I

A Brief Economic History

Chapter II

Who Is the Global Elite and How Does It Operate?

Chapter III

The US Federal Reserve System

Chapter IV

The Bank for International Settlements

Chapter V

World War II and What Followed

Chapter VI

The Post World War II Superstructure to Transform World Order, Destroy the World Economy and Capture All Wealth

Chapter VII

The Coup de Grâce: The Great Reset

Chapter VIII

Collapsing the Global Economy

Chapter IX

The Rothschilds and Transhumanism

Chapter X

So What Can We Do About This?

Conclusion

 

---

Preface

 

My father was a Coastwatcher during World War II and while he survived the war, both of his brothers were killed. His older brother, Bob, was killed when the unmarked and unescorted Japanese POW ship, Montevideo Maru, was torpedoed by the USS Sturgeon off the coast of the Philippines on 1 July 1942. Bob had been captured during the fall of Rabaul five months earlier. Dad’s twin brother, Tom, was shot down over Rabaul on 14 December 1943. It was his first mission. As a child, my father took my brother and me to an annual service at the Shrine of Remembrance to commemorate the death of his brothers.

Answering the question ‘Why do human beings kill each other?’ so that I might know how to end it, became my life passion.

But my investigation was still young when my search led me into a ‘minefield’ of issues and complexities. Surely someone already had the answer. But where was it? In the field of history, religion, politics, economics, sociology or psychology? All of these? Somewhere else? And was there a common thread explaining the violence of war and the violence of racism and the starvation the newspapers told me was happening in Africa? And would any ‘common thread’ explain destruction of the environment too? Where should I investigate first? Unfortunately but instructively, teachers at school and then University all had different answers to my fundamental question. And none of them felt compelling to me.

Clearly, I consciously conceded after a few years, the answer to my question was not as simple as posing the question had been. And, it seemed, I needed a much clearer sense of how the world worked. A political sociology class I attended in 1971 referenced a book written by C. Wright Mills: The Power Elite. If nothing else, reading this book made me realize that the world did not work as I had been taught. So I now sought to answer the question ‘Why Violence?’ with an awareness of my need to understand, far more deeply, how the world really worked.

And so, with the benefit of more than 50 years of investigation behind me, when prominent global and national figures starting expressing concern about the threat supposedly posed by a novel coronavirus in early 2020, some brief research soon revealed that there was no documented scientific proof that a unique ‘virus’ had been isolated and it was just the latest medical hoax to be perpetrated on humanity. From there, it was an easy step to identify and comprehend the basic components of this latest (technocratic) stage in the Elite program to impose control over all humanity. Still, after nearly three years, it felt like it was time to spell out, more fully, how what is happening now had a 5,000 year ‘lead time’. So this is my attempt to do so.

 

---

Acknowledgements

 

I thank Anita McKone, my lovely wife, fellow nonviolent activist and cofounder of ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’, for her thoughtful suggestions to improve the original draft of this investigation.

I extend my gratitude to Professor Michel Chossudovsky, whose investigative capacities, insight and courage has ensured the incredible value of his own contributions in exposing the Elite program but also in making ‘Global Research’ the premier news/analysis site for those resisting the ‘Great Reset’ and its fourth industrial revolution, transhumanist and eugenicist components.

And I thank my parents, Beryl and James Burrowes, both veterans of World War II and 99 years of age, for their unfailing love and support no matter where my investigation and nonviolent actions take me.

 

---

 

Introduction

 

According to a video published by the World Economic Forum in 2016, by 2030 ‘You’ll Own Nothing. And You’ll Be Happy.’ See ‘8 predictions for the world in 2030’.

Clearly, if this prediction is to come true, then many things must happen. Let me identify why the World Economic Forum believes it will happen and then investigate these claims. Among other questions, I will examine whether those who will own nothing will include the Rothschild, Rockefeller and other staggeringly wealthy families. Or, perhaps, whether they just mean people like you and me.

In fact, a primary intention behind the Elite’s ongoing technocratic coup, initiated in January 2020, is to kill off a substantial proportion of the human population, fundamentally reshape world order including by turning those humans left alive into transhuman slaves, drive the global economy to collapse and implement the final redistribution of global wealth from everyone else to this Elite. Let me start with the briefest of histories so that what is happening can be understood as the ultimate conclusion of a long-standing agenda, identify who I mean by the ‘Global Elite’ (and its agents), then present the evidence to explain how this is happening and, most importantly, a comprehensive strategy to defeat it.

Needless to say, in the interests of keeping this study manageable, many critical historical events – including how imperialism and colonialism, the international slave trade, a great number of wars and coups, Wall Street support for the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917 and precipitation of the Great Depression in 1929, were used to advance the Elite program – are not addressed in this investigation. But for accounts of the latter two events which provide evidence consistent with the analysis offered below, see Wall Street and The Bolshevik Revolution and The Secrets of the Federal Reserve.

 

---

 

Chapter I
A Brief Economic History

 

Following the Neolithic revolution 12,000 years ago, agriculture allowed human settlement to supersede the hunter-gatherer economy. However, while the Neolithic revolution occurred spontaneously in several parts of the world, some of the Neolithic societies that emerged in Asia, Europe, Central America and South America resorted to increasing degrees of social control, ostensibly to achieve a variety of social and economic outcomes, including increased efficiency in food production.

Civilizations emerged just over 5,000 years ago and, utilizing this higher degree of social control, were characterized by towns or cities, efficient food production allowing a large minority of the community to be engaged in more specialized activities, a centralized bureaucracy and the practice of skilled warfare. See ‘A Critique of Human Society since the Neolithic Revolution’.

With the emergence of civilization, elites of a local nature (such as the Pharoahs of Egypt), elites with imperial reach (including Roman emperors), elites of a religious nature (such as Popes and officials of the Vatican), elites of an economic character (particularly the City of London Corporation) and elites of a ‘national’ type (especially the monarchies of Europe) progressively emerged, essentially to manage the administration associated with maintaining and expanding their realms (political, economic and/or religious).

The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 formally established the nation-state system in Europe. Enriched by the long-standing and profitable legacy of their control over local domestic populations, support for the imperial conquest of non-European lands, colonial subjugation of indigenous peoples and the international slave trade, European elites, backed by military violence, were able to impose a long series of changes over national political, economic and legal systems which facilitated the emergence of industrial capitalism in Europe in the 18^th century.

These interrelated political, economic and legal changes facilitated scientific research that was increasingly geared towards utilizing new resources and technological innovation that drove the ongoing invention of machinery and the harnessing of coal-fired power to make industrial production possible.

Beyond this, and following several centuries of more and less formal versions of it, Elite political and economic imperatives drove the ‘legal’ enclosure of the Commons to force people off their land and into the poorly-paid labour force needed in the emerging industrial cities. In these cities, an ongoing series of developments in the organization of work in factories, electrification, banking, and other changes and technologies dramatically expanded the gap between rich and poor. Along with subsequently imposed changes to education and, later, healthcare, national economies and the global economy were increasingly structured to profoundly disconnect ‘ordinary’ people from their land, traditional knowledge and long-standing healthcare practices to make them dependent while dramatically reinforcing an institutional reality progressively consolidated since the dawn of human civilization: Elite control ensured that the economy perpetually redistributed wealth from those who have less to those who have more.

As noted by Adam Smith, for example, in his classic work An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations published in 1775: ‘All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind’.

And this was exemplified, for example, by the 150-year struggle between the bankers working to establish a privately-owned central bank in the newly independent United States and those Presidents (such as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln) and members of Congress who worked tirelessly to defeat it. In fact: ‘Most of the founding fathers realized the potential dangers of banking and feared bankers’ accumulation of wealth and power.’ Why?

Dividend Day at the Bank of England, 1770 (Licensed under the Public Domain)

Having observed how the privately-owned British central bank, the Bank of England, had run up the British national debt to such an extent that Parliament had been forced to place unfair taxes on the American colonies, the founders in the US understood the evils of a privately-owned central bank, which Benjamin Franklin later claimed was the real cause of the American Revolution.

As James Madison, principal author of the US Constitution argued: ‘History records that the Money Changers used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money, and its issuance.’ Another founder, Thomas Jefferson, put it this way: ‘I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.’ As it turns out, the battle over who would get the power to issue US money raged from 1764, changing hands eight times, until the bankers’ final deceitful victory in 1913 with the establishment of the Federal Reserve System. ‘The battle over who gets to issue our money has been the pivotal issue throughout the history of the United States. Wars are fought over it. Depressions are caused to acquire it. Yet after WWI, this battle was rarely mentioned in the newspapers or history books. Why? By WWI, the Money Changers with their dominant wealth had seized control of most of the nation’s press.’ Watch The Money Masters: How International Bankers Gained Control of America (with the relevant section of the four-part transcript of the video available here: ‘The Money Masters: Part I’.)

Why the objection to a private central bank? Well, consider the formation and ownership of the inaccurately named Bank of England, established in 1694.

By the end of the C17^th, England was in financial ruin: 50 years of more or less continuous wars with France and Holland had depleted it. So government officials asked the bankers for the loans necessary to pursue their political purposes. What did these bankers want in return? ‘The price was high: a government-sanctioned, privately owned bank which could issue money created out of nothing.’ It became the world’s first privately-owned central bank and, although it was deceptively called the Bank of England to make people think it was part of the government, it was not. Moreover, like any other private corporation, the Bank of England sold shares to get started. ‘The investors, whose names were never revealed, were supposed to put up 1,250,000 British pounds in gold coins, to buy their shares in the bank. But only 750,000 pounds was ever received.’ Despite that, the bank was duly chartered in 1694 and started the business of loaning out several times the money it supposedly had in reserves, all at interest.

Let me restate that for clarity: The British government legislated to create a privately-owned central bank (that is, a bank owned by a small group of wealthy individuals) that loaned out vast amounts of money it did not have so that it could make a profit by charging interest.

This practice is called ‘fractional reserve banking’ to make it sound like some sophisticated economic concept rather than a deceitful practice that, should you or I do it, we would be jailed. ‘In exchange the Bank would loan the British politicians as much of the new currency as they wanted, as long as they secured the debt by direct taxation of the British people.’ In other words, the Bank could not lose.

So, as William T. Still notes: ‘legalization of the Bank of England amounted to nothing less than the legal counterfeiting of a national currency for private gain.’

‘Unfortunately’, he goes on, ‘nearly every nation now has a privately controlled central bank, using the Bank of England as their basic model. Such is the power of these central banks, that they soon take total control over a nation’s economy. It soon amounts to nothing else than a plutocracy, rule by the rich.’ Watch The Money Masters: How International Bankers Gained Control of America (with the relevant section of the four-part transcript of the video available here: ‘The Money Masters: Part I’.)

Before proceeding, if how the banking system works isn’t your strong point, this brief video does a good job of spelling out essential points in a non-technical way. Watch ‘Banking – the Greatest Scam on Earth’.

And for a thoughtful explanation of the meaning and history of money, see Nick Szabo’s superb article  ‘Shelling Out: The Origins of Money’.

In any case, the fundamental point is simple: After 5,000 years, the various processes by which local elites, then ‘national’ elites, then international elites, and now the Global Elite have continuously asserted their control to enhance their capacity to shape how the world works and to accumulate wealth has now reached its climax. Thus we are on the brink of being herded into an Elite-controlled technocracy in which, as the World Economic Forum makes clear: By 2030 ‘You’ll Own Nothing. And You’ll Be Happy.’

So you will own nothing.

And why would you be happy about that? Because you will be a transhuman slave: an organism that no longer even owns their own mind.

 

---

Chapter II
Who Is the Global Elite and How Does It Operate?

 

Many authors have, directly or indirectly, addressed this question and each has come up with their own nuanced combination of wealthy individuals and families, their political connections, as well as the financial instruments and organizational structures through which their power is gained and exercised.

For the purposes of this study, I am going to define the Global Elite as those families that had acquired their vast wealth and firmly established their preeminent political and economic power in global society by the end of the 19^th century. These families have thus played the central role in shaping institutions and events both before but also since that time, thus providing the framework in which other wealthy people have since emerged.

In order to perform their fundamental role in shaping the modern world to serve their purposes, this Elite has facilitated the creation of a vast network of agents – corporations, institutions, other families and individuals – who are owned and/or controlled by this Elite and act as ‘fronts’ to advance Elite interests. In any given period, the Elite families remain largely unchanged (while succeeding generations of individuals further the families’ interests) but the organizational and individual agents through which these families work vary, depending on Elite aims in the contexts it precipitates.

A landmark Rothschild Palace in Frankfurt, Germany, Villa Günthersburg (photographed 1855) (Licensed under the Public Domain)

Let me briefly illustrate my approach by using one family – the ‘House of Rothschild’ – as a case study before moving onto a wider description of how Elite families use their wealth to shape corporations, institutions, events and people to serve their own purposes.

This example is drawn from the official Rothschild Archive and two (sometimes conflicting) Rothschild-authorized accounts of the family’s history written at different times. See The Rothschild Archive, The House of Rothschild – Money’s Prophets, 1798-1848 and The Rothschilds: A Family Portrait.

In addition, the account draws on sources that report neutrally on Rothschild involvement as well as some sources that are critical. These sources are cited in context below.

By the mid-18^th century, the ancestors of Mayer Amschel had long been small merchants in the town ghetto of Frankfurt. But, as a Jew without a family name and before street numbering was used, Mayer was also known by the name some ancestors had used on the house sign where they once lived: Rothschild (Red Shield). With more ability than other merchants and having been sent to learn the rudiments of business in the firm of Wolf Jakob Oppenheim, he became a dealer in rare coins, medals and antiques, the buyers of which were almost invariably aristocratic collectors, including William, Hereditary Prince of Hesse-Kassel. It was this business that enabled Mayer Amschel to accumulate the capital to move into banking, a natural outgrowth of his policy of extending credit to some of his clients. His wealth started to increase rapidly as he focused more on state and merchant banking, both local and international.

With a policy of seeking little profit from interest on loans while seeking trade concessions in other areas, seeking clientele only among ‘the noblest personages in Germany’, secret bookkeeping in parallel with the official one and, later, deploying his five sons to replicate his style and activities in England (Nathan, who, after a few years in Manchester, established himself in the City of London), Paris (Jakob, known as James), Naples (Kalman, or Carl), Vienna (Salomon) as well as Frankfurt (where eldest son Amschel eventually succeeded father Mayer), the Rothschild dynasty and ‘multinational business model’ quickly established itself throughout Europe. Critically, it was serviced by the maintenance of close relationships with leading political figures and salaried agents working in financial markets who provided essential political and commercial news, as well as private communications channels (including coaches with secret compartments) that worked with enormous efficiency.

And it was this ‘Red Shield’ communication network, later operating under Royal patronage, combined with a certain audacity, that enabled the Rothschilds to profit handsomely from a variety of adverse circumstances including the restrictions on trade between England and the continent which characterized the Napoleonic period, and the Napoleonic Wars as well. This included smuggling vast amounts of contraband goods from England to the continent and transferring a substantial hoard of gold bullion through France to finance the feeding of Wellington’s army.

Most spectacularly, and despite family efforts to suppress awareness of this fact, the Rothschilds profited enormously from their privileged notice that Wellington defeated Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815, as recorded by William T. Still and Patrick S.J. Carmack in their 3.5 hour documentary

The Money Masters: How International Bankers Gained Control of America (with the relevant section of the four-part transcript of the video available here:

‘The Money Masters: Part II’.)

How did this happen?

Following a long series of wars across Europe and the eastern Mediterranean, during which he was very successful, rapidly promoted and, in 1804, elected Emperor of France, Napoleon was eventually defeated. He abdicated and was exiled to Elba, an island off the Tuscan coast, in 1814 but escaped nine months later in February 1815.

As he returned to Paris, French troops were sent out to capture Napoleon but such was his charisma that ‘the soldiers rallied around their old leader and hailed him as their emperor once again.’ And, having borrowed funds to rearm, in March 1815 Napoleon’s freshly equipped army marched out to be ultimately defeated by Britain’s Duke of Wellington at Waterloo less than three months later. As Still remarks: ‘Some writers claimed Napoleon borrowed 5 million pounds from the Bank of England to rearm. But it appears these funds actually came from Ubard Banking House in Paris. Nevertheless, from about this point on, it was not unusual for privately controlled central banks to finance both sides in a war.’

‘Why would a central bank finance opposing sides in a war?’ Still asks. ‘Because war is the biggest debt generator of them all. A nation will borrow any amount for victory. The ultimate loser is loaned just enough to hold out the vain hope of victory, and the ultimate winner is given enough to win. Besides, such loans are usually conditioned upon the guarantee that the victor will honor the debts of the vanquished.’

Image: Nathan Mayer Rothschild (Licensed under the Public Domain)

While the outcome of the battle at Waterloo was certainly in doubt, back in London Nathan Rothschild planned to use the outcome, no matter who won or lost, to try to seize control over the British stock and bond market and possibly even the Bank of England. How did he do this? Here is one account. ‘Rothschild stationed a trusted agent, a man named Rothworth, on the north side of the battlefield, closer to the English Channel.’ Once the battle had been decided, at the cost of many thousands of French, English and other European lives, Rothworth headed immediately for the Channel. He delivered the news to Nathan Rothschild, a full 24 hours before Wellington’s own courier arrived with the news.

Rothschild hurried to the stock market and, with all eyes on him given the Rothschild’s legendary communications network was well known, others present observed Rothschild knowing that if Wellington had been defeated, and Napoleon was again at large in Europe, the British financial situation would become grave indeed. Rothschild began selling his consoles (British government bonds). ‘Other nervous investors saw that Rothschild was selling. It could only mean one thing: Napoleon must have won, Wellington must have lost.’

The market plummeted. Soon everyone was selling their own consoles and prices dropped sharply. ‘But then Rothschild started secretly buying up the consoles through his agents for only a fraction of their worth hours before.’

Fallacious? As Still concludes this recounting of the episode: ‘One hundred years later, the New York Times ran the story that Nathan Rothschild’s grandson had attempted to secure a court order to suppress a book with that stock market story in it. The Rothschild family claimed that the story was untrue and libelous. But the court denied the Rothschilds’ request and ordered the family to pay all court costs.’

In any case, having built their initial fortune using various means – some of which, as just illustrated, were neither moral nor legal – throughout the 19^th century the Rothschild family continued to accumulate wealth through the international bond market, which they played a key role in developing, as well as other forms of financial business: bullion broking and refining, accepting and discounting commercial bills, direct trading in commodities, foreign exchange dealing and arbitrage, even insurance. The Rothschilds also had a select group of clients – usually royal and aristocratic individuals whom they wished to cultivate – to whom they offered a range of ‘personal banking services’ ranging from large personal loans (such as that to the Austrian Chancellor Prince Metternich) to a first class private postal service (for Queen Victoria). The family also had substantial mining interests and was a major industrial investor backing the construction of railway lines in Europe in the 1830s and 1840s. But, apart from its other interests, the family continued to be heavily involved in ‘the money trade’.

‘From 1870 onwards, London was the centre of Britain’s greatest export: money. Vast quantities of savings and earnings were gathered and invested at considerable profit through the international merchant banks of Rothschild, Baring, Lazard, and Morgan in the City’. See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, p. 220.

But what, exactly, is the City?

Image: Coat of arms of the City of London. The Latin motto reads Domine Dirige Nos, “Lord, guide us”. (Licensed under the Public Domain)

The City of London Corporation, an independent square mile in the heart of London, was founded in about AD50 and quickly established itself as an important commercial centre which ultimately gave birth to some of the world’s greatest financial institutions such as the London Stock Exchange, Lloyd’s of London and, in 1694, the Bank of England. The City’s ‘modern period’ is sometimes dated from 1067.

However, as explained by Nicholas Shaxson, the City ‘is an ancient, [semi-foreign] entity lodged inside the British nation state; a “prehistoric monster which had mysteriously survived into the modern world”, as a 19^th century would-be City reformer put it…. the corporation is an offshore island inside Britain, a tax haven in its own right.’ Of course, the term ‘tax haven’ is a misnomer, ‘because such places aren’t just about tax. What they sell is escape: from the laws, rules and taxes of jurisdictions elsewhere, usually with secrecy as their prime offering. The notion of elsewhere (hence the term “offshore”) is central. The Cayman Islands’ tax and secrecy laws are not designed for the benefit of the 50,000-odd Caymanians, but help wealthy people and corporations, mostly in the US and Europe, get around the rules of their own democratic societies. The outcome is one set of rules for a rich elite and another for the rest of us.’

In the words of Shaxson:

The City’s ‘elsewhere’ status in Britain stems from a simple formula: over centuries, sovereigns and governments have sought City loans, and in exchange the City has extracted privileges and freedoms from rules and laws to which the rest of Britain must submit. The City does have a noble tradition of standing up for citizens’ freedoms against despotic sovereigns, but this has morphed into freedom for money. See ‘The tax haven in the heart of Britain’.

As Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor explain it then, by 1870:

City influence and investments crossed national boundaries and raised funds for governments and companies across the entire world. The great investment houses made billions, their political allies and agents grew wealthy…. Edward VII, both as king and earlier as Prince of Wales, swapped friendship and honours for the generous patronage of the Rothschilds, Cassel, and other Jewish banking families like the Montagus, Hirschs and Sassoons…. The Bank of England was completely in the hands of these powerful financiers, and the relationship went unchallenged….

The flow of money into the United States during the nineteenth century advanced industrial development to the immense benefit of the millionaires it created: Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Vanderbilt and their associates. The Rothschilds represented British interests, either directly through front companies or indirectly through agencies that they controlled. Railroads, steel, shipbuilding, construction, oil and finance blossomed…. These small groups of massively rich individuals on both sides of the Atlantic knew one another well, and the Secret Elite in London initiated the very select and secretive dining club, the Pilgrims, that brought them together on a regular basis. See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, p. 220.

To choose one example from those just listed, you can read an official account of the Rothschild family’s early involvement in oil production, including its ‘decisive influence’ in the formation of Royal Dutch Shell, in the Rothschild Archive. See ‘Searching for Oil in Roubaix’.

Beyond their investments in the industries just listed, however, the Rothschilds had significant media interests: Their Paribas Bank ‘controlled the all-powerful news agency Havas, which in turn owned the most important advertising agency in France.’ See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, p. 214.

And, by the late 19^th century, direct Rothschild investment in major ‘armaments companies’ (now better known as weapons corporations) and related industries was substantial with official biographer Niall Ferguson candidly noting ‘If late-nineteenth-century imperialism had its “military-industrial complex” the Rothschilds were unquestionably part of it.’ See The House of Rothschild – Volume 2 – The World’s Banker, 1849-1998, p. 579.

Of course, as noted previously, the Rothschild family is not the only family that uses its wealth to exercise enormous economic and political power and to profit from war, but the evidence suggests that it has long been the most deeply entrenched in the institutions, including those it has created, that facilitate the exercise of this power. Moreover, it is linked to many other wealthy families through a multitude of arrangements as will be shown.

Consider the following examples of how the power of wealth is exercised and note the names of some other wealthy families.

Invariably working ‘in the background’, elite figures spend considerable time manipulating ‘well-positioned’ people, and none are more adept at this than the Rothschilds. To cite just one of many examples, ‘both the great estates of Balmoral and Sandringham, so intimately associated with the British royal family, were facilitated, if not entirely paid for, through the largess of the House of Rothschild’ thus maintaining the long-standing Rothschild tradition of gifting ‘loans’ – that is, bribes, as the brothers had long before privately acknowledged – to royalty (and other key officials).

Of course, this manipulation of people is done to ensure the creation of particular institutions or to precipitate or facilitate a particular sequence of events. Just one obvious example of this occurred when the British government was manipulated into the Boer War of 1899-1902 by ‘the secret society of Cecil Rhodes’ as it was originally known and of which Lord (Nathan) Rothschild was a founding member along with Alfred, later Lord, Milner who succeeded Rhodes as head of this exclusive secret club. While the British public was given a more palatable pretext for this war via the media, it was fundamentally fought to defend and consolidate the rich South African gold-mining interests of wealthy businesspeople, including the Rothschilds. By the time the war ended, the Transvaal’s gold was finally in their hands. The cost? ‘32,000 deaths in the concentration camps, [of whom more than 26,000 were women and children]; 22,000 British Empire troops were killed and 23,000 wounded. Boer casualties numbered 34,000. Africans killed amounted to 14,000.’ See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, pp. 23 & 38-50 and The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden.

 

---

 

Chapter III
The US Federal Reserve System

 

In his classic work The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve, in which he describes the formation, structure and function of the US Federal Reserve System, which governs banking in the United States, G. Edward Griffin identified the seven men and who they represented, at the secret meeting held at the private resort of J.P. Morgan on Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia in November 1910 when the System was conceived (and later passed as The Federal Reserve Act in 1913).

The seven men at this meeting represented the great financial institutions of Wall Street and, indirectly, Europe as well: that is, they represented one-quarter of the total wealth of the entire world. They were Nelson W. Aldrich, Republican ‘whip’ in the US Senate, Chair of the National Monetary Commission and father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller Jr.; Henry P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company; Charles D. Norton, President of the 1st National Bank of New York; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; Frank A. Vanderlip, President of the National City Bank of New York, representing William Rockefeller; Benjamin Strong, head of J.P. Morgan’s Bankers Trust Company and later to become head of the System; and Paul M. Warburg, a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company, representing the Rothschilds and Warburgs in Europe.

But lest you think that there is some ‘diversity’ here, long-standing ties generated from huge financial injections at crucial times meant that several other key banks owed much to Rothschild wealth. For example, in 1857 a run on U.S. banks saw the bank Peabody, Morgan and Company in deep trouble as four other banks were driven out of business. But Peabody, Morgan and Company was saved by the Bank of England. Why? Who initiated the rescue? According to Docherty and Macgregor, ‘The Rothschilds held immense sway in the Bank of England and the most likely answer is that they intervened to save the firm. Peabody retired in 1864, and Junius Morgan inherited a strong bank with powerful links to Rothschild.’ Junius was the father of J.P. Morgan. See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, p. 222.

A similar thing happened when Nathaniel Rothschild headed the Bank of England committee that rescued Barings Bank from imminent collapse in 1890. But other big banks ‘were beholden to or fronts for the Rothschilds…. Like J.P. Morgan, Barings and Kuhn Loeb, the M.M. Warburg Bank owed its survival and ultimate success to Rothschild money.’ To reiterate then: ‘by the early twentieth century numerous major banks, including J.P. Morgan and Barings, and armaments firms, were beholden to or fronts for the Rothschilds.’ And this had many advantages. J.P. Morgan, who was deeply involved with the Pilgrims – an exclusive club that linked major U.K. and U.S. businesspeople – was clearly perceived as an upright Protestant guardian of capitalism, who could trace his family roots to pre-Revolutionary times, so by acting in the interests of the London Rothschilds he shielded their American profits from the poison of anti-Semitism.

But the connections do not end there. Superficially, ‘there were periods of blistering competition between the investment and banking houses, the steel companies, the railroad builders and the two international goliaths of oil, Rockefeller and Rothschilds, but by the turn of the century the surviving conglomerates adopted a more subtle relationship, which avoided real competition.’ A decade earlier, Baron de Rothschild had accepted an invitation from John D. Rockefeller to meet in New York behind the closed doors of Standard Oil’s headquarters on Broadway where they had quickly reached a confidential agreement. ‘Clearly both understood the advantage of monopolistic collusion.’ The apparent rivalry between major stakeholders in banking, industry and commerce has long been a convenient facade, which they are content to leave much of the world believing. See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, pp. 222-225.

The Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building (commonly known as the Eccles Building or Federal Reserve Building) located at 20th Street & Constitution Avenue NW in the Foggy Bottom neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Designed by architect Paul Philippe Cret in 1935, construction of the Art Deco building was completed in 1937. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Beyond business and financial links of this nature, of course, there is marriage. For example, according to  Dean Henderson: ‘The Warburgs, Kuhn Loebs, Goldman Sachs, Schiffs and Rothschilds have intermarried into one big happy banking family. The Warburg family… tied up with the Rothschilds in 1814 in Hamburg, while Kuhn Loeb powerhouse Jacob Schiff shared quarters with Rothschilds in 1785. Schiff immigrated to America in 1865. He joined forces with Abraham Kuhn and married Solomon Loeb’s daughter. Loeb and Kuhn married each others sisters and the Kuhn Loeb dynasty was consummated. Felix Warburg married Jacob Schiff’s daughter. Two Goldman daughters married two sons of the Sachs family, creating Goldman Sachs. In 1806 Nathan Rothschild married the oldest daughter of Levi Barent Cohen, a leading financier in London.’ See Big Oil and Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families and Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics and Terror Network, p. 488.

So to return to the foundation of the US Federal Reserve System, according to Griffin:

The reason for secrecy was simple. Had it been known that rival factions of the banking community had joined together, the public would have been alerted to the possibility that the bankers were plotting an agreement in restraint of trade – which, of course, is exactly what they were doing. What emerged was a cartel agreement with five objectives: stop the growing competition from the nation’s newer banks; obtain a franchise to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending; get control of the reserves of all banks so that the more reckless ones would not be exposed to currency drains and bank runs; get the taxpayer to pick up the cartel’s inevitable losses; and convince Congress that the purpose was to protect the public. It was realized that the bankers would have to become partners with the politicians and that the structure of the cartel would have to be a central bank. The record shows that the Fed has failed to achieve its stated objectives. That is because those were never its true goals. As a banking cartel, and in terms of the five objectives stated above, it has been an unqualified success.

To reiterate Griffin’s key point: ‘a primary objective of that cartel was to involve the federal government as an agent for shifting the inevitable losses from the owners of those banks to the taxpayers.’ And this is confirmed by the ‘massive evidence of history since the System was created’.

Or, in the words of economics Professor Antony C. Sutton, who carefully detailed the longstanding links between Wall Street and the family of US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, including Roosevelt himself (a banker and speculator from 1921 to 1928): ‘The Federal Reserve System is a legal private monopoly of the money supply operated for the benefit of a few under the guise of protecting and promoting the public interest.’ See Wall Street and F.D.R.

And, as U.S. Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden, chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, observed in 1932: ‘When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of the United States did not perceive that… this country was to supply financial power to an international superstate – a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure.’ See ‘Speech by Rep. Louis T. McFadden denouncing the Federal Reserve System’.

Equally importantly, creation of the Federal Reserve was just one of many preliminary steps taken over a 25-year period by a select group of men in key positions who conspired to ignite The Great War to both shape the future world order and profit enormously from the death and destruction. You can read detailed accounts of what took place, including key players, their motives and instigation of the Boer War in South Africa, touched on above, as part of the process, in books such as these: Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden, The House of Rothschild – Volume 2 – The World’s Banker, 1849-1998 and Prolonging the Agony: How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-and-a-Half Years. There is also a thoughtful summary in ‘A crime against humanity: the Great Reset of 1914-1918’ and an excellent video on the subject: ‘The WWI Conspiracy’.

The primary cost of World War I was 20 million human lives, but it was immensely profitable for some.

 

---

Chapter IV
The Bank for International Settlements

 

Another critical development in this period was the creation of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) – as ‘the central bank of central banks’ – in 1930. As described by Professor Carroll Quigley, the BIS was the apex of efforts by elite bankers ‘to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.’

But the push started many years before with Montagu Norman (Bank of England) and Benjamin Strong (the first governor of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York) both committed advocates. ‘In the 1920’s, they were determined to use the financial power of Britain and of the United States to force all the major countries of the world to go on the gold standard and to operate it through central banks free from all political control, with all questions of international finance to be settled by agreements by such central banks without interference from governments.’

All the members of the Bank for international settlements (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world. The B.I.S. as a private institution was owned by the seven chief central banks and was operated by the heads of these, who together formed its governing board.

But, Quigley points out:

It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called ‘international’ or ‘merchant’ bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world. They could dominate the financial and industrial systems of their own countries by their influence over the flow of current funds through bank loans, the discount rate, and the re-discounting of commercial debts; they could dominate governments by their control over current government loans and the play of the international exchanges. Almost all of this power was exercised by the personal influence and prestige of men who had demonstrated their ability in the past to bring off successful financial coupe, to keep their word, to remain cool in a crisis, and to share their winning opportunities with their associates. In this system the Rothschilds had been preeminent during much of the nineteenth century. See Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, pp. 242-3 & 245.

Ensuring that this select group of international bankers could operate without any form of accountability to any other authority in the world, the BIS ‘Headquarters Agreement with Switzerland’ Articles 4 and 12 specifically identify a range of ‘privileges and immunities’ that, among others, provide that ‘The Bank shall enjoy immunity from jurisdiction’ and ‘members of the Board of Directors of the Bank, together with the representatives of those central banks which are members of the Bank’ with ‘immunity from arrest or imprisonment’. See ‘Agreement between the Swiss Federal Council and the Bank for International Settlements to determine the Bank’s legal status in Switzerland’.

In plain language, the BIS and its members are beyond the reach of governments, key international organizations and the rule of law. They are accountable to no-one. And this is why the BIS was never held to account for its commission of war crimes. See ‘History – the BIS during the Second World War (1939-48)’. For an excellent and detailed account of the Bank for International Settlements, see Adam LeBor’s Tower of Basel: The Shadowy History of the Secret Bank that Runs the World.

Beyond this, as Sutton notes, because politicians sympathetic to financial capitalism and academics with ideas about world control are kept in line with a system of rewards and penalties, ‘in the early 1930s the guiding vehicle for this international system of financial and political control’ was the BIS, headquartered in Basle. The BIS ‘continued its work during World War II as the medium through which the bankers – who… were not at war with each other – continued a mutually beneficial exchange of ideas, information, and planning for the post-war world.’ In this sense only, the war was irrelevant to them. See Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler, pp. 11-12.

So while elite figures, including the Rothschilds, continued to shape institutions and events to restructure world order and make it more profitable for themselves, virtually everyone else in the world was an unwitting victim of their secret programs, many at the cost of their own life. A notable exception was US Major General Smedley Butler who at least spelled out the critical role that war played in wealth creation for the elite. Following more than three decades of highly-decorated service in the US Marine Corp, Butler later described his experience in the following terms: ‘I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.’ See ‘Major General Smedley Butler’.

In his book published in 1935, he wrote: ‘War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious…. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives…. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.’ He went on to describe some of the individuals and corporations that made huge profits out of World War I. See War Is A Racket.

 

---

 

Chapter V
World War II and What Followed

 

And, just a few years later, World War II demonstrated that ‘war is a racket’ yet again. By carefully penetrating the cloak of deception behind which it was hidden, Professor Antony C. Sutton considered original documentation and eyewitness accounts to reveal what remains one of the most remarkable and under-reported facts of World War II. In his account of this orchestrated conflagration, Sutton carefully documents how prominent Wall Street banks and US businesses supported Hitler’s rise to power by financing and trading with Nazi Germany, reaching the unsavory conclusion that ‘the catastrophe of World War II was extremely profitable for a select group of financial insiders’ including J.P. Morgan, T.W. Lamont, the Rockefeller interests, General Electric, Standard Oil, and the National City, Chase, and Manhattan banks, Kuhn, Loeb and Company, General Motors, Ford Motor Company, and scores of others in ‘the bloodiest, most destructive war in history’. See Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler.

To illustrate the complex and wide-ranging collaboration between US business interests and the Nazis throughout the war, consider just one example: On the eve of World War II the German chemical complex of I.G. Farben, which included the banker Max Warburg (brother of Paul of the US Federal Reserve) on its Board of Directors, was the largest chemical manufacturing enterprise in the world, with extraordinary political and economic power within Hitler’s Nazi state. The Farben cartel dated from 1925 and had been created with financial assistance from Wall Street by the organizing genius of Hermann Schmitz, a prominent early Nazi who, through I.G. Farben, helped fund Hitler’s seizure of control in March 1933. Schmitz created the super-giant chemical enterprise out of six already giant German chemical companies.

So critical was I.G. Farben to the Nazi war effort that it produced 100% of its lubricating oil and various other products, 95% of its poison gas – ‘enough gas to kill 200 million humans’ – used in the extermination chambers, 84% of its explosives, 70% of its gunpowder, and very high proportions of many other critical products including aviation fuel. As Sutton concludes: ‘Without the capital supplied by Wall Street, there would have been no I.G. Farben in the first place and almost certainly no Adolf Hitler and World War II.’ See Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler, pp.17-20.

The cost in human lives of World War II was 70-85 million. But there was no cost to those Wall Street corporations and their fellow war profiteers that collaborated with Nazi Germany. Just massive profits.

Following World War II

Documenting what had become the long-standing collusion between political, corporate and military elites, sociology Professor C. Wright Mills published his classic work The Power Elite in 1956. This scholarly effort was among the earliest of the post-World War II era to document the nature of the US elite and how it functioned, highlighting the interlocking power of corporate, political and military elites as they exercised control over US national society and went about the task of exploiting the general population.

But a weakness of the account by Mills was his failure to grapple with the already long-standing power of a global elite to manipulate key events in any one country, and certainly the United States, even if much of this was done through the relevant national elite(s).

This ‘global reach’ of the Elite is again clearly apparent in any study of ownership of the world’s oil resources. In his 1975 book The Seven Sisters, Anthony Sampson popularized this collective name for the shadowy oil cartel that, throughout its history, had vigorously worked to eliminate competitors and control the world’s oil. See The Seven Sisters: The Great Oil Companies and the World They Shaped. Several decades later, Dean Henderson simply observed that ‘After a tidal wave of mergers at the turn of the millennium, Sampson’s Seven Sisters were Four Horsemen: Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell.’ Beyond this, however, Henderson noted the following:

The oil wealth generated in the Persian Gulf region is the main source of capital [for the international mega-banks]. They sell the Gulf Cooperation Council sheiks 30-year treasury bonds at 5% interest, then loan the sheiks’ oil money out to Third World governments and Western consumers alike at 15-20% interest. In the process these financial overlords – who produce nothing of economic import – use debt as their lever in consolidating control over the global economy. See Big Oil and Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families and Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics and Terror Network, pp. 168, 451.

And, following a series of mergers and then the 2008 banking crisis, four giant banks emerged to dominate the US economy: JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America and Wells Fargo. Moreover, these banks, along with Deutsche Bank, Banque Paribas, Barclays ‘and other European old money behemoths’, own the four oil giants and are also ‘among the top 10 stock holders of virtually every Fortune 500 corporation’ giving them vast control over the global economy. See Big Oil and Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families and Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics and Terror Network, pp. 470, 473.

So who owns these banks? By now it should come as no surprise that several scholars at different times during the past 100 years have investigated this issue and come to essentially the same conclusion: the major families, increasingly interrelated by blood, marriage and/or business interests, have simply consolidated their control over the banks. Apart from scholars already mentioned above, in the 1983 revision of his book, Eustace Mullins noted that a few families still controlled the New York City banks which, in turn, hold the controlling stock of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Mullins identified the families of the Rothschilds, Morgans, Rockefellers, Warburgs and others. See The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, p. 224.

Several scholars have written on the subject of elite power since Mills with Professor Peter Phillips penning the 2018 book Giants: The Global Power Elite which reviews ‘the transition from the nation state power elites described by Mills to a transnational power elite centralized on the control of global capital around the world. The Global Power Elite function as a nongovernmental network of similarly educated wealthy people with common interests of managing, facilitating, and protecting concentrated global wealth and insuring the continued growth of capital.’

Aside from the obvious criticism that Phillips effectively repeats the mistake made by Mills in assuming that there was no pre-existing ‘transnational power elite’ even if in different form, Phillips goes on to usefully identify the world’s top seventeen asset management firms, such as BlackRock and J.P Morgan Chase, that collectively manage (by now) more than $US50 trillion in a self-invested network of interlocking capital that spans the globe.

Image: The WEF logo is seen on a window at the congress center during preparations for the upcoming Annual Meeting 2011 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 23, 2011. (Copyright by World Economic Forum, swiss-image.ch/Photo by Jolanda Flubacher)

More precisely, Phillips identifies the 199 individual directors of the seventeen global financial Giants and the importance of those transnational institutions that serve a unifying function – including the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, G20, G7, World Trade Organization (WTO), World Economic Forum  (WEF), Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group (with a review of Daniel Estulin’s book The True Story of the Bilderberg Group here: ‘“The True Story of the Bilderberg Group” and What They May Be Planning Now’), Bank for International Settlements and the Council on Foreign Relations (see ‘One World Governance and the Council on Foreign Relations. “We Shall have World Government… by Conquest or Consent.”’) – and particularly two very important global elite policy-planning organizations: the Group of Thirty (which has 32 members) and the extended executive committee of the Trilateral Commission (which has 55 members).

And Phillips carefully explains why and how the Global Elite defends its power, profits and privilege against rebellion by the ‘unruly exploited masses’: ‘the Global Power Elite uses NATO and the US military empire for its worldwide security…. The whole system continues wealth concentration for elites and expanded wretched inequality for the masses.’ Advocating the importance of systemic change and the redistribution of wealth, Phillips goes on to argue that ‘This concentration of protected wealth leads to a crisis of humanity, whereby poverty, war, starvation, mass alienation, media propaganda, and environmental devastation are reaching a species-level threat.’

Hence, it is worth reiterating: War plays an ongoing and vital role in the exercise of Elite power to reshape world order to maximize wealth concentration by the Elite. If you want further evidence of this, you might find these recent reports instructive: the US Congressional Research Service report ‘Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2022’, the Tufts University Fletcher Center for Strategic Studies report ‘Military Intervention Project (MIP) Research’ and an article and video that summarize and discuss these two reports in ‘US launched 251 military interventions since 1991, and 469 since 1798’.

But, as the discussion above and below illustrates, war is not the only mechanism the Elite uses.

For an account which focuses on identifying many of the world’s largest corporations, in many industries, and then illustrates the interlocking nature of corporate ownership while demonstrating that they are all owned by the same small group of giant asset management corporations – notably including Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street – this video is very instructive: ‘Monopoly: Who Owns the World?’ And for a penetrating critique of BlackRock and its overall strategy to acquire vast worldwide control, including by using its Aladdin investment analysis technology (which employs massive data collection, artificial intelligence and machine learning to derive investment insight), see ‘BlackRock: Bringing Together Man and Machine’ and this three-part series by James Corbett: ‘How BlackRock Conquered the World’.

In the ‘Monopoly’ video, you will again see the names of some familiar individuals and families who own significant shareholdings in these corporations and asset management firms. After showcasing families such as the Rothschilds, Rockefellers and Morgans, the narrator simply observes in relation to Vanguard that its ‘largest shareholders are the private funds and nonprofit organizations of these families’.

And if you think that national Elites in countries like China and Russia are somehow not involved in all this, you might find it interesting to read articles that discuss the wealth and political influence of the Chinese ‘immortals’ and the Russian oligarchs – see ‘China’s red aristocracy’ and ‘List of Oligarchs and Russian elites featured in ICIJ investigations’ – or to read the ‘Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on the International Relations Entering a New Era and the Global Sustainable Development’.

Beyond this, however, Emanuel Pastreich points out that if anyone attributes responsibility for Chinese policies in relation to data collection and control based on QR codes and contact tracing, they inevitably identify the Chinese government. ‘But the truth is that few, or none, of these policies were made up or implemented by the Chinese government itself, but rather that the Chinese government is occupied by IT corporations that report to the billionaires (often through Israel and the United States) and bypass the Chinese government altogether.’ Pastreich goes on to offer some insight into how key Elite intelligence and finance corporations are driving the technocratic social control policies being implemented under cover of the ‘virus’ in China. See ‘The Third Opium War Part One: The agenda behind the COVID-19 assault on China’and ‘The Third Opium War Part Two: The True Threat Posed by China’ or watch ‘Western Tech & China: Who Serves whom?’

In fact, as Patrick Wood points out, referencing a much earlier book of his own and Professor Antony Sutton – see Trilaterals Over Washington Volumes I & II  – ‘Thanks to early members of the [Elite’s] Trilateral Commission, China was brought out of its dark ages Communist dictatorship and onto the world stage. Furthermore, the Trilateral Commission orchestrated and then facilitated a massive transfer of technology to China in order to build up its non-existent infrastructure….  As a failed Communist dictatorship, China was a blank slate with over 1.2 billion citizens under its control. However, Chinese leadership knew nothing about capitalism and free enterprise, and [key Trilateralist Zbigniew] Brzezinski made no effort to teach them about it. Instead, he planted seeds of Technocracy…. In the 20-year period from 1980 to 2000, a transformation took place that was considered nothing short of an economic miracle; but it was not of China’s doing. Rather, it can be fully attributed to the masters of Technocracy within the ranks of the Trilateral Commission.’ After listing several key features of China’s technocracy (5G, AI, social credit scores…), Wood concludes that ‘China is a full-blown Technocracy and it is the first of its kind on planet earth.’ See this article on China as one of Wood’s 12-part series on technocracy: ‘Day 7: China Is A Technocracy’.

And in relation to Russia, Riley Waggaman simply observes that ‘As for “COVID-triggered” economic restructuring: the Russian government has openly embraced the World Economic Forum’s Fourth Industrial Revolution. In October [2021], the Russian government and the WEF signed a memorandum on the establishment of a Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution in Russia. Russia has already adopted a law allowing for “experimental legal regimes” to allow corporations and institutions to deploy AI and robots into the economy, without being encumbered by regulatory red tape. Returning to Gref and his digital Sbercoin: Russia’s central bank is already planning to test-run a digital ruble that, among other nifty features, could be used to restrict purchases.’ See ‘I believe we are facing an evil that has no equal in human history’.

Moreover, according to Mikhail Delyagin, a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation: ‘In the 90s, under Yeltsin, the external management of global banksters was carried out through the IMF and through [Russian oligarch Anatoly] Chubais. Now under Putin, external management will be done by Big Tech, social global platforms, and Big Pharma through the WHO. Exactly the same management.’ Cited in ‘Duma deputy: “Protect yourself and Russia from a coup d’état!”. Russian lawmaker issues video appeal to the nation. Will anyone listen?’

Separately from this, bear in mind that the Elite, as well as its agents and organizations (including those in China and Russia), have vast wealth stashed in ‘secrecy jurisdictions’ (better known as tax havens): locations around the world where wealthy individuals, criminals and terrorists, as well as governments and government agencies (such as the CIA), banks, corporations, hedge funds, international organizations (such as the Vatican) and crime syndicates (such as the Mafia), can stash their money so that they can avoid regulation and oversight, and evade tax. Just how much wealth is stashed in tax havens? While this is impossible to know precisely, it can only be measured in tens of trillions of dollars as well as an unknown number of gold bricks, artworks, yachts and racehorses. See ‘Elite Banking at Your Expense: How Secretive Tax Havens are Used to Steal Your Money’.

How is this possible? Well, it is protected by government legislation and legal systems, with an ‘army’ of Elite agents – accountants, auditors, bankers, businesspeople, lawyers and politicians – ensuring that they remain protected. The point here is simple: if you have enough money, the law simply does not exist. And you can evade taxes legally and in the full knowledge that your vast profits (even from immorally-acquired wealth such as sex trafficking, gun-running, endangered species trafficking, conflict diamonds and drug trafficking) are ‘lawful’ and will escape regulation and oversight of any kind. See ‘The Rule of Law: Unjust and Violent’.

But legal systems facilitate monstrous injustice in other ways too. For example, they ensure that owners of corporations are enabled to ruthlessly exploit both their workers and all taxpayers as well. For a thoughtful and straightforward account of how this works, see this article by Professor James Petras: ‘How Billionaires Become Billionaires’.

And to briefly revisit a subject discussed above: Who owns the US Federal Reserve System now? According to Dean Henderson writing in 2010, it is ‘the Goldman Sachs, Rockefellers, Lehmans and Kuhn Loebs of New York; the Rothschilds of Paris and London; the Warburgs of Hamburg; the Lazards of Paris; and the Israel Moses Seifs of Rome.’ Henderson goes on to state that ‘The control that these banking families exert over the global economy cannot be overstated and is quite intentionally shrouded in secrecy. Their corporate media arm is quick to discredit any information exposing these money powers as halfbaked conspiracy theory. The word “conspiracy” itself has been demonized, much like the word “communism”. Anyone who dare utter the word is quickly excluded from public debate and written off as insane. Yet the facts remain.’ See Big Oil and Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families and Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics and Terror Network, pp. 473-4.

Other scholars in the field agree.

In his exceptionally detailed investigation into three major historical events of the C20^th – the Bolshevik Revolution, the rise of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the rise of Hitler – Professor Antony Sutton identified the seat of political power in the United States not as the US Constitution authorized but ‘the financial establishment in New York: the private international bankers, more specifically the financial houses of J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank, and in earlier days (before amalgamation of their Manhattan Bank with the former Chase Bank), the Warburgs.’

For most of the twentieth century the Federal Reserve System, particularly the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (which is outside the control of Congress, unaudited and uncontrolled, with the power to print money and create credit at will), has exercised a virtual monopoly over the direction of the American economy. In foreign affairs the Council on Foreign Relations, superficially an innocent forum for academics, businessmen, and politicians, contains within its shell, perhaps unknown to many of its members, a power center that unilaterally determines U.S. foreign policy. The major objective of this submerged – and obviously subversive – foreign policy is the acquisition of markets and economic power (profits, if you will), for a small group of giant multi-nationals under the virtual control of a few banking investment houses and controlling families. See Wall Street and The Rise of Hitler, pp.125-126.

So what has changed?

Nothing has changed.

But it is not just fine scholars who have reached this conclusion. Consider David Rockefeller’s delusionary whitewashing of his own family’s key role in the killing, devastation and destruction outlined above: ‘Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it…. one of the most enduring [conspiracies] is that a secret group of international bankers and capitalists, and their minions, control the world’s economy…. [but these people] ignore the tangible benefits that have resulted from our active international role during the past half-century’. See Memoirs, p. 483.

If you are wondering how all of this happens without any significant pushback from within elite circles, there is a simple answer: They are all insane and control to maximize resource accumulation has become the perpetual substitute for their destroyed capacity to engage emotionally in their own lives and empathize with their fellow human beings. For more detail, see ‘Love Denied: The Psychology of Materialism, Violence and War’ and ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’.

So while some of us occasionally ponder how we can contribute more to improve the human condition and the state of the world, and then endeavour to do something along those lines, there are plenty of terrified people whose daily life is consumed (consciously or unconsciously) by the question ‘How can I take more?’ And people like that have been taking more since the dawn of human civilization and, no doubt, earlier.

The Global Elite is simply those who have been insanely ruthless and organized enough to take more, whatever the cost to humanity and all other life on Earth.

 

---

Chapter VI
The Post World War II Superstructure to Transform World Order,

Destroy the World Economy and Capture All Wealth

 

So how, precisely, is the Global Elite driving the transformation of world order, the collapse of the world economy and capturing final control of all wealth?

There are three parts to the answer to this question: 1. The foundations progressively laid over the past 5,000 years, as outlined above; 2. The superstructure (including such institutions as the United Nations, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund) that has been built since World War II and, more recently, under the guise of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development agenda, to impose global governance on the human population and, particularly, to intrude global financial governance into every aspect of our lives. In the words of Iain Davis and Whitney Webb, this is because the UN’s sustainable development goals ‘do not promote “sustainability” as most conceive it and instead utilise the same debt imperialism long used by the Anglo-American Empire to entrap nations in a new, equally predatory system of global financial governance’ – see ‘Sustainable Debt Slavery’ – and 3. The final part relates to political, economic and, especially, technological measures being imposed as part of the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ under cover of the fake narrative about a Covid-19 ‘pandemic’.

If we briefly consider elements of the post-World War II superstructure, for example, both the World Bank and International Monetary Fund have historically used debt to force countries, mostly in the developing world, to adopt policies that redistribute wealth to the elite via their banks, corporations and institutions. But corporations have employed their own ‘economic hit men’ to do the same thing: By identifying and ‘persuading’ leaders of developing nations, using a variety of devices – ranging from false economic projections and bribes to military threats and assassinations – to accept enormous ‘development’ loans for projects which are contracted with western corporations, countries quickly become entrapped in debt. This is then used to force those countries to implement unpopular austerity policies, deregulate financial and other markets, and privatize state assets, thus eroding national sovereignty. See The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.

If you want to read further evidence of the role of the World Bank and the IMF as agents of Elite policy against nation-states, you might find the US Army’s manual of unconventional warfare interesting. See ‘Army Special Operations Forces: Unconventional Warfare’. Originally released by Wikileaks in 2008 and described by them as the US military’s ‘regime change handbook’, as elaborated by Webb, ‘the U.S. Army states that major global financial institutions – such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) [and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS] – are used as unconventional, financial “weapons in times of conflict up to and including large-scale general war,” as well as in leveraging “the policies and cooperation of state governments.”’ See ‘Leaked Wikileaks Doc Reveals US Military Use of IMF, World Bank as “Unconventional” Weapons’.

Beyond this, however, what we have seen since the UN, increasingly a tool of corporations since the 1990s, adopted its Sustainable Development Goals is a dramatically expanded set of mechanisms designed to enslave the bulk of the human population, not just those in ‘developing’ countries, and take complete control of Earth’s ecosystems and natural processes.

Image: Klaus Schwab (Copyright World Economic Forum (www.weforum.org) swiss-image.ch/Photo by Remy Steinegger)

Among many initiatives, for example, the Global Public-Private Partnership has been presented by Klaus Schwab and Peter Vanham, on behalf of the World Economic Forum. See Stakeholder Capitalism: A Global Economy that Works for Progress, People and Planet summarized in ‘What is stakeholder capitalism?’

While this sanitized account obscures the threat it poses to humankind, Iain Davis and Whitney Webb have thoughtfully critiqued it – see ‘Sustainable Debt Slavery’ – noting that even a 2016 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs report – see ‘Public-Private Partnerships and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Fit for purpose?’ – also found it ‘unfit for purpose’. So what is it? According to Davis, the Global Public-Private Partnership (G3P) is a worldwide network of stakeholder capitalists and their partners: the Bank for International Settlements, central banks, global (including media) corporations, the ‘philanthropic’ foundations of multi-billionaires, policy think tanks, governments (and their agencies), key non-governmental organizations and global charities, selected academic and scientific institutions, labour unions and other chosen ‘thought leaders’. (You can see an instructive diagram in the article cited below.)

The G3P controls the world economy and global finance. ‘It sets world, national and local policy (via global governance) and then promotes those policies using the mainstream media’, typically distributes the policies through an intermediary such as the IMF, WHO or IPCC and uses governments to transform G3P global governance into hard policy, legislation and law at the national level. ‘In this way, the G3P controls many nations at once without having to resort to legislation. This has the added advantage of making any legal challenge to the decisions made by the most senior partners in the G3P (an authoritarian hierarchy) extremely difficult.’ In short: global governance has already superseded the national sovereignty of states: ‘National governments had been relegated to creating the G3P’s enabling environment by taxing the public and increasing government borrowing debt.’ See ‘What Is the Global Public-Private Partnership?’

As Davis notes: We are supposed to believe that a G3P-led system of global governance is beneficial for us and to accept that global corporations are committed to putting humanitarian and environmental causes before profit, when the conflict of interest is obvious. ‘Believing this requires a considerable degree of naïveté.’ Davis clearly perceives ‘an emergent global, corporate dictatorship that cares not one whit about truly stewarding the planet. The G3P will determine the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons. There is no opportunity for any of us to participate in either their project or the subsequent formation of policy.’ Davis goes on: ‘in theory, governments do not have to implement G3P policy, in reality they do. Global policies have been an increasing facet of our lives in the post-WW2 era…. It doesn’t matter who you elect, the policy trajectory is set at the global governance level. This is the dictatorial nature of the G3P and nothing could be less democratic.’

Another initiative was launched at the COP26 conference in November 2021. The Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) is an industry-led and UN-convened alliance of private banking and financial institutions that announced plans 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. See ‘Our progress and plan towards a net-zero global economy’.

But this report makes it clear that GFANZ will simply employ the same exploitative tactics that the ‘economic hitmen’ and agents such as the multilateral ‘development’ banks (MDBs) – including the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, the African Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development – have long used to force even greater deregulation on ‘developing’ countries to facilitate supposedly climate and environmentally-friendly investments by alliance members. In fact, composed of several “subsector alliances”, including the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, the Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance and the Net Zero Banking Alliance, GFANZ commands ‘a formidable part of global private banking and finance interests’. Moreover, the ‘largest financial players’ who dominate GFANZ include the CEOs of BlackRock, Citi, Bank of America, Banco Santander and HSBC as well as the CEO of the London Stock Exchange Group and chair of the Investment Committee of the David Rockefeller Fund. In essence then, as Whitney Webb goes on to explain it:

[T]hrough 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….

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. See ‘UN-Backed Banker Alliance Announces “Green” Plan to Transform the Global Financial System’.

But, again, it is not just their fellow human beings over whom the Elite wants total control. They want that control over nature too, and that is yet another project in which the Elite has been long engaged.

Hence, in September 2021, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) announced the launch of a new asset class, jointly developed with Intrinsic Exchange Group (IEG) – whose founding investors included the Inter-American Development Bank and the Rockefeller Foundation – for Natural Asset Companies: ‘sustainable enterprises that hold the rights to ecosystem services’ that enable natural asset owners ‘to convert nature’s value into financial capital, providing additional resources necessary to power a sustainable future’.

According to the IEG: ‘Natural areas, underpinned by biodiversity, are inherently valuable in and of themselves.’ See ‘Natural Areas’. Either unaware of their ignorance or, perhaps, making hypocritically tokenistic use of some key words often-expressed by indigenous peoples and deep ecologists (including the inventor of the term ‘deep ecology’, Professor Arne Naess, in his 1973 article ‘The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement’) – the IEG goes on to express this ‘value’ in strictly economic terms: ‘They also contribute life supporting services upon which humanity and the global economy depends. These include provisioning services such as food, water, timber, and genetic resources; regulating services that affect climate, floods, disease, and water quality; cultural services that provide recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual benefits; and supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling.’

And in its report on this subject, the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on Nature-Based Solutions urged investors, corporations and governments ‘to create and strengthen market-based mechanisms for valuing nature.’ See ‘Scaling Investments in Nature: The Next Critical Frontier for Private Sector Leadership’, p.14.

Elaborating the IEG’s delusional conception of how further business investment in natural resources will work, Douglas Eger, the CEO of IEG, suggests that ‘This new asset class on the NYSE will create a virtuous cycle of investment in nature that will help finance sustainable development for communities, companies and countries.’ Really? I wonder how. But IEG’s motives are more likely revealed in this fact: ‘The asset class was developed to enable exposure to the opportunities created by the estimated $125 trillion annual global ecosystem services market, encompassing areas such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity and clean water.’ See ‘NYSE to List New “Natural Asset Companies” Asset Class, Targeting Massive Opportunity in Ecosystem Services’.

Hence, to clarify: corporations are now engaged in the largest land and resource grab in history. This will enable Elite corporations to privately own the ecosystem services of a pristine rainforest, a majestic waterfall plunging into a lagoon, an expansive grassland, a picturesque cave, a magnificent wetland, a trout-filled lake, a beautiful coral reef or other natural area and then sell clean air, fresh water, pollination services, food, medicines, and a range of biodiversity services such as the enjoyment of nature, while displacing the world’s remaining indigenous populations.

So what about the Commons? ‘The Commons is property shared by all, inclusive of natural products like air, water, and a habitable planet, forests, fisheries, groundwater, wetlands, pastures, the atmosphere, the high seas, Antarctica, outer space, caves, all part of ecosystems of the planet.’ Or are corporations finally about to own the Commons as well? See ‘Mother Nature, Inc.’

Are we to reduce everything in nature to its value as a profit-making commodity?

As Robert Hunziker concludes his own critique of this initiative: ‘The sad truth is Mother Nature, Inc. will lead to extinction of The Commons, as an institution, in the biggest heist of all time. Surely, private ownership of nature is unseemly and certainly begs a much bigger relevant question that goes to the heart of the matter, to wit: Should nature’s ecosystems, which benefit society at large, be monetized for the direct benefit of the few?’ See ‘Mother Nature, Inc.’

More could be written about this, as Webb, for example, has done in ‘Wall Street’s Takeover of Nature Advances with Launch of New Asset Class’.

But if you believe that corporations – extensively documented to destroy pristine natural environments in their rapacious efforts to exploit fossil fuels, minerals, rainforest products and a vast range of other products, as well as force indigenous peoples off their land to do so: see, for example, ‘Seven (of Hundreds) Environmental Nightmares Created by Open Pit Mines (and the Obligatory Tailings Ponds) that have Caused Irremediable, Highly Toxic Contamination Downstream’ – are about to become ‘virtuous investors’ in nature when 4 billion years of Earth’s history and 200,000 years of indigenous people living harmoniously with nature have an impeccable record of preserving ecosystems and their services, without the involvement of these ‘virtuous investors’, then you will do extremely well on any gullibility test you attempt.

 

---

Chapter VII
The Coup de Grâce: The Great Reset

 

Building on millennia of learning how to structure and manage an economy to accumulate and consolidate control and wealth in particular hands, the Global Elite launched its final coup in January 2020 under cover of the fake Covid-19 ‘pandemic’. Using the health threat supposedly implied by the existence of a pathogenic ‘virus’, the bulk of the world population was terrorized into submitting to an onerous series of violations of their human rights which was tantamount to a declaration of martial law. See ‘The Final Battle For Humanity: It Is “Now or Never” In The Long War Against Homo Sapiens’.

Under a barrage of propaganda delivered by Elite agents – including organizations such as the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, the World Health Organisation, governments, the pharmaceutical industry and corporate media as well as individuals such as Klaus Schwab, Yuval Noah Harari and Bill Gates – people were compelled to wear masks, use QR codes, stay locked down in their homes and, later, submit to a series of experimental but involuntary gene-altering bioweapons to acquire a ‘vaccine passport’, among other measures.

Particularly importantly, these restrictions effectively shut down the mainstream economy with vast sectors of industry either closed outright or unable to function in the absence of locked-down or, later, bioweapon-injured or bioweapon-killed staff. For just one discussion of the vast evidence available of Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ injuries and deaths, watch ‘3.5 BILLION could be injured or killed by the jab. Are YOU ready?’ which is briefly discussed here: ‘Dr. David Martin blasts health authorities for turning roughly 4 billion people into “bioweapons factories”’.

This inevitably adversely impacted the entire supply chain: That is, the process that connects the production of raw materials, such as food grown on farms and minerals mined from the Earth, to factories that produce everything from canned food to computers, and then to outlets that sell these products to the public. All components of this chain were either shut down completely at one or more times, as part of the imposed restrictions or other policy measures – watch, for example, ‘Biden pays farms to STOP – EU out of Feed – Meat taxes & Chicken permits – Up to you to GROW FOOD!’ – or just substantially curtailed by the unavailability of essential inputs, ranging from replacement parts to competent labour.

To exacerbate matters, the transport industry (trucking, railroads, shipping, airlines) was also effectively shut down, containers became unavailable (because they were in the wrong places) and logistics corporations (that organize the movement of trade goods) were disabled, including by cyber attacks. The airline and tourist industries were just two industries that were profoundly disrupted. But so was much of small business, with many businesses destroyed. As a result, hundreds of millions of people lost employment, many permanently, throughout the industrial economies and millions more were starved to death in Africa, Asia and Central/South America because the day-to-day economy, by which many survive, was shuttered and any ameliorative measures by governments and international organizations were, deliberately, woefully inadequate (or were siphoned into elite wallets). See ‘The Global Elite’s “Kill and Control” Agenda: Destroying Our Food Security’.

But ‘behind the (obvious) scenes’ outlined above, there has been a great deal more going on that has been deliberately concealed from public view, and this has been considered and discussed by some fine analysts.

According to Catherine Austin Fitts, using ‘national security’ as the justification, the U.S. National Security Act 1947 and the CIA Act 1949 were the basis of a series of Acts and Executive Orders that ‘created a secrecy machinery’ which essentially meant that ‘the most powerful financial interests in the world can keep a whole bunch of money secret’, thus creating a secret black budget. And, starting in 1998, according to US federal government documentation, huge sums of money were not accounted for while private equity firms began exploding and, despite having no capacity to raise such amounts, were suddenly investing huge sums of money in emerging markets. According to Fitts ‘we are now missing over $US21 trillion’, which she calls a ‘financial coup d’etat’ that is clearly in ‘massive violation’ of the US constitution. The financial value of what has transpired under the Covid-19 narrative is that the ‘magic virus’ can be used to explain, for example, why there is no money for healthcare or pension funds cannot pay on retirement those who paid into them throughout their lives. Watch ‘We Need to Talk about Mr Global – Part Two’ with a simple summary here: ‘The Real Game of Missing Money’.

But if $US21 trillion missing already sounds like a lot, it doesn’t end there, as Fitt’s recent discussion with Professor Mark Skidmore makes perfectly clear in ‘The Financial Coup: More Missing Money & FASAB Standard 56’. Fitts observes:

We are now over $US100 trillion of undocumentable adjustments if we use their most recent figures and so I would say we are describing a financial system which is completely and utterly out of control…. If any of the allegations about financial fraud in the 2020 [US Presidential] election are true, and I believe that many of them are, we’ve now delinked both the election system and the finances [from] the constitution and the law so we are are now operating both in terms of who governs and how they spend the money completely outside of the law and completely outside of any democratic process. So this is a coup.

To which Professor Skidmore responds:

The reason that I really struggled… watching what was going on during the last financial crisis, [was that] I thought ‘Wow we don’t have the rule of law’. It was so obvious that we didn’t ten years ago and it’s like it’s devolving even more and so I am not sure how much further we can go before we are just completely devoid of the rule of law at least for a subset of the very powerful.

As an aside, while genuinely appreciative of the research of Fitts and Skidmore, as outlined earlier in this article and previously demonstrated, democracy has always been a sham and the Elite has always operated beyond the rule of law, routinely corrupting national political processes in pursuit of Elite ends. See ‘The Elite Coup to Kill or Enslave Us: Why Can’t Governments, Legal Actions and Protests Stop Them?’ All we are seeing in the current context is Elite corruption being flaunted in a way that reflects the sure knowledge that it can act corruptly, on a global scale, with impunity.

But to return to the subject at hand: In 2019, the central bankers of the G7 countries met for their regular conference at Jackson Hole, Wyoming and agreed to the ‘Going Direct Reset’, a plan devised (and later orchestrated) by BlackRock – see ‘Dealing with the next downturn’ – and, as explained by John Titus, the fundamental purpose of this ‘Reset’ was to orchestrate the largest asset transfer in history under cover of the forthcoming Covid-19 ‘pandemic’. Watch ‘Larry & Carstens’ Excellent Pandemic’ with a summary here: ‘Summary – Going Direct Reset’.

In the words of Titus: ‘In a nutshell, the arrival of the 2020 pandemic was about as accidental as an assassination. The pandemic narrative is nothing but a cover story to conceal from the public what in reality is the biggest asset transfer ever.’ See ‘Summary – Going Direct Reset’.

While you can learn the mechanics of how this was conducted in the excellent documents and videos immediately above, as Fitts points out in relation to the central banks: ‘Controlling and having access to data on fiscal and monetary policy is the basis of huge fortunes.’ And, combined with the secrecy that has protected their manipulations from public view – ‘if you look at all the technology and assets that have been transferred, by questionable means, into private and corporate hands, the liability is over the top’ – it has engendered the view that their only way forward is ‘complete, total central control’.

Central Bank Digital Currencies

How will this ‘total control’ be achieved? One key element will be the introduction of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). According to Fitts: The fundamental value of digitized systems, from the elite perspective, is that they enable centralized control. So, by creating CBDCs the financial transaction control grid becomes the means by which you enable centralized control; that is, slavery. Watch ‘We Need to Talk about Mr Global – Part Two’.

How does this work? CBDCs allow the Central Bank to determine exactly what products and services your digital currency can be spent on, when it can spent and where it can be spent. It also allows the issuing authority to freeze, reduce or empty your bank account, and to alter its functionality with the latest ‘update’, based on your ‘social credit score’, political allegiance or if you do not comply with certain directives. But it goes beyond this.

According to the Bank for International Settlements:

The G20 has made enhancing cross-border payments a global priority and has identified CBDC as a potential way forward to improving such payments. A “holy grail” solution for cross-border payments is one which allows such payments to be immediate, cheap, universally accessible and settled in a secure settlement medium. For wholesale payments, central bank money is the preferred medium for financial

market infrastructures. A multi-CBDC platform upon which multiple central banks can issue and exchange their respective CBDCs is a particularly promising solution for achieving this vision, and mBridge is a wholesale multi-CBDC project that aims to advance towards this goal. It builds on previous work…. Project mBridge tests the hypothesis that an efficient, low-cost, real-time and scalable cross-border multi-CBDC arrangement can provide a network of direct central bank and commercial participant connectivity and greatly increase the potential for international trade flows and cross-border business at large…. All the while safeguarding currency sovereignty and monetary and financial stability by appropriately integrating policy, regulatory and legal compliance, and privacy considerations. See ‘Project mBridge: Connecting economies through CBDC’.

Apart from the fact that the G20 governments are distinctly unrepresentative of the world’s people, these words are typical of the type usually chosen when the Elite is intent on sugarcoating their lies to conceal their true agenda.

Fortunately, Agustin Carstens of the Bank for International Settlements has been more forthcoming: ‘We don’t know, for example, who’s using a $100 bill today, we don’t know who is using a 1,000 peso bill today. The key difference with the CBDC is the central bank will have absolute control on the rules and regulations that will determine the use of that expression of central bank liability, and also we will have the technology to enforce that.’ Watch ‘Cross-Border Payments: A Vision for the Future’. And here is the Bank of England advising government ministers in the UK on the issue of programming CBDCs: ‘Bank of England tells ministers to intervene on digital currency “programming”’. For a more detailed explanation, see ‘What Is Programmable Money?’ And for an update on progress in your country, see ‘CBDC: A Country-by-Country Guide’.

Before proceeding, however, it is worthwhile noting the conflict that is going on between the central banks and the commercial banks (the traditional actors in the retail banking sector, that is, the part of banking where people interact directly with a bank), as well as that between the commercial banks and the big tech companies, such as PayPal, Alipay, Facebook and Amazon that have developed or are developing their own digital currencies and/or payments systems outside the traditional financial system. While non-bank financial institutions long-ago overtook commercial banks in lending, bank influence generally continues to decline and is accelerating in the face of the competition from the technology giants. Why the conflict? Because a CBDC risks collapsing the commercial banking sector completely by eliminating retail banking and thus destabilizing the long-standing financial system. For some discussion of this, watch Alice Fulwood’s presentation ‘Could digital currencies put banks out of business?’ There is no doubt, of course, that this conflict will be resolved and that it will not be in our favour.

In any case, CBDCs are just one feature of their planned technocracy which includes digitizing your identity, issuing you a social credit score, geofencing you in one of the Elite’s ‘smart cities’ and feeding you insects and processed trash, among many other elements. See ‘Digitizing Your Identity is the Fast-Track to Slavery: How Can You Defend Your Freedom?’ and ‘Digital Currency: The Fed Moves toward Monetary Totalitarianism’.

And to elaborate the significance of imprisoning you in a ‘smart’ city, Patrick Wood points out the evidence both in the literature and in practice: The intention is to force us off the land, as is already happening in China, and at gunpoint if necessary, so that ‘vacated farm land’ can be combined ‘into giant factory farms to be operated by advanced technology such as agricultural robots and automated tractors’. Once relocated into the ‘smart’ city of the government’s choice, everyone will be subject to 24 hour surveillance using a plethora of ‘smart’ technologies such as biometric facial scanning, geospatial tracking and CBDCs, forced onto public transport which will not include the option of leaving the city, and confined to those work and other activities approved by the relevant technocrats. See ‘Day 9: Technocracy And Smart Cities’.

The bottom line, in simple language however, is the same as it has always been: Endlessly acting to consolidate their control over the rest of us, our money is being stolen by the Elite for their own ends and they are not required to report it and they cannot be held accountable, legally or otherwise. The only difference to what has happened historically is that now even the pretense of some form of equity, the rule of law and even the notion of democracy are being abandoned in the final rush to techno-totalitarianism and wealth concentration.

Beyond this, however, other components of the elite program are designed to play a part in destroying human society and the global economy. For a summary of these, see ‘Killing Off Humanity: How The Global Elite Is Using Eugenics And Transhumanism To Shape Our Future’.

 

---

Chapter VIII
Collapsing the Global Economy

 

Not content with these measures, however, the war in central Asia was precipitated by the Elite to advance key elements of their program. Superficially portrayed by most politicians and corporate media as a war between Russia and Ukraine, many thoughtful analysts perceive some of the deeper strands of what has occurred: Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and NATO commitments made at the end of the Cold War, NATO has consistently violated those commitments and there has been routine Ukrainian attacks on Donetsk and Luhansk over the past eight years. These and other events have ensured a long but steady ‘lead time’ in the final build up to the war, precipitating the military response of Russia, as intended. For just four thoughtful analyses, see ‘Understanding The Great Game in Ukraine’, ‘Ukraine, Russia, and the New World Order’, ‘Some of Us Don’t Think the Russian Invasion Was “Aggression.” Here’s Why.’ and ‘The U.S. Is Leading the World Into the Abyss’.

Obscured by the war, however, the leaderships of both Russia and Ukraine are heavily involved in the World Economic Forum and both have been heavily committed to imposing the elite agenda on their populations. In short, the Russia-Ukraine war serves elite purposes well with consequences including even greater disruption of food and fuel supply chains than the ‘Great Reset’ was able to achieve alone. See ‘The War in Ukraine: Understanding and Resisting the Global Elite’s Deeper Agenda’.

Similarly, the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 & 2 gas pipelines – see ‘Ukraine War: New Developments’  – might be seen through various lenses but, again, it serves elite purposes well. As Tom Luongo noted: ‘The important thing I keep trying to point out [is] that thinking in terms of “country” is ultimately the wrong lens to view these people’s actions. Factions are the better lens. Factions cross political borders.’ See ‘The Curious Whodunit of Nordstreams 1 and 2’. Given that the sabotage of these two pipelines is seriously exacerbating the energy crisis in Europe, while displacing people’s anger onto one or other parties in the war, as always the elite forces driving destruction of the world economy escape scrutiny.

Beyond this, on 7 October 2022 the Biden Administration dealt a ‘nuclear’ strike to the hi-tech industry by imposing onerous new export rules that cut off supply of essential technology (advanced semiconductors, chip-making equipment and supercomputer components) to China, immediately and adversely impacting Chinese production. See ‘Implementation of Additional Export Controls: Certain Advanced Computing and Semiconductor Manufacturing Items’. But whatever pain this will inflict on the Chinese, it will inflict far more pain on ordinary people who will be required to deal with the outcomes of this latest supply-chain disruption: higher prices, more battered household budgets and fewer families able to scrape by on shrinking wages. See ‘Biden’s Tech-War Goes Nuclear’ and ‘US Economic War on China Threatens Global Microchip Industry’.

In any case, the ongoing destruction of the global economy will continue even while, apparently, considerable effort is being made to restructure key elements of it, such as those in relation to trade relations, trade routes, currencies and international banking being undertaken in various international fora. For one discussion of these ongoing efforts, see ‘Russia, India, China, Iran: the Quad that really matters’.

But, again, how serious are these efforts when all governments are collaborating closely on the fundamental Elite program? At one of these meetings, recently concluded, the G20 Summit in Bali – see ‘G20 Bali Leaders’ Declaration’ – Moscow, Beijing, Washington and all other governments present, agreed to ‘the creation of a global health-preserving Pandemic Fund sponsored by the WHO, the World Bank, Bill Gates, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The fund will ensure there is plenty of money for experimental genetic vaccines in the weeks, months, and decades ahead.’ Beyond this, however, the Declaration contains ‘purple prose’ about ‘digital transformation’, ‘interoperability of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) for cross-border payments’, and other elements of the Elite’s technocratic program. As Riley Waggaman observed: ‘It’s truly heart-warming that even amidst ceaseless geopolitical squabbling, Moscow and the Collective West can sit down at the negotiating table, break bread, and agree to cattle-tag the entire world.’ See ‘World leaders agree to cattle-tag the planet’.

And while a recent World Economic Forum report, based on the views of 50 chief economists from around the world, sanitized economic prospects by simply referring to a likely forthcoming ‘recession’ either in 2022 or 2023, spokesperson Saadia Zahidi couldn’t avoid mentioning the heavy consensus that real wages will decline, poverty will increase and ‘social unrest is expected to continue to rise’ in response to rises in the cost of living, particularly due to production and supply chain disruptions in fuel and food supplies. See ‘Special Agenda Dialogue on the Future of the Global Economy’.

Taking a similarly ‘moderate’ stance, in its recent ‘World Economic Outlook’, the International Monetary Fund warned that ‘More than a third of the global economy will contract this year or next, while the three largest economies – the United States, the European Union, and China – will continue to stall. In short, the worst is yet to come, and for many people 2023 will feel like a recession.’ See ‘World Economic Outlook – Countering the Cost-of-Living Crisis’. At the media briefing to launch the report, the Director of the IMF’s Research Department, Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, noted that ‘the global economy is headed for stormy waters’ and ‘Too many low-income countries are close to or are already in debt distress. Progress toward orderly debt restructuring… is urgently needed to avert a wave of sovereign debt crises. Time may soon run out.’ See ‘WEO Press Briefing Annual Meetings 2022’.

But other reports suggest something far worse.

Summarizing his own extensive research on the subject over the past three years, in a recent interview Professor Michel Chossudovsky simply explains what triggered the economic collapse, referring to the origin of the crisis with decisions made in early 2020: ‘This is really Economics 101:… the announcement of the lockdown… implies the confinement of the labor force on the one hand and the freezing of the workplace on the other…. What happens? The answer is obvious: Collapse! Economic and social collapse on an unprecedented basis because it was implemented simultaneously in 190 countries.’ Watch ‘The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity’.

Noting the complete failure of authorities to hold even one corporate executive to account for the financial collapse they caused in 2008 – when banking institutions intentionally sold securities they knew were bad to defraud customers and increase their own profits, as carefully reported in a ‘Frontline’ documentary in 2013 – Dr Joseph Mercola argues that the ‘same criminal bankers are now intentionally destroying the global financial system in order to replace it with something even worse – social credit scores, digital identity and Central Banking Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which will give them the ability to control not only your individual finances but also everything else in your life’. Apparently unaware of the extensive lead time on what is happening, he goes on to observe that ‘We’re now at the point where banksters have self-selected themselves to rule the whole world, tossing notions of democracy, freedom and human dignity in the waste bin along the way.’ See ‘Who Is Behind the Economic Collapse?’

As explained above, these ‘banksters’ operate beyond the rule of law too.

According to the Irish economist Philip Pilkington: ‘The Western world today faces a serious risk of slipping into another Great Depression. This risk has arisen… due to global economic relations deteriorating to the point of all out warfare.’ Noting the critical importance of the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, leaving Europe with ‘insufficient access to energy, the price of energy in Europe will remain extremely high for years to come. European industry, for which energy is a key input, will become uncompetitive.’ See ‘The next Great Depression? Economic warfare has severe implications’.

According to former BlackRock manager, Edward Dowd, the outcome of what has been happening, which is being accelerated by the corruption that has plagued Wall Street since the 1990s, is that the forthcoming financial collapse is a ‘mathematical certainty’ and will occur within the next six to 24 months. Watch ‘Ex-BlackRock Manager: Global Financial Collapse a “Mathematical Certainty”’.

Or, in the words of strategic risk consultant William Engdahl: What is coming in the months ahead, barring a dramatic policy reversal, ‘is the worst economic depression in history to date’. See ‘Global Planned Financial Tsunami Has Just Begun’.

After listing a sequence of industry shutdowns and other measures in Europe because of energy shortages, Michael Snyder simply observes that ‘This is what an economic collapse looks like’, notes the prospect (also predicted by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and, as we saw above, the World Economic Forum) of ‘civil unrest’ and warns that ‘Europe is going to descend into “the new Dark Ages” this winter, and the entire world will experience extreme pain as a result.’ See ‘This Winter, Europe Plunges Into “The New Dark Ages”’.

According to Irina Slav, countries of the European Union have suffered a consistent decline in gas and electricity consumption this year amid record-breaking prices. Businesses are shutting down factories, downsizing or relocating, while production of such basic products as steel, zinc, aluminium, chemicals, plastics and ceramics has been cut substantially, if not slashed dramatically. Observing that the European Union is heading for a recession that is ‘quite clear to anyone watching the indicators’ she goes on to state that ‘Europe may well be on the way to deindustrialization’. See ‘Europe May See Forced De-Industrialization As Result Of Energy Crisis’.

Dr. Seshadri Kumar agrees. He has offered an intensively detailed critique of the economic fallout from the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and events such as the sanctions against Russia and the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 & 2 gas pipelines. Following his careful analysis, he notes a series of conclusions including that ‘The scarcity of oil and gas, combined with the scarcity of commodities, will lead to the De-Industrialization of Europe in short order.’

Europe needs what Russia has (and what China has). It cannot do without those things. But Russia (and China) can do without what Europe has. They are self-sufficient. The financial impact of European sanctions on Russia is minimal. Therefore, economic sanctions against Russia (or China) will never work. But, because of the overwhelming dependence of Europe on Russian (and Chinese) goods, sanctions on Russia (or China) will utterly destroy Europe. The only hope for Europe to prevent a total economic catastrophe is to achieve an agreement with Russia that ends the current destructive sanctions as soon as possible, and at whatever political cost, including the abandonment of Ukraine and cession of Ukrainian territory to Russia. The longer this is postponed, the more extensive the permanent economic damage to Europe will be….

A New World Order is taking birth before our eyes….

The sanctions on Russia will be seen in hindsight as Europe’s Stalingrad as well as its Waterloo. See ‘The Coming European Economic Apocalypse’.

Commenting on the banking system, precious metals businessman Stefan Gleason warns that ‘The global fractional-reserve banking system is teetering on the brink of failure. Financial strains are exposing major banks as under-capitalized and ill prepared to weather additional strains from high inflation, rising interest rates, and a weakening economy. Banks operating outside the United States are presently most vulnerable. A spike in interest rates concomitant with a spike in the exchange rate of the Federal Reserve note “dollar” is wreaking havoc in global debt markets and driving capital flight. Many analysts fear bank runs are coming. They are already hitting developing countries.’ See ‘Banks on the Brink: Is Your Money Safe?’

Noting that imposition of technologies associated with the fourth industrial revolution and the war in Ukraine are impacting the labor force, among a wide variety of other impacts on society as a whole, ‘Winter Oak’ observes that while anticipating future employment trends is not easy, ‘the combined threat of pandemics and wars means the labour force is on the brink of an unprecedented reshuffle with technology reshaping logistics, potentially threatening hundreds of millions of blue and white collar jobs, resulting in the greatest and fastest displacement of jobs in history and foreshadowing a labour market shift which was previously inconceivable.’

Furthermore: the nation state model is being upended ‘by a global technocracy, consisting of an unelected consortium of leaders of industry, central banking oligarchs and private financial institutions, most of which are predominantly non-state corporate actors attempting to restructure global governance and enlist themselves in the global decision-making process.’ See ‘The Great Reset Phase 2: War’.

Copyright Investopedia / Daniel Fishel

James Corbett simply observes that ‘the financial order we have known our whole lives is slated for destruction’. The demolition of the economy provides cover to conceal implementation of other key elements of the elite plan in which all fit neatly together: ‘vaccine passports introduce the digital ID. The digital ID provides the infrastructure for the CBDCs. The CBDCs provide a mechanism for enforcement of a social credit system.’ As Corbett notes: ‘To see these events as separate events unfolding haphazardly and coincidentally is to miss the entire point.’ See ‘The Controlled Demolition of the Economy’.

And, according to a source cited by Anviksha Patel, executives at the giant hedge-fund firm Elliott Management Corp. recently sent a letter to investors advising that the world is ‘on the path to hyperinflation’ which could lead to ‘global societal collapse and civil or international strife’. See ‘Hedge-fund giant Elliott warns looming hyperinflation could lead to “global societal collapse”’.

Among many other commentaries offering insight into one or more aspects of what is happening, Oxfam documents the fact that ‘billionaires in the food and energy sectors are increasing their fortunes by $1 billion dollars every two days’ and that a new billionaire is being created every 30 hours while nearly a million people are being pushed into extreme poverty at nearly the same rate. See ‘Pandemic creates new billionaire every 30 hours – now a million people could fall into extreme poverty at same rate in 2022’.

But perhaps the most evocative account of what is transpiring is offered by Egon von Greyerz, founder and managing partner of Matterhorn Asset Management in Switzerland, a company that has ‘always held a deep respect for analysing and managing risk’: By the end of the 1990s, it was clear ‘that global [financial] risk was growing increasingly apparent as debts and derivative levels rapidly rose’. See Matterhorn Asset Management: History.

Noting that laws governing the functioning of modern economies ensure that ‘No banker, no company management or business owner ever has to take the loss personally if he makes a mistake. Losses are socialised and profits are capitalised. Heads I win, Tails I don’t lose!’ Greyerz goes on to note that ‘there are honourable exceptions.’ Some Swiss banks still operate in accordance with the principle of unlimited personal liability for the partners/owners which clearly encourages a responsible, ethical approach to the conduct of business.

He observes: ‘If the global financial system and governments applied that principle, imagine how different the world would look not just financially but also ethically.’ If we had such a system, he contends, then human values would come before adoration of ‘the golden calf’. And evaluation of an investment proposal or a loan would be based on a judgment about its soundness economically and ethically, as well as a judgment that the risk of loss was minimal, rather than just the size of the personal profit it might return.

Instead, since 1971 (when President Nixon unilaterally terminated convertibility of the US dollar into gold, effectively ending the 1944 Bretton Woods system) ‘governments and central banks have contributed to the creation of almost $300 trillion of new money plus quasi money in the form of unfunded liabilities and derivatives [‘the most dangerous and aggressive financial instrument of destruction’] of $2.2 quadrillion making $2.5 [quadrillion] in total. As debt explodes, the world could easily face a debt burden of $3 quadrillion by 2025-2030.’ At the same time, ‘Central banks around the world hold $2 trillion [in gold reserves].’

The outcome is inevitable: ‘with over $2 quadrillion (2 and 15 zeros) of debt and liabilities resting on a foundation of $2 trillion of government-owned gold that makes a gold coverage of 0.1% or a leverage of 1000X!… an inverse pyramid with a very weak foundation.’ Noting that a sound financial system ‘needs a very solid foundation of real money’ it is simply the case that quadrillions of debt and liabilities ‘can not survive resting on this feeble amount of gold. So the $2 quadrillion financial weapon of mass destruction is now on the way to totally destroy the system. This is a global house of cards that will collapse at some point in the not too distant future…. No government and no central bank can solve the problem that they have created. More of the same just won’t work.’ See ‘$2 Quadrillion Debt Precariously Resting on $2 Trillion Gold’.

The most likely outcome, according to Greyerz: ‘The dollar will go to ZERO and the US will default. The same will happen to most countries.’ See ‘In the End the $ Goes to Zero and the US Defaults’.

The fundamental summary then, according to Greyerz, is this: ‘This system will start to implode.’… ‘The whole banking system is rotten. With the problems in Europe now it is actually a critical situation…. We have a two tier economy:… the rich are still rich but the poor are really poor. And you see that in every country in the world now… People haven’t got enough money to live…. This is going to be a human disaster of major proportions: it’s so sad and governments will not have any chance of doing anything about it.’ In the US outside the metropolitan areas, ‘the poverty is incredibly high and people live in boxes… poverty is everywhere and sadly, we are only seeing the beginning and there is no solution…. From a human point of view, we are looking at a major disaster.’ Watch ‘$2.5 Quadrillion Disaster Waiting to Happen’.

Will action be taken to halt the collapse? According to alternative economist Brandon Smith, it won’t. Consider this: ‘What if the goal of the Fed is the destruction of the middle class?… What if they are luring investors into markets with rumors of a pivot, tricking those investors into pumping money back into markets and then triggering losses yet again with more rate hikes and hawkish language? What if this is a wealth destruction steam valve? What if it’s a trap? I present this idea because we have seen this before in the US, from 1929 through the 1930s during the Great Depression. The Fed used very similar tactics to systematically destroy middle class wealth and consolidate power for the international banking elites.’

Smith’s conclusion? ‘This is an engineered crash, not an accidental crash.’ See ‘Markets Are Expecting The Federal Reserve To Save Them – It’s Not Going To Happen’.

And that, of course, is the point: the crash has been engineered. Why?

In summarizing the ongoing collapse of European infrastructure and industry, and energy shortages in the USA, Mike Adams notes that the ‘globalists are decimating the pillars of civilization in order to cause collapse and depopulation…. The overarching goal is to exterminate the vast majority of the human population, then enslave the survivors.’ See ‘Dark Times: Industry and infrastructure collapsing by the day across Europe and the USA’.

But this is no surprise. All that any thoughtful observer needs to do is consider history, listen to what the Global Elite is telling us they are doing, observe them doing it, and then simply inform people what is at hand: The destruction of the global economy, as part of the fundamental reshaping of world order.

After all, the Elite has been crystal clear. It’s fundamental aim is to kill off a substantial proportion of the human population and reduce those humans and transhumans left alive to slavery while confined in their technocratic prison; even wealth concentration is anciliary to that, although a product of it. See ‘The Elite Coup to Kill or Enslave Us: Why Can’t Governments, Legal Actions and Protests Stop Them?’ And if you crash the global economy denying people regular food, energy to stay warm and the capacity to communicate effectively, most of those left alive will be inclined to submit to whatever conditions they are offered in order to survive. How bad does your technocratic prison sound now? Even if you are eating insects?

So, to reiterate a vital point, the Elite agenda in relation to the economy is intimately related to its wider agenda in relation to eugenics and technocracy.

In an interview about her recently published book – see One Nation Under Blackmail: The sordid union between Intelligence and Organized Crime that gave rise to Jeffrey Epstein – Whitney Webb simply observes that ‘we are being herded into a technofeudalism, slavery… there’s a lot of different names for it going around but it’s not good and it’s organized crime running the show’…. Elaborating, Webb explained that ‘They’re looking at feudalism and how do you create a class of slaves that cannot even cognitively rebel ever again.’ Watch ‘How Elites Will Create a New Class of Slaves’.

How will this happen? While it will obviously require several of the range of measures being introduced, particularly including the deployment of 5G, the digitization of your identity and the utilization of a range of other technologies such as artificial intelligence and geofencing, here is what Clive Thompson, retired Managing Director of Union Bancaire Privée in Switzerland, believes might happen:

I think its quite likely that the CBDC will arrive and it will also be the subject of the currency reset at the same time. At some point the world is going to go into a crisis or a country is going to go into a crisis…. When that happens I think they will close the banks, you will wake up on a Sunday morning and hear the news that they’ve shut the banks, they’re not going to open on Monday. Then by Monday evening or Tuesday you’ll get the announcement that we’re having a new currency – the CBDC – and don’t worry it will be one-to-one against the old currency but there will be some restrictions on your ability to convert your old money into the new money.

So if you’re poor and you have a small bank account it will be converted one-to-one straight away, and you’ll probably even find that you get a free gift from the government to kickstart the system, maybe three or five thousand pounds will be given to every citizen gratuitiously to kickstart the new system to the new CBDC. But if you have a hundred thousand or a million in the bank you’re going to be told ‘Yes, it’s one-to-one but you’re going to have to wait to convert it to the new currency.’ Now “wait” means “never”, we all know that. But they won’t tell you that. They’ll say it’s a temporary suspension because we’re in the middle of a crisis, the people are rioting in the street, we need to calm the system so ‘Here’s some free money everybody, go and enjoy yourselves.’…

So I think the CBDC will arrive as a consequence of a crisis and when that happens there will be a limitation on how much of your old currency you can convert, at one-to-one, with the new one…. But the advantage of this, from the government’s point of view, is it’s to all intents and purposes wiping the slate clean because all their liabilities will be denominated in a currency that nobody can use, nobody can spend. Watch ‘The Currency Reset Will Wipe Out Creditors and Usher in CBDCs. Part 1’.

In preparing to cope with the disruption this must inevitably cause, among other assets that would be critically useful while retaining value, such as open-pollinated (non-hybrid) seeds, Thompson suggests gold and silver (including gold and silver coins), land, property, equities, collectibles (such as art and rarer coins), machine and other tools, electricity generators, useful items, animals, firewood, washing powder, canned food and house extensions. See ‘The Currency Reset Will Wipe Out Creditors and Usher in CBDCs. Part 2.’

Of course, Thompson might be wrong in his prediction of precisely how the technocratic state will ultimately be imposed. But imposed it will be, one way or another, unless we are effectively resisting the foundational components of the Elite program.

Is cryptocurrency part of the answer?

Many people are suggesting cryptocurrencies as one way around some of the problems we face. However, the very basis of sound economy for any world that is unfolding is self-reliance, particularly in relation to essential needs around food, water, clothing, shelter and energy, within a local, sustainable community that is as self-sufficient as possible, and able to nonviolently defend itself.

Complemented by use of local markets and trading schemes – whether using local currencies or goods and services directly – this will maximise economic survival prospects for those participating (and no doubt some others besides).

Anything that is internet-based will become increasingly vulnerable, and there are definitely plans to shut down some/all of it, depending on the scenario. Cyber Polygon makes that crystal clear. See ‘Taking Control by Destroying Cash: Beware Cyber Polygon as Part of the Elite Coup’.

And unless a currency is backed by something with genuine value – as currencies were backed by gold or other metals in earlier eras – or there is widespread confidence in a currency for another reason (as currencies around the world have been backed by their governments until now), it can become valueless very quickly.

Moreover, the big banks are heavily invested in cryptocurrencies: Another reason to be wary. See ‘3 Banks That Have Big Plans for Blockchain and Cryptocurrency’.

But for an extremely succinct warning against crypto, check out this brief statement from Catherine Austin Fitts: ‘If you move to crypto, and I just want to really underscore this, crypto is not a currency, it is a control system.’ See ‘The Dangers Of Cryptocurrencies’.

And, perhaps, the recent bankruptcy of the FTX Group is worth considering. See ‘“This Is Unprecedented”: Enron Liquidator Overseeing FTX Bankruptcy Speechless: “I Have Never Seen Anything Like This”’.

For another of the many critiques of crypto, see retired corporate accountant Lawrence A. Stellato’s ‘The Dangers of Cryptocurrencies’.

Crypto has a high environmental cost too, given the technology it uses and the energy it needs to run.

In essence: Just not part of the future we must work together to build.

 

---

 

Chapter IX
The Rothschilds and Transhumanism

Before concluding this investigation, it is worth returning to consideration of the Rothschild family in relation to one final issue: Transhumanism.

Why is this important?

Throughout this investigation, I have endeavoured to document a few basic facts: The Global Elite is intent on reshaping world order by killing off a substantial proportion of the human population and enslaving those left alive as transhuman slaves imprisoned in ‘smart’ cities. As part of achieving this outcome, the global economy is being ransacked and destroyed: This is intended to deprive people of the sustenance necessary to resist the entire Elite program that, among other outcomes, will concentrate virtually all remaining wealth in Elite hands.

This program has been planned in detail by elite agents in organizations like the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organization and is being implemented by relevant international organizations and multinational corporations (particularly those in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and the corporate media), as well as national governments and medical organizations.

But, as I have pointed out, every organization, corporation and government is composed of individual human beings who make decisions (consciously or unconsciously) about what they do in any given circumstance. And while structural power is not something that can be ignored, individuals do have agency.

To illustrate this point, I have used the House of Rothschild as one example of a family of individuals who make decisions about how to act in the world and how the decisions of this family exercise enormous influence over world events. Consider another brief example of the decisions made by Rothschild family members and what has transpired as a result.

The Rothschild influence over world banking and the global economy, and thus political systems, is heavily documented and illustrated above. So, given the current Elite push to substantially reduce the human population and introduce a technocratic state populated by transhuman slaves, one question that inevitably suggests itself as worthy of further investigation concerns the possible involvement of the Rothschilds in the research and development of the technologies and biotechnologies that make this all possible.

An investigation soon reveals that Nathaniel Mayer Victor Rothschild, the 3rd Baron Rothschild, was born in 1910 and attended Trinity College, Cambridge, where he read physiology, later gaining a PhD. After working for MI5 during World War II, ‘he joined the zoology department at Cambridge University from 1950 to 1970. He served as chairman of the Agricultural Research Council from 1948 to 1958 and as worldwide head of research at Royal Dutch/Shell [as noted above, a family business] from 1963 to 1970.’ See ‘Victor Rothschild, 3rd Baron Rothschild’.

Beyond this, however, articles in ‘The Financial Times’ in 1982-1983 reveal that N.M. Rothschild, of which the biologist Lord Rothschild was head, had established a venture capital fund called Biotechnology Investments in 1981 to attract £25m investments for biotechnology research. However, the fund, registered in the tax haven of Guernsey, had such exacting scientific and financial standards that it was having trouble identifying companies that could meet those standards despite the rapidly growing field. According to one news report in 1982: ‘City [of London] estimates put the number of new technology companies established in the last five years at about 150, mostly in North America. At least 70 are practising genetic engineering.’ See ‘Newsclippings re. Biotechnology Investments Limited (BIL) owned by N.M. Rothschild Asset Management’.

But lest you are concerned that the Rothschilds failed to establish a firm foothold in this fledgling industry, you might be reassured, but no wiser, to read the entry on the CHSL Archives Repository (that focuses on ‘Preserving and promoting the history of molecular biology’) titled ‘Rothschild Asset Management – Rothschild, Lord Victor’.

You will be no wiser because the archive is marked ‘Closed until Jan 2045 – Suppress all images for 60 years’.

As it turns out, however, the Rothschilds, whose business acumen is never questioned, are still raising funds and investing heavily in biotechnology. See ‘Edmond de Rothschild private equity unit to invest in biotech’. It’s just that, as usual, while you are hearing from elite agents (such as Klaus Schwab, Yuval Noah Harari and Elon Musk) who publicly promote transhumanist endeavours, you are hearing very little from those, like the Rothschilds, who prefer control and profit to publicity.

Consequently, the Rothschilds are playing a key role both in the ongoing ransacking of the global economy and in profiting from the control they are helping to make possible through introduction of transhumanist technologies. It goes without saying that the family has heavy investments in many other technologies too, including those that will be critical to the success of the imminent technocratic world order, such as the Internet of Things. See, for example, Rothschild Technology Limited.

Of course, the Rothschilds and other Elite families with whom they are interconnected in various ways are also heavily involved through investments in major asset management corporations such as Vanguard and BlackRock. But again, it is not just about wealth concentration; it is about control and depopulation too. So, for example, the Rockefellers, another family closely connected to the Rothschilds, are also well-known for their longstanding involvement in social engineering and eugenics. See ‘Where Did this “New World Order” Coup Come From? The Rockefeller’s “Social Engineering Project”’ and ‘Killing Off Humanity: How the Global Elite is using Eugenics and Transhumanism to Shape Our Future’.

 

---

 

Chapter X
So What Can We Do About This?

 

Because it controls the political, economic, financial, technological, medical, educational, media and other important levers of society, the Elite profits hugely from daily human activity. But it can also precipitate an ‘extreme event’ (or the delusion of one) – a war, financial crisis (including depression), revolution, ‘natural disaster’, ‘pandemic’ (if you think that the Covid-19 scam was the last of its kind, see ‘Who’s Driving the Pandemic Express?’ and watch the plan for the next one, already available: ‘Catastrophic Contagion’) – and use its control of the political, economic, technological and other levers mentioned to manage how events unfold while simultaneously managing the narrative about what is taking place so that the truth is concealed.

This means that the Elite’s killing and exploitation of the human population at large is hidden behind whatever ‘enemy’ (human or otherwise) that Elite agents in government and the media direct the attention of the public towards at any given time.

It doesn’t matter whether we all end up blaming Hitler, Saddam or ‘the Russians’, ‘the capitalists’ or ‘Wall Street’, ‘the government’, ‘the climate’ or ‘the virus’, we never blame the Elite. So we never take action that is focused on stopping those individuals and their corporations and institutions that are fundamentally responsible for inflicting unending harm on us all, as well as the Earth and all of its other creatures too.

Fortunately, while the Elite is adept at devising an ever-expanding range of tools that can be used to manipulate events while simultaneously concealing this behind a barrage of propaganda, there is still just enough time to finally recognize what is happening and to end it. Otherwise, just as in the board game ‘Monopoly’, where one player finally owns everything and the other players have been forced out of the game, the Elite will win the ‘final battle’ against humanity, capture all wealth and reduce those humans and transhumans left alive to the status of slaves. See ‘The Final Battle for Humanity: It is “Now or Never” in the Long War Against Homo Sapiens’.

Does this sound insane to you? Of course it is. Do you think the Elite is insane? Of course it is. See ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’ with further detail in ‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’.

But just because someone is insane and their plan is insane, it doesn’t mean they cannot succeed. Remember Adolf Hitler? Idi Amin in Uganda? Pol Pot in Cambodia? Insane violence of unspeakable magnitude can succeed if too many people either cannot perceive the insanity, are afraid of it or simply believe it is too preposterous – ‘It can’t be true.’ – and do nothing about it. Or, in the cases just mentioned, not until it was too late to prevent vast killing.

So here is the summary: Humanity faces the gravest threat in our history. But because our opponent – the Global Elite – is insane, we cannot rely on reason or thoughtfulness alone to get us out of this mess: You cannot reason with insanity. And because the Global Elite controls international and national political processes, the global economy and legal systems, efforts to seek redress through those channels must fail. See ‘The Elite Coup to Kill or Enslave Us: Why Can’t Governments, Legal Actions and Protests Stop Them?’

Hence, if we are going to defeat this long-planned, complex and multifaceted threat, we must defeat its foundational components, not delude ourselves that we can defeat it one threat at a time or even by choosing those threats we think are the worst and addressing those first.

This is because the elite program, whatever its flaws and inconsistencies, as well as its potential for technological failure at times, is deeply integrated so we must direct our efforts at preventing or halting those foundational components of it that make everything else possible. This is why random acts of resistance will achieve nothing. Effective resistance requires the focused exercise of our power. In simple terms, we must be ‘strategic’.

If you are interested in being strategic in your resistance to the ‘Great Reset’ and its related agendas, you are welcome to participate in the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ campaign which identifies a list of 30 strategic goals for doing so.

In addition and more simply, you can download the one-page flyer that identifies a short series of crucial nonviolent actions that anyone can take. This flyer, recently updated and now available in 23 languages (Chinese, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Malay, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, Slovak and Turkish) with several more languages in the pipeline, can be downloaded from here: ‘One-page Flyer’.

If this strategic resistance to the ‘Great Reset’ (and related agendas) appeals to you, consider joining the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ Telegram group (with a link accessible from the website).

And if you want to organize a mass mobilization, such as a rally, at least make sure that one or more of any team of organizers and/or speakers is responsible for inviting people to participate in this campaign and that some people at the event are designated to hand out the one-page flyer about the campaign.

If you like, you can also watch, share and/or organize to show, a short video about the campaign here: ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ video.

In parallel with our resistance, we must create the political, economic and social structures that serve our needs, not those of the Elite. That is why long-standing efforts to encourage and support people to grow their own food, participate in local trading schemes (involving the exchange of knowledge, skills, services and products with or without a local medium of exchange) and develop structures for cooperation, governance, nonviolent defence and networking with other communities are so important. Of course, indigenous peoples still have many of these capacities – lost to vast numbers of humans as civilization has expanded over the past five millennia – but many people are now engaged in renewed efforts to create local communities, such as ecovillages, and local trading schemes, such as Community Exchange Systems. Obviously, we must initiate/expand these forms of individual and community engagement in city neighbourhoods too.

Moreover, as Catherine Austin Fitts reminds us, if we choose that option, there is nothing to stop us having our own decentralised money system, starting with our own local community central bank and our own local community currency. Watch ‘We Need to Talk about Mr Global – Part Two’.

Finally, as noted by Professor Carroll Quigley in the very last words of his nearly-1,000 page epic Tragedy & Hope:

‘Some things we clearly do not yet know, including the most important of all, which is how to bring up children to form them into mature, responsible adults.’ See Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, p. 947.

Fortunately, the passage of time since Quigley wrote these words has revealed an answer to this challenge. So, if you want to raise children who are powerfully able to investigate, analyze and act, you are welcome to make ‘My Promise to Children’.

 

---

 

Conclusion

 

Since the dawn of human civilization 5,000 years ago, in one context after another, some people who are more terrified than others in their immediate vicinity have sought what they perceived to be increased personal ‘security’ by gaining and exercising greater control over the people and resources around them.

Progressively, over time, this serious psychological dysfunctionality has been compounding until, today, the degree of ‘security’ and control that some people require includes all of us and all of the world’s resources. For want of a better term, we might call them the ‘Global Elite’ but it is important to understand that they are insane, criminal and ruthlessly violent.

This takeover of all of us and everything on Planet Earth is currently being attempted by this Elite through the ‘Great Reset’ and its related fourth industrial revolution, eugenicist and transhumanist agendas.

In essence, the intention is to kill off a substantial proportion of us, as is now happening, enclose the Commons forever (and force those who live in regional areas off the land) while imprisoning those left alive as transhuman slaves in their technocratic ‘smart cities’ where we will ‘own nothing’ but provide the compliant workforce necessary to serve Elite ends.

Whether wars or financial crises (including depressions), ‘natural disasters’, revolutions or ‘pandemics’, great events are contrived by the Elite to distract attention from and facilitate profound changes in world order and obscure vast transfers of wealth from ordinary people to this Elite.

And this is done with the active complicity of Elite agents – including international organizations such as the United Nations, national governments and legal systems – which is why redress cannot be found through mainstream political or legal channels.

However, distracted by an endless stream of irrelevant ‘news’, superficial debates such as capitalism vs. socialism, monarchy vs. democracy, this political party vs. that political party, or even which football team is better, virtually all people are oblivious to how the world really works and who is orchestrating how history will be written by elite agents.

Is there conflict between individuals, families and groups within the Elite? Of course! But unlike the conflicts they endlessly throw in our faces to distract and manipulate us, the unifying agenda to which they all subscribe is to perpetually restructure world order to expand Elite control and extract more wealth for Elites. 5,000 years of human history categorically demonstrates that point.

Hence, if humanity is to defeat this Elite program, we must do it ourselves.

And if you want your resistance to this carefully-planned Elite technocratic takeover to be effective, then it must be strategic. Otherwise, your death or technocratic enslavement is now imminent.

---

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

Os mercenários estrangeiros estão a desempenhar um papel importante na invasão ucraniana de Kursk. Um soldado ucraniano que se rendeu aos russos contou a verdade sobre as tropas ucranianas envolvidas na operação de Kursk. Segundo ele, há muitos estrangeiros entre os militares, inclusive pessoas de países da OTAN. Este é mais um exemplo claro de como Kiev está a utilizar mercenários internacionais nas suas principais unidades de combate, agravando ainda mais a internacionalização do conflito.

Recentemente, o Serviço Federal de Segurança Russo (FSB) divulgou um vídeo de uma entrevista com um soldado ucraniano capturado. O prisioneiro deu detalhes sobre as tropas que invadiram Kursk, afirmando que há vários não-ucranianos entre os soldados envolvidos no assalto a Kursk, o que mostra o quão dependente Kiev está dos serviços de mercenários estrangeiros para realizar as suas operações.

O prisioneiro identificou-se como Ruslan Poltoratsky, membro da 80ª Brigada de Assalto Aéreo Ucraniana. Poltoratsky caminhava pela região de Kursk quando foi capturado por uma milícia de civis armados que protegiam voluntariamente a região. Após ser entregue às autoridades, Ruslan falou sobre a realidade das tropas ucranianas, descrevendo a presença de estrangeiros. Afirmou que havia um problema de comunicação devido ao fato dos soldados não falarem ucraniano, sendo que alguns combatentes falavam inglês, polaco ou francês. A dificuldade de comunicação com os colegas fez com que ele se perdesse na linha de frente e acabasse capturado.

A partir deste relatório é possível perceber que a presença de estrangeiros na Ucrânia é tão grande que começa até a criar problemas para a administração militar. Há falhas de comunicação e erros de comando simplesmente porque os soldados já não falam a mesma língua. Essa situação tende a gerar cada vez mais problemas. É possível prever que haverá uma onda de operações fracassadas num futuro próximo, com erros operacionais sendo cometidos devido a dificuldades de comunicação entre os próprios soldados.

Certamente há muitos soldados de países da OTAN, tendo em conta que o prisioneiro ucraniano mencionou línguas como inglês, francês e polaco. Isto não é surpreendente, uma vez que os soldados da OTAN tem estado diretamente envolvidos em hostilidades sob o rótulo de mercenários. Frequentemente, cidadãos americanos e franceses morrem nas linhas da frente, levantando uma série de preocupações para as autoridades ocidentais sobre como disfarçar essas mortes.

Quanto aos polacos, a sua participação na Ucrânia já se está a tornar semi-oficial. As tropas polacas tornaram-se comuns no campo de batalha desde 2022, tendo um grande número de baixas destes mercenários durante as ações russas. Na prática, a Polônia já participa de facto na guerra, sendo um dos maiores fornecedores de tropas ao regime de Kiev – além de ser a maior rota de chegada de armas da OTAN ao conflito.

A Geórgia está na mesma situação que a Polônia. Apesar de não ser membro da OTAN, a Geórgia é um dos principais fornecedores de mercenários da Ucrânia Isto deve-se ao fato de existirem fortes sentimentos russofóbicos entre parte do povo georgiano, uma vez que o país do Cáucaso é um dos mais afetados pela lavagem cerebral psicológica operações realizadas pela OTAN. O revanchismo histórico e a russofobia encorajaram muitos georgianos a alistar-se para defender a Ucrânia, sendo a maior organização paramilitar georgiana pró-ucraniana a chamada “Legião Georgiana” – um grupo terrorista proibido na Rússia e conhecido mundialmente por publicar vídeos torturando russos.

Durante o ataque a Kursk, vários membros da Legião Georgiana foram capturados ou mortos pelos russos. Há vídeos circulando na internet mostrando soldados do PMC do Grupo Wagner prendendo alguns cidadãos georgianos durante o contra-ataque russo em Kursk. Na mesma linha, há fotos e vídeos de soldados americanos e de alguns europeus lutando por Kiev durante esta invasão. Na prática, parece que os mercenários foram vitais para a viabilização do ataque – o que corrobora a tese de que Kiev está sem forças suficientes para lutar, dependendo de uma forte ajuda externa direta para continuar enfrentando os russos.

Por seu lado, a Rússia afirmou repetidamente que a eliminação dos mercenários estrangeiros é uma prioridade na operação militar especial. Estas tropas não estão protegidas pelo Direito Internacional Humanitário, uma vez que não são soldados regulares. Por esta razão, se capturados pelos russos, poderiam ser enviados a tribunais marciais por crimes cometidos contra os cidadãos de Kursk e outras regiões – sendo a pena mais severa a prisão perpétua.

Na verdade, a trágica invasão de Kursk mostrou que a Ucrânia já não é capaz de realizar qualquer atividade militar por si só, estando totalmente dependente do apoio de mercenários ilegais. Embora ajudem Kiev a ter tropas suficientes para combater, esta presença massiva de estrangeiros está a causar sérios problemas, principalmente em questões de comunicação e logística, o que mostra como Kiev está longe de encontrar uma “solução” para as suas necessidades militares através da contratação de criminosos estrangeiros.

Lucas Leiroz De Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês : Foreign mercenaries massively participating in Ukraine’s invasion of Kursk, 14 de Agosto de 2024.

Imagem InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

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

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Give Truth a Chance. Secure Your Access to Unchained News, Donate to Global Research.

First published by Global Research on 24 June 2024

***

America’s addiction to nuclear weapons does not lend itself to deterrence-based stability. It only leads to war.

“That’s great, it starts with an earthquake…”

There’s nothing like a classic 1980’s rock song to get one’s blood up and running, and REM’s 1987 classic, It’s the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine), fits the bill just right on this hot and muggy summer day.

The only problem is, the song might as well be prophesy, because from where I sit, taking in the news about the rapidly escalating nuclear arms race between the United States and Russia, it very much looks like the end of the world as we know it.

And I don’t feel fine.

The news isn’t good. Last month, on May 6, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that it would, on the orders of Russian President Vladimir Putin, conduct exercises involving the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons. According to Russian officials, the exercises were a response to “provocative statements and threats from certain Western officials directed at the Russian Federation.”

The Russians were responding to statements made by French President Emmanuel Macron to The Economist on May 2, where he declared that

“I’m not ruling anything out [when it comes to deploying French troops to Ukraine], because we are facing someone [Putin] who is not ruling anything out.” Macron added that “if Russia decided to go further [advancing in Ukraine], we will in any case all have to ask ourselves this question (whether to send of troops).”

While Macron described his remarks as a “strategic wake-up call for my counterparts,” it was clear not everyone was buying into what he was selling. “If a NATO member commits ground troops [to Ukraine],” Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said after Macron’s words became public, “it will be a direct NATO-Russia confrontation, and then it will be World War III.”

The Russians conducted their exercises in two phases, with the first taking place in late May. There, the tactical missile forces of the Southern Military District practiced “the task of obtaining special training ammunition for the Iskander tactical missile system, equipping them with launch vehicles and secretly moving to the designated position area to prepare for missile launches.”

The Iskander-M is the nuclear-capable version of the Iskander family of missiles and can carry a single nuclear warhead with a variable yield of between 5 and 50 kilotons. (By way of comparison, the American atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 15 kilotons.) The single-stage solid rocket missile flies at high hypersonic speeds, and possesses a maneuvering warhead, making it virtually impossible to shoot down. With a range of 500 kilometers, the Iskander-M, when fired from locations in Crimea, would be able to reach French bases located in Romania, which ostensibly would be used to surge forces into Ukraine.

The second phase of the exercises took place on June 10, when the Russian and Belorussian forces practiced the transfer of Russian nuclear weapons to Belorussian control as part of the new Russian nuclear sharing doctrine put in place by Vladimir Putin and his Belorussian counterpart, Alexander Lukashenko, earlier this year. The weapons involved included the Iskander-M missile and gravity bombs that would be delivered by modified Belorussian SU-25 aircraft. The weapons would put all of Poland and the Baltic States under the threat of nuclear attack.

Belorussian SU-25 aircraft

Around the same time that Russia was carrying out its tactical nuclear drills, several NATO nations, including Germany, announced that they had given Ukraine the green light to use weapons it had provided to strike targets inside Russia. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, speaking on the sidelines of a NATO foreign ministers meeting in Prague on May 29, said Ukraine had the right to strike legitimate military targets inside Russia.

“Ukraine has the right for self-defense,” Stoltenberg declared, adding that “we have the right to help Ukraine uphold the right for self-defense, and that does not make NATO allies a party to the conflict.”

Putin took time from his visit to Uzbekistan to reply, warning that NATO members in Europe were playing with fire by proposing to let Ukraine use Western weapons to strike deep inside Russia. Putin said Ukrainian strikes on Russia with long-range weapons would need Western satellite, intelligence and military assistance, thus making any Western help in this regard a direct participant in the conflict.

“Constant escalation can lead to serious consequences,” Putin said. “If these serious consequences occur in Europe, how will the United States behave, bearing in mind our parity in the field of strategic weapons? It’s hard to say,” Putin said, answering his own question. “Do they want a global conflict?”

On June 5, speaking to an audience of senior editors of international news agencies while attending the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin observed that,

“For some reason, the West believes that Russia will never use it [nuclear weapons]. We have a nuclear doctrine,” Putin noted. “Look what it says. If someone’s actions threaten our sovereignty and territorial integrity, we consider it possible for us to use all means at our disposal. This should not be taken lightly, superficially.”

But the US and NATO were doing just that. In an interview to the British Telegraph newspaper given at NATO’s headquarters building in Brussels, Belgium, Stoltenberg said that NATO members were consulting about deploying more nuclear weapons, taking them out of storage and placing them on standby in the face of a growing threat from Russia and China.

“I won’t go into operational details about how many nuclear warheads should be operational and which should be stored, but we need to consult on these issues,” Stoltenberg said.

American technicians with a pair of B61 nuclear bombs

The only nuclear weapons currently in the NATO system are some 150 US-controlled B61 gravity bombs stored at six NATO bases: Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Büchel Air Base in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi Air Base in Italy, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands and Incirlik in Turkey. NATO officials later clarified Stoltenberg’s remarks, saying there were no significant changes to the NATO nuclear posture, noting that Stoltenberg’s comments referred to the modernization of NATO’s nuclear deterrent, including the replacement of F-16 jets with F-35 stealth fighters, and the modernization of some of the B61 bombs currently deployed in Europe.

Stoltenberg’s comments to the Telegraph came 10 days after Pranay Vaddi, the senior director for arms control at the National Security Council, announced a “new era” for nuclear arms in which the US would deploy nuclear weapons “without numerical constraints.”

Stoltenberg’s statements, when viewed in the context of Vaddi’s declaration, points to a dangerous shift in focus within both NATO and the US away from the concept of nuclear weapons representing a force of deterrence, and instead increasingly being seen in the West as a usable weapon of war.

The concept of deterrence as the sole justification for the existence of nuclear weapons dates back to 1978, when the United Nations General Assembly held its first Special Session on Disarmament. One of the main ideas to emerge from this event was the notion of so-called negative security assurances, or NSAs, in which the declared nuclear-armed states committed to not using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states that were in good standing with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and not otherwise aligned with a nuclear-armed state.

These NSAs furthered the notion of nuclear deterrence as a formal binding doctrine among nuclear-armed states, operating on the idea that since nuclear weapons could only be used against a nuclear-armed state, and that any such use would lead to the mutual destruction of the involved parties, therefore the only rational purpose for the existence of nuclear weapons was to deter those nations that also possessed them from ever using them in the first place.

From this foundational understanding emerged modern concepts of nuclear disarmament which framed the arms control policies of the United States and the Soviet Union that emerged in the 1980’s and 1990’s—since the sole purpose of nuclear weapons was deterrence, it was in the best interest of all parties to a) significantly reduce their respective nuclear arsenals and b) implement policies designed to normalize relations to the point that nuclear arsenals became moot.

Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev sign the New START Treaty in 2010

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, however, ushered in a new post-Cold War reality which saw the notion of a nuclear “balance” where the US and Soviets operated as equals being replaced by a doctrine of “managed supremacy” which saw the US use the mechanisms of arms control and disarmament to promote and sustain its position as the world’s dominant nuclear power. Arms control ceased being a concept premised on equitable deterrence, and instead became a tool designed to subordinate the nuclear capabilities of the Russian Federation that emerged from the ashes of the Soviet Empire to those of the newly-minted American hegemon.

The US began deconstructing the foundation of arms control treaties that had been negotiated on the premise of sustaining a nuclear deterrence-based balance of power, first by using the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) process as a mechanism to promote the unilateral disarmament of the Russian strategic arsenal, and later by withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty that had served as the foundational agreement around which the concept of mutually assured destruction (MAD) was framed.

Deterrence theory is viable only so long as MAD is viewed as the inevitable outcome of any nuclear conflict. By re-embracing the notion of viable ballistic missile defense, the US undermined the premise enshrined in MAD, namely that to use nuclear weapons was to invite your own demise. The US now operated in a world where it embraced deterrence theory only in so far as it deterred other nations from attacking the US with nuclear weapons. From the US perspective, assured destruction was a dated notion, one that was replaced by the concept of a “winnable” nuclear war.

The proactive utility of nuclear weapons form the standpoint of US nuclear doctrine, as expressed in the US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) of 2010, where the US, while continuing to commit not to “use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons against [NPT-compliant] non-nuclear-weapon states,” declared that “there remains a narrow range of contingencies in which US nuclear weapons may still play a role in deterring a conventional or [chemical and biological weapons] attack.”

Subsequent NPRs have expanded on this notion, incorporating the possibility of US nuclear retaliation against cyber attacks and other non-WMD linked events. The proactive nature of the US nuclear posture was such that when a senior Trump administration official involved in making nuclear policy declared that the goal of the administration of President Donald Trump was to have the Chinese and Russians waking up every morning not knowing whether of not “this was the day the US nuked them,” one simply could not write off the statement as ill-conceived hyperbole, but rather recognize it as part and parcel of ill-conceived nuclear policy.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, however, is not one to wake up in the morning afraid of a potential US nuclear attack. Speaking recently from Hanoi, Putin said “They [the US and NATO] seem to think that at some point we will get scared. But at the same time, they also say they want to achieve a strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield.” Putin then ominously remarked that, “It means the end of the 1,000-year history of the Russian state. I think this is clear to everyone. Isn’t it better to go all the way, until the end?”

Accusing the West of “lowering the threshold” for the use of nuclear weapons against Russia, Putin declared that Russia must now reconsider its own nuclear posture considering NATO’s apparent willingness to make operational tactical nuclear weapons—a clear reference to Jens Stoltenberg’s June 16 comments. Russia last published its nuclear weapons doctrine, formally known as “Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence,” in 2020. This doctrine declares that Russia could use nuclear weapons if an enemy “threatened the existence of the Russian state” in response to an enemy’s use of weapons of mass destruction against Russia or its allies, or if Russia received credible information that a nuclear strike was being planned or about to take place.

Putin, in his Hanoi remarks, downplayed the notion of Russia embracing a policy of nuclear preemption. “We don’t need a preventive strike,” Putin said, “because with a retaliatory strike the enemy is guaranteed to be destroyed.”

When asked by reporters whether Ukraine’s use of Western long-range weapons against Russian territory could be considered an act of aggression and a direct threat to the Russian state, Putin replied “This requires additional research, but it’s close.”

Too damn close.

The United States and Russia are drifting closer and closer to all-out nuclear war. It is high time that the people who would pay the ultimate price for such folly decide, to borrow from the poetry of Dylan Thomas, if they want to go “gently into the night” of nuclear Armageddon, or instead “rage, rage against the dying of the light” by demanding better policy from their respective governments.

As for me, I choose rage.

There will be an event dedicated to stopping this mad rush toward on September 28, in Kingston, New York. Gerald Celente is putting this together, along with a coalition of like-minded citizen patriots.

We hope to organize sister events in cities across the country.

We want to put more than a million Americans into the streets that day, focused on one thing and one thing only—stop the madness of nuclear war.

Will you join us?

Or will you stay at home and listen to the music of the collective versions of modern-day Nero’s, fiddling while America and the rest of the world burns.

You vitriolic, patriotic, slam fight, bright light

Feeling pretty psyched

It’s the end of the world as we know it…

But not if I can help it.

*

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

Featured image: Russian Iskander-M nuclear missile (Source: Scott Ritter Extra)

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute    

Here’s what went down in a nutshell in this, Our Land of Freedom™:

• Vermont parents Dario and Shujen Politella, in November 2021, explicitly warn the school where their six-year-old child attended, Academy School in Brattleboro, that he is not to receive the experimental gene therapy marketed as a “vaccine”
• An unidentified worker at the school’s “vaccination clinic” gives the shot to the kid anyway “by mistake” while they distract him with a stuffed animal
• The school writes a letter to the parents stating the administration was “deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures.”
• The parents file suit in state court
• State Supreme Court rules in favor of the school district, arguing that it is immune from liability because of an obscure 2005 federal law that grants emergency powers to the government in times of declared emergencies, such as COVID-19

Looks like a pretty cut-and-dry case of criminal malfeasance with, in an ideal world, summary executions for all involved school officials.

The Vermont Supreme Court sees things differently, per its recent ruling on the matter.

Via VT Digger (emphasis added):

“The Vermont Supreme Court on Friday affirmed a lower court decision that the state and the Windham Southeast Supervisory Union were immune from legal challenges brought by the parents of a student who received a Covid-19 vaccine against their wishes.

The litigation, brought against the state and the school district two years ago by Dario and Shujen Politella, claimed the defendants were not immune from legal challenges. Workers at a vaccination clinic held at the Academy School in Brattleboro in November 2021, the Politellas’ suit argued, were negligent when they mixed up name tags and mistakenly administered a Covid-19 shot to their child, who was 6 years old at the time.

Mark Speno, the Windham Southeast superintendent, later wrote to the parents that school officials were “deeply sorry that this mistake happened, and have worked internally to improve our screening procedures.”

The Politellas sued in Windham Superior Court, but Judge Michael Kainen dismissed the case in January 2023. They then appealed to the Supreme Court, where a hearing was held on May 28 of this year.

The litigation centers around the federal PREP Act, a 2005 law that provides immunity from liability to government officials administering “countermeasures” in response to a public health emergency — in this case, a vaccine against the Covid-19 virus that had caused a global pandemic starting in early 2020…

Justice Karen Carroll wrote in the decision that the federal PREP Act bars all claims based on state law against defendants and that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

“We conclude that when the federal PREP Act immunizes a defendant, the PREP Act bars all state-law claims against that defendant as a matter of law,” Carroll wrote.

The Politellas and their attorney, Ronald Ferrara, argued that the PREP Act did not provide blanket immunity in this case, and said that the alleged negligence of the school district and the state’s clinic workers was subject to damages.”

Via Snopes (emphasis added):

“According to the ruling, the father spoke to the school’s principal a few days before the clinic, reiterating that his child was not to be vaccinated. The principal acknowledged this and confirmed his son would not be vaccinated without the parents’ consent.

However, on the day of the clinic, “an unidentified worker” incorrectly gave the child the name tag of another student. As a result, the child was vaccinated with the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine and the family then sued the school district.

In July 2024, the court said that, under federal law, the lawsuit could not proceed. Citing the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act of 2005, the court ruled the school was immune from prosecution. Indeed, the PREP Act does provide “liability immunity to certain individuals and entities (Covered Persons) against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures (Covered Countermeasures), except for claims involving ‘willful misconduct’ as defined in the PREP Act.”

In other words, during public health emergencies, the PREP Act protects people whose job it is to implement measures — such as vaccines and vaccination campaigns — designed to counteract these emergencies, from legal consequences…

In order for the lawsuit to have proceeded, the plaintiffs needed to prove the workers were guilty of “willful misconduct,” or the incident happened outside the timeframe of this public health emergency.”

So, you shoot a few kids up, shrug your shoulders and call it an accident, and get off scot-free. You want to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs.

That’s called Democracy™, and I’ll be damned if these parents don’t find themselves on some Homeland Security domestic terrorist list in the future.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Armageddon Prose.

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Follow his stuff via Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

A preliminary investigation report by Rep. Clay Higgins (LA-R) has revealed the body of Trump rally shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks is gone.

In Rep. Higgins’s report, he wrote that on August 5th, when he requested to view the body of Thomas Matthew Crooks, he was told the body of Crooks was “gone.”

The representative from Louisiana further noted that the FBI released the body to be cremated just ten days after the shooting occurred on July 13.

Higgins, in his preliminary report of the Trump rally shooting, wrote,

“My effort to examine Crooks’ body on Monday, August 5, caused quite a stir and revealed a disturbing fact… the FBI released the body for cremation 10 days after J13.”

“On J23, Crooks was gone. Nobody knew this until Monday, August 5, including the County Coroner, law enforcement,
Sheriff, etc. Yes, Butler County Coroner technically had legal authority over the body,” added Higgins.

Higgins also noted in his report that the FBI released the crime scene after three days and cleaned up biological evidence from the scene.

🚨BREAKING NEWS🚨

Matthew Crook’s body is GONE@RepClayHiggins requested to examine the assassin’s body and was told it was released to the family by the FBI.

Nobody even knew his body was gone until August 5, including the Butler County Coroner, LEO, and the Butler County… pic.twitter.com/HDPyE1cNvF

— Kylie Jane Kremer (@KylieJaneKremer) August 16, 2024

Per Clay Higgins’ Office:

My effort to examine Crooks’ body on Monday, August 5, caused quite a stir and revealed a disturbing fact… the FBI released the body for cremation 10 days after J13. On J23, Crooks was gone. Nobody knew this until Monday, August 5, including the County Coroner, law enforcement, Sheriff, etc.

Yes, Butler County Coroner technically had legal authority over the body, but I spoke with the Coroner, and he would have never released Crooks’ body to the family for cremation or burial without specific permission from the FBI.

The coroner’s report and autopsy report are both “late.” As of Monday, August 5, they were a week late. The problem with me not being able to examine the actual body is that I won’t know 100% if the coroner’s report and the autopsy report are accurate. We will actually never know. Yes, we’ll get the reports and pictures, etc, but I will not ever be able to say with certainty that those reports and pictures are accurate according to my own examination of the body.

Again, similar to releasing the crime scene and scrubbing crime scene biological evidence… this action by the FBI can only be described by any reasonable man as an obstruction to any following investigative effort. Please note,

Mr. Chairman, that on J23, the day that Crooks was cremated, both the Homeland Security Committee and the Oversight Committee had begun House Committee jurisdictional investigation into J13, and Speaker Johnson had already stated that he was forming an Official Congressional investigative body. Why, then, by what measure, would the FBI release his body to the family for cremation? This pattern of investigative scorched earth by the FBI is quite troubling.

BOMBSHELL REPORT: Thomas Crooks body was CREMATED just 10 day's after Trump's ass*ssination attempt…

"Nobody knew this until until August 5, including the Butler County Coroner, Law Enforcement, Sheriff, etc.

Butler County Coroner technically had legal authority over the body… pic.twitter.com/qIIEJB3MzC

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) August 16, 2024

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

Featured image is from TGP

For years, the political West has been adamant that there’s “no Nazism” in NATO-occupied Ukraine. All of it was just “Russian propaganda”, essentially a “ruse” fabricated by “evil Putin” as a supposed “excuse” for the “brutal invasion of a fully sovereign, democratic European country”. Others would say that the Russians were “paranoid” and/or “obsessed” with WWII, that they were simply “living in the past”, etc. And yet, there was ample evidence that quite the opposite is true. These “paranoid” Russians weren’t hallucinating or seeing ghosts. For around a decade, their compatriots all across Ukraine were being brutally tortured and murdered by mobs of CIA-trained Neo-Nazi extremists, starting with the horrendous Odessa massacre. Fast forward to the present, the results of this perfectly avoidable NATO-orchestrated war are clearly visible to everyone.

However, although the number of the dead is nearing one million at this point, it’s simply not enough for the world’s most vile racketeering cartel. They want to make sure that the war they orchestrated keeps going for as long as possible and they’re not interested in the unprecedented demographic consequences for Ukraine. And yet, it seems there are still people in this unfortunate, NATO-occupied country who want this horrible war to not only keep going, but also escalate. This is precisely why the Kiev regime launched the suicidal Kursk oblast (region) incursion. The attack itself is a desperate attempt to shift attention away from the Neo-Nazi junta’s massive losses in the Donbass and elsewhere. And while the mainstream propaganda machine is using the PR momentum, most Western analysts aren’t exactly thrilled.

However, the actual PR situation is a lot worse, as the Kiev regime forces that took a number of settlements in the Kursk oblast have already started committing gruesome atrocities against Russian civilians. In the best-case scenario, most of them are subjected to inhumane treatment. This includes molesting the elderly, with one video showing two Neo-Nazi junta soldiers wearing SS helmets and treating an elderly Russian civilian exactly as the Wehrmacht soldiers would treat him back in WWII. While the man was saying that he’s been wandering around for days without food, the Kiev regime soldiers kept mocking and insulting him, including by calling him a “Russian swine” (in bad German, just like their Banderist ancestors) and emulating typical Nazi behavior. The video has been posted on numerous Telegram channels.

Many sources have already identified one of the Kiev regime soldiers as Vasily Danylyuk, a 38-year-old resident of the city of Horodenka, Ivano-Frankivsk oblast in Western Ukraine, infamous for the pro-Nazi sentiments of many of its residents. It can only be expected that millions of Russians have already seen the video, evoking memories of the horrendous fate their ancestors had to endure under Nazi German occupation, when tens of millions were murdered in the most brutal ways imaginable (and unimaginable). The horrors of that time are very well documented and very few people (if any) could’ve dreamed that such evil would rear its ugly head once again. And yet, here we are. Thanks to the political West, we’re now going through exactly that and the Russians are furious (rightfully so, to say the least).

No country in the world comes close to the unprecedented sacrifice of the people of Russia and the former Soviet Union when it comes to defeating Nazi Germany and its allies. However, thanks to NATO, Ukraine, one of the successors of the USSR and a country that gave at least five million lives to defeat Nazism, has been hijacked by the descendants of Nazi collaborators and effectively turned into a zombified mini-Reich. What’s more, the battlefield is essentially the same as in WWII, with Kursk being the site of one of the two most decisive battles of the war (the other being Stalingrad). The mainstream propaganda machine’s desperate attempts to whitewash the Kiev regime keep failing and no thanks to Moscow, but the political West’s favorite puppets themselves, as they keep exposing their real nature to the entire world.

The sheer number of examples of blatant Nazi affiliation among the NATO-backed troops in Ukraine couldn’t fit into a book. Whether it’s the infamous swastika, Nazi salutes and uniforms, the German Totenkopf or the Wehrmacht’s Balkenkreuz, the Kiev regime forces have it all. It’s so prevalent that not even the mainstream propaganda machine could hide it, with countless instances of soldiers talking about how Nazism in Ukraine is just “Russian propaganda” while sporting at least some of the aforementioned Nazi insignia. For at least ten years, the NATO-occupied Ukraine has become a hotbed for various extremists, shady mercenaries and terrorists, all of whom were turned into a unified fighting force precisely thanks to the involvement of American and other NATO intelligence services, the “fruits” of which we see every day.

Combined with the extremely disturbing (re)nazification trends in Europe, none of this bodes well for the “old continent” (or the world, for that matter). With calls for Japanese-style internment camps for Russians, the neverending deliveries of ever more advanced and destructive weapons, the direct participation in targeting Russian troops and countless other moves tantamount to a declaration of war, the political West is pushing us all toward a bottomless abyss. It’s only thanks to Russia’s immense patience and self-control that the world hasn’t been blown up yet. However, the Kremlin cannot (and will not) keep being the only adult in the room, particularly when it becomes ultimately self-defeating to do so. And that moment is nearing very, very fast, as the Russian people are awakening to the fact that they’re being invaded once again.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Ukrainian neo-Nazis from Azov receiving NATO weapons and training (Source: Multipolarista)

The greatest medical crime and atrocity in history has been committed in the form of COVID-19-contaminated genetic injections, which have been coerced into the majority of the global population under the false pretense of “safe and effective vaccines.”

You can trace this story back to my first warnings regarding the injections’ contents in January 2021, my first alert to doctors and nurses regarding the criminality of the injection campaign in April 2021, my early detailed explanations of anticipated toxic effects of the injections in June 2021, my 2022 revelations of chemical contaminants discovered in the injections in September 2022, my 2023 revelations of nefarious DNA contaminants discovered in the injections in April 2023, my 2024 exploration of evidence of self-assembling nanotechnology observed in the injections in June 2024, my team’s indexing of evidence of the adverse effects of these injections in September 2023, and my instructional material for countering their toxic effects in July 2023.

The World Council for Health has been a consistent leader in educating and protecting you from the coerced and illegal C-19 injections. This has included the WCH Spike Protein Detox Guide, the WCH global cease and desist orders since 2021, and much more!

Since the shocking 2023 revelations of DNA contamination, SV40 promoter sequences, and related fraud by Pfizer, the World Council for Health has hosted three expert panels. The first, hosted by Christof Plothe and myself, brought together an international panel of top scientists to discuss and ultimately confirm the DNA contamination and genetic assault on humanity in October 2023. The second panel, hosted by Shabnam Palesa Mohamed and myself, brought together legal experts from around the world to analyze the legal implications and necessary strategies regarding the DNA contaminants in 2024.

Most recently, on June 24, 2024, Christof Plothe and I hosted the third WCH global expert panel on this subject under the title: COVID “Vaccines”: Where Do We Stand In 2024? Here is the complete library from that event, where you will find the most up-to-date and honest information regarding the COVID-19 genetic “vaccines.”

I anticipate this is a post that you will want to bookmark and return to repeatedly, as it is very robust with important information.

 

 

On June 24th, 2024, the World Council for Health, along with Christof Plothe, DO, and Dr. Mark Trozzi, MD, hosted an expert panel that included: Biologist, Biochemist, and Mathematician Dr. Jessica Rose, PhD; Geneticist Professor Dr. Alexandra Caude, PhD; Viral Immunologist Associate Professor Dr. Byram Bridle, PhD; Microbiologist Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, MD, PhD; Molecular Biologist specializing in Oncology Professor Maarten Forenrod, PhD; Geneticist Kevin McKernan, MS; Immunologist, Geneticist, and Molecular Biologist Professor Dr. Karina Azevedo Whitehouse, PhD; Biochemist and Molecular Biologist Dr. Janci Lindsay, PhD; Cardiorenal and Coronavirus Expert Professor Dr. Peter McCullough, MD; and attorney Katie Ashby Koppins, JD.

***

WCH Expert Hearing: Covid “Vaccines”, Where Do We Stand in 2024? 

Introduction

Christof Plothe, DO, and Dr. Mark Trozzi present today’s panel, featuring a distinguished lineup of world-renowned experts.

Click here to watch the video

Are We at the Edge of a Genetic Precipice?

Dr. Jessica Rose, PhD

An update on the latest VAERS data, exploring how DNA contamination may lead to cancer on three different levels, and addressing issues related to genetic modification.

 

Click here to watch the video

Can We Turn Our Science Into Counter-power in This Post-COVID World?

Professor Dr. Alexandra Caude, PhD

Addressing the challenge of reaching the masses with accurate information amidst widespread propaganda and the demands of the attention economy.

 

Click here to watch the video

The Rationale for Using Toxic LNPs for Vaccines 

Professor Dr. Byram Bridle, PhD 

Given the toxicity of LNPs – particularly with multiple doses over months or years – there should be an immediate global moratorium on the use of LNP-based so-called ‘vaccines.’

 

Click here to watch the video

The House of Cards Is Ready to Fall 

Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, MD, PhD

The cards are all on the table. It is time for us to take action, turn the tables, and hunt the global preditors.

 

Click here to watch the video

Click here to read the full article.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

We’ve all heard about 5G and its potential to transform our lives forever.

What is 5G really about?

Is there more to the story?

.

.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

Europe is not seriously discussing options for military support for Ukraine and is reluctant to step up assistance to Kiev, while, at the same time, with the current level of support, Ukraine has no chance of winning the conflict in the medium term, the Financial Times newspaper cited a senior European official as saying. This comes following Ukraine’s failed offensive against Kursk, which US officials believe will only lead to Russian President Vladimir Putin acting “decisively.”

As the publication notes, citing a senior European official, while there is a “recognition” in the European Union that European countries will have to do more to arm Ukraine, there is “no substantive discussion of options” for assistance.

The newspaper also notes that with the current level of Western military aid and mobilisation in Ukraine, Kiev has no chance of winning in the medium term and that the decision to attack Russia’s Kursk region could cost Ukraine dearly and have serious consequences.

According to the outlet, Ukrainian soldiers and Western analysts worry that throwing scarce resources at Kursk will make it harder for Ukraine to hold on to strategically important positions in Donetsk and as Russia continues to advance in recent days, Kiev risks overcommitting itself, for political reasons, to its new offensive, just as it did last year with its doomed defence of Bakhmut, now called Artyomovsk.

Earlier this month, Ukrainian forces crossed the border into Russia and launched an offensive in the Kursk region, capturing villages, killing civilians, and injuring at least another 121 people, including ten children.

Putin said the Ukrainian action was another large-scale provocation and accused Ukraine of indiscriminately shooting at civilians. Several senior Russian officials have warned that Kiev should expect severe consequences for carrying out such an operation.

However, it is not only the Kremlin warning of major retaliations, with former US Ambassador to Russia John Sullivan telling CNN that Ukraine had crossed a “red line” by attacking the Kursk region and that Putin will act as decisively as possible to expel Ukrainian forces from Russian soil.

“[The Russians may think that] the United States was involved in what they call ‘serious provocation or terrorist incident’ and that this is some kind of red line that the Ukrainians have crossed,” he said, responding to a question about the recent actions of the Ukrainian army.

Sullivan also added that he expects Putin to “respond as decisively as he can” to expel Ukrainian troops from Russian territory.

The diplomat’s word quickly came true with Russian general and commander of the Akhmat special forces regiment Apty Alaudinov announcing on August 14 that the main units of the Ukrainian military in the Kursk region had been stopped and that most of their equipment had been destroyed.

“At the moment, I can basically say that these [Ukrainian] forces and means are already almost completely blocked, so the blockade from all directions is being completed. Somewhere behind us, there are isolated sabotage groups […] they are somewhere in the forests — we have recorded this. But the main forces of the enemy have already been stopped, their blockade is being completed,” Alaudinov told Russia’s Pervy TV channel.

The Financial Times reported that Kiev knows it will come under increasing pressure to negotiate an end to the war, especially if Donald Trump returns to the White House after November’s presidential election, but not only. Europe fears that if re-elected, Republican candidate Donald Trump will cut aid to Kiev and pressure Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky to accept a peace deal with Russia.

With European industry unable to meet the needs of the Ukrainian military and Putin promising a “decisive” response to Ukraine’s attack on Kursk, things are about to become all the more difficult for the Kiev regime, especially with the end of summer only a few weeks away, meaning the onset of another difficult winter under wartime conditions.

Rather than demonstrating Ukraine’s capabilities, the attack on Kursk only shows the Kiev regime’s desperation as Russian forces continue to liberate more territory in the east with little serious opposition. Although it is uncertain whether Trump will win the election, what is almost certain is that the upcoming winter will be the last winter of the war as Russia’s superior military and industrial capabilities will collapse what scarce resources Ukraine has left.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: © Sputnik. Kursk Region Acting Governor Press Office 

A bid to break up Alphabet Inc.’s Google is one of the options being considered by the Justice Department after a landmark court ruling found that the company monopolized the online search market, according to people with knowledge of the deliberations.

The move would be Washington’s first push to dismantle a company for illegal monopolization since unsuccessful efforts to break up Microsoft Corp. two decades ago. Less severe options include forcing Google to share more data with competitors and measures to prevent it from gaining an unfair advantage in AI products, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing private conversations.

Alphabet shares were down 3.8% at 10:13 a.m. in New York, the most since Aug. 5, when a federal judge ruled the company has an illegal monopoly in the search market.

Regardless, the government will likely seek a ban on the type of exclusive contracts that were at the center of its case against Google. If the Justice Department pushes ahead with a breakup plan, the most likely units for divestment are the Android operating system and Google’s web browser Chrome, said the people. Officials are also looking at trying to force a possible sale of AdWords, the platform the company uses to sell text advertising, one of the people said.

The Justice Department discussions have intensified in the wake of Judge Amit Mehta’s Aug. 5 ruling that Google illegally monopolized the markets of online search and search text ads. Google has said it will appeal that decision, but Mehta has ordered both sides to begin plans for the second phase of the case, which will involve the government’s proposals for restoring competition, including a possible breakup request.

A Google spokesman declined to comment on the possible remedy. A Justice Department spokeswoman also declined to comment.

The U.S. plan will need to be accepted by Mehta, who would direct the company to comply. A forced breakup of Google would be the biggest of a U.S. company since AT&T was dismantled in the 1980s.

Justice Department attorneys, who have been consulting with companies affected by Google’s practices, have raised concerns in their discussions that the company’s search dominance gives it advantages in developing artificial intelligence technology, the people said. As part of a remedy, the government might seek to stop the company from forcing websites to allow their content to be used for some of Google’s AI products in order to appear in search results.

Click here to read the full article on BNN Bloomberg.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Featured image is from NEO

The decision by the US State Department to maintain economic sanctions against the Paraguayan company Tabesa (Tabacalera del Este) for its links with former Paraguayan President Horacio Cartes (2013-2018) has raised tensions between the government of President Santiago Peña and the US embassy in Asunción. While Paraguayan decision-makers in the capital, Asunción, seek to avoid a diplomatic conflict, Washington has been told to “move forward” with the departure of Ambassador Marc Ostfield.

On August 6, the State Department announced the extension of sanctions imposed on Cartes in January 2023 on Tabesa and accused him of “significant corruption.” Although Cartes divested his share in the company – which amounted to at least 50% – Washington accused the company of allegedly paying the former Paraguayan president millions of dollars.

The State Department announced that the measures “reinforce the United States sanctions on former President Cartes and demonstrate the US commitment to ensuring the integrity of our sanctions programs and inhibiting Cartes’s ability to receive financial benefits.”

US Ambassador Marc Ostfield expressed a similar sentiment, stating that Washington will “use the range of relevant tools to combat corruption, including visa restrictions, designations, financial sanctions and extradition.”

Washington’s position was not well received by the Peña administration, which summoned Ostfield and issued a statement about how Asunción “received with displeasure the media coverage and politicization of the administrative sanctions.”

“Since the beginning of this government, we have gone through a period in which trust was built, so we are displeased by the media coverage and politicization of administrative sanctions. For this reason, we are asking the American government to speed up the process of the ambassador’s departure and thus prevent the loss of trust in one person from damaging the relationship we have historically maintained,” the Paraguayan Foreign Ministry stated.

Peña’s administration is not ignoring the underlying issue of the sanctions against Cartes but is seeking to underline its discontent because the accusation against the former president has undeniable important political impacts. For example, the incident could delay the arrival of a new US ambassador to Paraguay.

The request for Washington to speed up Ostfield’s departure, whose mission was already ending, is not a usual measure in international diplomacy, but it does clarify Asunción’s position. Nonetheless, Peña’s government is seeking to ensure that the episode does not provoke an escalation in tension with the US, especially when the current president’s administration has just announced the economy’s recovery to investment grade as an achievement.

Asunción has modified its discourse, maintaining a controlled response. What was initially denounced as “foreign interference” has been transformed into a more moderate criticism, focused on the forms and methods used by the US ambassador and pointing out unnecessary politicization and media use of the sanction’s announcement.

There is clear displeasure among those who supported Cartes, who are more reactionary in the face of US pressure. The situation puts Peña in an uncomfortable position since the Cartes supporters want him to set greater limits with Washington.

Despite the incident, Peña’s government will continue to have Washington as one of its main allies. Peña’s foreign policy agenda is closely tied to the US, so he will probably try to de-escalate the situation.

In the meantime, the strategy will be to seek other international alliances that can counterbalance the White House’s influence in Paraguayan politics.

The sanctions imposed by the US against Cartes are part of what Washington calls the ‘Magnitsky Act,’ a national security law to protect the US economic, political, and security interests. The US has sanctioned more than 300 people worldwide for violating the Magnitsky Act’s provisions, which affect non-US citizens who use the US financial system without respecting its security standards.

Washington also previously justified the sanctions against Cartes based on an alleged link between the former Paraguayan president and the Iranian-backed Lebanese Shi’ite movement Hezbollah and for allegedly interfering in an international investigation into international crime.

Cartes’ situation is not replicated with other South American politicians who have been investigated for corruption. In fact, Paraguay is the only country in South America where the US acts as a watchdog of internal corruption and an active guardian against terrorist activities. Similar cases are only found in Central America, where the US has applied comparable sanctions under a similar legal framework. In this regard, Washington’s interest in Cartes has not ended despite his departure from politics.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is licensed under CC BY 2.0

The Wall Street Journal, the official mouthpiece of establishment Republicans, owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, that has taken the lead in publishing insider scoops during the four-year tenure of the Biden admin while the Democratic shills, the New York Times and Washington Post, took a backseat out of deference for self-styled “progressives” in the White House, has published another bizarre scoop that’s the talk of the town today and will likely be forgotten tomorrow.

The asinine report claims the Nord Stream gas pipelines, providing Russian natural gas to European countries before the war, were blown up by a six-member Ukrainian sabotage team of skilled deep-sea divers in an operation that was initially approved by Volodymyr Zelensky and then called off, but which went ahead anyway, likely due to a communication glitch in the Starlink video conferencing or a “terrible misunderstanding” between the president of the banana republic and his top military commander.

According to the outlet’s “credible but phantasmagorical” sources, the idea of blowing up Nord Stream was conceived by “a handful of senior Ukrainian military officers and businessmen” as they gathered for drinks in May 2022, a few months after the outbreak of the conflict between Moscow and Kyiv. The plotters believed that it would reduce Russia’s energy revenues and make the EU less dependent on Moscow.

The subversive operation was allegedly directed by a serving army general, who reported to Ukraine’s then commander in chief, Valery Zaluzhny. Zelensky initially approved the plan, but later backtracked after the CIA found out about it and asked Kyiv to call it off. Nonetheless, Zaluzhny pressed ahead with the mission, claiming once dispatched, a sabotage team goes incommunicado and cannot be withdrawn.

Before being nominated Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Kamala Harris was California’s Attorney General and a prosecutor. In that capacity, she dealt with “sexual predators, fraudsters and cheaters.” She evidently knows “Trump’s type” as well as WSJ’s. But even she would’ve contemptuously spurned the scandalous investigation. Because there are so many legal lacunae in the Harry Potter’s latest cock and bull story that any sensible judge would defenestrate the ludicrous petition and might even order damages be paid to victim of defamation.

Nord Stream pipelines were ruptured by blasts under the Baltic Sea in September 2022. Early the following year, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh conclusively proved with irrefutable facts and incontrovertible evidence that explosives were planted on the Nord Stream pipelines by US Navy divers under the cover of a NATO exercise, and detonated on orders from Washington in order to wean Germany off Russian energy amidst the Ukraine War.

The reason WSJ fabricated a malicious report, scapegoating a rogue general while exonerating mainstream media’s “blue-eyed bae” the Ukrainian president, is that Zelensky sacked Valery Zaluzhny in February as commander-in-chief of Ukrainian forces on the whim of US security establishment. As he was hesitant to commit more cannon fodder to breach Russia’s defensive lines in Donbas amid much-hyped albeit easily foiled Ukrainian counteroffensive lasting from June to December last year.

In fact, the planners of the thwarted counteroffensive themselves were well aware that it was a futile effort because Ukraine’s largely conscript and mercenary army was simply not a match for Russia’s professional military and superior firepower. But they kept painting the rosy picture of the battlefield for public consumption in order to oblige the Biden regime to keep providing billions of dollars military assistance to Ukraine.

Similarly, the Kursk and previous Belgorod incursions, too, are simply morale-boosting stratagems meant to create a perception that Ukrainian conscripts are capable of fighting wars when, in fact, sleazy Ukrainian politicians and military commanders are squandering lavish military aid on buying opulent villas in southern France and spending the nights gambling away millions of dollars in swanky casinos of Monte Carlo.

Nonetheless, differences between Zelensky and Zaluzhny had been simmering for many months but appeared to grow wider towards the end of last year, after Zaluzhny said the war had reached a stalemate in a long essay and interview in The Economist magazine in November. After being sacked for defying American masters, Zaluzhny is now paying the price for publicly spilling the open secret, as he is being implicated in ordering the Nord Stream sabotage.

Zaluzhnyi with Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskyi (left) during the Battle of Kyiv, March 2022 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

New commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskyi has been criticized for pursuing bloody and reckless military tactics which resulted in significant Ukrainian losses during the Battle of Bakhmut, and was nicknamed “General 200,” a reference to Cargo 200, a Soviet military code denoting military fatalities.

He would likely retain his job as long he uncritically obeys Washington’s dictates. But if he made the mistake of developing critical faculties, a cardinal sin in military command structure across the world, then he too would meet the same ignominious fate that befell his disgraced predecessor.

Notwithstanding, on August 6, Ukrainian forces, numbering several thousand and backed by German Marder infantry fighting vehicles, advanced  across the border into Russia’s Kursk region. Previous incursions from Ukraine into Russia, near the city of Belgorod, were led by neo-Nazi militias and foreign mercenaries. But this time, the incursion was reportedly conducted by Ukrainian forces. Subsequently, Zelensky publicly admitted he had ordered the incursion.

The main operational Russian gas pipeline into Europe runs near Sudzha, where a metering station – reportedly captured by Ukraine and confirmed by Ukraine’s new commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskyi – monitors the reduced Russian supplies to countries such as Austria and Hungary.

Russia has declared a state of emergency in Kursk and over two hundred thousand civilians had been evacuated following an attack that has clearly caught Moscow off guard. In addition, Russia has also declared a state of emergency in neighboring Belgorod region.

The Kursk incursion is clearly the handiwork of Oleksandr Syrskyi, aptly named “General 200,” because it serves no strategic objective, as even mainstream media reports have acknowledged that holding on to Russian territory is next to impossible.

Hence, the only plausible rationale that Syrskyi decided to place more Ukrainian “cannon fodder” in the line of fire was to pander to the dictates of Washington, which has been excoriating Ukraine’s military commanders to show tangible battlefield achievements since the much-hyped counteroffensive was easily thwarted last year in order to keep receiving billions of dollars in military assistance.

But Russian positions in heavily fortified Donbas region were so impregnable that Ukrainian troops couldn’t advance an inch further without taking significant casualties. Therefore, Syrskyi meticulously scanned the map to find an easy military target to assuage American masters. Invading even Belgorod region appeared a daunting task because Russians were prepared.

Suddenly, the general noticed an unfamiliar name on the map, Kursk. He inquired an aid, “Is Kursk in Ukraine or Russia?” The aid obsequiously replied, “Sir, it’s across the border in Russia.” “Viola!” exclaimed Syrskyi, “We’re gonna invade Kursk next to make Gen. Cavoli (incumbent commander of EUCOM and SACEUR) happy.”

Russia shares a thousand miles border with Ukraine, and it could be breached anywhere with a surprise attack. Kremlin didn’t expect a Ukrainian military commander would be foolhardy enough to mount an incursion in poorly guarded Kursk region.

The only comprehensible objective of the Kursk incursion seems to gain international publicity for a few days before Russian reinforcements arrive and beat Ukrainian forces back across the border after taking significant casualty toll.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based geopolitical and national security analyst focused on geo-strategic affairs and hybrid warfare in the Middle East and Eurasia regions. His domains of expertise include neocolonialism, military-industrial complex and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor of diligently researched investigative reports to Global Research. 

Featured image: Gas emanating from the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in the Baltic Sea, September 28, 2022. / Swedish Coast Guard.

Two doctors who spoke out about vaccines and alternative treatments for COVID-19 received notice that their medical certifications were revoked, while another doctor said her certification was revoked without her knowledge.

The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) last week revoked the certifications of Drs. Pierre Kory and Paul Marik, following a two-year investigation into their promotion of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as treatments for COVID-19 and their statements questioning the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.

According to The Washington Post, the two physicians continued “to promote ivermectin, an anti-parasitic medication, as a treatment for COVID long after the medical community found it to be ineffective.”

Kory and Marik are co-founders of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), which promotes alternative treatments for COVID-19.

Citing unnamed experts, the Post claimed the FLCCC “spread misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic.”

MedPageToday quoted an ABIM spokesperson, who said the organization “does not comment publicly on the reasons for the revocation of certification.”

However, in a summary of the ABIM’s decision reviewed by The Defender, the organization stated that the doctors’ “conduct poses serious concerns for patient safety and undermines the trust that the public and the medical profession place in the meaning of ABIM board certification.”

In a press release, the FLCCC Alliance said it “categorically disagrees” with ABIM’s decision.

“We believe this decision represents a dangerous shift away from the foundational principles of medical discourse and scientific debate that have historically been the bedrock of medical education associations,” the press release states.

Marik told The Defender:

“The bottom line is we’re disappointed because we stand up for the truth. To censor science is to censor progress. Science is based on dialogue and people can have different points of view. That is the principle of science: it’s people having different points of view.

“We’ve never been in a situation before where physicians who have opposing points of view are silenced … It sets a really bad precedent that you can’t really challenge the status quo, and as we know, in medicine, there have been very dramatic changes based on changing understandings of science.”

In the FLCCC Alliance press release, Kory said,

“This fight is about more than just our right to speak — it’s about protecting the future of healthcare. When doctors are silenced for questioning the prevailing narrative, we all lose.”

Kory and Marik participated in an ABIM hearing in May, but internist Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, told The Defender that ABIM revoked her certification without her knowledge.

Nass said she was blindsided by ABIM’s decision to revoke her license, which she said she found out about only when she searched for herself in the organization’s database of certified physicians.

Nass told The Defender:

“After the Maine Medical Board suspended my license illegally — even though none of my alleged transgressions met the statutory requirement for an immediate suspension — the board later found me guilty of things I had not done and continued the suspension … All of this with never a single patient complaint.

“Now I learn, by chance, that the ABIM has suspended me without ever informing me I was even under an investigation, which is illegal according to the ABIM’s process.”

Dr. Peter McCullough also faced similar difficulties with the ABIM over his positions on COVID-19 vaccines and treatments. According to MedPageToday, ABIM revoked his certifications in 2022 — although, as of today, ABIM lists him as certified.

McCullough told The Defender, “The ABIM is violating principles of equal protection, due process, rules of evidence and has gone ex post facto to find reasons to attack qualified ABIM-certified doctors who innovated and saved lives early in the pandemic.”

Science Based on ‘Different Points of View’

Kory and Marik held ABIM certifications in internal and critical care medicine, while Kory was also certified in pulmonary disease, according to MedPageToday.

They were initially notified about the risk of losing their certification in May 2022. Last year, ABIM’s Credentials and Certification Committee recommended the revocation of their certification for disseminating “false or inaccurate medical information.” A hearing followed in May.

According to the FLCCC Alliance’s press release, Kory and Marik “tirelessly defended their positions.” However, despite “presenting over 170 references in a detailed 60-page response submitted in January 2023, the ABIM has chosen to dismiss these robust scientific contributions in favor of a narrow, ‘consensus-driven’ narrative.”

According to the summary of ABIM’s decision, Kory and Marik’s “statements about the safety and efficacy of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine” as treatments for COVID-19 “are false and inaccurate because they are unsupported by factual, scientifically grounded, and consensus-driven medical information.”

The ABIM also addressed the doctors’ positions on the COVID-19 vaccines:

“[The doctors’] statements about the purported ineffectiveness and dangers of COVID-19 vaccines are false and inaccurate because they are unsupported by factual, scientifically grounded, and consensus-driven medical information. …

“There is extensive factual, scientifically grounded, and consensus-driven medical information demonstrating that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, and lead to better health outcomes.”

Marik questioned the board’s assertions regarding ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and the vaccines.

“What they do is, they cherry-pick articles which support their point of view and then they go on to say the vaccine is safe and effective. We know that’s completely not true. There’s overwhelming data to question both the safety and efficacy of the vaccine,” Marik added.

McCullough said:

“ABIM never updated its members on important risks such as fatal vaccine adverse events, including myocarditis, nor failing theoretical efficacy necessitating boosters that skipped human testing altogether.

“Setting a new dark milestone, ABIM is decertifying highly qualified physicians for nonclinical reasons and ignoring the evidence for early therapeutics and COVID-19 vaccine safety.”

ABIM Engaging in ‘Medical Lawfare’

According to the Post, Kory maintains a license to practice medicine in California, New York and Wisconsin, where “there are no disciplinary actions listed against him.” Marik has retired and his medical license expired in 2022.

Revocation of their ABIM certification “effectively prevents them from practicing at large hospitals and academic institutions,” the Post reported.

Marik and Nass outlined the difficulties of practicing medicine without certification.

“It doesn’t affect us directly, but it affects us indirectly because we’re being accused of committing offenses that are just not true,” Marik said. “The indirect impact to our reputation … it’s a slap in the face, basically, for all the hard work we’ve done.”

Accusing the ABIM of being part of the “medical-industrial complex,” Marik said,

“They seem more interested in making money than in protecting physicians. There have been a number of lawsuits against ABIM, so they don’t have the best of reputations. But unfortunately, they are the main certifying organization in the U.S., so they have enormous power and leverage.”

“If I get my license back — a big if, without board certification, I would have great difficulty getting hospital privileges and collecting insurance reimbursements. In other words, I would be unemployable, though I could potentially work on my own if patients paid me directly,” Nass said.

In 2021, ABIM and the Federation of State Medical Boards collaborated to draft the statement used to discipline Nass.

Nass said organizations like ABIM are engaging in “medical lawfare.” She said they are:

“Creating crimes that do not exist, using procedures that do not exist, to try and silence people like me. What did I do wrong? I read the literature and told the truth about what it said, publicly. The COVID vaccines are very dangerous. They don’t prevent COVID. Drugs can effectively treat COVID. And I prescribed those drugs and helped hundreds of Maine citizens. That was my crime.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”

Featured image is from CHD

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

On July 31, at 2:00 am. local time, Israel assassinated Palestinian leader, and the head of Hamas political office, Ismail Haniyeh in the Iranian capital of Tehran, hours after he attended the inauguration of the new President of Iran.  Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, vowed to reply to this Israeli aggression and that Israel would pay a price for crossing a red-line and killing a guest of Iran.

The Middle East is going through turmoil and on the edge of a regional war that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thrust the US into unwillingly. Iran is using psychological warfare on the Israeli public, which has paralyzed their daily life. While the threat of a retaliatory attack is real, Iran has done nothing, but this fear has caused Israelis to sleep in shelters, shut their businesses and many have left the country and may not return.

Israel and the world are awaiting a reply from Hezbollah and Iran, but are unsure if the reply will be separate or jointly. Especially, after Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah vowed to respond to the Israeli assassination of Hezbollah military leader Fuad Shukr in Beirut, Lebanon on July 30.

The US Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, has sent warships and nuclear submarines to the eastern Mediterranean in anticipation of escalating military conflict in the region. The Biden administration has warned Netanyahu repeatedly to decrease the tensions and to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza, but Netanyahu is not listening.

Some experts warn that Netanyahu may use the situation to attack Iran with missiles, even perhaps going so far as to target Iran’s nuclear facilities.

In an effort to better understand the back-story to these headlines, journalist Steven Sahiounie interviewed Iranian Dr. Hadi Issa Dalloul, International Law and Nuclear Physics Consultant. Dr. Dalloul is a nuclear physicist who studied at the University of Houston, in the US and at Imperial College, in the UK.

Steven Sahiounie (SS):  On July 31, Israel assassinated Palestinian leader Ismail Haniyeh in the Iranian capital Tehran. In your opinion, why did Israel choose this timing to kill him?

Hadi Issa Dalloul (HAD):  The Israeli government is politically weak, and this forced the intelligence department (Mossad) to take action in order to reflect power to the Americans and Europeans, who are kept unaware of the Israeli military failure in Gaza. For this reason, Israel chose to kill Haniyeh inside Iran in a show of strength to the Israeli public.

SS:  Benjamin Netanyahu took the decision to take the Middle East and the world to war by assassinating a top Hezbollah leader, and Hamas leader. Do you see the Middle East going to war, and can Benjamin Netanyahu be stopped?

HAD: The Israeli government is seeking to begin an open war conflict with Hezbollah and Hamas, but if the US will not become directly involved on behalf of Israel, and the Europeans as well do not get directly involved on the Israeli side, Israel will not be able to face Hezbollah on the ground in Lebanon. Israel is depending on the US and EU to fight the war against Hezbollah and Hamas for them. It is not enough that Israel receives sophisticated weapons and massive financial support from the US, because in the event of a genocide being carried out Israel needs the US and EU military on the ground as well to shield Israel from the ICJ, the court at the Hague.

SS:  Both Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian leader Ali Khamenei promised to reply to the Israeli aggression on both Beirut and Tehran. In your opinion, will the reply be done separately, or together?

HAD:  This current situation is different than previous events.  In this case, the target was movable, as opposed to a building. The counter attack must be cleverly studied, monitored and located so it will be targeted easily and exactly.  Hezbollah has the right o reply, and Iran has the right to a different channel of reply.

SS:  Benjamin Netanyahu keeps escalating the situation in the Middle East, while the United States and the Western world is unable to stop him. In your opinion, does the US and Europe want a regional war, or has Benjamin Netanyahu ignored their warnings?

HAD:  Netanyahu is trying to force the US into and open war, but the US will not get involved because they don’t want to lose the oil and gas their get from the west coast of the Persian Gulf, as that will be targeted by Yemen.

SS:  Both Iran and Hezbollah are using psychological warfare against Israel, and it is being successful while causing massive losses in the Israeli economy. In your opinion, can Israel afford these huge losses in their economy, and so many Israelis leaving Israel?

HAD:  The Israeli economic crisis as a consequence of war can be easily covered if the situation remains limited. However, if the conflict escalates into the targeting of the energy resources of the oil and gas in the Middle East, which benefits the US, then the loss felt by the US will be far greater than any amount of paper printed at a bank and sent to Israel to cover their losses.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

A reader asked me recently what can be done on the legal front against Pfizer and Moderna regarding their genocidal shots that were deceptively marketed as “vaccines” even though they are gene therapies.

First, any meaningful action by the government, the only entity with the power to make them pay, would require an executive branch that respects the rule of law and works on behalf of its people — which obviously doesn’t exist and certainly won’t for as long as the Democrats hold power.

Second, any meaningful action by the government or private entities requires a judiciary that’s also honest and beholden to the rule of law, which would allow fraud lawsuits to proceed unmolested.

If those prerequisites are met, the crux of the matter becomes proving whether Pfizer lied in its clinical trials to push the shots through the emergency use authorization (EUA) process — which it certainly did.

Such lawsuits exist, but they have not met with success so far, one having been summarily dismissed by a federal court before any litigation could occur.

Via Children’s Health Defense (emphasis added):

“For the second time, a federal court in Texas has dismissed a whistleblower lawsuit alleging Pfizer and two of its contractors manipulated data and committed other acts of fraud during clinical trials for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in 2020.

In his Aug. 9 ruling, District Judge Michael J. Truncale sided with the U.S. government, ruling the government had demonstrated “good cause” to intervene and dismiss the case. He wrote:

“The Government’s desire to dismiss the case — because of its doubt as to the case’s merits, differing assessment of the Pfizer vaccine data, desire to avoid discovery and litigation obligations, and belief that it should not have to expend resources in a case that is contrary to its public health policy — constitutes good cause to intervene.”…

According to the lawsuit, the three companies “deliberately withheld crucial information from the United States that calls the safety and efficacy of their vaccine into question,” thus defrauding the federal government, which purchased the vaccines.

The FCA allows the government or a party suing on its behalf to attempt to recover money for false claims made by parties to secure payment from the government.”

The reason injured parties can’t sue Pfizer directly for the damages they suffered is that the government inexplicably granted it blanket immunity prior to the rollout — the only kind of immunity associated with the shots being legal — a carve-out that doesn’t exist for virtually any other consumer product or service. Injured individuals can neither sue the FDA or any government agency that pushed them, nor employers that mandated them.

The only legal remedy, therefore, is to prove that the EUA authorization Pfizer got itself through bribery and manipulation of data was all based on fraud from the start, which would definitely nullify the emergency use authorization and probably Pfizer’s blanket immunity (any lawyers can weigh in on the latter issue because it’s hazier).

Pfizer Adverse Reporting Document Shows 23% of Vaccinated Mothers Had Dead Babies 

The following information is sourced directly from Pfizer’s own document — which, as noted, only covered a three-month period of observation, meaning the actual percentage of miscarriages and dead babies in the general population is likely far higher, as it doesn’t account for women who got pregnant later.

Via DailyClout (emphasis added):

“It is important to note that the information in the 5.3.6 document was reported to Pfizer for only a 90-day period starting on December 1, 2020, the date of the United Kingdom’s public rollout of Pfizer’s COVID-19 experimental mRNA “vaccine” product…

Twenty-eight deaths of either a fetus or neonate happened to women in the vaccinated group (124 women). So, 23% of the vaccinated mothers had fetuses or newborns who died.”

Via Pregnancy and Lactation Cumulative Review (emphasis added):

“[Pfizer’s] safety database was searched for all BNT162b2 vaccine cases reporting any exposure to vaccine during pregnancy (mother and/or baby) or exposure to baby via lactation from all time through 28 February 2021. A search of the Pfizer safety database identified 673 case reports. …

Of the 673 case reports identified in the search, 458 involved BNT162b2 exposure during pregnancy (mother/fetus) and 215 involved exposure during breast-feeding…

In 174 of the 215 reports, there was no AE reported other than ‘Exposure via breast milk/maternal exposure during breast feeding’. In the remaining 41 cases, AEs were reported in the infants following BNT162b2 exposure via lactation.”

What do the benevolent Pfizer-funded Public Health™ overlords do with this information?

Three and a half years in, they’re still shilling the shots for pregnant women (whom they call “pregnant people”).

Via CDC (emphasis added):

“Getting recommended vaccines while you are pregnant helps protect both you and your baby from potentially serious diseases…

COVID-19 vaccine: Get if you are pregnant and not up to date on your COVID-19 vaccine. CDC recommends updated COVID-19 vaccination for everyone aged 6 months and older…

It’s safe to receive vaccines after giving birth, even while you are breastfeeding.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Armageddon Prose.

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Follow his stuff via Substack. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.

Featured image source

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

“With a click, with a shock
Phone’ll jingle, door’ll knock, open the latch
Something’s coming, don’t know when but it’s soon . . . “
– “Something’s Coming,” lyrics by S. Sondheim, music by L. Bernstein – West Side Story

Shock should not be the word, but when World War III breaks fully loose many who are now sleeping will be shocked.  The war has already started, but it’s full fury and devastation are just around the corner.  When it does, Tony’s singular fate in West Side Story will be the fate of untold millions.

It is a Greek tragedy brought on by the terrible hubris of the United States, its NATO accomplices, and the genocidal state of Israel and the Zionist terrorists who run it.

Tony felt a miracle was due, but it didn’t come true for him except to briefly love Maria and then get killed as result of a false report, and only a miracle will now save the world from the cataclysm that is on the way, whether it is initiated by intent, a false report, an accident, or the game of nuclear chicken played once too often.

Let us hope but not be naïve.  The signs all point in one direction.  The gun on the wall in the first act of this tragic play is primed to go off in the final one.  Every effort to avoid this terrible fate by seeking peace and not war has been rejected by the U.S. and its equally insane allies.  Every so-called red line laid down by Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinians, and their allies has been violated with impunity and blatant arrogance.  But impunity has its limits and the dark Furies of vengeance will have their day.

“It is the dead, not the living,” said Antigone, “who make the longest demands.”  Their ghostly voices cry out to be avenged.

I wish I were not compelled by conscience to write this, but it seems clearly evident to me that we stand on the edge of an abyss.  The fate of the world rests in the hands of leaders who are clearly psychotic and who harbor death wishes.  It’s not terribly complex.  Netanyahu and Biden are two of them.  Yes, like other mass killers, I think they love their children and give their dogs biscuits to eat.  But yes, they also are so corrupted in their souls that they relish war and the sense of false power and prestige it brings them.  They gladly kill other people’s children.  They can defend themselves many times over, offer all kinds of excuses, but the facts speak otherwise.  This is hard for regular people to accept.

The great American writer who lived in exile in France for so many years and who was born 100 years ago this month, James Baldwin, wrote an essay – “The Creative Process” – in which he addressed the issue of how becoming a normal member of society dulls one to the shadow side of personal and social truths.  He wrote:

And, in the same way that to become a social human being one modifies and suppresses and, ultimately, without great courage, lies to oneself about all one’s interior, uncharted chaos, so have we, as a nation, modified or suppressed and lied about all the darker forces in our history.

And lie and suppress we still do today.

Imagine, if you will, that Mexico has invaded Texas with the full support of the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian governments.  Their weapons are supplied by these countries and their drone and missile attacks on the U.S. are coordinated by Russian technology.  The Seven Mile Bridge in Florida has been attacked.  The U.S. Mexican border is dotted with Russian troops on bases with nuclear missiles aimed at U.S. cities.

It’s not hard to do.  That is a small analogy to what the U.S./NATO is doing to Russia.

Do you think the United States would not respond with great force?

Do you think it would not feel threatened with nuclear annihilation?

How do you think it would respond?

The U.S/NATO war against Russia via Ukraine is accelerating by the day.  The current Ukrainian invasion of Russia’s Kursk region has upped the ante dramatically.  After denying it knew in advance of this Ukrainian invasion of Russia, the demented U.S. President Joseph Biden said the other day when asked about the fighting in Kursk, “I’ve spoken with my staff on a regular basis probably every four or five hours for the last six or eight days. And it’s — it’s creating a real dilemma for Putin.  And we’ve been in direct contact — constant contact with — with the Ukrainians.”  Do you think Kamala Harris was kept in the dark?

Now how do you think the Russians are going to respond?  How many red lines will they allow the U.S. to cross without massive retaliation?  And what kind of retaliation?

Switch then to the Middle East where the Iranians and their allies are preparing to retaliate to Israel’s attacks on their soil. No one knows when but it seems soon.  Something is coming and it won’t be pretty.  Will it then ignite a massive war in the region with the U.S. and Israel pitted against the region?  Will nuclear weapons be used?  Will the wars in Ukraine/Russia and the Middle East join into what will be called WW III?

While the U.S. continues to massively arm Israel, Russian is arming its ally Iran and likely training them in the use of those weapons as the U.S. is doing in Ukraine. The stage is set.  We enter the final act.

Natanyahu wants and needs war to survive.  So he thinks.  Psychotic killers always do.

The signs all point in one direction.  No one should be shocked if the worst comes to pass.

“Phone’ll jingle, door’ll knock, open the latch.”

If you have time.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is AI-generated

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

The philosophy of the dunce, and the politics of the demagogue, often keep company.  And Peter Dutton has both of these unenviable traits in spades.  The Australian opposition leader, smelling weakness in his opponent, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has again gravitated to something he is most comfortable worth: terrifying the kaka out of the Australian public.

The method of doing so is always unimaginatively dull and almost always inaccurate.  Select your marginal group in society.  Elevate it as a threat, filling it with a gaseous, nasty fantasy.  Condemn said group for various fictional and misattributed defects.  When all is done, demonise its members and tar any alleged supporters or collaborators as foolish at best, unpatriotic at worst.

The group of late to rankle Dutton and his front bench of security hysterics are Palestinians, notably those fleeing the odious war in Gaza and seeking sanctuary in Australia.  Since the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, only 2,922 visas have been granted to those possessing Palestinian Authority travel documents, with roughly 350 being visitor visas.  Much larger total of 7,111 visa applications have been refused by the federal government.  So far, a mere 1,300 of them have made it to Australia, placed on temporary visitor visas that do not enable the holders to receive government aid or engage in meaningful employment.  The Albanese government is ruminating on whether to create a new category of visa that would lift such impediments.

On such figures, Dutton has little to work with.  Undeterred, he has spent the best part of a week playing the role of the tactically paranoid. “If people are coming in from that war zone and we’re uncertain about their identity or allegiances,” he told Sky News on August 14, it was “not prudent” to let them in.

Education Minister Jason Clare, who represents an electorate in Western Sydney with a sizeable Muslim population, mockingly invited Dutton to pay a visit.  “There are people from Gaza here now, they live in my electorate, I’ve met them, great people.”  They had “had their homes blown up, their schools blown up, their hospitals blown up, who have had their kids blown up.”

The Shadow Home Secretary James Paterson has also drummed up the concern that the government has simply not convinced “us and the Australian people that the security and identity checks that they’re doing are sufficiently thorough and robust to protect the Australian people”.  While Australia had an “important role to play” in confronting “a very serious need,” safety and security of the Australian populace came first.

What constitutes a satisfactory measure for Paterson?  A blanket refusal to grant visas to any supporters of Hamas would be a start.  “We are several days now into this debate, and they still have not clearly said whether they will or whether they won’t accept someone who is a supporter of Hamas into our country.”  All applications from Palestinians fleeing Gaza had to be referred to the domestic intelligence service, ASIO and “robust in-person interviews and biometric tests” conducted.

In comments made to The Australian Financial Review, Paterson revealed the true intention of this dash into demagogy’s thicket.  “Governments make choices all the time about who they prioritise to bring to Australia.  If the Albanese government picks this cohort ahead of others it will be a revealing choice.”

These objections have an air of stifling unreality to them.  For one thing, they are scornful of the views of Mike Burgess, the current ASIO director general, who, on August 11, stated that “there are security checks” or “criteria by which people are referred to my service for review and when they are, we deal with that effectively.”

Burgess, showing uncharacteristic nuance, drew a distinction between the provision of financial or material aid to the organisation, something which might tickle the interest of a screening officer, and that of “rhetorical support”.  “If it’s just rhetorical support, and they don’t have an ideology or support for a violent extremism ideology, then that’s not a problem.”

The logic of preventing individuals coming to Australia purely because of a supporting link with Hamas shows a dunce’s principle at work.  It falsely imputes that the individual is a potential terrorist, eschewing any broader understanding.  Immature and unworldly, such a perspective ignores the blood-spattered political realities of the conflict.  The insinuation here is that the only acceptable Palestinian is an apolitical one mutely acknowledging the primacy of Israel power, humble in expressing any claims to self-determination.

The Coalition opposition to granting visas to Palestinians voicing support for Hamas is also implausible in another respect.  While claiming to be defenders of that most weaselly of terms, “social cohesion”, Dutton and his stormtroopers seek to demolish it.  Manufacturing insecurity, much like the mafia’s credo, becomes the pretext for battling it.

Boiled down to its essentials, the views of Dutton and his colleagues, wholly picked from the cabinet of Israel’s security narrative, is that any support for Palestinian autonomy and independence, manifested through any political or military arm, must be suspect.  You had to be, as Paterson put it, “a peaceful supporter of Palestinian self-determination” and an opponent of “using violent means”.  Be quiet, remain subservient, and wait for the oppressor’s good will.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: [email protected] 

Featured image is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

The exclusive report in today’s Economic Times carrying Sheikh Hasina’s first remarks after her ouster from power will come as a slap on the face of the nincompoops in our country who are waxing eloquently about developments in that country as a stand-alone democracy moment in regional politics.

Hasina told ET,

“I resigned, so that I did not have to see the procession of dead bodies. They wanted to come to power over the dead bodies of students, but I did not allow it, I resigned from premiership. I could have remained in power if I had surrendered the sovereignty of Saint Martin Island and allowed America to hold sway over the Bay of Bengal. I beseech to the people of my land, ‘Please do not allow to be manipulated by radicals.’” 

The ET report citing Awami League sources implied that the hatchet man of the colour revolution in Bangladesh is none other than Donald Lu, the incumbent Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian affairs who visited Dhaka in May. 

 

Screenshot from Times of India

 

This is credible enough. A background check on Lu’s string of postings gives away the story. This Chinese-American ‘diplomat’ served as political officer in Peshawar (1992 to 1994); special assistant to Ambassador Frank Wisner (whose family lineage as operatives of the Deep State is far too well-known to be explained) in Delhi (1996-1997); subsequently, as the Deputy Chief of Mission in Delhi from 1997-2000 (during which his portfolio included Kashmir and India-Pakistan relations), inheriting the job, curiously enough, from Robin Raphel, whose reputation as India’s bête noire is still living memory — CIA analyst, lobbyist, and ‘expert’ on Pakistan affairs. 

Indeed, Lu visited Bangladesh in mid-May and met with senior government officials and civil society leaders. And shortly after his visit, the US announced sanctions against then Bangladesh army chief General Aziz Ahmed for what Washington termed his involvement in “significant corruption.”  

Image: U.S. Department of State – Ambassador Donald Lu (From the Public Domain)

After his Dhaka visit, Lu told Voice of America openly,

“Promoting democracy and human rights in Bangladesh remains a priority for us. We will continue to support the important work of civil society and journalists and to advocate for democratic processes and institutions in Bangladesh, as we do in countries around the world…

“We [US] were outspoken in our condemnation of the violence that marred the election cycle [in January] and we have urged the government of Bangladesh to credibly investigate incidents of violence and hold perpetrators accountable. We will continue to engage on these issues…”

Lu played a similar proactive role during his past assignment in Kyrgyzstan (2003-2006) which culminated a colour revolution. Lu specialised in fuelling and masterminding colour revolutions, which led to regime changes in Albania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan (ouster of Imran Khan). 

Sheikh Hasina’s disclosure could not have come as surprise to the Indian intelligence. In the run-up to the elections in Bangladesh in January, Russian Foreign Ministry had openly alleged that the US diplomacy was changing tack and planning a series of events to destabilise the situation in Bangladesh in the post-election scenario. 

The Foreign Ministry spokesperson said in a statement in Moscow, 

“On December 12-13, in a number of areas of Bangladesh, opponents of the current government blocked road traffic, burned buses, and clashed with the police. We see a direct connection between these events and the inflammatory activity of Western diplomatic missions in Dhaka. In particular, US Ambassador P Haas, which we already discussed at the briefing on November 22.

“There are serious reasons to fear that in the coming weeks an even wider arsenal of pressure, including sanctions, may be used against the government of Bangladesh, which is undesirable to the West. Key industries may come under attack, as well as a number of officials who will be accused without evidence of obstructing the democratic will of citizens in the upcoming parliamentary elections on January 7, 2024.

“Unfortunately, there is little chance that Washington will come to its senses and refrain from yet another gross interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. We are confident, however, that despite all the machinations of external forces, the issue of power in Bangladesh will ultimately be decided by the friendly people of this country, and no one else.” 

Moscow and Beijing have nonetheless taken a scrupulously correct stance of non-interference. True to Russian pragmatism, Moscow’s Ambassador to Bangladesh Alexander Mantytsky noted that his country “will cooperate with any leader and government elected by the people of Bangladesh who is ready for equal and mutually respectful dialogue with Russia.”

That said, both Russia and China must be worried about the US intentions. Also, they cannot but be sceptical about the shape of things to come, given the abysmal record of the US’ client regimes catapulted to power through colour revolutions. 

Unlike Russia, which has economic interests in Bangladesh and is a stakeholder in the creation of a multipolar world order, the security interests of China and India are going to be directly affected if the new regime in Dhaka fails to deliver and the country descends into economic crisis and lawlessness as a failed state. 

It is a moot point, therefore, whether this regime change in Dhaka masterminded by Washington is ‘India-centric’ or not. The heart of the matter is that today, India is flanked on the west and the east by two unfriendly regimes that are under US influence. And this is happening at a juncture when signs are plentiful that the government’s independent foreign policies and stubborn adherence to strategic autonomy has upset the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy.

The paradox is, the colour revolution in Bangladesh was set in motion within a week of the ministerial level Quad meeting in Tokyo, which was, by the way, a hastily-arranged US initiative too. Possibly, the Indian establishment was lulled into a sense of complacency?  

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy reached out to External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar with a phone call on August 8 coinciding with the appointment of the interim government in Dhaka, which the UK has welcomed while also urging for “a peaceful pathway to an inclusive democratic future” for Bangladesh — much as the people of that country deserve “accountability.” [Emphasis added.]

India is keeping mum. The only way Bangladesh can figure a way out of the foxhole is through an inclusive democratic process going forward. But the appointment, ostensibly at the students’ recommendation, of a US-educated lawyer as the new chief justice of the Supreme Court in Dhaka is yet another ominous sign of Washington tightening its grip. 

Against this geopolitical backdrop, a commentary in the Chinese daily Global Times on Thursday titled China-India relations easing, navigating new realities gives some food for thought. 

It spoke of the imperative for India and China “to create a new kind of relationship that reflects their status as major powers… Both countries should welcome and support each other’s presence in their respective neighbouring regions.” Or else, the commentary underscored, “the surrounding diplomatic environment for both countries will be difficult to improve.” 

The regime change in Bangladesh bears testimony to this new reality. The bottom line is that while on the one hand, Indians bought into the US narrative that they are a ‘counterweight to China’, in reality, the US has begun exploiting India-China tensions to keep them apart with a view to advance its own geopolitical agenda of regional hegemony. 

Delhi should take a strategic overview of where its interests would lie in this paradigm shift, as the usual way of thinking about or doing something in our neighbourhood is brusquely replaced by a new and different experience that Washington has unilaterally imposed. What we may have failed to comprehend is that the seeds of the new paradigm were already present within the existing one. 

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

Featured image: Hasina addressing a party rally in Kotalipara, Gopalganj in February 2023 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

At the beginning of this year, on January 12, 2024 to be precise, about 20 eminent persons involved in humanitarian aid efforts for Central Sahel region of Africa issued an appeal for giving the proper attention to the serious humanitarian situation in the three countries of this region—Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger. These eminent persons included the UN Under-Secretary General of Humanitarian Affairs Mr. Martin Griffiths and the FAO Secretary General Dr. Qu Dongyu.

There was a special reason why the need for such a special appeal was felt, although of course the reason was not specifically mentioned in the document. All these three countries have experienced military coups and what is more, there has been recent pushbacks to western (particularly French and US) presence in the region, including military presence. Consequently western countries have been pulling back from development aid commitments. Hence it was feared that humanitarian aid commitments may fall much short of real needs at a time when these are desperately needed.

This appeal stated that aid operations in the region are facing “crippling funding shortfalls”. In 2023, this appeal stated, only one-third of the funding needs were met. During 2024 nearly one-fifth of the people in this region (or about 17 million people) needed humanitarian aid and protection, the appeal added.

In Mali there have been two recent military coups in 2020-21. Nearly half of the population is reported to be in extreme poverty. In 2022 the rank of the country in the Human Development Index was 186 out of a total of 191 countries. Nearly 7 million people need humanitarian assistance and protection. Nearly 400,000 are internally displaced. The humanitarian crisis is more serious in the areas bordering Niger and Burkina Faso. 

 

Streets of Bamako during the 2020 Malian coup d’état (From the Public Domain)

In Burkina Faso there were two coups in 2022. Now nearly 6.3 million people here are estimated to need humanitarian assistance. Nearly 2 million are internally displaced. 

In Niger there was a coup in 2023. Nearly 4.5 million people here need humanitarian assistance and protection. There are nearly 330,000 internally displaced people in the country. In 2022 Human Development Index ranking, the country was placed at 189 out of 191. Closure of borders has hampered the supply of humanitarian aid food and other materials.

Apart from conflict situations this region has been troubled increasingly by adverse weather situations that are likely to increase in times of climate change. In the recent past an extreme heat wave, described as a once in 200 years extreme heat condition—added to the woes of people.

Source: WFP

Apart from violence, conflicts, extremist and terror groups, the grab for valuable minerals and resources, narrow promotion of their interests by foreign powers including western countries, ecological degradation and adverse international economic and trade system have contributed to the humanitarian crisis. Earlier jobs in prosperous Libya and remittances from there had provided some support to the people here but after the removal and assassination of Qaddafi instigated by western countries this support also vanished, and instead the arrival of more destructive weapons from the fighting in Libya aggravated the violence here too.

Clearly there is a strong case for mobilizing adequate funds and materials for stepping up humanitarian assistance in the Central Sahel region to satisfactory levels.

At the same time, there should be longer-term development commitments too. As the appeal quoted in the beginning of this article says, “While humanitarian aid is urgently needed, it is not the solution to the cycles of hunger, displacement and disease that characterize the crisis in the Central Sahel region. Investments in resilience, sustainable development and social cohesion are crucial to help countries keep moving forward and to prevent further increases in human needs.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Man over Machine and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.        

Featured image: Since January 2019, 600,000 people have fled violence in Burkina Faso, such as this family in Pissila camp, near Kaya. Photo: WFP/Marwa Awad 

French Olympics Closing – Dystopian Apocalypse Now?

Peter Koenig, August 11, 2024

Vladimir Putin and Klaus Schwab “Go Way Back”. Does Putin Support the Covid Vaccine?

Riley Waggaman, August 12, 2024

Planned NATO-Kiev Assassination of Putin and Defense Minister Belousov: How NATO and Neo-Nazi Junta Lunatics Nearly Blew Up the World

Drago Bosnic, August 14, 2024

Bombshell: ‘You Were Right, Vaccines Are Killing Millions of Our Loved Ones’. Japan’s Former Minister of Internal Affairs Apologizes to the Unvaccinated

Sean Adl-Tabatabai, August 11, 2024

Club of Rome “Limits to Growth” Author Promotes Genocide of 86% of the World’s Population

Rhoda Wilson, August 11, 2024

It’s the End of the World As We Know It. The American-NATO Rush Toward Nuclear War with Russia. Scott Ritter

Scott Ritter, August 11, 2024

France – The Satanic Olympics. The Macron Government Belongs to a Diabolical Cult

Peter Koenig, August 10, 2024

Bill Gates Plans for New Catastrophic Contagion

Dr. Joseph Mercola, August 14, 2024

Carefully Planned NATO-Kiev Operation: Is Russia Really “Losing in Kursk”?

Drago Bosnic, August 15, 2024

Israel’s “Hit List” and Alleged “Information Terrorists”. Scott Ritter, Ali Abunimah, Al Mayadeen, …

Rima Najjar, August 13, 2024

America’s Perpetual War: Six Questions

Prof. Joseph H. Chung, August 14, 2024

Young People Dying of Cancer at ‘Explosive’ Rates, UK Government Data Show. Study

Mike Capuzzo, August 12, 2024

The Fire Front Advances. Targeted Assassinations and “Regime Change”. Manlio Dinucci

Manlio Dinucci, August 14, 2024

US-NATO Are Afraid China Will Play an Active Role in Ukraine

Drago Bosnic, August 12, 2024

Japan Issued Its First-ever Megaquake Alert. What Does That Mean?

Francis Tang, August 11, 2024

Has Hamas Won? Has Hezbollah Won? “The Campaign to Vanquish Iran”

Prof. Anthony J. Hall, August 11, 2024

WHO Official Admits Vaccine Passports May Have Been a Scam

Paul D Thacker, August 10, 2024

The War on Gaza: Perpetual Falsehoods and Betrayals in the Service of Endless Deception. Amir Nour

Amir Nour, August 12, 2024

Antivax Grab-Bag: 74 Memes, Blurbs and Links. Mike Whitney

Mike Whitney, August 14, 2024

Biden’s Fall from Grace and Ukraine’s Kursk Attack inside Russia, Which Has Caught Moscow Off Guard

Nauman Sadiq, August 9, 2024

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

(Originally published November 18, 2023)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

It’s been called the end of innocence. The first of the great assassinations of the nineteen sixties. The first emergence of a national tragedy in real time on the media airwaves. The end of Camelot.

The death of the 35th president of the United States in a motorcade travelling through Dallas marked the end of trust in the U.S. government, and the dawn of what came to be known as “Conspiracy Theories” revolving around seemingly impossible events. Did someone really kill our beloved president? How can that be?

But as listeners to this program, and patrons of Global Research know all too well, we cannot exclude criminal practices from within the ranks of governments and government servants acting nominally in our own interests.

To quote the simple statement from Walt Kelly’s cartoon:

“We have met the enemy and he is us.” [1]

 

The 60th anniversary of the death of Kennedy is approaching in a few days. There is a major conference taking place in Dallas put on by The JFK Historical Group in collaboration with JFK Conferences, LLC, and Project JFK. They are looking to re-examine the evidence and decades of research “with fresh eyes and New Technology.” [2]

Many individuals will no doubt similarly mark the profound moment of sadness, and a resolve to get at the truth of once and for all of what happened to the man, and to America in the interests of justice and clarity. Radio show hosts like John Young and Canadian Brent Holland are two examples of researchers active in radio putting the question “Who killed Kennedy?” on the airwaves.

And the Global Research News Hour is no exception!

We have certainly had remarkable individual researchers sharing the results of their research. But as “JFK DAY” approaches in this critical year, the show plans to investigate the death from the standpoint of the present. And from vantage points not yet explored in past episodes.

Our first guest, Jeremy Kuzmarov of Covert Action Magazine, who plans to bring out a special article on JFK in coming days, talks about the recent refusal of both Presidents Trump and Biden to fully release all documents relating to the JFK assassination since 2017 according to the 1992 President John F. Kennedy Records Collection Act. He also explores other more recent revelations about circumstances surrounding Kennedy’s death. And he dovetails into a discussion of so-called “red herrings” pursued by some researchers that led them away from more solid evidentiary ground.

In our second half hour, we speak with Phillip F. Nelson. He is also a JFK assassination writer who wrote the extra-ordinary 2010 book: LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination. Nelson spends the bulk of the interview detailing the man hidden in plain site as having the motive to ascend to power working in collaboration with “Deep State” forces to get the deed done, with virtually no one, including JFK director Oliver Stone suspecting his involvement! He also talks about the direction he thinks a new generation of researchers and activists should take to reveal the aspects of the case that should be in the foreground moving forward.

Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction .Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He also authored the December 2022 article: Biden Protects CIA By Withholding 5,000 Critical Documents on JFK Assassination.

Phillip F. Nelson is the author of LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination; Remember the Liberty! Almost Sunk by Treason on the High Seas; and Who Really Killed Martin Luther King Jr.?: The Case Against Lyndon B. Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover, among other books. After college, a stint in the Peace Corps, and a corporate career, he began an intensive study of the JFK assassination, Johnson’s presidency, and his continuing criminal conduct. Phillip resides Greenville, South Carolina and can be reached at [email protected].

(Global Research News Hour Episode 409)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

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.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

1. Walt Kelly (April 22, 1971), Pogo, ink and pencil on paper, Pogo Collection, Publisher’s Hall Syndicate inc.
2. https://projectjfk.com/events

O conflito ucraniano entrou numa nova fase. Na sequência das últimas provocações do regime neonazista contra as áreas civis russas, Moscou tomou uma decisão importante, eliminando qualquer possibilidade de negociação. O ataque terrorista ucraniano a Kursk violou uma grave linha vermelha, razão pela qual as autoridades russas acreditam que a única solução possível para a guerra é uma vitória militar absoluta.

No seu discurso de 12 de Agosto, o Presidente russo, Vladimir Putin, deixou claro que não serão possíveis negociações diplomáticas enquanto Kiev continuar a atacar alvos civis russos. As suas palavras surgiram no meio da controvérsia sobre a agressão violenta da Ucrânia contra o oblast russo de Kursk, onde vários civis foram sistematicamente assassinados por forças neonazistas. Ele enfatizou como Moscou demonstrou boa vontade diplomática, permanecendo aberta a negociações desde o início das hostilidades. No entanto, as ações do inimigo tornam impossível qualquer tipo de diálogo frutífero.

O presidente russo também sublinhou a gravidade dos ataques ucranianos às instalações nucleares russas. Recentemente, um bombardeamento por parte das forças de Kiev causou um incêndio na ZNPP, levantando preocupações globais sobre a segurança da central. Além disso, durante a incursão ucraniana em Kursk, os soldados de Kiev avançaram em direção à central nuclear de Kurchatov. Muitos analistas acreditam que a Ucrânia pretendia capturar a central de Kursk para ganhar “poder de barganha” com os russos e negociar o “retorno” do ZNPP.

Todas estas medidas simplesmente tornaram impossível qualquer diálogo diplomático. Antes da invasão de Kursk, a Federação Russa manteve a sua proposta de fim imediato das hostilidades no caso de reconhecimento dos Novos Territórios Russos pela Ucrânia, além de uma promessa formal de não procurar a adesão à OTAN. A Ucrânia, como era de se esperar, sempre ignorou a proposta de paz, escolhendo o caminho da guerra e da destruição. Agora, com a escalada iniciada por Kiev, os russos decidiram pôr fim a qualquer tentativa de diálogo e avançar para a única solução que resta para o conflito – a militar.

A declaração de Putin é verdadeiramente decisiva e marca o início de uma nova fase nas hostilidades. Agora os russos já não têm qualquer esperança de dissuadir o inimigo e forçá-lo a negociar a paz. Aparentemente, será procurada uma solução militar a qualquer custo, razão pela qual se espera uma escalada das ações russas. É provável que em breve sejam tomadas manobras militares mais decisivas, tornando a situação do regime de Kiev no campo de batalha ainda pior.

Existem muitas possibilidades para os russos agirem. É possível que uma nova mobilização parcial seja implementada, ampliando o número de tropas na zona de conflito – inclusive nas novas frentes abertas pelos ucranianos em Kursk e Belgorod. Na mesma linha, os bombardeamentos massivos podem tornar-se mais frequentes, neutralizando alvos de infra-estruturas críticas e centros de tomada de decisão. Espera-se agora que sejam tomadas todas as medidas que os russos estavam a evitar para evitar a escalada, uma vez que a esperança de uma resolução pacífica já foi eliminada.

Para a Rússia, esta situação continua bastante confortável. Moscou está a utilizar apenas uma pequena percentagem do seu aparato de defesa no campo de batalha, tendo forças de reserva suficientes e a plena capacidade de substituir pessoal e equipamento. A escalada das ações militares é uma tarefa possível, viável e até fácil para as forças russas. Por outro lado, a Ucrânia está absolutamente devastada, com centenas de milhares de soldados mortos e já não sendo capaz de repor as suas perdas. Por esta razão, uma nova escalada seria certamente letal para o regime neonazista, acelerando significativamente a sua derrota final.

Não é possível saber exatamente qual será o desfecho final do conflito no que diz respeito à configuração territorial da Ucrânia. Na Rússia, os sectores patrióticos têm apoiado cada vez mais a expansão dos Novos Territórios, incluindo a reintegração de áreas próximas das fronteiras, como Kharkov e Sumy. Há também uma forte pressão para a libertação total de Odessa, onde vivem milhares de civis russos e são vítimas das políticas abusivas do regime fascista. É possível que nesta nova fase do conflito os russos comecem a planear uma nova onda de novos referendos após a inevitável libertação militar dos territórios agora controlados pela Ucrânia.

No final, ao atacar civis russos, a Ucrânia está simplesmente a escolher sofrer ainda mais. Em vez de aceitar a derrota inevitável e tentar negociar termos razoavelmente favoráveis, o regime neonazista optou pelo aumento da violência e por uma derrota mais brutal, perdendo ainda mais territórios e vidas.

Agora, o ponto sem retorno da guerra parece ter sido finalmente ultrapassado e já não há qualquer esperança de um reatamento do diálogo diplomático. Os russos simplesmente já não podem confiar num inimigo que está disposto a massacrar civis. Para Moscou, derrubar a Junta Maidan pela força é a única alternativa.

Lucas Leiroz De Almeida

 

 

 

Artigo em inglês : No more negotiations after Ukrainian massacre of civilians in Kursk, InfoBrics, 13 de agouti de 2024.

Imagem InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

For a moment imagine a society where the rules of the nation are capable of guiding every aspect of daily life that assures order, harmony and progress. Central to this nation is a firm belief in the wisdom of its leadership and courts that are perceived as supporting every citizen’s best interests, even if the average person has no idea what those interests actually are.

In this society, education has been customized and tailored to reflect the government’s idyllic goals, and the curriculum is deeply rooted in these principles. The system may be criticized for advancing an agenda of indoctrination, however, this is absolutely essential for maintaining a social order where every child, adolescent and young adult can feel safe and find their rightful place in the culture. 

Public life, including individual behavior in the private sector and all public institutions are governed by a set of rules that are morally enforced if violated. These rules oversee everything from individual behavior and speech in public to business practices.

Even entertainment and social interactions are expected to abide by these standards and deviations from this norm are fiercely ridiculed or even banned or punished. Yet all of this is done for the sole benefit of community cohesion. By adhering to a unified code of conduct, society can progress towards a universal harmony and avoid the disruptions and conflicts that, in this system’s view, are caused by contrary beliefs and worldviews. It is the collective responsibility of the citizenry to maintain these values and these values should be held as sacred. It is not simply a matter of individual discipline alone but a collective effort to build a society that will be prosperous and peaceful under the judicial guidance of a wise government in service to the country.

On the surface, this doesn’t sound too bad, does it? Compared to the multitude of crises currently ravaging America today, its a pretty good vision. 

Now we can take this utterly bland and non-descript nation and by filling in some blanks accurately describe the goals and ideals of a woke nation that has been codified by the standards of critical race theory, the rules of diversity, inclusion and equity (DIE), and social justice policing. It would accurately describe the evolution of our Democratic Party’s fundamental social goals during the past decade and now being more fully realized in the presidential campaign embodied by the legacies of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. And for those who lack critical thought and find comfort in being scared participants in the collective beehive, isn’t this utopic woke society so very appealing?

However, there is a caveat. The template used to define this non-descript nation is not the Democrat’s America but rather “the Taliban” in Afghanistan. By simply removing references to Islam, the Hanafi interpretation of shariah, social conformity by coercion and capital punishment, the ideals of woke ideology are exposed as being no different. In short, a nation built and ruled on woke principles would simply be a secularized Taliban based upon a similar underlying psychology, albeit one traditionally religious and the other thoroughly secular and anti-religious. But we also mustn’t let the Republicans off the hook either. As Chris Hedges has so eloquently described, the Christian nationalist right behind Trump is every bit as fundamentalist, backwards and authoritarian as the most rabid mullahs in the Afghani madrassas in Kandahar. 

The past three and a half years of the Joe Biden administration have marked the continuation of profound shifts in the Democrat Party, steering it further towards a comprehensive, ideological embrace of “woke culture” and an increased reliance on social censorship. This shift has not only manifested within the political sphere but now permeates various sectors of power and influence, including the financial industry, Silicon Valley, the private military complex and social justice activist organizations. We are no longer capable of seeing clearly behind the veneer of a woke authoritarianism that shields the party’s control. For many Americans, it is obvious that President Biden was simply a figurehead; Kamala Harris, if elected, will be more so. The Democrat National Committee has been so thoroughly hijacked and compromised by the billionaire class that the presidency is no longer a vitally important institution.  We see it in every corner of our lives. In this environment, Vice President Kamala Harris has played a significant role as the embodiment of the party’s commitment to woke culture. She repeatedly says people need to become more woke and embrace the controversial gender spectrum and DIE policies despite her checkered resume showing any noteworthy accomplishments.

This ideological woke alignment, however, extends beyond the confines of the political arena. For instance, the financial industry has seen a surge in initiatives aimed at promoting DIE within corporate structures, often under the guise of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria. A prominent example is BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, which has made DIE a central tenet of its investment strategy. BlackRock’s CEO, Larry Fink, has openly advocated for corporate America to embrace these values, tying the company’s investment decisions to the adherence of ESG principles. This alignment between the Democrat Party’s ideological stance and the financial sector’s operations demonstrates the deep intertwining of political and economic power under the Biden administration.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ career trajectory from California’s Attorney General to a U.S. Senator, and ultimately to the Vice Presidency has been riddled with controversies. Despite her rapid rise to political prominence, Harris’ record is underwhelming and marred by inconsistencies.

As Attorney General of California, she faced backlash for her handling of several high-profile legal cases. She was criticized for her refusal to support statewide reforms to reduce prison overcrowding and for her stance on the death penalty, where she declined to support a federal judge’s ruling that declared California’s death penalty system unconstitutional. She was accused of neglecting to prosecute cases of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church, further tarnishing her record as the state’s top prosecutor.

Harris’ tenure as a U.S. Senator was similarly an example of mediocrity. She praised the disgraced co-founder of Black Lives Matter, Alicia Garza, as a “powerful voice against police injustice; Garza was indicted for misappropriating $6 million of the organization’s funds for her personal use. While she co-sponsored several bills, her name is not associated with any significant legislative victories. Her ineffectiveness has carried over into her role as Vice President, where her portfolio, which includes overseeing the immigration crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border, has been inept at best.

Despite her poor professional record, Kamala has been an unwavering advocate for woke social justice initiatives and the DIE agenda. As Vice President, she championed policies aimed at increasing representation and opportunities for marginalized communities. However, her commitment to this agenda is more symbolic than substantive. For example, she has been vocal in her support for the administration’s efforts to ensure that the federal workforce reflects the diversity of the American populace. This included initiatives aimed at increasing the number of women and people of color in senior government positions. However, critics argue that these efforts have focused more on optics than on addressing the systemic issues that contribute to inequality. The administration’s emphasis on diversity hiring practices, while important, has overshadowed the need for broader economic and social reforms that could more effectively address the root causes of inequality.

The Biden administration’s policies, particularly those related to censorship and surveillance, have raised significant concerns that these measures are antithetical to the principles of freedom and democracy that the administration claims to uphold. Under the banner of combating misinformation and protecting national security, the administration implemented policies that have led to increased surveillance and censorship, particularly in online spaces.

For instance, the administration has pressured social media companies such as Twitter and Facebook to monitor and censor content that is deemed to be misinformation or harmful to public discourse. This has had a chilling effect on free speech; many individuals and organizations found themselves demonetized, de-platformed or silenced for expressing dissenting opinions that criticized Democrats’ draconian domestic and foreign policies. Consequently, the line between protecting public safety and infringing on civil liberties became increasingly blurred with the long-term implications of threatening democracy.

At the same time, the administration has employed a Hollywood-like veneer of emotive and often empty rhetoric to justify its draconian measures and radical woke ideologies. Phrases like “freedom,” “democracy,” and “American values” are now invoked to defend policies that, in practice, curtail the very freedoms they claim to protect. This rhetorical strategy has become ubiquitous and has succeeded in masking the administration’s authoritarian disdain towards the nation’s electorate. It presents a polished image of governance that rewrites history and belies the reality of increased control and surveillance. 

If Kamala’s woke agenda is disturbing, her running mate Tim Walz, the current Governor of Minnesota, is outrageous. If there is any expectation that the Democratic party’s complete embrace of woke culture and faux promises of freedom have a chance to reside due to a public backlash, the selection of Tim Walz as the party’s Vice Presidential candidate should railroad those hopes. 

Walz is well-known in his state for his ardent embrace of a woke agenda, particularly those centered around DIE. Throughout his tenure as governor, he has championed a series of policies that align closely with woke culture, which has made Minnesota a focal point for some of the most radical social and political reforms in the nation. Similarly he is a vocal advocate for cancel culture and blatantly ignorant about the First Amendment.

In an interview, he stated there is “no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”

Of course, the First Amendment guarantees free speech to both misinformation and hate speech. Besides there is no universal agreement on what defines either of the two. 

Walz on free speech, in 2022, 

Minnesota has long been recognized as a welcoming state for refugees, which according to the America First Policy Institute boasts the highest rate of refugees per capita in the United States. This tradition of openness has been a point of pride for many Minnesotans, reflecting the state’s commitment to humanitarian values. However, under Walz’s leadership, this openness has been coupled with a series of policies that has pushed the state toward the extreme end of the woke spectrum. His commitment to woke ideologies is perhaps most evident in his efforts to turn Minnesota into a medical sanctuary for children seeking gender transition services. In a move that has sparked national debate, Walz supported legislation that allows the state to take custody of minors if their parents refuse to provide them with gender-affirming care. This policy, seen by many as a direct attack on parental rights, has been hailed by the most radical wing of the LGBTQ+ movement as necessary for protecting transgender youth. But for most it is a dangerous overreach of governmental authority.

To further his woke ideology, Walz also backed one of the nation’s most radical education reforms by mandating ethnic studies based on woke principles in grades K-12. This curriculum aims to center the experiences of marginalized communities in the education system by prioritizing ideological indoctrination over traditional educational goals. 

Tim Walz’s governorship in Minnesota during the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020 is widely regarded as one of the most catastrophic failures of leadership by any American governor in recent history. The protests, which were sparked by the tragic death of George Floyd at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer, quickly escalated into some of the most destructive riots the state had ever witnessed. According to Newsweek, “Minnesota became a war zone.” The failure of Walz to adequately respond to the chaotic riots not only led to massive destruction of property and businesses but also left the state and the city of Minneapolis grappling with an immense financial burden. Over 1,500 buildings were damaged, looted, or completely destroyed, including small businesses that were the lifeblood of local communities. The cost of the damage was staggering, with estimates exceeding $500 million, making it the second-most costly civil disturbance in U.S. history and surpassed only by the 1992 Los Angeles riots. The city of Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota were left with the enormous burden of rebuilding, both physically and economically, with many businesses and property owners unable to recover from the losses. The economic impact was devastating, with many businesses permanently shuttered and neighborhoods left in ruins.

Instead of taking decisive action to quell the violence and protect citizens and property, Walz was paralyzed by the political implications of using force to restore order. His administration was slow to deploy the National Guard by which time much of the damage had already been done. This delay can be seen as a clear indication that Walz prioritized the political optics of aligning with the BLM movement protestors over the immediate need to protect the lives and livelihoods of Minnesotans.

Furthermore, Walz appeared to side more with the rioters than with law enforcement. He failed dismally to give the police the necessary support to manage the chaos. His rhetoric often empathized more with the protestors’ anger rather than to condemn the random violence and destruction that was occurring. Walz’s bias further demoralized law enforcement and emboldened the rioters and contributed directly to the prolonged unrest.

Another example is Walz’s support for the controversial Minnesota Freedom Fund, a non-profit organization that has provided bail for individuals accused of violent crimes, including a child rapist. The fund, which received national attention after being promoted by Vice President Kamala Harris during the George Floyd protests, has been criticized for its role in releasing dangerous individuals back into the community without regard for public safety. This scandal is indicative of Walz’s broader disregard for the rule of law and constitutional protections in favor of promoting a radical social agenda.

In addition, Tim Walz’s handling of the Covid-19 pandemic represents a textbook case study of what not to do during a pandemic. His administration’s heavy-handed policies were a gross overreach of executive power. His unilateral decision to shut down schools, businesses, and houses of worship drew widespread criticism as these measures were implemented with little regard for the economic and social impacts on Minnesota’s communities. The shutdowns led to significant disruptions in education, with Minnesota’s school rankings plummeting from 7th to 19th nationally under Walz’s watch. This decline in educational standards was accompanied by a growing achievement gap between black and white students, with only 31% of black students in Minnesota achieving reading proficiency compared to 59% of white students. These statistics highlight the failures of Walz’s policies in addressing the deep-rooted educational inequalities in the state.

Even more alarming was Walz’s decision to set up a hotline encouraging citizens to report their neighbors to law enforcement if they were suspected of violating pandemic lockdown rules. This move was widely condemned as unconstitutional and antithetical to the principles of individual freedom that form the bedrock of American society. The idea of turning citizens against one another in the name of public health led to the erosion of trust between the government and the people it serves, which has increasingly plagued the both parties in the Covid-19 aftermath.

The Harris-Walz tandem may be defined by their zealous embrace of woke culture and a commitment to policies that many see as extreme and divisive.

People will not be voting only for a woman of color, but a radical undemocratic secular Taliban-like ideology promoted by a woman and her vice president. In its pursuit of an ordered, compliant and faux harmonious society, these efforts come at the expense of constitutional protections, individual freedoms, and preservation of the pillars of democracy. The push for CRT and DIE in schools and workplaces marginalizes differing viewpoints mirroring the Taliban’s enforcement of its own version of religious and social conformity. Just as the Taliban imposes its interpretation of Islamic law to maintain societal order, the woke agenda implements policies that demand adherence to its own beliefs about race, gender and personal identity. The consequences for those who resist or question wokeism can be severe, including social ostracism, loss of employment and other kinds of punishment similar to policing through coercion and fear. 

Finally, the fierce political standoff between Harris and Trump leading to the November election is an indication that the US has reached a critical point with the potential to inflame riots across the country. As the polarization deepens, scholars and social commentators from across the political spectrum—Democrat, Republican, and Independent—have raised alarms about the rising hatred between the two major parties and the possible consequences of such intense discord.

Some political scholars argue that the current level of animosity between Democrats and Republicans is unprecedented in modern American history. Lilliana Mason, a Johns Hopkins University political scientist and author of Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity, notes, “The hatred that people feel for the other party is not just about policy differences anymore. It’s become deeply personal, and that’s where the danger lies.” Mason warns that the current climate could lead to an escalation in violence, as people increasingly view political opponents not just as rivals but as existential threats.

Similarly, Barbara Walter, a professor of political science at the University of California at San Diego, and author of How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them, has expressed concerns about the possibility of civil unrest. She states, “We are closer to civil war than any of us would like to believe. The conditions that precipitated civil wars in other countries—such as entrenched polarization, a breakdown in democratic norms, and the rise of paramilitary groups—are all present in the United States today.”

Social commentators across the political spectrum, from Ben Shapiro on the far right to Van Jones on the far left, have echoed these concerns. Independent scholars, who often occupy a middle ground, are equally concerned. Yascha Mounk, a scholar at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, has warned that the combination of extreme polarization and the erosion of democratic norms could lead to a dangerous tipping point. He writes, “If the two major parties continue to see each other as enemies of democracy, rather than as competitors within a shared system, we could be heading toward a period of sustained political violence.”

This potential for violence is real and growing. The combination of intense polarization, the erosion of trust in institutions, and the increasing acceptance of violence as a political tool has created a volatile environment. The recent riots in the UK following the Tory defeat could very easily be witnessed here. As the 2024 election approaches, the stakes are high, and the potential for unrest is a serious concern for those who study the dynamics of political conflict.

The warnings upon us should serve as a sobering reminder of the fragility of democracy in the face of deep division. Without concerted efforts to bridge the gap between the two sides and restore faith in democratic processes, the U.S. could be heading toward a period of significant turmoil as political solutions seem increasingly out of reach.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image: Tim Walz and Kamala Harris together in March 2024, prior to the start of the Harris 2024 campaign. Walz would go on to become the campaign’s vice presidential candidate. (From the Public Domain)

Since the beginning of the Russian Special Military Operation in Ukraine, the African continent has become a major battleground in the renewed Cold War between Moscow and Washington.

In recent weeks in response to an attack by rebels in the north of Mali, the military government based in Bamako has revealed that Ukrainian military forces were involved in an ambush against its soldiers and Russian security advisors.

Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso have formed an Alliance of Sahel States (AES) which has formerly broken with the western-backed Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Political changes in the Sahel region over the last two years have resulted in the ordering of United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) troops and their counterparts in the French Foreign Legion to leave their respective states.

All of these states, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, were utilized by Washington and Paris as outposts for imperialist military operations in the region. These West African states embody geostrategic and economic resources which are of benefit to western nations.

For example, Niger contains one of the largest uranium deposits in the world. The uranium resources were controlled by corporations based in France, the former colonial power.

Since the independence movements which swept the African continent from the 1950s to the early 1990s, nationally oppressed people made significant gains in throwing off the yoke of institutionalized white domination. However, there was a more nuanced form of imperialism which became dominant. Dr Kwame Nkrumah, the founder of the Convention People’s Party of the Gold Coast (renamed Ghana in 1957 at its independence) after nearly a decade of independence struggles referred to neo-colonialism as the last stage of imperialism.

Developments in the Sahel region of West Africa since 2020 have clearly illustrated the modern-day machinations of neo-colonialism. The contradiction in these historical events is that nearly all of the leaders of the military coups which have displaced pro-western administrations, maintained close ties with AFRICOM and Operation Barkhane.

The idea behind AFRICOM and the French counterparts known as Operation Barkhane and the G5, was to train the post-colonial military forces in the ethos of imperialism. For years many of these regimes, whether bourgeois democratic or military, provided diplomatic and political cover for the continuation of the exploitation of African resources and labor.

Imperialism Wants Africa Under Its Total Control

Ukraine’s administration led by President Volodymyr Zelensky is a proxy political and military adjunct to U.S. imperialism and its NATO allies. The revelations emanating from Mali are further evidence of its surrogate role not only in Eastern Europe this clearly exposes the efforts to destabilize the African continent.

Mali has signed agreements with Russian military advisors often referred to as the African Corps, which is an attempt to transition the operations of the Wagner Group into a more consolidated structure under the centralized control of the government in Moscow. In addition to Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso have made decisions to accept the assistance of the Russian advisors. These monumental shifts in foreign and security policies in these Sahel states have made them targets of U.S. imperialism and its NATO counterparts.

Many have suggested that the rebel activity in West Africa under the guise of “Islamic extremism” emanates from U.S. intelligence. This pattern extends back to the late 1970s and 1980s in Afghanistan when the administration of President Jimmy Carter began covert operations aimed at ending the influence of the Soviet Union in Central Asia.

In recent years the Pentagon-NATO destruction of Libya in 2011 overthrew the most prosperous state on the continent while unleashing a wave of instability throughout West Africa. The emergence of the rebel groupings complimented U.S. foreign policy under the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama.

With attacks on civilian targets by the rebels, this provided a rationale for the increased military and intelligence presence within the African Union (AU) member-states. Thousands upon thousands of AFRICOM and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) personnel established long term and makeshift bases.

As the apparent correlation between rebel presence alongside imperialist military forces prompted a series of military coups by the very same elements who served as operatives in the neo-colonial process, the collaborators shifted to rethink the entire process of governance and foreign policy. These developments occurred as the tensions within Eastern Ukraine exploded full blown by the early weeks of 2022.

It was the response of the AU member-states within the United Nations General Assembly where many abstained from resolutions condemning the Russian Federation signaling the declining status of imperialism internationally. The AU deployed a peace delegation to Russia and Ukraine to emphasize the need for a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine war.

Africa suffered immensely due to the disruption of agricultural trade between both Ukraine and Russia. Today Ukraine is working to overthrow the government of Mali so that a pro-western regime can be reinstalled.

An article published by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on the significance of the July 27 terrorist attack in northern Mali utilizing a Tuareg rebel group, said that:

“The ambush at Tinzaouten on 27 July reportedly killed 84 Wagner fighters and 47 Malian soldiers. It was a painful military blow for the mercenary outfit once headed by the late Yevgeny Prigozhin, but now controlled by Russia’s official defense command structure. Just two days later Andriy Yusov, spokesman for Kyiv’s military intelligence service (GUR), said that ethnic Tuareg rebels in Mali had ‘received necessary information, and not just information, which enabled a successful military operation against Russian war criminals’. Subsequent reports suggested that Ukrainian special forces had trained the separatists in the use of attack drones.” 

Meanwhile ECOWAS, even with its current leadership being thoroughly subservient to the imperialist powers, is facing enormous economic and political crises. President Bola Tinubu of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is facing rising resistance to neo-colonialism as the trade union movement and progressive youth engage in general strikes and mass demonstrations.

A similar situation is emerging in Ghana as runaway inflation and the negative terms of trade and borrowing arrangements with international finance capital has forced the administration of President Nana Akufo-Addo to impose International Monetary Fund (IMF) conditionalities upon the people. Ghanaian courts have sided with the imperialists by enacting bans on mass demonstrations against the impact of neoliberal prescriptions on the workers, youth and farmers of the country.

Patterns of Destabilization

News reports on the Ukrainian involvement in terrorist attacks in Mali will further aggravate relations with the administration of President Joe Biden in Washington. The U.S. and France are committed to retaliating for the expulsion of their troops and some economic interests in the Alliance of Sahel States.

In the aftermath of the severing of diplomatic relations by Mali and Niger with Ukraine, there has also been a rupture with Sweden, a member of NATO. Africa News notes:

“Bamako’s decision to cut ties with Kyiv prompted Sweden’s minister for international development cooperation and trade, Johan Forssell, to say on Wednesday that the government had decided to phase out bilateral aid to Mali due to its ties to Moscow. ‘You cannot support Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and at the same time receive several hundred million kronor each year in development aid,’ Forssell said on social media platform X.” 

Additional developments witnessed the summoning of the Ukrainian ambassador by the new government in Senegal which came to power as a result of a popular uprising over the need for a new approach to domestic and foreign policy. After becoming aware of the propaganda praising the attacks on Malian troops and Russian advisors, the foreign ministry expressed its strong opposition to the imperialist-coordinated campaign to undermine sovereign African states.

The Dakar-based APA news agency emphasized:

“The Senegalese Ministry of African Integration and Foreign Affairs has reacted strongly to a controversial publication from the Ukrainian embassy in Dakar, in connection with the recent battle of Tinzaouatène, in northern Mali…. Senegal, which maintains a position of ‘constructive neutrality in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict’, strongly condemned the publication. The Senegalese authorities have declared that the country ‘cannot tolerate any attempt to transfer the media propaganda underway in this conflict to its territory.’ The Senegalese government stressed that ‘our country, which rejects terrorism in all its forms, cannot accept on its territory and in any way, comments and gestures in the direction of apologizing for terrorism, especially when the latter aims to destabilize a country, a brotherly one like Mali.’” 

These diplomatic expulsions and other forms of protests will undoubtedly further the hostility between various African states and the imperialist centers in Europe and North America. These strains in relations should be viewed positively in the sense that they provide AU member-states with the potential for a major shift in foreign policy away from the former colonial and now-existing neo-colonial powers based in Western Europe and North America.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

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

Since last week, there’s been a lot of panic among many supporters of Russia due to the situation in the Kursk oblast (region). I’ve gotten numerous questions from people who were watching the news and getting reports about Russia being “in jeopardy”, particularly from my readers who are severely exposed to the mainstream propaganda machine. Such concerns are perfectly understandable, especially if one is getting one-sided info, which is the goal of the so-called “Big Tech” and other mass media in the political West. There has also been a copious amount of malevolent glee among high-ranking politicians in the United States, European Union and other pathologically Russophobic countries. All of them are quite happy to see that Russia is supposedly “losing”. Which begs the obvious question – is it really “losing”?

First of all, it’s very important to “zoom out” and see the real situation on the entire frontline. Only then should one make definite conclusions. Is there anything groundbreaking happening?

Will the Kiev regime take over the Kursk nuclear power plant and then blackmail Moscow to sign an unfavorable “peace deal”?

Will the Kremlin be forced to exchange territories and call it a day?

This is how far a few people were going with some of the doom and gloom questions I’ve got. Many in Russia also have similar concerns, to the point that President Vladimir Putin had to spell it out that nobody’s signing anything or exchanging territory. He also reiterated that all the goals of the special military operation (SMO) will be accomplished. However, it seems not even this was enough for some people who are simply too worried.

First of all, it should be noted that the operation that the Neo-Nazi junta and its NATO overlords planned in the Kursk oblast was very well executed and involved the coordination of a lot of moving parts. It also suggests that the Kiev regime learned some valuable lessons after its much-touted counteroffensive last year. Namely, it finally realized that it’s completely senseless to pompously announce any major action weeks or months in advance and give your enemy enough warning time to prepare adequate defenses. In that regard, the preparation for the Kursk oblast incursion was nearly flawless from the perspective of media coverage, as there was none. Not even OSINT (open source intelligence) outlets could predict this operation. It would be simply foolish and self-defeating not to admit this.

In addition, NATO and the Neo-Nazi junta knew the exact concentration of Russian forces, mostly deployed from the Belgorod oblast all the way to the Donbass itself. Launching a surprise attack on any of these areas would’ve been patently suicidal. It would accomplish quite literally nothing on an operational (much less on a strategic) level. However, the Kursk oblast had very few regular units that could’ve offered enough resistance. The area was mostly guarded by the Rosgvardiya, specifically the “Akhmat” special forces mostly composed of personnel from Chechnya. Many soon blamed this unit for the advance of the Kiev regime forces, but it should be noted that stopping regular army troops is not what “Akhmat” specializes in. Namely, they’re tasked with preventing low-level incursions across the border.

This includes the prompt elimination of saboteurs, infiltrators and special forces. And that’s exactly what the unit has been doing so far, quite successfully, it should be noted, mostly in cooperation with FSB border guards. However, because the “Akhmat” are mostly Chechens, the Kiev regime tried using this as a potent propaganda weapon to cause and/or intensify internal divisions within Russia. It brought mixed results, as some were disappointed with the “Akhmat’s” performance, but this was quite short-lived, as it soon became apparent that the unit was faced with overwhelming enemy forces it was never equipped to handle. But “PR victories” are the only thing that the Neo-Nazi junta really cares about. Which brings us to the next silly myth – “only 1000 Ukrainian soldiers took 1000 km² of Russian territory”.

Namely, it was impossible to carry out such an attack with less than 10,000-20,000 troops who are either under the influence of narcotics or are simply suicidal enough to sacrifice themselves for yet another “PR victory”. In addition, these forces were directly supported by NATO ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets, providing excellent coordination and planning. There certainly might have been some errors on the Russian side, both in terms of local intelligence and tactical ISR, but realistically speaking, there were no regular units equipped to stop this incursion. In addition, there was a tacit agreement not to touch the area because of the Yelets-Kursk-Dykanka natural gas pipeline. However, as per usual, the infamous Neo-Nazi junta has proven once again that it’s not to be trusted one bit.

This incursion now jeopardizes gas supplies to countries such as Hungary and Slovakia, which will only worsen their already tense (to put it mildly) relations with the Kiev regime.

However, it also explains why the US and NATO would support such an attack. Namely, it’s in their direct interest to cut off any remaining Russian natural gas deliveries to Europe, as this would force several more countries to buy the exorbitantly expensive American LNG. In addition, apart from jeopardizing energy infrastructure, the Neo-Nazi junta forces also attacked civilians, committing gruesome war crimes in the process. However, as soon as the Kremlin responded with regular units, these troops were in for a nasty surprise. And indeed, all hell broke loose as soon as the Russian military engaged the enemy forces.

Both Soviet-era and NATO-sourced armor was obliterated from afar, while even foreign volunteers fighting for Moscow took part in suppressing the Kiev regime forces. All this suggests that the Kursk incursion was a desperate attempt to divert attention from the Donbass, where the second line of the Neo-Nazi junta’s defense is now being overrun by the Russian military, as predicted by experts. The Kremlin never stopped advancing in this area, while its long-range strike systems keep obliterating NATO-supplied air defenses and whatever’s left of the Kiev regime’s air force. Thus, this adventure in the Kursk oblast accomplished very little, especially when considering the losses of precious reserve troops that the Neo-Nazi junta will have major trouble replacing. And yet, Ukrainians keep dying for “PR victories”.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: © Sputnik . Kursk Region Acting Governor Press Office

On Wednesday, August 7, 2024, the FBI executed a search warrant at my residence. The FBI claimed they were investigating whether I was functioning as an unregistered agent of a foreign government. But what was really taking place was a frontal assault on peace.

Shortly before 2 pm on August 5, 2024, attorneys from the Northern District of New York, accompanied by agents from the National Security Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), gathered in the chambers of Christian F. Hummel, a United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of New York. Hummel was appointed to this position in September 2012. Prior to his appointment, Hummel, a graduate of Albany Law School, had a career in civil litigation as a trial lawyer, before being elected as the Town Justice for the town of East Greenbush. Hummel moved on to be a Rensselaer County Family Court Judge and, later, the Rensselaer County Surrogate, the position he held at the time of his appointment as a US Magistrate Judge.

The US attorneys presented Hummel with a series of affidavits from the FBI and possibly other US government agencies which they maintained established probable cause for the federal law enforcement to conduct a search of my residence for “any computers, computer equipment, cellular telephones, and/or any other electronic media or storage devices.”

According to the affidavits (which were not included as part of the search warrant presented to me by the FBI agents), these electronic devices contained information they believed would advance their case that I was operating as an unregistered agent of a foreign government in violation of the Foreign Agent and Registration Act.

Based upon the questions asked of me by the FBI during the conduct of this search, the foreign government in question was the Russian Federation.

The search warrant required that the search be conducted in the daytime between 6 am and 10 pm, which meant that the US Attorneys and the FBI either did not seek to establish cause for a nighttime raid or were unable to convince Judge Hummel that such cause existed. Likewise, the US Attorneys and the FBI did not make a case to delay notification of their execution of the search warrant.

In short, this search warrant was as non-confrontational a process as one can have when 20-plus armed US government agents invade your home and rifle through your life’s possessions, and those of your family.

The FBI agents involved in both the search and the questioning were professional and courteous throughout the five-plus hour event.

A couple of takeaways from a cursory analysis of this search warrant.

First, the FBI was most likely not looking for anything related to the active commission of a crime—I was not handcuffed, and the interview process was completely voluntary on my part—they did not read me my rights, nor was I asked to waive my rights. This suggests that neither the US Attorneys nor the FBI were operating based on any federal indictment—if such an indictment existed and had been used as the foundation of this search, the tenor of the proceedings would have been far different. Indeed, at no time did the FBI suggest that I had committed a crime—they simply said there was concern within the US government that I was engaged in activities that fell under the FARA statute.

Second, it appeared to me that the FBI was on a fishing expedition. The two special agents who questioned me each held thick folders filled with documents that they would refer to during the interview. On one occasion, after they completed a particular line of questioning, the two agents stared at each other, as if they were struggling with how to proceed. “You guys clearly have something on your mind,” I said. “Just say what it is. I’m being completely cooperative here. Ask your question, and I’ll answer it to the best of my ability.”

At that point, one of the agents reached into her folder and pulled out copies of an email exchange I had back in February 2023 with Igor Shaktar-ool, a senior counselor with the Russian Embassy.

The author with Russian diplomats inside the Russian Embassy, February 21, 2023. Igor Shakra-ool is on the far right.

The production of this email demonstrated that the FBI had most likely obtained a FISA warrant which enabled them, directly or indirectly, to monitor my communications. This did not necessarily mean that they had received permission to monitor me directly—as a US citizen, I have constitutionally-derived rights of privacy which preclude such monitoring void of very specific justification and authorization, none of which could possibly have been met given the facts of the case. (Moreover, if there had been a FISA warrant issued, and this product was the result, then I doubt the FBI agent would have shared it with me in such a non-confrontational manner.)

The FBI is, however, allowed to monitor the emails of foreign diplomats, of whom Igor Shaktar-ool is one. As an American citizen caught up in any intercepted communication, my identity would normally be “masked,” meaning that anyone who encountered the intercepted email would only know me as a faceless, nameless “US citizen.”

At some point in time, however, my actions regarding Russia must have reached a level of concern where my identity was “unmasked” so that the data contained in the emails could be more thoroughly evaluated.

And this “unmasking” undoubtedly led to the FBI seeking a court order to gain access to the emails in question outside the FISA procedures, freeing up the information contained within to be used by a wider audience.

This appears to be the case.

Back on June 3, I had received an email from Google informing me that they had “received and responded to a legal process issued by the FBI compelling the release of information related to Google accounts that are linked to or associated with a specific identifier.” Google’s response, the email noted, “included information about your account.” Google had been prohibited from disclosing this information to me by a “court order.” This order had either expired or had been rescinded, and Google was now permitted to disclose their receipt of the FBI request.

I’m not a big believer in coincidences. June 3 was also the date the Customs and Border Protection agents seized my passport as I was preparing to board a flight at JFK airport that was to take me to Russia, where I was scheduled to participate in the Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum before embarking on a 40-plus day tour of Russia. As was the case with the search warrant, if I was under suspicion of having committed a crime, I would have been arrested and detained once they seized my passport.

The fact that the Customs and Border Protection agents allowed me to leave unhindered pointed to the existence of an ongoing federal law enforcement investigation which feared the unmonitored connectivity I would have with Russians, including Russian government officials, while travelling in Russia.

Igor Shaktar-ool and most of the Russian Embassy staff use Gmail as their email provider.

To legally seize my passport in the manner they did, the US government would be revealing that they had an ongoing federal investigation against me. This would require the unsealing of the court order related to that investigation. Which would free up Google to send me the email about the FBI investigation.

Life is stranger than fiction.

Now to the email chain in question.

I had visited the Russian Embassy, at my request, on February 20, to inform the Russian government of my intent to travel to Russia later in the spring as part of a book tour to promote the publication of my recently released memoir—Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika: Arms control and the end of the Soviet Union—of my time as an inspector implementing the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in the Soviet Union back in 1988-1990. The US had withdrawn from the INF treaty back in August 2019, an action that I believed accelerated the risk of nuclear war. At the time, I was promoting the idea of a major anti-nuclear war rally here in the United States, and I was thinking about trying to organize similar rallies in Russia.

As I explained to the Russians, my background as a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who had worked in the Soviet Union in that capacity would undoubtedly raise alarms in the Kremlin. My purpose in visiting the Russian Embassy—which was done on my request and my initiative—was to answer any questions the Russians might have about my upcoming trip so that there were no misperceptions or concerns about motive. The last thing I wanted, I told the Russian diplomats I met with, was to be viewed as a threat by the Russian government.

My mission in travelling to Russia was to promote better relations by reminding a Russian audience that once upon a time our two nations actively worked together in the furtherance of the cause of peace by eliminating the very weapons—nuclear-armed missiles—that threatened our mutual existence. The story of my experience as a weapons inspector in the Soviet Union, in my opinion, served as an example of not only what was, but what could—and, in my opinion, should—be again. I wanted to go to Russia, engage in a conversation with the Russian people about furthering nuclear arms control and bettering relations, and then return to the United States and educate the American people about the Russian reality as I saw it.

Jimmy Dore addresses the crowd at the “Rage against the War Machine” rally, February 19, 2023

I had been scheduled to speak as part of the “Rage Against the War Machine” rally scheduled to take place in Washington, DC on February 19. My conviction as a sex offender (unjust, based upon a manufactured case, and which I will continue to challenge on appeal), combined with what my critics contend is my “pro-Russian” attitude toward the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, created such a controversy that I withdrew from the event.

I published my prepared remarks on February 10 on my Substack. Extracts from this undelivered speech best explain my mindset at the time of my meeting at the Russian Embassy on February 20:

Everyone standing here today should reflect on this statement and say a quiet word of thanks to those men and women, American and Soviet alike, who made the intermediate nuclear forces treaty a reality and, in doing so, literally saved the world from nuclear destruction.

Arms control, however, is no longer part of the US-Russian dialogue. The American war machine has conspired to denigrate the notion of mutually beneficial disarmament in the minds of the American public, instead seeking to use arms control as a mechanism to achieve unilateral strategic advantage.

When an arms control treaty becomes inconvenient to the objective of American global domination, then the war machine simply quits. America’s record in this regard is damnable—the anti-ballistic missile treaty, the intermediate nuclear forces treaty, the open-skies treaty—all relegated to the trash bin of history in the cause of seeking unilateral advantage for the American war machine.

In a world without arms control, we will once again be confronted with a renewed arms race where each side develops weapons that protect nothing while threatening everything. Without arms control, we will return to a time where living on the edge of the abyss of imminent nuclear annihilation was the norm, not the exception…

In the case of US-Russian relations, this fear is produced by systemic Russophobia imposed on the American public by a war machine and its compliant minions in the mainstream media. Left to its own device, the collusion between government and media will only further reinforce ignorance-based fear through a process of dehumanizing Russia and the Russian people in the eyes of the American public, until we have become desensitized to the lies and distortions, accepting at face value anything negative said about Russia…

Some 60 years ago, on these very steps, in this very place, a man of peace gave a speech that captured the imagination of the nation and the world, searing into our collective hearts and minds the words, “I have a dream.”

Dr. Martin Luther King’s historic address confronted America’s sordid history of slavery, and the inhumanity and injustice of racial segregation. In it, he dreamed “that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

All men are created equal.

These words resonated in the context of America’s desperate internal struggle with the legacy of slavery and racial injustice.

But these words apply equally, especially when taken in the context that we are all God’s children, black, white, rich, poor.

American.

Russian.

You see, I too have a dream.

That the audience gathered here today can find a way to overcome the ignorance-based fears generated by the disease of Russophobia, to open our minds and our hearts to accept the Russian people as fellow human beings deserving of the same compassion and consideration as our fellow Americans—as all humankind.

I too have a dream.

That we the people of the United States of America, can unite in common cause with the Russian people to build bridges of peace that facilitate an exchange of ideas, open minds closed by the hate-filled rhetoric of Russophobia that is promulgated by the war machine and its allies, and allow the love we have for ourselves to manifest itself into love and respect for our fellow man.

Especially those who live in Russia.

Newton’s Third Law, that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, applies to the human condition every bit as much as it applies to the physical world.

Love thy neighbor as thyself is applicable to all humanity.

I too have a dream.

That by overcoming the hate generated by systemic Russophobia we can work with our fellow human beings in Russia to create communities of compassion that, when united, make a world filled with nuclear weapons undesirable, and policies built on the principles of mutually beneficial arms control second nature.

I too have a dream.

That one day, whether on the red hills of Georgia, or the black soil of the Kuban, the sons and daughters of the men and women who today operate the Russian and American nuclear arsenals will be able to quote Dr. King, “to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.”

This is not an impossible dream.

I have lived it. I once was corrupted by the hatred that comes from fear generated by the ignorance about the reality of those whom I was trained to kill.

But I then embarked on a remarkable journey of discovery, facilitated by the implementation of the very same intermediate nuclear forces treaty that ended up saving humanity from nuclear annihilation, where I came to know the Russian people not as enemy, but as friend. Not as opponent, but colleague. As fellow humans capable of the same emotions as myself, imbued with the same human desire to build a better world for themselves and their loved ones, a world free of the tyranny of nuclear weapons.

I too have a dream.

That the people gathered here today will join me on a new journey of discovery, one that tears down the walls of ignorance and fear constructed by the war machine, walls designed to separate us from our fellow human beings in Russia, and instead builds bridges that connect us to those we have been conditioned to hate, but now—for the sake of ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren—must learn to love.

This will not be an easy journey, but it is one worth taking.

This is my journey, your journey, our journey, where we will embark, literally, down the road less travelled.

And yes, it will the one that will make all the difference.

The Russian Embassy officials were familiar with this article (apparently, they subscribe to my Substack—it’s a free subscription! The FBI should do so as well, if they already have not.) In addition to discussing my plans regarding bringing the message of peace and hope contained in my book Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika to Russia, our conversation turned to the issue of Russophobia in the United States. I viewed Russophobia as the greatest impediment to the cause of bringing about good relations between Russia and the United States—so long as the American people were taught to be afraid of Russia, they would never be able to responsibly engage on the issue of improving relations with Russia.

It was at this juncture that Igor Shaktar-ool mentioned that the Russian Ambassador, Anatoly Antonov, had recently written an article on the problem of Russophobia. I was shown a draft of the article. Igor noted that in the past the Ambassador would have sought to publish the article as an Op Ed in either the New York Times or Washington Post, both of which had in the past published essays written by Russian diplomats. Igor noted that in the present climate, neither publication was sympathetic to the views of a Russian diplomat.

I asked if Igor could provide me with a copy of the article so I could read it over. Igor promised to email me a copy.

The next day Igor sent me an email.

It was [a] pleasure to meet you in the Embassy yesterday. I am grateful to you for the very interesting discussion on Russia-US relations in the context of Ukraine crisis.

As we agreed I am sending to you our article on Russophobia.

We would appreciate [it] if you could assist us in publishing it in the US media, for instance, in the Nation or Consortium News. It was pleasure to meet you in the Embassy yesterday. I am grateful to you for the very interesting discussion on Russia-US relations in the context of Ukraine crisis.

I reached out to both The Nation and Consortium News about Ambassador Antonov’s essay. I never heard back from The Nation, and Joe Lauria, the editor at Consortium News, was gun-shy about running something sourced straight from the Russian Embassy. Given the reality of the current climate, I couldn’t blame him.

The author with Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov at the Russian Ambassador’s residence, December 2022

I sent an email to Igor on February 23, informing him as much. I also told him that I had taken the initiative to write my own article, using Antonov’s essay as the core point of departure.

Instead of trying to place the essay in an American publication, I proposed that I publish my article on my own Substack. “I would then publish it on Twitter (100,000-plus followers), Telegram (80,000-plus followers) and Facebook (I have no idea how many followers). There is a good chance it would be picked up by other outlets,” I noted, adding (optimistically) “It could easily get a million views.”

I used every word in your essay as written. I did move a paragraph to the front to help me set the stage properly.

Let me know what you think. I could publish this as soon as I got your approval.

Or if you have concerns, we can talk it through.

And, at the end of the day, [if] you would prefer to have your essay published as is, we can keep trying.

The FBI agent who showed me the email exchange between Igor and myself underscored the sentence in bold, above.

“You asked for his approval,” she said. “It suggests that you were taking instructions from the Russian Embassy.”

I laughed. “It shows no such thing,” I replied. I pointed out that I had shifted paragraphs around, breaking up the flow of Ambassador Antonov’s essay as it had originally been written. It was only proper that I make sure the source was okay with this.  “I’m a journalist,” I said. “I’m using material written by someone else. I have a duty to make sure that I use this material in a manner which meets with the approval of the source. It’s standard practice.”

Igor replied to me the next day. He thanked me for my interest in Antonov’s Russophobia article, and for my “creative approach with substantial comments on the problem we raise.”

Igor asked that I give the Embassy some time to discuss my draft. “I will let you know about our decision,” he wrote.

Igor was as good as his word, writing to me on February 25. He told me that the Embassy had decided to publish Antonov’s article on the Embassy Facebook page. “This doesn’t negate our great interest in your article,” he wrote, “which we find very strong, thoughtful, detailed and well-written.”

Igor proposed that I publish my article as a separate piece. He did request that I change the opening passage of the article “for objective reasons.”

“And you made those changes,” the FBI agent said. “It shows that you are being directed by the Russians, and that you are complying with their directions.”

The opening passage of the draft article that I had sent to Igor reads as follows:

Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with a Russian diplomat assigned to the Russian Embassy in the United States. He shared with me an essay prepared by the Embassy which was intended for publication in an American media outlet. In years past, this was common practice—as part of a time-honored practice derived from the principles of free speech which encourage debate, dialogue, and discussion of topical issues, foreign diplomats would have essays published, often as Op-Ed articles, in the pages of prestigious American newspapers.

But the Russian Embassy, when it came to the essay in question, had been met with a wall of silence. There was no interest, it seemed, in providing a platform for any Russian opinion.

It is not as if the essay that had been prepared by the Russian Embassy addressed a controversial issue, such as the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Rather, it addressed the elephant in the room when it came to explaining the very psychology which motivated the decision to ban the Russian essay from the pages of American newspapers designed to promote, and provoke, thought—Russophobia.

It was my understanding that the Russians objected to identifying them as the source of the essay. So, I rewrote the passage.

Recently, I ran across an essay that had been published by the Ambassador of Russia to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, in the Russian newspaper, Rossiyaskaya Gazeta, and subsequently posted on the Russian Embassy Facebook page. The title of the essay, “Russophobia as a malignant tumor in the United States”, is, admittedly, provocative—as all good, thought-provoking titles should be. After reading it, it became apparent to me that, in the interest of combating Russophobia, I should help bring the Ambassador’s essay to the attention of as many people as possible.  

Once again, the FBI agent expressed her concern. “You clearly took instruction from the Russian Embassy and complied.”

And once again, I objected. “I’m a journalist. I was respecting my source’s wishes regarding how to describe the source of the material. Nothing I wrote was inaccurate. All journalists do this.”

As I responded, I couldn’t help but recall the case of Evan Gershkovich, the Wall Street Journal journalist who had been arrested and charged with espionage by the Russian government for receiving classified information from an employee of a sensitive military industrial facility near the city of Ekaterinburg.

In recordings released by RT of Gershkovich’s rendezvous with his source, the source is heard telling Gershkovich to be “very careful,” adding that the information he was providing is “secret.”

Gershkovich replied that in his article he would not mention seeing the documents in question, and that he would cite “anonymous sources” in what he wrote. In this way, Gershkovich would shield from discovery the fact that secret information had been collected, and that there was a source leaking this classified information.

According to Gershkovich’s editor at the Wall Street Journal, Gershkovich’s deception regarding the source of the information he was collecting was consistent with the actions taken by a journalist to protect the identity of his source.

Gershkovich was clearly practicing deception, and yet his technique is considered standard journalistic practice.

 

Evan Gershkovich, the Wall Street Journal journalist arrested by Russia for espionage

In many ways, my rewritten passage was more accurate in describing the source of information used in my article than the original draft.

The FBI agent clearly was not happy with my answer. “You were acting as a foreign agent,” she said.

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.), defines the term “agent of a foreign principal” as “any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control, of a foreign principal or of a person any of whose activities are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidized in whole or in major part by a foreign principal” who “engages within the United States in political activities for or in the interests of such foreign principal” or “acts within the United States as a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information-service employee or political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal.”

The FARA statute also notes that “the term ‘agent of a foreign principal’ does not include any news or press service.”

I once again reminded the FBI agent that I was acting as a journalist when I both met and exchanged emails with Igor Shaktar-ool, that it was I who had requested the meeting with the Russians, not them, and that it was me who raised the topic of Russophobia. I was the one who decided to write the article in question. That I had a source of information with whom I worked to make sure that the information provided was used in a manner agreeable to the source is basic journalism—nothing more, nothing less. Any “requests” made by the Russians in this regard were simply in the context of the interaction between a journalist and his source.

In short, my actions did not fit the definition of an “agent of a foreign principle,” but rather that of a working journalist.

FARA defines “political activities” to mean “any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party.”

There is no doubt that much of my work falls under the category of “political activity.”

As I wrote in my Substack article of February 10, my goal was to defeat the disease of Russophobia so that the American people would be empowered by fact-based knowledge and information to make decisions that could lead to the betterment of relations between Russia and the United States.

I am therefore guilty of trying to influence the American public when it comes to US attitudes toward Russia and, in doing so, seek to generate public pressure of US policy makers to formulate more responsible policies that don’t lend themselves to a nuclear arms race with Russia.

This is the moral duty and responsibility of every American citizen—to hold his or her elected representatives accountable for what is done in their name.

It is the bedrock principle of representational democracy.

And now the FBI is seeking to criminalize it.

I am a practitioner of what is known as “advocacy journalism,” a genre of journalism which openly pursues a social or political purpose. I am an advocate for the betterment of relations between the US and Russia, not because I seek to further Russian interests on behalf of Russia, but because I firmly believe, as an American, it is in the best interests of my country to facilitate the peaceful coexistence between the US and Russia predicated on a mutual desire to avoid nuclear war and, as such, embrace arms control. In pursuing this advocacy, I have been assiduous in ensuring that what I report on is derived from fact-based truth, something that separates me from the bias that has corrupted the more conventional “balanced” reporting of mainstream media.

There is no doubt that there are those in the United States, including many in the US government (and, very likely, many in the Department of Justic and the FBI) who take extreme umbrage over what I say and write when it comes to Russia.

Compare and contrast my approach to journalism with admissions by the US intelligence community that it deliberately declassifies and releases for public consumption intelligence information it knew to be unverified or even wrong about Russia for the sole purpose of shaping public opinion amongst the American people so that they would unquestioningly support US policy objectives vis-à-vis Russia that not only have put the United States on the cusp of a direct conflict with Russia in Ukraine, but run the real risk of inciting a larger conflict that could, and probably would, lead to a nuclear conflagration that would not just hazard American lives, but humanity as a whole.

In his concurring opinion to the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in New York Times Co. v. United States, Justice Hugo Black wrote: “The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of the government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.”

That is my mission as a journalist—to prevent my government from deceiving my fellow citizens and, in doing so, preventing the men and women who honor us with their service in the US military from being sent off to fight and die in a distant land in furtherance of a cause that was built on the foundation of lies, half-truths, and misinformation, most if not all of which is being disseminated to the American people on behalf of the US government by a compliant and controlled mainstream media.

I don’t work for the US government.

I don’t advocate on its behalf.

I work for myself.

And I advocate on behalf of the American people.

Because I am an American.

A citizen true to the demands of citizenship, which mandates that I oppose the governors when they are acting in a manner which I believe is to the detriment of the governed.

And now the FBI and the Department of Justice want to criminalize my work.

If the Department of Justice wants to have a legal wrestling match over the definition of journalism and a working journalist in the United States, and the rights accrued to me as an American citizen under the First Amendment of the US Constitution (“Congress shall make no law…prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”), that is a fight I am ready to engage in.

FARA is literally a law made by the US Congress.

And, according to the FBI, it can now be used to define what is and isn’t journalism in the United States.

The FBI’s reasoning, and that of the Department of Justice, in this matter represents nothing less than a frontal assault on both free speech and a free press, one which, should the FBI decide to proceed, cannot and will not go unchallenged.

The FARA statute was promulgated ostensibly to serve the national security interests of the United States by denying foreign governments the ability to interfere in the internal political affairs of the American people by hiding their actions through American citizens acting on their behalf. On the surface, this is a good thing to try and prevent.

However, by seeking to extend the jurisdiction of FARA so that it covers the practice of journalism by American citizens, it is a frontal assault on that most precious American right—free speech and a free press, all in the name of “national security.”

Justice Black addressed this issue in his New York Times Co. v. United States concurring opinion: “[W]e are asked to hold that…the Executive Branch, the Congress, and the Judiciary can make laws…abridging the freedom of the press in the name of ‘national security’.” To permit this, Justice Black argued, “would wipe out the First Amendment and destroy the fundamental liberty and security of the very people the Government hopes to make ‘secure’…[t]he word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.”

There is no legitimate national security interest in interfering in the work of a journalist whose ideas the US government finds objectionable. Justice Black agreed. “The Framers of the First Amendment,” he wrote, “fully aware of both the need to defend a new nation and the abuses of the English and Colonial governments, sought to give this new society strength and security by providing that freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly should not be abridged.”

In its efforts to label me a foreign agent because of my journalistic activity, the FBI and the Department of Justice are seeking to do just that—abridge freedom of speech and a free press.

Having arrived at this juncture, however, I was still concerned about the tactics being employed by the Department of Justice in addressing the one alleged “violation” of FARA alluded to by the FBI agents who interviewed me.

If this was the basis of their concern, it could have—and indeed, should have—been addressed by having the FARA Unit send me a “letter of inquiry” advising me of my potential obligations under FARA, and seeking additional information from me that hopefully answered their concerns.

Instead, they executed a search warrant.

Why?

This is a question only those who swore out the affidavits that were presented to Magistrate Judge Hummel can answer.

Hopefully, someday they will.

The FBI had, by their own admission, been monitoring my communications for well over 18 months.

All they had to show for it was a meeting between myself and Russian diplomats that resulted in me publishing an article talking about the danger of Russophobia.

An article which detailed the sourcing of the information used to write it.

By their own actions the FBI demonstrated that this, in and of itself, did not constitute a violation of the FARA statute, let alone a crime.

If it was a clear-cut violation of FARA, the Justice Department’s FARA Unit would have issued a letter of inquiry.

Instead, the FBI executed a search warrant based upon affidavits possessing information sufficient to satisfy a Federal Magistrate Judge that there was probable cause for a search of my personal electronics which the FBI claimed would show…what?

The commission of a crime?

No.

If that was the case, the entire tenor of the search would have been different.

I would have more than likely been detained.

One is left, therefore, with the FBI looking for additional information to sustain their theory that I am operating as an unregistered agent of the Russian government.

The FBI was clearly concerned about the time I spent in Russia, outside their span of control.

Maybe they thought that my computer and cell phone would contain evidence of a covert relationship between myself and the Russian government.

They will be disappointed.

Upon my return from my first trip to Russia, I was detained by the Customs and Border Protection agents for several hours. During that time, I was questioned in depth by an agent who specialized in Russia about my trip. He had many questions, and I had many honest answers.

He inspected my luggage, including the gifts I had received from Alexander Zyrianov, my host, which I had declared on my customs declaration. The agent then exercised his option to wave charging me a duty assessment on the gifts.

The FBI acknowledged they were aware of this.

On my return from my second trip, I was detained by the Customs and Border Protection agents for an hour. I was prepared with a fully filled-out customs declaration form.

I was ready to answer all their questions.

Instead, the CBP agents released me after an hour with no interview and no inspection of my luggage.

Just a simple cursory “welcome home” from the CBP agent as he returned my passport.

This was after a trip which took me to Chechnya, where I met with Ramzan Khadirov and spoke before 25,000 Chechen soldiers.

 

The author, accompanied by Alexander Zyrianov, at lunch with Ramzan Khadirov, January 2024

Where I visited Crimea.

Where I visited the four “new territories” of Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk, and Lugansk.

If there ever was a visit to Russia that demanded attention from CBP, this was it.

And yet they let me go, no questions, no inspection.

In retrospect, I believe this was the moment that the FBI decided they were going to begin manufacturing their case against me, creating the foundation of probable cause based upon demonstrated behavior patterns that could sustain an argument before a Magistrate Judge that I was involved in activities which would require me to register as a foreign agent under the FARA statute.

This case would have been undermined if the CBP agents had questioned me, and I answered the questions as completely and honestly as I had done back in 2023.

This case would have been undermined if the CBP agents had inspected my luggage, eliminating the element of uncertainty the FBI was later able to create about the contents of my bags.

It also explains why my passport was seized by the CBP back on July 3.

The FBI was making a case that I was an unregistered Russian agent.

That I was working under the control and direction of the Russian government.

And yet the trip I was scheduled to begin on June 3 would prove the exact opposite—that I was a journalist whose interest in Russia was to learn more about the Russian people—the Russian “soul”—so that I might empower an American audience to rethink their attitudes toward all things Russian, attitudes shaped in large part by systemic Russophobia.

Because the FBI had been monitoring my communications, they were aware of the agenda, goals, and objectives of this planned trip, which included taking my podcast, Ask the Inspector, to some 16 Russian cities over the course of 40 days.

The FBI was aware that myself and my co-host, Jeff Norman, had been raising money in support of this trip, and that we were in the final phases of discussions with a donor who was going to provide the money needed to make this ambitious trip a reality.

The FBI was aware of the detailed line-item budget we had prepared, and the fact that we intended to pay for every single expense associated with this trip.

The FBI knew that if I went on this trip, they could never successfully manufacture a case built on the premise that I was operating under the direction of the Russian government.

So, the FBI killed the trip.

And when I adjusted to this new reality by refocusing my efforts on a massive peace rally hosted by Gerald Celente in Kingston, New York, which is scheduled for September 28, the FBI had no choice but to act.

Perhaps they thought the Kingston rally is being directed and/or funded by the Russians.

There is no doubt that the Kingston rally is going to be a political event—as part of the event, I am organizing Operation DAWN, an event designed to help prevent nuclear war between the US and Russia by asking the following questions of American voters: “What would you do to save Democracy, save America, save the World, by empowering your vote in November?”

All the FBI had to do was ask me a question outlining their concern; as I demonstrated during their multi-hour interview conducted while my home was being searched, I am fully cooperative and transparent when it comes to my work.

But simply asking me questions wouldn’t achieve what I believe to be the larger objective—to bring harm to the rally itself.

To stop Operation DAWN in its tracks.

Perhaps the FBI honestly believes that I am a Russian agent, and as such Operation DAWN is prohibited political action conducted on behalf of the Russian government.

Maybe they think there will be some form of communication between myself and my imaginary Russian controllers that detail this perceived collaboration.

They will be disappointed.

 

The author addresses the crowd at the Peace & Freedom Rally in 2022

Or maybe someone in the FBI and/or the Department of Justice, on their own volition or following orders from above, simply decided to try and discredit Operation DAWN and the Kingston rally by doing the only thing they were capable of doing at this juncture—execute a daytime search warrant of my residence in a manner which generated the maximum amount of publicity, and then remain silent about why they had done this, knowing all too well that the compliant mainstream media would pick up the ball and run with it, publishing scandalous stories based upon a rehashing of past events and full of irresponsible speculation drawn from the imaginations of so-called “experts” who know nothing whatsoever about the facts of the case (yes, Albany Times Union, I’m speaking about you.)

Maybe the FBI thought I would be intimidated by the raid, and opt to remain silent out of fear of generating unwanted attention.

But all the FBI really accomplished that day was to execute a raid on peace.

Because that is what Operation DAWN and the September 28 rally in Kingston are all about—promoting the cause of peace based upon good relations between nations, of preventing nuclear war through meaningful arms control.

I don’t know yet how this story ends.

I know how it should end—with the FBI returning my electronics and issuing a statement that nothing had been found of interest.

Maybe even issue a statement that I was no longer a subject of interest.

Maybe even return my passport.

But in this day and age of politicized justice, such an outcome, even if warranted, is not assured.

But I do know a few things.

One, I am not an agent of the Russian government.

Two, I am an American patriot who loves my country with all my being.

Three, I believe the threat of nuclear war represents the greatest existential threat to my country today.

Four, one of the last remaining opportunities for the American people to help prevent a nuclear war is to empower their vote in November’s presidential election by making the candidates for that office earn it by articulating policies that promote peace, the prevention of nuclear war, and the promotion of arms control.

And, finally, five—that God willing, I will be in Kingston, New York, on September 28, side by side with Gerald Celente and a host of friends and colleagues, including those physically present and those participating remotely, to promote the cause of peace that constitute the core objectives of Operation DAWN.

I hope many of you who read this can join us on that day.

Let’s shut down the thruway, just like they did back during the Woodstock Festival in August 1969.

Let us make happen what the FBI and Department of Justice appear hellbent on stopping.

Let’s make peace, not war, a national priority.

I’ll see you in Kingston.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Featured image: FBI agents load boxes containing material seized during the execution of a search warrant on the author’s residence on August 7, 2024. (All images in this article are from the author)

In June, rumors swirled in the media that the Biden administration was holding discussions with Israel and Ukraine about the possibility of transferring aging Patriot air defense systems currently in Israel to Ukraine. The CNN reported: “The systems would likely need to be transferred to the US first, where they would undergo refurbishment, before being sent to Ukraine.”

In April, the Israel Defense Forces said it would soon “retire its Patriot systems,” as noted by The Financial Times, though the report elided over providing a valid reason for scraping the much-touted air defense system. Since then, a gag order appears to have been issued on reporting about military co-operation between Israel and Ukraine, as it is a sensitive and strictly off-limits topic.

Russian news agency Sputnik reported on August 12 that Poland had signed an agreement on the production of 48 launchers of the Patriot surface-to-air missile system, United States Ambassador to Poland Mark Brzezinski claimed on Monday during the signing ceremony.

Under a deal worth $1.23 billion (4.7 billion zloty), the M903 launch stations will be produced at Stalowa Wola steelworks in Poland in co-operation with US defense giant Raytheon Technologies Corp. for which the US approved a $2 billion defense loan to Poland last month. The air defense systems production will run through 2027-2029.

The US has been increasingly looking to outsource production of the systems, with a joint US-Japan project hitting a stumbling block in July, the report noted, though it failed to clarify how Poland’s primitive defense production industry would produce launchers for advanced Patriot missile systems when it could hardly produce 155 mm. artillery shells that Ukraine, under the patronage of the US, had to import from a number of European and Asian countries during the two-year-long war.

Clearly, a behind-the-scenes understanding has been reached that instead of refurbishing “aging Israeli Patriot systems” in the US, the launchers would instead be transferred to Poland where they would be refurbished under the supervision of Raytheon’s technicians and then deployed in the Ukraine War.

During the two-year conflict, Israel’s thriving military-industrial complex has provided plenty of weapons, specifically its cutting-edge drone and missile technology, to Ukraine, but mainstream media, on the instructions of the US security establishment, has been especially careful not to report on the “sensitive topic.”  

Instead, Western media bent over backwards to publish misleading reports at the beginning of the Ukraine War that Ukraine’s Jewish President Volodymyr Zelensky pleaded for Iron Dome missile interceptors, a risible request that Israel allegedly “contemptuously rebuffed,” after which the Zelensky regime had a fictitious spat with Israeli policymakers.

The clear objective of creating this smokescreen around clandestine military co-operation between Washington’s servile surrogates, Ukraine and Israel, was in deference to Israel’s regional security interests. Because Israel frequently mounts airstrikes on Iran-backed militant groups in Lebanon and Syria, whereas Russia has deployed troops, aircraft and S-400 air defense system at Syria’s Mediterranean coast. If Russia gets even an inkling of Israel’s military assistance to Ukraine, then Israel would have to rethink its belligerent attitude.

Nonetheless, besides pledging to refurbish Israeli Patriot missile launchers for Ukraine, Poland also inked a bilateral security agreement with Ukraine on July 8. Among other substantial commitments, the security agreement signed in Warsaw provided for the development of a mechanism for Poland to shoot down Russian missiles and drones fired in the direction of Poland in Ukrainian airspace, which would legally amount to an unequivocal declaration of war between a NATO member state, Poland, and Russia.

President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky during a joint press conference with Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk stated:

“We are especially grateful for the special arrangements, and this is reflected in the security agreement. It provides for the development of a mechanism to shoot down [by Poland] Russian missiles and drones fired in the airspace of Ukraine in the direction of Poland. I am confident that our teams and the teams of the ministries of defense, together with our military, will work together to work out how we can quickly implement this point of our agreements.”

The vendetta between Russia and Poland, clearly punching above its weight, goes a long way back. In a highly symbolic move expressing solidarity with Ukraine, the prime ministers of Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovenia traveled together to the embattled Ukrainian capital of Kyiv and met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on March 15, 2022, weeks after Russia’s intervention in February.

The “Three Musketeers” took hours-long train trip on their journey from the west Ukrainian city of Lviv to the capital Kyiv, allegedly “endangering their lives” due to security risks involved in traveling within a war zone, though there was no risk to their lives, as such, because they had requested prior permission for the official visit from the Kremlin, which was graciously granted keeping in view diplomatic conventions.

Accompanying the trio of premiers was a “special guest” of the Zelensky regime, Jaroslaw Kaczynski—then the deputy prime minister of Poland, the head of Law and Justice (PiS) Party to which the president and prime minister of Poland belonged and the infamous “puppet master” who hired and fired government executives and ministers on a whim.

Jaroslaw Kaczynski is the twin brother of late President Lech Kaczynski, who died in a plane crash at Smolensk, Russia, in 2010 along with 95 other Poles, among them political and military leaders, as they traveled to commemorate the Katyn massacre that occurred during the Second World War.

Subsequent Polish and international investigations led by independent observers conclusively determined that the crash-landing was an accident caused by fog and pilot error. Still, Kaczynski had long suspected that Russian President Vladimir Putin had a role in provoking the accident, and was harboring a personal grudge against the Russian president.

The Polish electorate dispensed poetic justice to kingmaker Kaczynski as he was ousted from power following the last October’s parliamentary elections in Poland due to his myopic and vindictive policies and Donald Tusk was elected prime minister of the coalition government.

Tusk is a seasoned politician and diplomat who was the President of the European Council from 2014 to 2019. It was expected of him to display statesmanship and revisit the confrontational approach of his predecessors. But clearly, he is going down the same path of perdition that proved fatal not only for egocentric and spiteful politicians but for the Poles as a nation.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based geopolitical and national security analyst focused on geo-strategic affairs and hybrid warfare in the Middle East and Eurasia regions. His domains of expertise include neocolonialism, military-industrial complex and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor of diligently researched investigative reports to Global Research.

Featured image source

On May 19, 2024, Iran’s President, Ebrahim Raisi, met the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, at the Giz Galasi Dam along the two countries’ borders to inaugurate the hydroelectric complex there. In his return en route to Tabriz, the helicopter carrying Raisi, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, and other companions crashed. While the Islamic Republic’s officials have refused to provide transparent information about the cause of the helicopter crash, speculations about it are still ongoing.

Some observers in Iran have hypothesized that Raisi’s helicopter possibly crashed in a “deliberate accident.” Government officials have indicated that the results of additional investigations will be reported soon. Yet, the spokesperson of the judicial branch recently dodged the reporters’ questions regarding the latest report of the crash.

A day after the inauguration of the new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, on July 30, Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas’s political office, was assassinated in Tehran. The official report by Tasnim reported that Haniyeh was killed by a short-range missile fired from outside the building. In contrast, on August 5, the Jewish Chronicle reported that Haniyeh’s assassination was managed by an explosive device placed under his bed. Two Iranians recruited by the Mossad from the Ansar al-Mahdi security unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps planted the device.

After the assassination of Haniyeh, the possibility of an “intentional crash” of Raisi’s helicopter has once again been raised. We must be very naïve to believe that the crash of the Raisi helicopter was an accident and had not been carefully planned.

Some Iranians referred to the friendly relations between the Republic of Azerbaijan and Israel, claiming a possibility of Israel’s involvement in the crash. Israeli journalist Edi Cohen wrote about the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh on X social media and warned the Iranian authorities: “Did you understand who targeted the helicopter?” The Iranian Intelligence minister is traditionally a mullah who is chosen by Leader Ali Khamenei and commonly lacks professional experience and knowledge of espionage in the digital age. In 2022, Ali Yunesi, a former Intelligence Minister, warned that Mossad had infiltrated many parts of the country. Cases of intelligence failure have been reported on a few occasions. In 2017, Catherine Shakdaman, a Jewish journalist disguised as a converted Shia, went to Iran and established friendly relations with some top government authorities in Tehran. She wrote some articles for the Iranian media and then left Iran. In 2022, it was reported that she had been a Mossad spy. Also, Ali Reza Akbari, a deputy defense minister, had been recruited by the British to leak certain sensitive information to them. Akbari was later convicted as a spy and was hanged in January 2023.

Even though most Iranians disliked Ebrahim Raisi for his role in the execution of about 5000 political prisoners in 1988, he succeeded in strengthening Iran’s relations with the East. That was after his predecessor, Hassan Rouhani’s rapprochement with the West and lifting of economic sanctions completely failed. Under the Raisi administration, Iran was admitted as a full member of SCO, and it joined BRICS. Masoud Pezeshkian, who succeeded Raisi, favors reviving rapprochement with the West.

Pezeshkian chose Mohammad Javad Zarif as the Strategic Vice President and Head of the Presidential Strategic Studies Center to select the nominees for his cabinet. By appointment of Zarif, reformists thought a cabinet could be formed in their favor to benefit from the possible removal of the sanctions. Zarif presented a list of the prospective cabinet nominees. However, only a few of those on the list were chosen after consultation with the Leader. Moreover, Zarif had become an ideal stooge of the American top Democrats who liked him to be a future leader in Iran. Fundamentalists (principalists) felt that Zarif’s presence in the government would weaken their power and pushed for his removal. They used an interpretation of a law regarding employment in sensitive government positions to pressure him to resign. Zarif’s children are American citizens, as they were born in the United States, which is related to that law. As a result, Zarif resigned from his position and said he would return to his university teaching job.

Currently, there is a power struggle between the two sides of the regime. The fundamentalists want to retaliate to punish Israel for the latest assassination, while the reformists insist on restraint and ask for the removal of the economic sanctions.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Akbar E. Torbat is the author of “Politics of Oil and Nuclear Technology in Iran,” Palgrave Macmillan (2020). Farsi translation of the book is available here. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

The push towards an all-out war in the Middle East is moving out of its sleepwalking phase to that of conscious eschatological reckoning.  A blood filled, fiery Armageddon will reveal the forces of virtue, linking the evangelicals of the United States with the right-wing Jewish nationalists in Israel.  That appalling prospect is certainly not one to discount: the messianic are always a frightful bunch, thinking history and selectively pruned religions texts to be on their side.

Each week now comes with some measure of sabotage, mutilation and disruption to prospects of peace.  In his July 24 address to the US Congress, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined his crude Manichean vision in routine barking fashion.  In doing so, his intention, as Noa Landau pithily put it, was not to end the war in Gaza so much as prolong it.

For Netanyahu, the strained chords of civilisational rhetoric are never far away.  He would like other powers to muck in, battling the fiends he calls an “axis of terror”.  Impediments to the Jewish state’s war efforts had to be rejected.  To impose them would see other countries of similar kidney shackled.  “If Israel’s hands are tied, America is next.  I’ll tell you what else is next: the ability of all democracies to fight terrorism will be imperilled.”

Room was reserved to attack the International Criminal Court, whose chief prosecutor has sought warrants of arrest against himself and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, and the presidents of notable US universities.  As for protesting students, they had chosen to “stand with evil.  They stand with Hamas.  They stand with rapists and murderers.”  With daring outrage, he blotted out any notion that Palestinian civilians were being butchered, despite a death toll in the densely populated strip hovering near 40,000.  Indeed, civilian deaths had been “practically none,” with Israel scrupulous in “getting civilians out of harm’s way, something people said we could never do”.

With this blood crusted Weltanschauung, acts of destabilising mayhem are automatic.  Showing an utter contempt for Israeli hostages, let alone any humanity for the Palestinians they regard with expansive condescension, the Netanyahu government thought it wise to carry out two assassinations: that of Hamas’ political chief and chief negotiator Ismail Haniyeh, and Hezbollah’s top military chief Fuad Shukr, both killed within twenty-four hours in Beirut and Tehran respectively.

The response to the assassinations in Israel was one of relish – at least for those of the Itamar Ben-Gvir school of thought.  As David Issacharoff, writing in Haaretz, described it, “Israel has become a Matryoshka doll of pyromaniacs.”  From his skewed vantage point as National Security Minister, assassinations are staple food for the state.  The killing of Hezbollah’s second in command, ostensibly for his alleged role in an attack on a Druze village in the Golan Heights, drew the gleeful response that “Every god has his day”.

Despite certain Israeli media reports claiming an order from Netanyahu that ministers were to stay silent over Haniyeh’s killing, the enthusiasts were voluble in rapture.  Heritage Minister Amichay Eliyahu, also of Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party, expressed his glee on social media, claiming that “this is the right way to clean the world of this filth.”  There were to be “No more imaginary ‘peace’/surrender agreements, no more mercy for these sons of death.”

Other cabinet ministers also joined the gloating chorus.  “Careful What You Wish For,” wrote Minister for the Diaspora Amichai Chikli over a video of Haniyeh in a conference hall while people chanted “Death to Israel.”  Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi resorted to biblical verse: “So may all your enemies perish, O Lord.”

Despite no official confirmation of Israel’s role in the killing of the senior Hamas official, the Government Press Office posted, if only briefly, an image of Haniyeh which left no room for nuance: “Eliminated: Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas highest-ranking leader, was killed in a precise strike in Tehran, Iran.”

The richly violent musings of Ben-Gvir and his circle of sanctified terror have even proven indigestible for some members of the war cabinet.  Defence Minister Gallant, not immune from the urge to dehumanise the residents of Gaza, accused his national security counterpart of being a “pyromaniac”.  On the X platform, he declared his opposition against “any negotiations to bring him into the war cabinet – it would allow him to implement his plans.”  The same Gallant, however, was also in celebratory mood about the assassinations.

Even outside the war cabinet, the views of Ben-Gvir, not to mention his overall influence, travel with toxic rapture.  In the background, incandescently inspiring, is Rabbi Dov Lior, a figure of glowing nationalist fury. It was he who incited members of the Jewish Underground to conduct various terrorist attacks in the 1980s against Palestinians.  (The same group also unsuccessfully plotted to blow up the Dome on the Rock.)

This, as former UK diplomat Alastair Crooke observes, is the State of Judea doing battle against the State of Israel.  He quotes Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon, former Chief of Staff of the IDF, who sees such bloody eschatology as resting on a fundamental concept: “Jewish supremacy” or “Mein Kampf in reverse”.  For Rabbi Lior, the next big war cannot come soon enough, one, he anticipates, that is bound to feature Gog and Magog.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: [email protected] 

Featured image source

A recent poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs between June 21^st and July 1^st under their headline ‘Majority of Americans Oppose Sending US Forces to Defend Israel if Attacked by Iran’ said that 56% of respondents oppose sending US troops to defend Israel. The breakdown is as follows:

An overall 42 percent of the US public would favor using US troops to defend Israel if it were attached by Iran (56% oppose). While a slim majority of Republicans would favor US forces defending Israel in this scenario (53%), only four in 10 Independents (42%) and third of Democrats (34%) agree  

The Israelis are trying hard to get the US military to attack Iran since they are losing on all fronts including its war on Hamas in Gaza and with Hezbollah in their northern borders and they will do anything.  Would they attempt another false-flag operation like the September 11^th attacks that led to the war in Iraq?  They have experience in conducting a large scale false-flag operations to manipulate the US and European public that a war against any of their enemies in the Middle East is in their best interests, at least that is what Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated to the US Congress on multiple occasions. 

In September 2002 during a congressional hearing, Netanyahu called for a US led war on Iraq that would stop Saddam Hussein and the Bath party from developing nuclear weapons.  For years, Netanyahu has been saying the same thing about Iran, claiming that they are trying to produce a nuclear weapon.  The relentless propaganda never ends for the Israelis until the US and its European allies plus a handful of their puppet governments in the Middle East including Jordan and Saudi Arabia declare war on Iran.

Since support for Israel is waning thin among the US population, what will Israel do to regain the support it once had?

If you remember the Lavon Affair (Code name: Operation Susannah’) that occurred in 1954 which is historically described as an unsuccessful false flag operation carried out by Egyptian Jews recruited by the Israeli military intelligence unit called ‘AMAN.’  The Egyptian Jews were under the name ‘Unit 131’ which was originally founded in 1948, however, egos got in the way of who can control Unit 131 between AMAN and the Israel’s main national intelligence agency, Mossad. 

It all began when an Israeli intelligence officer by the name of Avraham Dar who changed his name to John Darling visited Egypt and pretended to be a British citizen had recruited several ‘Egyptian Jews’ who had assisted Jews in Egypt to escape to Israel since many were involved in illegal activities that could have gotten themselves imprisoned or even gotten themselves killed if the Egyptian security forces had caught them.    

Unit 131 were used to place bombs in American, British and Egyptian owned civilian targets including movie theaters, libraries and other places so that the Muslim Brotherhood, nationalists and communists would be blamed and force the British government to keep its occupational forces in Egypt’s Suez Canal and stop Western governments from supporting Egypt’s government that was led by Gamal Abdel Nasser.  The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists published Leonard Weiss’s ‘The Lavon Affair: How a false-flag operation led to war and the Israeli bomb’ from 2016 explained what was the intentions of the Israelis for setting up the terror attacks that occurred throughout Egypt:

In 1954, Israeli Military Intelligence (often known by its Hebrew abbreviation AMAN) activated a sleeper cell that had been tasked with setting off a series of bombs in Egypt. In this risky operation, a small number of Egyptian Jews were to bomb Western and Egyptian institutions in Egypt, hoping the attacks could be blamed on Egyptian opponents of the country’s leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, including members of the Muslim Brotherhood or the Communist Party. The ensuing chaos, it apparently was hoped, would persuade Western governments that Nasser’s regime was unstable and, therefore, unworthy of financial and other support

Terrorist attacks by Israeli patsies included the bombing of the Alexandria post office which was followed up by several bombings of buildings in Alexandria and Cairo a few weeks later.  Egyptian security forces eventually caught the Israeli-backed terrorists with a lead on a specific terrorist who was about to place a bomb on another target and was arrested. 

The operation failed to do what it was intended to do, and it became a political scandal. The Egyptian government held a trial of the bombers sentencing two of the accused terrorists, Moshe Marzouk and Shmuel Azar to death by hanging, several received long prison terms and two were acquitted.  The trial was seen as a “show trial” throughout Israel since many believed that the defendants were innocent due to Israel’s censorship at the time thus hiding the facts of the case from public scrutiny.  In the end, Israel’s minister of defense, Pinhas Lavon was accused of the false flag operation that was allegedly carried out under his watch, but an Israeli investigation said he could have been framed. 

However, in March 2005, An Israeli website Ynetnews.com published an article that proves that Israel don’t care about what the Americans or British think, in fact, it’s a slap in the face, the article ‘Israel honors 9 Egyptian spies’ said that “After half a century of reticence and recrimination, Israel on Wednesday honored nine Egyptian Jews recruited as agents-provocateur in what became one of the worst intelligence bungles in the country’s history” it continued “Israel was at war with Egypt when it hatched a plan in 1954 to ruin its rapprochement with the United States and Britain by firebombing sites frequented by foreigners in Cairo and Alexandria.”  Israel admits that they were behind the false flag failure, “But Israeli hopes the attacks, which caused no casualties, would be blamed on local insurgents collapsed when the young Zionist bombers were caught and confessed at public trials. Two were hanged. The rest served jail terms and emigrated to Israel.”

The Israelis are clearly laughing in the faces of the Americans and British, but it does not end there, the former agents involved in the Lavon Affair were also campaigning at the time to include the terrorist event into Israel’s education system.  Yes, they want the history of what happened in 1954 included for their high school curriculum as part of their education:

Now that they have been officially recognised in Israel, the former agents are campaigning for a full account of their operation to be included in the high-school syllabus. “This is a great day for all of us, those who were hanged and those who died,” Marcelle Ninio, the only female member of the cell, said. “We are happy we’ve got our honor back”

According to The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ The failure of Israel’s false-flag operation led to the development of its nuclear arsenal:

This ill-conceived false-flag operation failed, embarrassingly, to accomplish its goal of undermining Nasser. Although usually ignored or portrayed as an intramural political fight among high-level Israeli politicians, the Lavon Affair also played a major role in setting in motion a chain of events that led to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, via scientific and military cooperation with France

France had a hand in providing Israel with nuclear technological capabilities in creating its own arsenal at the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center in the Negev desert, close to the south-east of the city of Dimona:

France, partly because it was excluded from cooperating with the United States on the development of the bomb during and after World War II, as well as its parlous financial condition at the time, was significantly disadvantaged in regard to nuclear technology development at the end of the war (Goldschmidt, 1982). However, the US Atomic Energy Commission and its nuclear labs at Los Alamos, Livermore, and Oak Ridge provided a model that was followed by other countries with nuclear ambitions, including France, which created the Commissariat à l’énergie atomique in 1945 and, subsequently, the nuclear research centers at Chatillon in 1946 and Saclay in 1952. Meanwhile, Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, influenced by his science advisor Ernst David Bergmann, decided to launch a nuclear technology development program within the Ministry of Defense. Bergmann was a scientist with an international reputation in chemistry and professional connections in many countries, including France. These connections enabled Israel to send some of its budding nuclear physicists for training at Saclay (Cohen, 1998). Thus, the foundation for a future French–Israeli nuclear connection was laid

Israel has a history of committing false flags besides the Lavon Affair such as the attack on the USS Liberty on June 8^th, 1967 to get the US to attack Egypt which was considered a failure but it was the September 11^th attacks that proved to be a success since the US and their ‘Coalition of the Willing’ invaded and then destroyed Iraq, so for Israel, it accomplished what it wanted, and that was to get Iraq out of the way and focus on their next target, Iran.     

Make no mistake, Israel would do anything to get their US and Western allies to attack Iran because Israel would lose if they decided to go to war themselves against the Axis of Resistance which includes Hezbollah, Lebanon. Hamas, Syria, Iraqi insurgents, Iran and Yemen. 

Israel’s economy in in shambles, their northern region has been bombarded by Hezbollah, and the Axis of Resistance is clearly ready for an all-out war against the Jewish state, so what are the Israelis willing to do to get the US military into another unwinnable war in the Middle East? Perhaps carry out another false-flag operation within the United States?  Are they looking at the border crisis with millions of illegal immigrants who are entering the US so that they can take advantage of that vulnerable situation with another terrorist cell just like Unit 131?   

We don’t know, but one thing is certain, Israel would do anything to start a new war to eliminate their adversaries so that they can become the “Greater Israel” (Zionist Empire) ruling over the Muslims, Christians and others in the Middle East. 

The US and its allies would certainly lose the war against Iran and its allies, but the main question is, what would Israel do to lure the US into another unwinnable war?  Perhaps, Israel’s only hope is to commit another false-flag operation such as 911 that would change US public opinion on sending their sons and daughters to Iran and fight for Israel. 

But what happens if that does not work, would they launch a nuclear bomb against Iran?  Not sure because no one in the Middle East or elsewhere including a nuclear-armed Pakistan or Russia would stand for an Israeli strike against a Muslim nation without facing a severe retaliation. 

Israel is in a difficult situation; they are getting desperate, so the world needs to keep a close eye on Israel’s actions in the coming weeks and months ahead. They are cornered, what will they do?       

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his own blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

It’s not easy to commit crimes and get off scot-free. It requires legal expertise and a degree of sophistication, especially when you simultaneously have to contend with public opinion, both local and international.

And no, I’m not talking about the reservists suspected of raping a Palestinian detainee at the Sde Teiman army base. I’m talking about the State of Israel and its sophisticated whitewashing mechanisms. These mechanisms have loyally served the Israeli system for generations. But it seems they have finally reached their expiration date and are now collapsing under the weight of the internal contradictions they had previously managed to contain.

For decades, the Israeli system perfected its ability to use brutal violence against Palestinians without having to pay any price for it. This is a critical issue. After all, it’s impossible to oppress millions of people for decades without violence on a horrifying scale. But it’s also impossible to keep putting those who employ such violence on trial, because who would agree to rule via force if they will later be denounced as criminals?

So what do you do? You engage in a typical Israeli bluff – but a sophisticated one.

The bluff is the operating system that has worked so well until now. Masses of complaints are received from anyone who bothers to complain. Palestinians, human rights organizations, UN agencies – please, just complain. Paperwork is generated, but nothing is seriously investigated. 

Each incident is treated as if were at most a violation by the lower ranks. The policy and the senior ranks are never investigated. And the whole process proceeds very slowly.

It gets dragged out for so long that in the meantime, everyone forgets. Attention moves on, and years go by. And by then, who cares about some Palestinian teen whom soldiers shot in the back and killed somewhere near the separation barrier many years ago? But nevertheless, we can say, “We investigated.”

Protesters outside Sde Teiman, in April.Credit: Eliyahu Hershkovitz

As part of this system, some low-ranking person is indicted once every few years and a big deal is made of it. Such an indictment almost always happens when there is incontrovertible video footage or forensic evidence, so what can you do? And then, it’s a scandal. There’s international attention. Shock.

Think of Border Police officer Ben Dery in Beitunia in 2014 or Sgt. Elor Azaria in Hebron in 2016. In both cases, there was unequivocal video evidence, so there was no choice but to put them on trial.

The penalties were certainly ridiculous. But they were useful. Look: We investigated; we took steps. Now we can comfortably close all the other cases. That’s how Israel has managed to maintain its image as a normative country while at the same time neutralizing the risk of international trials.

It is precisely this method that Israel’s entire political, military and judicial establishment is gearing up for by repeating that sacred, sweet-talking mantra: “Investigations protect the soldiers.” Reflect on how many times you have heard this benighted phrase in recent months: from the prime minister and the head of the opposition, from the current chief of staff and from former chiefs, from legal counsels and former judges. And the intention is made explicit, lest it be misunderstood: if we “investigate” here – then those antisemites in The Hague won’t investigate there. So we had better “investigate” here, wink-wink. Got it? 

And for all the Israeli bluff that it is – you have got to admit it has turned out not half bad. Think, on one side, about all the bodies, all the torture, all the ruin and all the other crimes. Then think, on the other hand, about the number of Israelis who have so far been brought to trial abroad. Tens of thousands on one side, zero on the other. The method works.

Until it stopped working, both locally and internationally. In the local scene, the political cost of investigations and the rare trial became too high, because the public won’t even accept this meagre, decrepit shield. Like the nation-state law and other similar phenomena, the current political bon ton is Jewish supremacy from on high. It is a supremacy that now refuses to accept even a make-believe show of accountability for the killing or abuse of Palestinians.

In the international arena, too, the bluff gradually stopped working. After years of repeated reports from human rights organizations, it has become harder to deny what is really going on here – and still, that wasn’t enough. In the end, though, changes in international public opinion, Israel’s no longer bothering to keep up appearances and the scope and duration of the violence – all interrelated – have combined to make the risk of the international court in The Hague real. This risk has reduced in turn political willingness in Israel to go on with the “investigation” farce.

Because, after all, what is it all for? For all of the show put on by the High Court of Justice, the attorney general, the state attorney, the complaints and the mountains of paperwork – even rare trials – it still looks like The Hague will issue arrest warrants. If that’s the case, then this is “evidence refuting the saying that our judiciary is our shield against the courts of law abroad,” as Simcha Rothman explained.

Rothman, the chairman of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, was reminding us that the legal system’s only apparent value here is instrumental.

Which brings us to Sde Teiman – and to The Hague. Parts of the Israeli establishment are still trying to function using the old activation code. They do this haltingly, out of weakness, as if compelled, afraid of the crowd as well as of the prime minister himself. The prime minister and his crowd are already operating from on-high, using the new activation code. But those who hold on to the old code don’t do it to serve justice or because it is the proper and morally necessary thing to do. Even in the face of the most horrible of acts, their goal was and remains instrumental. As IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi was quick to explain, “These investigations protect our soldiers in Israel and abroad, and help protect IDF values.” After listening this week to all those politicians and officers, one might conclude that the only terrible things that happened, if they were terrible at all, were civilians breaking into Sde Teiman and obstructing the military’s ability to “investigate.” No one would be concerned, god forbid, about atrocities inflicted by soldiers against detainees in their charge.

IDF chief Herzl Halevi at the Beit Lid base on July 30, 2023.Credit: IDF Spokesperson’s Unit

This one investigation that blew up this week is just the tip of the iceberg. Further investigations await not only the junior ranks in Israel. For a change, real investigations abroad are in store for very high-ranking figures. For questions about Sde Teiman can’t help but bubble upwards to the Military Advocate General herself.

And questions about the policy using military force in Gaza, with its tens of thousands of dead, will not be answered by sergeants. And we haven’t said a word yet about Israeli policy in the West Bank, which is rife with war crimes – crimes that are, essentially, crimes of policy, the result of decisions made by administration after administration after administration. International arrest warrants will come, and they won’t target junior ranking Housing Ministry officials.

These intersecting forces are the result of the crossing between Israel’s system of government – pure, obvious Jewish supremacy – and reality. It’s the reality of a non-normative state that can’t avoid international legal risks. The old activation code has expired. Keeping it in use is not the way to fix what’s broken.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Featured image: Protesters outside the Beit Lid army base demonstrating in support of the soldiers arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting a prisoner, last week.Credit: Avishag Sha’ar-Yashuv

Please watch this powerful message from a beautiful Gazan girl.

It is a message to the world about the Israeli Zionist bombing-massacre committed on a school in Gaza City, in the Al-Daraj neighborhood. See 1-minute facebook video below.

.

.

Way over 100 people, almost all kids, lost their lives — and countless others were severely wounded and may also die. 

The children were seeking refuge in the school. They were praying when the bombs hit.

These perpetrators are not humans.

They are not animals.

They are a life satanic infiltration on Mother Earth.

Despite worldwide condemnation for war crimes in Gaza, the diabolical Chief Zionist talks to US Congress and gets 56 standing ovations.

The US Congress, whether Republican or Democrat, is a representation of what the self-styled world’s hegemon stands for. It represents their ethical standards, their soul that has long been erased by greed for money and political power, and therefore, no matter whether the representation comes from so-called MAGA (Make America Great Again) US Southern States, like Texas and Florida – they are equally sold to the devil, as some snippets of the Zionist Israel supporters below will show: 

Self-explanatory Snippets:

Arizona Republican Representative Eli Crane was spotted in the Congress expressing support for Netanyahu.

Republican Representative from Florida, Anna Paulina Luna, appeared in Congress, seemingly attempting to get Palestinian US member of Congress Rashida Tlaib to take down her sign that read “War criminal” and “Guilty of genocide.”

Republican Representative Andy Biggs from Arizona was also among the lawmakers giving a standing ovation to Netanyahu.

Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri was also at Congress, and his post on X stated that the US “has no more important ally than Israel.”

“Powerful, inspirational words today from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. America has no more important ally than Israel,” he posted on X (former Twitter) following Netanyahu’s speech.

Republican US Senator Ted Cruz from Texas is one of the biggest Israel’s allies in the Congress, calling Netanyahu’s speech “Churchillian.”

“He understands the gravity of the war in Israel, the existential threat to our Israeli allies, and the staggering risks posed to American national security,” he said on X.

Senator Ron Johnson, Republican from Wisconsin, was also spotted in Congress showing support for Netanyahu.

Republican Representative Byron Donalds of Florida also attended the Congressional session and criticized Vice President Kamala Harris on Wednesday for skipping Netanyahu’s address.

He said Harris and Democrats “take American Jews for granted.”

Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican Representative from Georgia, and far-right Republican Lauren Boebert from Colorado, who supports closer ties with Israel for religious reasons, also attended the Congress during Netanyahu’s address. 

 … and so on, and on, and on…..

See this for full article and photo from the website.

 What does this say for Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump?

Is he going to go against his own party?

Or is this unquestionable support for war criminals just continuing? You are the judge.

Democratic Presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, although she did not attend the Congress session, she met later separately with Netanyahu, assuring him of her full and undivided support. Sealed with a strong handshake.

Does anybody believe that Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald Trump, would go against his own party? Think again! This is an endless support of genocide, from both sides of the isle, as well as both sides of the Atlantic.

Then – see this:

 

However, looking closer who represents the Government – not just Congress but also the Executive, it may be a clear-cut explanation for a worldwide fraud that has been expanding quietly, without people noticing. 

Jews representing just a about 2% of the US population, but they call the shots in the Government (executive), as well as in Congress (legislative).

It is what you may call the “salami-tactic” in reverse: Slice by little slice is cut off the salami, representing the US people, and when you are coming to the end – there is no salami left, no people’s representation – just pure Zionist representation.

American people, it is time to shake yourself awake.

*

This may be revealing – the cut salami – as the United States’ People’s representation.

It is not just the Biden-Harris representation, it is not Russia and China which are doing all the “bad things” to this good country, called US of A. 

Look who are the Zionists in the Administration – and this is just a small sample:

• Secretary of State Antony Blinken;
• Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen;
• Attorney General Merrick Garland;
• Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas;
• CIA Deputy Director David Cohen;
• Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines;
• SEC (Security and Exchange Commission) Chair Gary Gensler;
• Council of Economic Advisors Jared Bernstein;
• FCC (Federal Communications Commission) Chair Jessica Rosenworcel;
• Director of CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) Rochelle Walensky;
• and more ….

Mind you, corrupted European mis-leadership, especially the European Commission, is made of the same fabric; not an iota better. Otherwise, they would show the self-styled chosen people what humanity is indeed all about. Apparently, the Holocaust has not taught them any lesson.

*

Now, who would listen to this little Gazan girl’s outcry to the world – for help, for attention? When the Western World is united as Murderers and Co?

Listen again:

People of the world who read these lines, please stand up against this US-European-supported Zionist Israeli horror genocide inflicted on Gaza, and on the Palestinian people.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

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

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image source

In Murder in Samarkand I describe how as a British Ambassador, when I discovered the full extent of our complicity in torture in the War on Terror, I thought it must be a rogue operation and all I had to do was make ministers and senior officials aware and they would stop it.

When I was reprimanded and officially told that receipt of intelligence from torture in the “War on Terror” was approved from the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary down, and it became clear to me that there was a deliberate promoting of false intelligence narratives through torture which exaggerated the Al Qaida threat to justify military policy in Afghanistan and Central Asia, my worldview was severely shaken.

Somehow I mentally compartmentalised this as an aberration, due to overreaction to 9/11 and the unique narcissism and viciousness of Tony Blair. I did not lose faith in western democracy or the notion that the western powers, on the whole, were a positive force when contrasted with other powers.

It is a hard thing to lose the entire belief system in which you were brought up – probably particularly hard if like me, you had a very happy life right from childhood and were highly successful within the terms of the governmental system.

I have however now finally shed the last of my illusions and I am obliged to acknowledge that the system of which I am a part – call it “the West”, “liberal democracy”, “capitalism”, “neo-liberalism”, “neo-conservatism”, “Imperialism”, “the New World Order” – call it what you will in fact, it is a force for evil.

Gaza has been an important catalyst. I am not lacking in empathy, but my knowledge of the horrid butchery by the Western powers in Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya was an intellectual knowledge, not a lived experience.

Technology has brought us the Gaza genocide – which has so far killed fewer people than any of those earlier NATO member perpetrated massacres – in gut wrenching detail. I have just been looking at 75kg bags of mixed human meat handed over to relatives in lieu of an identifiable corpse, and am in shock.

That is not the worst we have seen in Gaza.

If only the people of Mosul and Fallujah had had modern mobile phone technology, what horrors we would know.

Incidentally, I tried to find you some images of the massive US destruction of Mosul and Fallujah in 2002‒4 and Google won’t give me any. It will, however, offer thousands of images from fighting there with ISIL in 2017. Which rather underlines my point about the extraordinary lack of imagery of the Second Iraq War.

Of the current genocide in Gaza, again I found myself naively thinking at some point this will stop. That Western politicians would not in fact countenance the total destruction of Gaza. That there would be a limit to the number of Palestinian civilian deaths they could accept, the number of UN facilities, schools and hospitals destroyed, the number of little children torn into shreds.

I thought that at some stage human decency must outweigh Zionist lobby cash.

But I was wrong.

The Ukrainian attack into Kursk also has a profound emotional resonance. The Battle of Kursk was arguably the most important blow struck against Nazi Germany, the largest tank battle in the history of the world by a wide margin.

The Ukrainian government has destroyed all the monuments to the Red Army which achieved this, and denigrates the Ukrainians who fought against fascism. By contrast, it honours the very substantial Ukrainian components of the Nazi forces, including but not limited to, the Galician Division and their leaders.

Kursk is therefore a place of great symbolism for Ukraine to attack now into Russia, including with German artillery and armour.

German politicians seem to have an atavistic urge to attack Russia, and support the genocide of Palestinians to an astonishing degree.

Germany has effectively ended all freedom of speech on Palestine, banning conferences of distinguished speakers and making pro-Palestinian speech illegal. Germany has intervened on Israel’s side in the genocide case before the ICJ, and intervened at the ICC to object to an arrest warrant against Netanyahu.

I do not know how many civilian dead would assuage German lust for the expiatory blood of Palestinians. 500,000? 1 Million? 2 Million?

Or perhaps 6 Million?

The West are not the good guys. Our so-called “democratic systems” give us no ability to vote for anybody who may get into power who does not support the genocide and imperialist foreign policy.

It is not an accident and it is not genius that makes a man-child like Elon Musk worth 100 billion dollars. The power structures of society are deliberately designed by those with wealth to promote massive concentration of wealth in favour of those who already have it, exploiting and disempowering the rest of society.

The rise of the multi-billionaires is not a fluke. It is a plan, and the misallocation of more than adequate resources is the cause of poverty. The attempt to shift blame onto the desperate constituents of waves of immigration forced into life by Western destruction of foreign countries, is also systematic.

There is no longer any free space for dissent in the media to oppose any of this.

We are the Bad Guys. We resist our own governing systems, or we are complicit.

In the United Kingdom it falls to the Celtic nations to try to break up the state which is a subordinate but important imperialist engine. The paths of resistance are various, depending where you are.

But find one and take one.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

Featured image source

US military contractors are concerned about corruption and the security of co-production in Ukraine and are therefore in no rush to sign contracts, a US State Department spokesperson said. Without the US being able to construct military-industrial infrastructure, Ukraine will never be able to meet its weapons and ammunition needs in the current war.

“Several US defense companies are considering joint production inside Ukraine, but questions remain about the safety of doing business in a war zone, the persistence of corruption, and the long-term business case,” Defense One reported on August 6, citing a State Department official spoken to on the sidelines of the Farnborough air show.

“The Pentagon has been pushing American defense contractors to increase collaboration with their Ukrainian counterparts, but US firms have been slower to ink deals than European companies,” ​​the report added.

According to the State Department spokesperson, the main concerns are the security of employees and facilities, corruption, and political risks.

“I think our industry is really eager, but at the same time, [it] has to make sense from a business case, right? And financing is an issue too, how you can actually pay for this stuff,” the official added.

The source noted that Washington intends to increase the number of companies cooperating with Ukraine, that a team oversees such deals, and that US companies are generally open to dialogue. However, despite this supposed enthusiasm, another major concern is corruption.

“Clearly, corruption is a concern,” the official said.

Corruption is not an issue shared only by US companies, though. A survey conducted in February by Rating found that 51% of Ukrainians believe corruption in government bodies is a greater hindrance to development than the war with Russia (46%). A survey conducted from March 1 to 15 found that 70% of Ukrainians believe that the government is profiteering from the war and increasingly sinking into corruption, a massive increase from the 43% recorded a year earlier.

Although Washington, Brussels, and Kiev claim that corruption is being stamped out, as reflected by citizen experiences, this is certainly not the case. Multimillion/billion-dollar companies do not make investment decisions based on the government’s propaganda statements but on the reality on the ground, which is that deep-rooted corruption has been consolidated into fewer hands, mostly Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his inner circle.

Beyond the issue of corruption, there is also the likely scenario that Russian missiles and bombs will destroy any military-related infrastructure in Ukraine.

“But American companies have a lot to consider before they sign up for co-production in a war zone; no one wants their facilities blown up or employees getting hurt,” the official was quoted by Defense One as saying.  

Although the Biden administration does not take any warnings from Moscow with seriousness, such as the willingness to militarily intervene if the Kiev regime continued its policies of persecuting the Russian minority and pursuing NATO membership, US companies are certainly not under any illusions and are, therefore deterred from making any investments that will quite literally end up in smoke. 

It is recalled that Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in September 2023:

“Any facilities for the production of weapons, especially if these weapons fire at us, they become objects of special attention for our military.”

Staying true to this message, in a recent one-week period alone, Russian troops carried out 19 strikes by precision weapons and drones at Ukrainian military-industrial and energy sites, air defense systems and arms depots over the past week in the special military operation in Ukraine, Russia’s Defense Ministry announced on August 9.

“On August 3-9, 2024, the Russian Armed Forces delivered 19 combined strikes by high-precision weapons and attack unmanned aerial vehicles, hitting Ukrainian military-industrial enterprises and associated energy facilities, aerodrome infrastructure, air defense systems, assembly workshops and storage sites of attack UAVs. In addition, the strikes targeted fuel bases, armament and ammunition depots, areas of massed Ukrainian army reserves, temporary deployment sites of nationalist formations and foreign mercenaries,” the ministry said in a statement.

These are the conditions under which Ukraine’s military-industrial complex must operate and why it cannot meet the Ukrainian military’s weapons and ammunition needs. Even if corruption was not deterring American investment opportunities, to begin with, the fact that Russia destroys military-industrial infrastructure with such ease means that the interest American companies will have in setting up in Ukraine will all but end.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

“The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice.

You don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything.

They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls. They got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear… They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying. Lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else… It’s called the American Dream, ’cause you have to be asleep to believe it.”—George Carlin

Who owns America?

Is it the government? The politicians? The corporations? The foreign investors? The American people?

While the Deep State keeps the nation divided and distracted by a presidential election whose outcome is foregone (the police state’s stranglehold on power will ensure the continuation of endless wars and out-of-control spending, while disregarding the citizenry’s fundamental rights and the rule of law), America is literally being bought and sold right out from under us.

Consider the facts.

We’re losing more and more of our land every year to corporations and foreign interests. Foreign ownership of U.S. agricultural land has increased by 66% since 2010. In 2021, it was reported that foreign investors owned approximately 40 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, which is more than the entire state of Iowa. By 2022 that number had grown to 43.4 million acres. The rate at which U.S. farmland is being bought up by foreign interests grew by 2.2 million acres per year from 2015 to 2021. The number of U.S. farm acres owned by foreign entities grew more than 8% (3.4 million acres) in 2022.

We’re losing more and more of our businesses every year to foreign corporations and interests.Although China owns a small fraction of foreign-owned U.S. land at 380,000 acres (less than the state of Rhode Island), Chinese companies and investors are also buying up major food companies, commercial and residential real estate, and other businesses. As RetailWire explains, “Currently, many brands started by early American pioneers now wave international flags. This revolution is a direct result of globalization.” The growing list of once-notable American brands that have been sold to foreign corporations includes: U.S. Steel (now Japanese-owned); General Electric (Chinese-owned); Budweiser (Belgium); Burger King (Canada); 7-Eleven (Japan); Jeep, Chrysler, and Dodge (Netherlands); and IBM (China).

We’re digging ourselves deeper and deeper into debt, both as a nation and as a populace. Basically, the U.S. government is funding its existence with a credit card, spending money it doesn’t have on programs it can’t afford. The bulk of that debt has been amassed over the past two decades, thanks in large part to the fiscal shenanigans of four presidents, 10 sessions of Congress and two wars. The national debt (the amount the federal government has borrowed over the years and must pay back) is more than $34 trillionand will grow another $19 trillion by 2033. Foreign ownership makes up 29% of the U.S. debt held by the public. Of that amount, reports the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, “52 percent was held by private foreign investors while foreign governments held the remaining 48 percent.”

The Fourth Estate has been taken over by media conglomerates that prioritize profit over principle.Independent news agencies, which were supposed to act as bulwarks against government propaganda, have been subsumed by a global corporate takeover of newspapers, television and radio. Consequently, a handful of corporations now control most of the media industry and, thus, the information dished out to the public. Likewise, with Facebook and Google having appointed themselves the arbiters of disinformation, we now find ourselves grappling with new levels of corporate censorship by entities with a history of colluding with the government to keep the citizenry mindless, muzzled and in the dark.

Most critically of all, however, the U.S. government, long ago sold to the highest bidders, has become little more than a shell company, a front for corporate interests. Nowhere is this state of affairs more evident than in the manufactured spectacle that is the presidential election. As for members of Congress, long before they’re elected, they are trained to dance to the tune of their wealthy benefactors, so much so that they spend two-thirds of their time in office raising money. As Reuters reports, “It also means that lawmakers often spend more time listening to the concerns of the wealthy than anyone else.”

In the oligarchy that is the American police state, it clearly doesn’t matter who wins the White House, because they all work for the same boss: a Corporate State that has gone global.

So much for living the American dream.

“We the people” have become the new, permanent underclass in America.

We’re being forced to shell out money for endless wars that are bleeding us dry; money for surveillance systems to track our movements; money to further militarize our already militarized police; money to allow the government to raid our homes and bank accounts; money to fund schools where our kids learn nothing about freedom and everything about how to comply; and on and on.

This is no way of life.

It’s tempting to say that there’s little we can do about it, except that’s not quite accurate.

There are a few things we can do (demand transparency, reject cronyism and graft, insist on fair pricing and honest accounting methods, call a halt to incentive-driven government programs that prioritize profits over people), but it will require that “we the people” stop playing politics and stand united against the politicians and corporate interests who have turned our government and economy into a pay-to-play exercise in fascism.

Unfortunately, we’ve become so invested in identity politics that label us based on our political leanings that we’ve lost sight of the one label that unites us: we’re all Americans.

The powers-that-be want us to adopt an “us versus them” mindset that keeps us powerless and divided. Yet as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the only “us versus them” that matters is “we the people” against the Deep State.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

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

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image source

The headline below, about yet another Israeli operation to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians in the tiny, besieged and utterly destroyed enclave of Gaza, was published in yesterday’s Middle East Eye.

When I began studying Israeli history more than a quarter of a century ago, people claiming to be experts proffered plenty of excuses to explain why Israelis should not be held responsible for the 1948 ethnic cleansing of some 750,000 Palestinians from their homes – what Palestinians call their Nakba, or Catastrophe.

 

 

1. I was told most Israelis were not involved and knew nothing of the war crimes carried out against the Palestinians during Israel’s establishment.

2. I was told that those Israelis who did take part in war crimes, like Operation Broom to expel Palestinians from their homeland, did so only because they were traumatised by their experiences in Europe. In the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust, these Israelis assumed that, were the Jewish people to survive, they had no alternative but to drive out the Palestinians en masse.

3. From others, I was told that no ethnic cleansing had taken place. The Palestinians had simply fled at the first sign of conflict because they had no real historical attachment to the land.

4. Or I was told that the Palestinians’ displacement was an unfortunate consequence of a violent war in which Israeli leaders had the best interests of Palestinians at heart. The Palestinians hadn’t left because of Israeli violence but because they has been ordered to do so by Arab leaders in the region. In fact, the story went, Israel had pleaded with many of the 750,000 refugees to come home afterwards, but those same Arab leaders stubbornly blocked their return.

Every one of these claims was nonsense, directly contradicted by all the documentary evidence.

That should be even clearer today, as Israel continues the ethnic cleansing and slaughter of the Palestinian people more than 75 years on.

1. Every Israeli knows exactly what is going on in Gaza – after all, their children-soldiers keep posting videos online showing the latest crimes they have committed, from blowing up mosques and hospitals to shooting randomly into homes. Polls show all but a small minority of Israelis approve of the savagery that has killed many tens of thousands of Palestinians, including children. A third of them think Israel needs to go further in its barbarity.

Today, Israeli TV shows host debates about how much pain soldiers should be allowed to inflict by raping their Palestinian captives. Don’t believe me? Watch this from Israel’s Channel 12:

🔴SHOCKING🔴

Israel is quite possibly the only nation in the world where it is permissable and commonplace to go on TV and openly declare that the RAPING of prisoners should be a LEGITIMATE and OFFICIAL POLICY of the state and must be widely implemented.
pic.twitter.com/1PyRXk8fxU

— Niz (@NizMhani) August 7, 2024

2. If the existential fears of Israelis and Jews still require the murder, rape and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians three-quarters of a century on from the Holocaust, then we need to treat that trauma as the problem – and refuse to indulge it any longer.

3. The people of Gaza are fleeing their homes – or at least the small number who still have homes not bombed to ruins – not because they lack an attachment to Palestine. They are fleeing from one part of the cage Israel has created for them to another part of it for one reason alone: because all of them – men, women and children – are terrified of being slaughtered by an Israeli military, at best, indifferent to their suffering and their fate.

The official death toll in Gaza is a lie. The casualty numbers are far, far higher.

In my latest article, I explain how the trick has been pulled off: https://t.co/WfH4wt1bJM pic.twitter.com/qI0NFfRL8v

— Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) July 31, 2024

4. No serious case can be made today that Israel is carrying out any of its crimes in Gaza – from bombing civilians to starving them – with regret, or that its leaders seek the best for the Palestinian population. Israel is on trial for genocide at the world’s highest court precisely because the judges there suspect it has the very worst intentions possible towards the Palestinian people.

We have been lied to for decades about the creation of Israel. It was always a settler colonial project. And like other settler colonial projects – from the US and Australia to South Africa and Algeria – it always viewed the native people as inferior, as non-human, as animals, and was bent on their elimination.

What is so obviously true today was true then too, at Israel’s birth. Israel was born in sin, and it continues to live in sin.

We in the West abetted its crimes in 1948, and we’re still abetting them today. Nothing has changed, except the excuses no longer work.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

Jonathan Cook is the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at www.jonathan-cook.net

Featured image: A boy sits among the rubble following an Israeli airstrike on Gaza, March 2023. (Shutterstock)

Uma das principais razões para o Ocidente insistir em prolongar a guerra na Ucrânia é o lucro exorbitante que o conflito garante aos empresários do setor industrial militar. De acordo com dados recentes, a empresa alemã Rheinmetall, um dos principais fabricantes de armas da Europa, duplicou os seus lucros devido ao seu envolvimento no armamento da Ucrânia. Este negócio lucrativo está a gerar milhares de milhões para as elites ocidentais, enquanto soldados ucranianos morrem na linha da frente.

A principal empresa militar alemã anunciou recentemente que as suas vendas atingiram um recorde histórico de 91% de lucro operacional. A Rheinmetall tem uma carteira de encomendas de quase 50 mil milhões de euros, atingindo um impressionante recorde histórico. No mesmo comunicado, os porta-vozes da empresa também deixam claro que as razões para este aumento dos lucros se devem especificamente às hostilidades na Ucrânia – que, segundo eles, “melhoraram significativamente o desempenho empresarial”.

É possível dizer que a guerra “salvou” os investimentos militares da Rheinmetall. Antes da operação militar especial, os negócios militares da empresa estavam em declínio, com a maior parte das vendas da Rheinmetall representada por peças de automóveis vendidas para a indústria automobilística. Agora, os produtos militares constituem a maior parte da produção da empresa, sendo dada prioridade ao fabrico de diversos tipos de armas, incluindo veículos blindados, tanques, peças de artilharia e sistemas de defesa aérea.

Os negócios crescem tanto que a empresa está prestes a inaugurar uma nova fábrica para possibilitar o atendimento às novas demandas. A nova unidade está prestes a ser inaugurada na Baixa Saxônia, onde serão fabricados cerca de 100 mil projéteis de artilharia anualmente. Anteriormente, a Rheinmetall anunciou que o seu objetivo é conseguir produzir 700 mil projéteis por ano, razão pela qual a expansão das capacidades industriais é uma necessidade.

Esta procura incessante de armas é garantida pela constante procura ucraniana de equipamentos. Autoridades em Kiev dizem que precisam de cerca de 20 mil projéteis de 155 mm por dia para combater adequadamente os russos. O alto consumo de munições pelos ucranianos cria uma espécie de “mercado infinito” para as empresas ocidentais, o que consequentemente amplia as vendas e os lucros de fabricantes como a Rheinmetall.

Obviamente, as empresas ocidentais também estão aproveitando o momento para aumentar os preços dos seus produtos. No ano passado, a Rheinmetall anunciou que o valor das suas armas precisaria aumentar, o que está sendo feito agora. Considerando que a Ucrânia nada pode fazer senão comprar estas armas – com a ajuda de empréstimos de fundos de investimento ocidentais, a empresa está a sobrevalorizar os seus produtos e a maximizar os seus lucros.

Esta expansão do complexo industrial alemão chama a atenção das próprias autoridades alemãs. O governo federal alemão anunciou recentemente que está a considerar participar nos negócios dos seus fabricantes de armas. É possível que o Estado alemão esteja interessado em utilizar os lucros da empresa para facilitar o financiamento de algumas políticas sociais, tendo em conta que a Alemanha se encontra numa grave crise social, com muitos cidadãos desempregados e a necessitar de apoio estatal. Então, na prática, o governo viu que a indústria militar garante lucros e agora quer ficar com algumas peças para si.

Os lucros dos agentes privados têm sido uma realidade desde o início do conflito. As empresas fabricantes de armas não querem que o conflito acabe, pois isso acabaria com a possibilidade de vender armas à Ucrânia e aos próprios países ocidentais – já que alguns deles continuam a acreditar no mito da “invasão russa da Europa”. Quanto mais guerra, medo e instabilidade, mais armas – e então, as empresas lucram com a fabricação de armas.

No caso específico da Ucrânia, é interessante pensar até que ponto todo este esforço é inútil. O país está se endividando comprando armas que não terão valor real na linha de frente, pois os esforços de guerra já se mostraram incapazes de reverter o cenário militar. A vitória russa não pode ser evitada com a chegada de novas armas e é simplesmente irracional continuar a insistir na compra sistemática de equipamento ocidental.

Na prática, os soldados ucranianos estão morrendo para os oligarcas ocidentais ficarem mais rico. Mais do que isso, os lucros são tão grandes que até os estados ocidentais estão interessados ​​em participar nestes investimentos privados, como é o caso da Alemanha. Kiev está a servir como uma rica fonte de recursos para o Ocidente, o que explica por que tantos querem que as hostilidades continuem.

O lado mais afetado é a própria Ucrânia, que sairá do conflito derrotada e imersa numa dívida imensurável. Esta situação poderia ser facilmente revertida se o regime entendesse de uma vez por todas que é inútil continuar a comprar armas, sendo as negociações e a rendição as únicas opções para acabar com as hostilidades.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

 

Artigo em inglês : Western military industrial complex keeps profiting while Ukrainians die, InfoBrics, 12 de Agosto de 20024

Imagem InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://x.com/leiroz_lucas

First published on August 1, 2024

It is no longer possible to categorise the nihilistic violence of the Israeli state. It appears to have no objective other than violence and an urge for desolation.

In 24 hours Israel has murdered the man with whom it would need to negotiate hostage release in the short term and political settlement in the long term, and a key figure in its most dangerous potential military enemy which has refrained from full-on war.

In doing so it has violated the territory, indeed the capitals, of two crucial regional states.

Israel has also taken a policy decision that the mass rape of detainees by soldiers – and, somewhat strangely, homosexual rape in particular – is acceptable in war and not to be punished.

Ironically Israel has also underlined its genocidal intent in Gaza by proving that it has the technical ability to carry out targeted attacks, and that the flattening of entire cities with 2,000lb bombs and the massacre of tens of thousands of innocents has been a policy choice.

The western media appears paralysed by this. I have seen virtually no serious comment or analysis. Nor has anybody pointed out the contrast between Israel’s lies about mass rape on October 7 and Israel’s now-admitted policy of tolerating rape of detainees.

The political class seems even more paralysed than the media class. Caught in their commitment to Zionism – basically bought and paid for – they have nothing to say about these incredible events more sensible than Kamala Harris’s zombie-like incantation of “Israel’s right to self-defence”.

The British Foreign Office has failed to produce its promised considered reaction to the ICJ Opinion on the illegality of Israeli occupation, let alone responded sensibly to Israel’s crazed paroxysm of destruction this week.

For me it is now axiomatic that there is no two state solution and that apartheid Israel must be completely dismantled as an entity. I believe that more and more people around the entire globe believe that now.

And if we have to dismantle our own political and media classes to get there, so be it.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research 

Featured image source

One hundred and fiftieth episodes of the Pangea Grandangolo programme, the international press review on Byoblu TV channel on August 8, 2024. In this episode dramatic exclusive testimonies from the latest UN Report on the conditions of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons. There are exclusive images of the Palestinian massacre going on in Gaza and spreading to the West Bank and Jerusalem.

“The United States recognizes Maduro’s rival as the winner of the Venezuelan elections“. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said there is overwhelming evidence of Edmundo González’s victory despite President Nicolás Maduro claiming victory”: this is what Washington decrees.

The attack does not only come from the Biden Administration: Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, now Donald Trump’s main supporter and financier (after having supported Biden), compares Nicolas Maduro to “a donkey” and announces that he is ready to face the “autocratic leader” in hand-to-hand combat. At the same time, Washington foments violent demonstrations inside Venezuela, during the rallies a statue of Hugo Chavez was torn down. This historic leader freed Venezuela – the country with the world’s largest oil reserves – from US domination.

Washington’s policy is clear: every country that becomes sovereign by escaping US domination – this is the focal point of Western domination – becomes an enemy to be fought and defeated. This is the policy that lights and fuels the flames of war that spread throughout the world. The West, however, is losing the dominance it has exercised for centuries. It is emblematic that the BRICS, centering on the alliance between Russia and China, has expanded from five to ten and continues to expand.

This is the context in which both the waged war by the United States and the European powers against Russia, and the war unleashed by Israel and the United States in the Middle East with the main aim of striking Iran, are taking place. In this war the genocide of the Palestinian people is being carried out, this genocide has been condemned as such by the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial body of the United Nations. The targeted assassinations of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders by Israel have triggered a chain reaction with possible catastrophic outcomes.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

This article was originally published in Italian on Grandangolo, Byoblu TV.

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

Featured image is from Black Agenda Report

Neste episódio dramático, testemunhos exclusivos do último relatório da ONU sobre as condições dos prisioneiros palestinianos nas prisões israelitas. Imagens exclusivas do massacre de palestinianos que continua em Gaza e está a alastrar à Cisjordânia e a Jerusalém.

Os EUA reconhecem o rival de Maduro como vencedor das eleições na Venezuela. O secretário de Estado Antony Blinken declara que há provas esmagadoras da vitória de Edmundo González, apesar do facto de o presidente Nicolás Maduro ter reivindicado a vitória’, decreta Washington. O ataque não vem apenas da administração Biden: Elon Musk, o homem mais rico do mundo, agora o principal apoiante e apoiante de Donald Trump (depois de ter apoiado Biden) compara Nicolas Maduro a “um burro” e anuncia que está pronto para enfrentar o “líder autocrático” em combate corpo a corpo.

Ao mesmo tempo, Washington fomenta manifestações violentas no interior da Venezuela, durante as quais é deitada abaixo uma estátua de Hugo Chavez, o líder histórico que libertou a Venezuela – o país com as maiores reservas de petróleo do mundo – do domínio dos EUA. A política de Washington é clara: qualquer país que se torne soberano, afastando-se da dominação dos EUA – o ponto central da dominação do Ocidente – torna-se um inimigo a ser combatido e derrubado. Esta é a política que acende e alimenta as chamas da guerra que se espalham pelo mundo. No entanto, o Ocidente está a perder o domínio que exerceu durante séculos. É emblemático o facto de os BRICS, centrados na aliança entre a Rússia e a China, se terem alargado de cinco para dez e continuarem a expandir-se.

Isto inclui tanto a guerra contra a Rússia, conduzida pelos EUA e pelas potências europeias, como a guerra conduzida por Israel e pelos EUA no Médio Oriente com o objetivo principal de atingir o Irão. Nesta guerra, está em curso o genocídio do povo palestiniano, condenado como tal pelo Tribunal Internacional de Justiça, o principal órgão judicial das Nações Unidas. Os assassinatos selectivos de dirigentes do Hamas e do Hezbollah por parte de Israel desencadearam uma reação em cadeia com possíveis resultados catastróficos.

Manlio Dinucci

 

Breve resumo da revista de imprensa internacional Grandangolo de sexta-feira, 9 de agosto de 2024, no canal de televisão italiano Byoblu

https://www.byoblu.com/2024/08/09/il-fronte-del-fuoco-avanza-grandangolo-pangea-la-rassegna-stampa-internazionale-di-byoblu/

Artigo em italiano :

Il Fronte del Fuoco Avanza

Traduzido por Mondialisation.ca com DeepL

 

 

VIDEO (italiano) : byoblu.com

A large-scale peer-reviewed South Korean study has found significantly increased risks of serious cardiac and neurological conditions following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, and lesser risks of several autoimmune diseases.

The nationwide population-based cohort study, published Tuesday in Nature Communications, followed nearly 4.5 million people for an average of 15 months after vaccination. First published on July 23, 2024

.

.

Screenshot from Nature

Researchers found a striking 620% increased risk of myocarditis and 175% increased risk of pericarditis in people who received the vaccine compared to historical controls.

The study also revealed a 62% increased risk for Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder.

The researchers did not highlight the the cardiac and GBS risks, but only used the data to confirm the validity of their study design, which focused on determining the risks of autoimmune diseases associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

The researchers found a 16% increased chance of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE — the most common lupus type) and a 58% higher risk of bullous pemphigoid (BP — large, fluid-filled blisters).

The study also revealed that booster shots were associated with slightly increased risks of several autoimmune connective tissue diseases (AI-CTDs), including alopecia areata (patchy hair loss), psoriasis (scaly, inflamed skin) and rheumatoid arthritis.

“Given that the risk of SLE and BP was increased in certain demographic conditions such as age and sex, long-term monitoring is necessary after mRNA vaccination for the development of AI-CTDs,” the study authors noted.

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer at Children’s Health Defense (CHD), noted how the authors minimized the most alarming data but told The Defender the study was otherwise “very robust.”

Hooker said several other studies also show relationships between autoimmune disorders — including systemic lupus — and mRNA vaccination.

The Nature Communications article follows another South Korean study published in May that found significant increases in the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination.

One of Largest Studies of Its Kind

The South Korean study, one of the largest of its kind, examined the long-term risk of autoimmune connective tissue diseases following mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

Researchers analyzed data from 9,258,803 individuals who had received at least one dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The researchers then randomly split this total into a vaccination cohort of 4,445,333 people and a historical control cohort of 4,444,932 individuals.

Because of South Korea’s high vaccination rate (96.6% of adults completed the primary COVID-19 series by October 2022), the researchers studied the health history of the control cohort for the two-year period prior to their first vaccine dose, up to Dec. 31, 2020 — just before the vaccine rollout. The vaccination group was observed through Dec. 31, 2022.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at CHD, criticized the observation period for the historical control group, pointing out that this timeframe bridges the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

“This makes it impossible (or really darn difficult) to disentangle results based on vaccination or infection,” he told The Defender. “Ideally this study would include a contemporary unvaccinated cohort for scientific examination.”

However, the researchers chose not to study unvaccinated people due to concerns over “inappropriate cohort selection and potential selection bias.”

The mean follow-up times were 471.24 ± 66.16 days for the vaccination cohort and 471.28 ± 66.15 days for the historical control cohort.

The researchers used comprehensive demographic data and healthcare records from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) and Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) databases, which cover over 99% of the South Korean population.

They attributed disease conditions when confirmed by the corresponding International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) diagnostic codes through at least three inpatient or outpatient visits during the observation period.

To ensure fair comparisons between the vaccinated group and the historical control group, researchers used statistical methods to balance out differences in:

• Age and sex
• Income levels and place of residence
• Health habits like smoking and drinking
• Existing health conditions, from high blood pressure to HIV

They also accounted for changes over time, such as when people got booster shots.

High Risk of Myocarditis in Women Among Key Findings

The researchers used their assessment of increased risks for myocarditis, pericarditis and Guillain-Barré syndrome as “positive control outcomes” to validate their study methodology.

By demonstrating the known increases in risk for these outcomes, the researchers aimed to show that their study design was capable of detecting vaccine-related adverse events.

Negative control outcomes included benign skin tumors, melanoma in situ (stage 0) and tympanic membrane perforation (ruptured eardrum) — conditions less likely to be associated with COVID-19 vaccination.

This approach lends credibility to their findings on autoimmune connective tissue diseases, suggesting that the observed increases in risk for certain AI-CTDs are likely genuine effects rather than artifacts of the study design or analysis methods.

The study identified the following variations in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups, respectively:

• Myocarditis: 164 cases versus 21 cases (620% increased risk)
• Pericarditis: 155 cases versus 54 cases (175% increased risk)
• Guillain-Barré syndrome: 123 cases versus 71 cases (62% increased risk)

Hooker told The Defender he found it odd that increased risks for these “control” sequelae were treated in passing. “It’s like, ‘Oh, everyone knows that these vaccines cause myocarditis, pericarditis and GBS … ho hum. If you have that adverse event, oh well, too bad for you.’”

Jablonowski said that given the extreme risk increase of myocarditis from vaccination found in the study, it was “stunning” that neither the paper’s title nor abstract even mentioned it. He attributed the exclusion to “the changing scope of censorship in science.”

He said:

“We know that myocarditis is most often the result of the second mRNA dose. Figure 5 of the paper further verifies this, as column C denotes a 9.17-times increase in myocarditis for those who receive only mRNA vaccinations as opposed to 2.91-times increase in myocarditis for those who are cross-vaccinated with mRNA and non-mRNA vaccines.”

Jablonowski highlighted the paper’s confirmation of other studies showing people younger than 40 are nearly twice as likely to develop myocarditis as those over 40 (12.53 times increased risk versus 6.18 times).

But he was surprised by the study’s findings that females are nearly twice as likely to develop myocarditis as males (10.53 times increased risk versus 5.26 times). “To my knowledge, this has never been shown in any population before.”

Regarding the study’s primary stated purpose, the researchers found that mRNA vaccination did not increase the risk of most autoimmune connective tissue diseases.

However, they identified a statistically significant 16% increased risk of systemic lupus erythematosus in vaccinated individuals when compared to the historic control cohort.

Gender-specific risks also emerged in the analysis. Women receiving the mRNA vaccine had a significantly higher risk — 167% — of developing bullous pemphigoid, compared to just a 2% increased risk for men.

The research also uncovered the following increased risks associated with COVID-19 booster shots: 12% for alopecia areata, 14% for rheumatoid arthritis and 16% for psoriasis.

Differences between vaccine types were also noted. Recipients of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine had an 18% higher risk of developing SLE compared to those who received Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine, who had an 8% increased risk.

Jablonowski said he had no theory about how the two vaccine brands resulted in the different risks observed. He speculated it could have something to do with the timing of the doses, with the two Pfizer doses being recommended three weeks apart and two Moderna doses four weeks apart.

Booster Shots May Increase Amount of Free-floating DNA in Key Immune Cells

The researchers wrote that the association between mRNA vaccination and SLE remains unclear, but they admitted that vaccine-associated SLE has been found in other studies.

The researchers noted that mRNA vaccines may increase levels of certain antibodies in the blood that can react with the body’s own DNA. This process could potentially trigger autoimmune diseases like lupus.

They also referenced a study suggesting that booster shots may increase the amount of free-floating DNA in key immune cells. This could potentially disrupt normal immune function.

Hooker said that “Mechanisms regarding innate immune activation via DAMPS [damage-associated molecular patterns] have been proposed for these relationships” between mRNA vaccines and autoimmune disorders like SLE. This process involves cells releasing bits of their own DNA and other molecules, causing the immune system to overactivate and potentially attack the body’s own tissues.

The authors called for further research into the association between mRNA-based vaccines and AI-CTDs.

The researchers highlighted several key limitations to their findings.

The study’s focus on a single ethnic group, South Koreans, may limit its applicability to other populations due to genetic variations in autoimmune disease susceptibility.

The authors noted that the two-year pre-study observation period may have missed some pre-existing autoimmune conditions due to their gradual onset.

Requiring three consistent ICD-10-coded records for each person to confirm disease states may also have understated the actual rates.

Pandemic-related reductions in healthcare utilization could have led to the under-diagnosis of some conditions during the study period, they said.

Despite a mean follow-up of 471 days, one of the longest for mRNA vaccine studies, the authors noted this might still be insufficient given the potentially slow development of autoimmune connective tissue diseases.

Hooker emphasized that 15 months is “the tip of the iceberg” for this type of study. He said:

“Autoimmune sequelae could take years to develop, based on previous experience with ASIA (autoimmune/inflammatory syndromes induced by adjuvants). This is confounded by boosters ad infinitum, especially with mRNA vaccines.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research

John-Michael Dumais is a news editor for The Defender. He has been a writer and community organizer on a variety of issues, including the death penalty, war, health freedom and all things related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Featured image is from CHD

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

First published on August 4, 2024

On July 28, Russia was celebrating the Navy Day with a parade in St. Petersburg. Most of the top officials were present, including President Vladimir Putin and the new Defense Minister Andrei Belousov. The former has been presiding over Russia’s resurgence to superpower status, achieving unrivaled milestones in the last nearly 25 years.

The latter is the architect of Moscow’s unprecedented economic resilience that resulted in the country zooming past both Germany and Japan, making it the fourth largest economy in the world now. Impressed by Belousov’s results, Putin entrusted him with the Ministry of Defense (MoD), a reshuffling that has been followed by a massive increase in military spending, incomparable to anything seen since the (First) Cold War ended. Thus, it can be argued that Putin and Belousov are now the Eurasian giant’s two most important policymakers.

Expectedly, all this makes both of them prime targets for Russia’s enemies. It’s virtually a given they think that removing such people would be a deadly blow to the Kremlin and it seems that’s precisely what they tried to do.

Namely, according to Moscow’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, the Neo-Nazi junta and the United States were preparing an assassination attempt on Putin and Belousov precisely during the Navy Day parade in St. Petersburg.

Russian intelligence services uncovered the plot and prevented it from going forward.

Obviously, the Kremlin was furious, but unlike Washington DC, it’s run by sane people who don’t want to see the world blown up. Thus, Defense Minister Belousov himself talked to his US counterpart Lloyd Austin and politely explained it would dawn at 3:00 AM if anything like this were to happen again.

For obvious security reasons, Ryabkov couldn’t reveal the details, leaving many to speculate on how the assassination attempt could’ve played out. Some argue that sea or even underwater drones could’ve been used, most likely launched from a neutral merchant ship, while others think it was likely a UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle).

To make matters worse, the possible participation of NATO members Poland and Finland was also discussed, meaning that the world’s most aggressive racketeering cartel was directly involved. As soon as Ryabkov revealed that the unprecedented assassination attempt was thwarted, the mainstream propaganda machine resorted to immediate damage control, spewing nonsense about the US allegedly “blocking” the plot, while others claim that Russia supposedly “pleaded” with America to “prevent” the assassination attempt.

However, Pepe Escobar, a colossus of geopolitical analytics, argues that’s not the case and that the Kremlin warned the Pentagon that if US services succeeded in their terrorist tactics, it would be the very last thing anyone from America would ever do, as the world’s most aggressive thalassocracy would simply cease to exist immediately after that. In other words, the warmongering lunatics and war criminals in Washington DC would be willing to not only jeopardize the lives of 330 million Americans, but also over 8 billion other people on the entire planet. I’ve had the honor of participating in a meeting with Pepe Escobar and other experts and analysts from all over the world, where he confirmed that the assassination attempt took place and that Russia indeed warned the US that the consequence of such barbarism would be the total annihilation of every single culprit.

It’s virtually a given that the mainstream propaganda machine will try to denigrate and discredit such reputable sources, calling them “conspiracy theorists”. It will also certainly engage in a cover-up, either by denying that the assassination attempt ever took place or at least trying to prevent the US from looking bad by disseminating blatant lies such as the one that it supposedly “tried to prevent the plot”. Either way, as per usual, the truth will have no part whatsoever in their activities. However, empirical and historical evidence shows that the US-led political West not only has the propensity to assassinate rival leaders, but it also regularly (and openly) brags about it. Not to mention the simple fact that several high-ranking American officials unashamedly talked about decapitation strikes on Russia, despite the perfectly clear consequences of such actions.

Others, such as the infamous  Lindsey Graham didn’t even bother using any sort of euphemisms, but called for the US services to, I quote, “take Putin out”. His warmonger “buddy” John Bolton said virtually the same thing and also called for a coup in Russia.

Former US Army general and CIA director David Petraeus called for strikes on Moscow, while the Pentagon itself talked about a decapitation strike on the Kremlin.

Immediately after such statements, Russia changed its long-range strike doctrine, including the preemptive one. Moscow is also regularly upgrading its already impressive strategic arsenal, including with hypersonic weapons, while Washington DC can’t even make a basic ICBM anymore due to the very real issues with its Military Industrial Complex. And yet, this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to America’s massive issues.

Namely, its already atrocious political situation is becoming even worse now, with the border crisis escalating and assassinations of political opponents becoming the “new normal” in the US. In the meantime, stealing Russian forex reserves has become the political West’s favorite pastime and a way to partially finance its favorite Neo-Nazi puppets, whose total defeat is the only way to end the suffering of the millions of regular Ukrainians. In the meantime, the US and NATO are effectively planning yet another pandemic, a fact that the Russian military openly warned about. Worse yet, their policy of “controlled” escalation is getting out of hand, resulting in multiple actions that can only be described as a declaration of war on Russia. This includes everything from sabotage operations to both direct and indirect terrorist attacks (through Islamic radicals).

The US and NATO directly participate in the planning and execution of these black ops, resulting in the deaths and injuries of hundreds (or even thousands) of Russian civilians. The political West is also trying to drag numerous other countries into this mess, including through coercion or even direct threats. The only logical explanation is that NATO wants to trigger Moscow to react in the most violent way possible. The constant usage of legal gray areas to target Russian troops and civilians is extremely frustrating, although the Kremlin has managed to keep its cool for the most part. For now, at least, as Russian patience, although unrivaled, has its limits. This is precisely why Moscow keeps warning against further escalation, but to no avail. The political West is determined to cause the complete destruction of the entire world with its certifiably insane actions and policies.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Featured image source

 

First published on June 2, 2021 at the hight of the Covid crisis

Sold under the pretence of a quest for optimising well-being and ‘happiness’, capitalism thrives on the exploitation of peoples and the environment. What really matters is the strive to maintain viable profit margins. The prevailing economic system demands ever-increasing levels of extraction, production and consumption and needs a certain level of annual GDP growth for large firms to make sufficient profit.

But at some point, markets become saturated, demand rates fall and overproduction and overaccumulation of capital becomes a problem. In response, we have seen credit markets expand and personal debt increase to maintain consumer demand as workers’ wages have been squeezed, financial and real estate speculation rise (new investment markets), stock buy backs and massive bail outs and subsidies (public money to maintain the viability of private capital) and an expansion of militarism (a major driving force for many sectors of the economy).

We have also witnessed systems of production abroad being displaced for global corporations to then capture and expand markets in foreign countries.

The old normal

Much of what is outlined above is inherent to capitalism. But the 1980s was a crucial period that helped set the framework for where we find ourselves today.

Remember when the cult of the individual was centre stage? It formed part of the Reagan-Thatcher rhetoric of the ‘new normal’ of 1980s neoliberalism.

In the UK, the running down of welfare provision was justified by government-media rhetoric about ‘individual responsibility’, reducing the role of the state and the need to ‘stand on your own two feet’. The selling off of public assets to profiteering corporations was sold to the masses on the basis of market efficiency and ‘freedom of choice’.

The state provision of welfare, education, health services and the role of the public sector was relentlessly undermined by neoliberal dogma and the creed that the market (global corporations) constituted the best method for supplying human needs.

Thatcher’s stated mission was to unleash the entrepreneurial spirit by rolling back the ‘nanny state’. She wasted little time in crushing the power of the trade unions and privatising key state assets.

Despite her rhetoric, she did not actually reduce the role of the state. She used its machinery differently, on behalf of business. Neither did she unleash the ‘spirit of entrepreneurialism’. Economic growth rates under her were similar as in the 1970s, but a concentration of ownership occurred and levels of inequality rocketed.

Margaret Thatcher was well trained in perception management, manipulating certain strands of latent populist sentiment and prejudice. Her free market, anti-big-government platitudes were passed off to a section of the public that was all too eager to embrace them as a proxy for remedying all that was wrong with Britain. For many, what were once regarded as the extreme social and economic policies of the right became entrenched as the common sense of the age.

Thatcher’s policies destroyed a fifth of Britain’s industrial base in just two years alone. The service sector, finance and banking were heralded as the new drivers of the economy, as much of Britain’s manufacturing sector was out-sourced to cheap labour economies.

Under Thatcher, employees’ share of national income was slashed from 65% to 53%. Long gone are many of the relatively well-paid manufacturing jobs that helped build and sustain the economy. In their place, the country has witnessed the imposition of a low taxation regime and low-paid and insecure ‘service sector’ jobs (no-contract work, macjobs, call centre jobs – many of which soon went abroad) as well as a real estate bubble, credit card debt and student debt, which helped to keep the economy afloat.

However, ultimately, what Thatcher did was – despite her rhetoric of helping small-scale businesses and wrapping herself in the national flag – facilitate the globalisation process by opening the British economy to international capital flows and allowing free rein for global finance and transnational corporations.

Referring back to the beginning of this article, it is clear whose happiness and well-being counts most and whose does not matter at all as detailed by David Rothkopf in his 2008 book ‘Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making‘. Members of the superclass belong to the megacorporation-interlocked, policy-building elites of the world and come from the highest echelons of finance, industry, the military, government and other shadow elites. These are the people whose interests Margaret Thatcher was serving.

These people set the agendas at the Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, G-7, G-20, NATO, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization.

And let us not forget the various key think tanks and policy making arenas like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Brookings Institute and Chatham House as well as the World Economic Forum (WEF), where sections of the global elite forge policies and strategies and pass them to their political handmaidens.

Driven by the vision of its influential executive chairman Klaus Schwab, the WEF is a major driving force for the dystopian ‘great reset’, a tectonic shift that intends to change how we live, work and interact with each other.

The new normal

The great reset envisages a transformation of capitalism, resulting in permanent restrictions on fundamental liberties and mass surveillance as livelihoods and entire sectors are sacrificed to boost the monopoly and hegemony of pharmaceutical corporations, high-tech/big data giants, Amazon, Google, major global chains, the digital payments sector, biotech concerns, etc.

Under the cover of COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions, the great reset is being rolled out under the guise of a ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ in which smaller enterprises are to be driven to bankruptcy or bought up by monopolies. Economies are being ‘restructured’ and many jobs and roles will be carried out by AI-driven technology.

The WEF says the public will ‘rent’ everything they require: stripping the right of ownership under the guise of a ‘green economy’ underpinned by the rhetoric of ‘sustainable consumption’ and ‘climate emergency’.

At the same time new (‘green product’) markets are being created and, on the back of COVID, fresh opportunities for profit extraction are opening up abroad. For instance, World Bank Group President David Malpass has stated that poorer countries will be ‘helped’ to get back on their feet after the various lockdowns that have been implemented in response to the Covid-19 crisis. This ‘help’ will be on condition that neoliberal reforms and the undermining of public services are implemented and become further embedded.

Just a month into the COVID crisis, the IMF and World Bank were already facing a deluge of aid requests from developing countries. Scores of countries were asking for bailouts and loans. Ideal cover for rebooting the global economy via a debt crisis and the subsequent privatisation of national assets and the further ‘structural adjustment’ of economies.

Many people waste no time in referring to this as  some kind of ‘Marxist’ or ‘communist’ takeover of the planet because a tiny elite will be dictating policies. This has nothing to do with Marxism. An authoritarian capitalist elite – supported by their political technocrats – aims to secure even greater control of the global economy. It will no longer be a (loosely labelled) ‘capitalism’ based on ‘free’ markets and competition (not that those concepts ever really withstood proper scrutiny). Economies will be monopolised by global players, not least e-commerce platforms run by the likes of Amazon, Walmart, Facebook and Google and their multi-billionaire owners.

Essential (for capitalism) new markets will also be created through the ‘financialisation’ and ownership of all aspects of nature, which is to be colonised, commodified and traded under the fraudulent notion of protecting the environment.

The so-called ‘green economy’ will fit in with the notion of ‘sustainable consumption’ and ‘climate emergency’. A bunch of billionaires and their platforms will control every aspect of the value chain. Of course, they themselves will not reduce their own consumption or get rid of their personal jets, expensive vehicles, numerous exclusive homes or ditch their resource gobbling lifestyles. Reduced consumption is meant only for the masses.

They will not only control and own data about consumption but also control and own data on production, logistics, who needs what, when they need it, who should produce it, who should move it and when it should be moved. Independent enterprises will disappear or become incorporated into the platforms acting as subservient cogs. Elected representatives will be mere technocratic overseers of these platforms and the artificial intelligence tools that plan and determine all of the above.

The lockdowns and restrictions we have seen since March 2020 have helped boost the bottom line of global chains and the e-commerce giants and have cemented their dominance. Many small and medium-size independent enterprises have been pushed towards bankruptcy. At the same time, fundamental rights have been eradicated under COVID19 government measures.

Politicians in countries throughout the world have been using the rhetoric of the WEF’s great reset, talking of the need to ‘build back better’ for the ‘new normal’. They are all on point. Hardly a coincidence. Essential to this ‘new normal’ is the compulsion to remove individual liberties and personal freedoms given that, in the ‘green new normal’, unfettered consumption will no longer be an option for the bulk of the population.

It has long been the case that a significant part of the working class has been deemed ‘surplus to requirements’ – three decades ago, such people were sacrificed on the altar of neo-liberalism. They lost their jobs due to automation and offshoring. They have had to rely on meagre state welfare and run-down public services.

But what we are now seeing is the possibility of hundreds of millions around the world being robbed of their livelihoods. Forget about the benign sounding ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ and its promised techno-utopia. What we are witnessing right now seems to be a major restructuring of capitalist economies.

With AI and advanced automation of production, distribution and service provision (3D printing/manufacturing, drone technology, driverless vehicles, lab grown food, farmerless farms, robotics, etc), a mass labour force – and therefore mass education, mass welfare, mass healthcare provision and entire systems that were in place to reproduce labour for capitalist economic activity – will no longer be required. As economic activity is restructured, labour’s relationship to capital is being transformed.

In a reorganised system that no longer needs to sell the virtues of excessive individualism (consumerism), the levels of political and civil rights and freedoms we have been used to will not be tolerated.

Neoliberalism might have reached its logical conclusion (for now). Making trade unions toothless, beating down wages to create unimaginable levels of inequality and (via the dismantling of Bretton Woods) affording private capital so much freedom to secure profit and political clout under the guise of ‘globalisation’ would inevitably lead to one outcome.

A concentration of wealth, power, ownership and control at the top with large sections of the population on state-controlled universal basic income and everyone subjected to the discipline of an emerging biosecurity surveillance state designed to curtail liberties ranging from freedom of movement and assembly to political protest and free speech.

Perception management is of course vital for pushing through all of this. Rhetoric about ‘liberty’ and ‘individual responsibility’ worked a treat in the 1980s to help bring about a massive heist of wealth. This time, it is a public health scare and ‘collective responsibility’ as part of a strategy to help move towards near-monopolistic control over economies by a handful of global players.  

And the perception of freedom is also being managed. Once vaccinated many will begin to feel free. Freer than under lockdown. But not really free at all.

*

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

Colin Todhunter is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research.

Summary

We studied all-cause mortality in 125 countries with available all-cause mortality data by time (week or month), starting several years prior to the declared pandemic, and for up to and more than three years of the Covid period (2020-2023). The studied countries are on six continents and comprise approximately 35 % of the global population (2.70 billion of 7.76 billion, in 2019).

The overall excess all-cause mortality rate in the 93 countries with sufficient data in the 3-year period 2020-2022 is 0.392 ± 0.002 % of 2021 population, which is comparable to the historic rate of approximately 0.97 % of population over the course of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic.

The overall excess all-cause mortality rate in the 93 countries with sufficient data in the 3-year period 2020-2022 is 0.392 ± 0.002 % of 2021 population, which is comparable to the historic rate of approximately 0.97 % of population over the course of the 1918 “Spanish Flu” pandemic.

By comparison, India (which is not included in the present study) had an April-July 2021 peak in excess all-cause mortality of 3.7 million deaths for its 2021 population of approximately 1.41 billion, which corresponds to an excess death rate of 0.26 % for 2021 alone (Rancourt, 2022).

Our calculated excess mortality rate (0.392 ± 0.002 %) corresponds to 30.9 ± 0.2 million excess deaths projected to have occurred globally for the 3-year period 2020-2022, from all causes of excess mortality during this period.

We also calculate the population-wide risk of death per injection (vDFR) by dose number (1st dose, 2nd dose, boosters) (actually, by time period), and by age (in a subset of European countries). Using the median value of all-ages vDFR for 2021-2022 for the 78 countries with sufficient data gives an estimated projected global all-ages excess mortality associated with the COVID-19 vaccine rollouts up to 30 December 2022: 16.9 million COVID-19-vaccine-associated deaths.

Large differences in excess all-cause mortality rate (by population) and in age-and-health-status-adjusted (P-score) mortality are incompatible with a viral pandemic spread hypothesis and are strongly associated with the combination (product) of share of population that is elderly (60+ years) and share of population living in poverty.

There are large North-South (Canada-USA-Mexico) differences in North America, and large East-West differences in Europe, which are due to large national jurisdictional differences, or discontinuities in socio-economic and institutional conditions. Such systematic differences in mortality and underlying structure are captured by hierarchical cluster analysis using a panel of (yearly) time series, including to some extent the likelihood of persistent excess all-cause mortality into 2023.

Excluding borderline cases, 28 countries (of 79 countries with sufficient data, 35 % of countries) have a high statistical certainty of persistent and significant excess all-cause mortality into 2023, compared to the extrapolated pre-Covid historic trend, excluding excess all-cause mortality from peak residuals extending out from 2022, and excluding accidentally large values: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Qatar, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, United Kingdom, and USA. More research is needed to elucidate this phenomenon.

The spatiotemporal variations in national excess all-cause mortality rates allow us to conclude that the Covid-period (2020-2023) excess all-cause mortality in the world is incompatible with a pandemic viral respiratory disease as a primary cause of death. This hypothesis, although believed to be supported by testing campaigns, should be abandoned.

Inconsistencies that disprove the hypothesis of a viral respiratory pandemic to explain excess all-cause mortality during the Covid period are seen on a global scale and include the following.

• Near-synchronicity of onset, across several continents, of surges in excess mortality occurring immediately when a pandemic is declared by the WHO (11 March 2020), and never prior to pandemic announcement in any country
• Excessively large country-to-country heterogeneity of the age-and-health-status-adjusted (P-score) mortality during the Covid period, including across shared borders between adjacent countries, and including in all time periods down to half years
• Highly time variable age-and-health-status-adjusted (P-score) mortality in individual countries during and after the Covid period, including more-than-year-long periods of zero excess mortality, long-duration plateaus or regimes of high excess mortality, single peaks versus many recurring peaks, and persistent high excess mortality after a pandemic is declared to have ended (5 May 2023)
• Strong correlations (all-country scatter plots) between excess all-cause mortality rates and socio-economic factors (esp. measures of poverty) change with time (by year and half year) during the Covid period, between diametrically opposite values (near-zero, large and positive, large and negative) of the Pearson correlation coefficient (e.g., Figure 29, first half of 2020 to first half of 2023)

One might tentatively add:

• No evidence of the large vaccine rollouts ever being associated with reductions in excess all-cause mortality, in any country (and see Rancourt and Hickey, 2023)
• Exponential increases with age in excess all-cause mortality rate (by population), consistent with age-dominant frailty rather than infection in the limit of high virulence

We describe plausible mechanisms and argue that the three primary causes of death associated with the excess all-cause mortality during (and after) the Covid period are:

1. Biological (including psychological) stress from mandates such as lockdowns and associated socio-economic structural changes
2. Non-COVID-19-vaccine medical interventions such as mechanical ventilators and drugs (including denial of treatment with antibiotics)
3. COVID-19 vaccine injection rollouts, including repeated rollouts on the same populations

In all cases ― for all three identified primary causes of death ― a proximal or clinical cause of death associated (such as on death certificates) with the quantified excess all-cause mortality is respiratory condition or infection. Therefore, we distinguish (and define) true primary causes of death from the pervasive and accompanying proximal or clinical cause of death as respiratory.

We understand the Covid-period mortality catastrophe to be precisely what happens when governments cause global disruptions and assaults against populations. We emphasize the importance of biological stress from sudden and profound structural societal changes and of medical assaults (including denial of treatment for bacterial pneumonias, repeated vaccine injections, etc.). We estimate that such a campaign of disruptions and assaults in a modern world will produce a global all-ages mortality rate of >0.1 % of population per year, as was also the case in the 1918 mortality catastrophe.

Introduction

All-cause mortality by time and by administrative jurisdiction is arguably the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events causing death, and for gauging the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause. Such data can be collected by national or state jurisdiction or subdivision, by age, by sex, by location of death, and so on. It is not susceptible to reporting bias or to any bias in attributing causes of death in the mortality itself (see many references in Rancourt et al., 2023a).

Rancourt and collaborators have studied all-cause mortality for many jurisdictions, while developing the analytic approaches:

• several, esp. USA (Rancourt, 2020);
• France (Rancourt et al., 2020);
• India (Rancourt, 2022);
• USA (Rancourt et al., 2021a, 2022b);
• Canada (Rancourt et al., 2021b, 2022c);
• Australia (Rancourt et al., 2022a, 2023b);
• 17 countries in the Southern Hemisphere (Rancourt et al., 2023a);
• Israel (Rancourt et al., 2023b);
• world, with respect to COVID-19 vaccine efficacy (Rancourt and Hickey, 2023).

Researchers at CORRELATION and collaborators continue to be engaged in a broad research program of all-cause mortality and its associations with various factors.

Here we study all-cause mortality in 125 countries with available all-cause mortality data by time (week or month). The studied countries are on six continents and comprise approximately 35 % of the global population (2.70 billion of 7.76 billion, in 2019).

Large countries which are notably excluded for lack of available data include China (1.41 billion in 2019), India (1.38 billion in 2029), Indonesia, Pakistan, and most countries in Africa, although India has previously been studied (Rancourt, 2022; and references therein).

See the Summary for an overview.

Click here to read the full report.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Spread the Truth, Refer a Friend to Global Research 

Featured image is from NaturalNews.com

This incisive article by Allen L. Roland on the repeal of civil liberties and freedom of speech in America was first published by Global Research in August 2006,  18 years ago. 

It brings to forefront of debate the ongoing road map towards “Police State America”.

Civil liberties are being arbitrarily repealed. There is a crackdown on freedom of information.

The Lie has become the Truth.

A fear campaign is accompanied by media propaganda.

Under the Biden administration, there is a process of social submission to higher authority.

The derogation of fundamental rights is being carried out Worldwide.

Those who question the legitimacy of government policies including the lockdown, the vaccine and the engineered disruption of economic activity are branded as “conspiracy theorists”. 

Is Martial Law Contemplated? 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, July 16, 2023, June 7, 2024

 

***

We are dangerously close to a situation where ~ if the American people took to the streets in righteous indignation or if there were another 9/11 ~ a mechanism for martial law could be quickly implemented and carried out under REX 84.  

The Cheney/Bush administration has a plan which would accommodate the detention of large numbers of American citizens during times of emergency.

The plan is called REX 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984. Through Rex-84 an undisclosed number of concentration camps were set in operation throughout the United States, for internment of dissidents and others potentially harmful to the state.

The Rex 84 Program was originally established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA.

Existence of the Rex 84 plan was first revealed during the Iran-Contra Hearings in 1987, and subsequently  reported by the Miami Herald on July 5, 1987

” These camps are to be operated by FEMA should martial law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general’s signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached.”

And there you have it ~ the real purpose of FEMA is to not only protect the government but to be its principal vehicle for martial law.

This is why FEMA could not respond immediately to the Hurricane Katrina disaster ~ humanitarian efforts were no longer part of its job description under the Department of Homeland Security.

It appears Hurricane Katrina also provided FEMA with an excuse to “dry run” its unconstitutional powers in New Orleans, rounding up “refugees” (now called “evacuees”) and “relocating” them in various camps. “Some evacuees are being treated as ‘internees’ by FEMA,” writes former NSA employee Wayne Madsen.

“Reports continue to come into WMR that evacuees from New Orleans and Acadiana [the traditional twenty-two parish Cajun homeland] who have been scattered across the United States are being treated as ‘internees’ and not dislocated American citizens from a catastrophe”

We are dangerously close to a situation where ~ if the American people took to the streets in righteous indignation or if there were another 9/11 ~ a mechanism for martial law could be quickly implemented and carried out under REX 84.

Be forewarned ~ the Cheney/Bush administration will stop at nothing to preserve their power and their ongoing neocon mis-adventure and they have currently proposed having executive control over all the states National Guard troops  in a national emergency.

Governor Tom Vilsack of Iowa, called the proposal ” one step away from a complete takeover of the National Guard, the end of the Guard as a dual-function force that can respond to both state and national needs.”

The provision was tucked into the House version of the defense bill without notice to the states, something Vilsack said he resented as much as the proposal itself.

Under the provision, the president would have authority to take control of the Guard in case of  ” a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident or catastrophe” in the United States.

Do remember, to the Cheney/Bush administration ~ the Mob at the Gates that they truly fear is not terrorists but, instead, the people demanding the truth.

REX 84 AND FEMA

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/FEMA-Concentration-Camps3sep04.htm

MINDFULLY, 2004 – There over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners.

They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA should martial law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general’s signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached. . . The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA.

Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed down and to be turned into prisons.

Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government.

FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation.

The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners.

Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold thousands of  people.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published three years ago on September 16, 2021

 

Introduction

“We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World  War, feel bound to follow our conscience. …

Another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied.”

(Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir, Sorin Shapira, Mascha Orel, Morry Krispijn et al, see complete text here)

***

The mRNA vaccine is “experimental’ and unapproved. Since December 2020, it has resulted in a worldwide upward trend in deaths and injuries.

Numerous scientific studies confirm the nature of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine which is being imposed on all humanity. 

The stated objective is to enforce the Worldwide vaccination of 7.9 billion people in more than 190 countries, to be followed by the imposition of a digitized “vaccine passport”.  

Needless to say this is a multi-billion dollar operation for Big Pharma. In a bitter irony, Pfizer which is playing a dominant role in marketing the vaccine at the level of the entire planet, has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice (for more details see below). 

The national health authorities cannot say: we did not know. Nor can they say that the objective is “to save lives”. This is a killer vaccine. And they know it. 

The latest official figures (September 15, 2021) point to approximately: 

40,666 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and

6.6 Million reported “adverse events”.

But only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities.

Those death and injury figures (EU, UK, US) SOFAR are at least ten times higher than the official reported cases. 

410,000 deaths, 66 million injuries out of a population of  approximately 850 million. 

Moreover, the health authorities are actively involved in obfuscating the deaths and injuries resulting from the mRNA “vaccine”, while inflating the number of Covid-19 related deaths. (“autopsies not required”). 

Video: Michel Chossudovsky provides a broad picture of the ongoing crisis which is destroying people’s lives Worldwide.

To view the video on Bitchute, enter a comment, click the link below:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/uBzx3eYozeXz/

Spread the Word. Forward this video.

Digital Tyranny at a Global Level

The vaccine is being applied and imposed Worldwide. The target population is 7.9 billion. Several doses are contemplated. It is the largest vaccination program in World history.

“Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body”.

The WHO “Guidelines” for establishing a Worldwide Digital Informations System for issuing so-called “Digital Certificates for Covid-19” are generously funded by the Rockefeller and Bill and Melinda Gates foundations.

The mRNA vaccine is not a project of a UN intergovernmental body (WHO) on behalf the member states of the UN: This is a private initiative. The billionaire elites which fund and enforce the Vaccine Project Worldwide are Eugenists committed to Depopulation.

 

Big Pharma: Pfizer Seeks Worldwide Dominance

The global vaccine project entitled COVAX is coordinated Worldwide by the WHO, GAVI, CEPI, the  Gates Foundation in liaison with the World Economic Forum (WEF),  the Wellcome Trust, DARPA and Big Pharma which is increasingly dominated by the Pfizer-GSK partnership established barely four months before the onset of the Covid-19 crisis in early January 2020.

Pfizer –which has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice– is playing a “near monopoly role” in the marketing of the mRNA “vaccine”. Already in the EU, Pfizer is slated to deliver 1.8 billion doses which is equivalent to four times the population of the European Union.

In a historic US Department of Justice decision in September 2009, Pfizer Inc. pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It was “The Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement” in the History of the U.S. Department of Justice.

In addition to compliance and enforcement, the “vaccine poison” imposed at the level of the entire planet is produced by a pharmaceutical company which has been indicted by the DOJ on charges of “fraudulent marketing”. 

 

Compliance: No Jab, No Job

“Fraudulent Marketing” in relation to the mRNA vaccine is a gross understatement. The health authorities as well as Big Pharma not to mention the WHO, the Rockefellers and the Gates foundation are fully aware that the vaccine has resulted in countless deaths and injuries, including blood clots, infertility, brain damage, myocarditis, etc.

And yet the governments (with the 24/7 support of the media) are pressuring people to take the jab. “It will save lives”.

The health risks are known and documented, yet at the same time people are not only misinformed, they are forced into accepting the vaccine. Or else…

No career, no income, no future… It’s an issue of compliance. And no access to education and health services if you are not vaccinated.

If they refuse the jab, they loose their job.

Students are barred from attending schools, colleges and universities, health workers and high school teachers who do not conform are fired, civil society is precipitated into a state of chaos.

Relevance of the Nuremberg Code

Focussing on the experimental nature of the mRNA vaccine and its devastating health impacts, legal analysts have raised the issue of the historic Nuremberg “Nazi Doctors Trial’ (1946-47) in which Nazi doctors were charged for war crimes, specifically in the conduct of medical experiments on both prisoners in the concentration camps and civilians.

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

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

 

Resulting from the verdict on August 19, 1947, the Nuremberg Code was enacted. Reviewed below are the Ten Principles of the Nuremberg Code. Several of these principles –in relation to the mRNA vaccine and the vaccine passport– have been blatantly violated.

The first principle of the “Nuremberg Code.” states that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” And that is precisely what is being denied in relation to the “vaccine”(see sentences in bold below).

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

emphasis added

Entire populations in a large number of countries are under threat to comply and get vaccinated.

With reference to the Nuremberg Code, they are unable:

“to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion” (Nuremberg 1 above).

Amply documented, there is an upward trend in mRNA vaccine deaths and injuries Worldwide and the health authorities are fully aware of the “health risks”, yet they have not informed the public. There is no informed consent. And the media is lying through their teeth:

“No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur” (Nuremberg 5 above). 

That “a priori reason” outlined in Nuremberg principle 5, is amply documented: Deaths and disabling injuries are ongoing at the level of the entire planet. They are confirmed by the official statistics of mRNA vaccine mortality and morbidity (EU, US, UK).

Video: The mRNA vaccine was launched in mid to late December 2020. In many countries, there was a significant shift in mortality following the introduction of the mRNA vaccine

Source: HeathData.org

Nazi “Medical Experiments”

Let us recall the categorization of specific crimes pertaining to Nazi “medical experiments” conducted on concentration camp prisoners. These included “the killing of Jews for anatomical research, the killing of tubercular Poles, and the euthanasia of sick and disabled civilians in Germany and occupied territories. …”

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

The trial documents and evidence are all on file. The defendants were charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. 

Nuremberg Doctors Trial

The Scale and Size of the Worldwide Covid-19 Vaxx Operation

I have not been able to review the relevant documents in detail with a view to establishing the number of victims resulting from the Nazi medical experiments.

While the Nuremberg principles are of utmost relevance to the Covid-19 vaccine project, simplistic comparisons should be avoided. The context, the history and the mechanisms of compliance pertaining to the mRNA “vaccine” are fundamentally different.

The scale and size of the Worldwide Vaxx operation as well as its complex organizational structure (WHO, GAVI, Gates Foundation, Big Pharma) is unprecedented.

Humanity in its entirety is the objective of the Vaxx project. The target population for vaccine experimentation of the Covid-19 vaccine is the entire population of Planet Earth:

7.9 billion people, involving several doses.

Multiply the World’s population by 4 doses (as proposed by Pfizer): the order of magnitude is 30 billion doses Worldwide.

The numbers are in the billions. The likely impacts on mortality and morbidity are beyond description.

Big Money is behind this public-private partnership project.

We are dealing with a Worldwide process of crimes against humanity. Entire populations in a large number of member states of the UN are subject to compliance and enforcement (without the Rule of Law).

If they refuse the vaccine, they are socially marginalized and confined, rejected by their employers, rejected by society: no education, no career, no life. Their lives are destroyed.

If they accept the vaccine, their health and their life are potentially in jeopardy. The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming.

And that’s just the beginning.

Extensive crimes against humanity Worldwide are being committed.

The mRNA “vaccine” modifies the human genome at the level of the entire Planet. It’s Genocide.

It’s  a “Holocaust of Greater Magnitude, Taking Place before our Eyes”. 

***

About the Author

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (1979, 1983)

He is the author of twelve books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at [email protected]

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

America’s Perpetual War: Six Questions

by Professor (Joseph) Hee Soo Chung

Scroll down to read this article in Korean. AI translation

미국의 영원한 전쟁: 여섯 가지 질문

(조셉) 희수 정 교수에 의해

이 기사를 한국어로 읽으려면 아래로 스크롤하세요. AI 번역

 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on June 12, 2023, this incisive and timely article by the late Professor Joseph Chung (who passed away in October  2024) provides us a carefully documented history of America’s Perpetual War.

May Professor Chung’s Legacy and commitment to Peace Live Forever. 

*** 

Introduction

Former American President Jimmy Carter said in 2018 that in America, there were 226 years of wars since its independence which took place 242 years ago thus leaving only 16 years of peace.

Since WWII, there were 32 American military conflicts involving dozens of countries. Some of these military conflicts have lasted for over twenty years and some others are still continuing.

In other words, the U.S. is a country of perpetual war. War is terribly destructive human activity. Millions of human beings have been sacrificed. Tens of trillions of dollars worth of housing, school, factories, hospitals and other infrastructure facilities have been destroyed in the countries which have been the target of American military attacks.

The perpetual war has destroyed the very foundation of freedom and democracy; it has prevented healthy and equitable economic development of the world; it has led to the violation of human rights; it has ruined traditional values of many countries and, above all, it has caused lasting human suffering.

America’s multi-trillion dollar perpetual war has denied and deprived millions of Americans of decent income, adequate housing, needed foods, necessary health care, safety on the street, reliable infrastructure facilities, essential education and other goods and services needed for descent living.

Before I go any further, I would like to quote the historical statement of President Dwight Eisenhower.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone, it is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hope of children. (President Dwight Eisenhower address to the North American Society of News editors, April 16, 1953)

In this paper, I am asking the following six questions:

• How many wars has the U.S. undertaken since WWII?
• How are the American wars organized?
• What is the purpose of the American wars?
• Who are the beneficiaries of the American wars?
• What are the negative impacts of the American wars?
• Will the American wars continue?

How many wars has the U.S. undertaken since WWII?

There are undoubtedly several ways of defining war. In this paper, I define war in terms of American military interventions. Defined thus, I have counted 32 wars undertaken by the U.S. since WWII.

I have classified these wars in terms of the following categories:

• invasion (23 cases),
• “civil war” (7 cases), and
• multi-target war (2),

which gives 32 wars that took place since the WWII, in the course of the so-called “post war era”. 

There are reasons to believe that there are still many undeclared military interventions conducted by war contractors and Special Operation Forces units spread in 1,000 bases in 191 countries. The following shows the list of American wars.

Invasions,

• Korean War (1950-1953),
• Vietnam War (1955-1975);
• Cuban,Bay of Pigs (1961),
• Lebanon (1982-1984),
• Grenada (1983),
• Libya bombing (1984),
• Tanker War-Persian Gulf  (1984-1987),
• Panama (1989-1990),
• Gulf War (1989-1991),
• Iraq War (1991-1993),
• Bosnia War (1992-1995),
• Haiti (1994-1999),
• Kosovo (1998-1999),
• Afghanistan (2001-2021),
• Yemen (2002-present),
• Iraq (2003-2011),
• Pakistan (2004-2018),
• Somalia (2007-present)
• Libya (2011),
• Niger (2013-present)
• Iraq (2014-2021),
• Syria (2014-present),
• Libya (2015-2019).
• [Ukraine, yet to be categorized]

Civil Wars:

Indo-China (1959-1975),

Indonesia (1958-1961)

Lebanon (1958),

Dominican Republic (1968-1966),

Korea DMZ (1966-1969),

Cambodia (1967-1975)

Somalia (1991-present).

Multi-target wars:

Operation Ocean Shield: location, Indian- Ocean (2008-2016), Operation Observant Compass: location, Uganda and Central Africa (2011-2017).

How are the American Wars Organized?

To understand the nature and the implication of the perpetual war in the U.S., it is necessary to introduce the concept of American Pro-War Community (APWC).

In literature and media, we use the notion of military-industrial complex (MIC) to describe the vast system of perpetual U.S. wars. But, actually, the system of perpetual war involves many more individuals and organizations than in the MIC.

The APWC is a tightly knit community promoting its interests at the expense of the wellbeing of ordinary Americans and the interests of the people of the target countries. It is so well organized and so well rooted and so powerful that it is quasi impossible to dissolve it.

The AWPC’s core group comprises the war corporations and the federal government led by the Pentagon, the Congress, the Senate and other government agencies.

There are two supporting groups comprising all sorts of institutions and organizations.

There is the group supporting the supply of war goods and services.

Then, there is the group supporting the creation of demand for war goods and services.

The efficiency of the whole system of producing and selling war goods and services depends on how the core group and the supporting groups can work in harmony together to attain the objectives of wars, namely, the maximization of profit and the intra-APWC sharing of the profit.

Supply of War Goods and Services

The supply of war goods and services is assured by war corporations which produce weapons, building contractors which build all sorts of buildings and manage them, catering services companies that provide foods and drinks for the GIs, information firms which offer information needed for wars and even the academics that offers ideas and technologies.

In the U.S. 40 major war corporations have annual sales of almost $ 600 billion.

The following table shows the importance of the five leading war corporations in U.S.

Table 1. Five major War Corporations: Annual Sales ($ billion) 2022 and Growth (recent years: %)

Note: LM (Lockheed Martin), NG (Northrop Grumman); GD (General Dynamics) Source

The combined annual sale of the five leading firms in 2022 was as much as $ 241.8 billion of which $183.3 billon was for the sale of military goods and services, or 75.8% of the total sale.

The supply of war goods and services relies on the extensive production chain involving foreign and domestic providers of raw materials and intermediary products. In addition, the academics and information firms offer information, technology and other services needed for the production of weapons.

The following is a list of the well known universities which are deeply involved in American wars. Each one of these universities produces, for the war industry, a variety of war products and services.

In this paper, for each academic institution, just one typical product or service is mentioned.

No less than 70% of university research projects are funded by the Pentagon:

• The Boston College helps the Air Force
• The University of Massachusetts Lowell develops mono-technology for the Army.
• Tufts University improves of soldiers cognitive and physical performance
• MIT is producing so many war goods ns services that it is known as a “war corporation.”
• Columbia University and Brown University develops, for DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Project Agency), the neural engineering system
• Princeton University produces hardware for design and verification of open-source integrated circuit
• Dartmouth University sells machine learning
• Pennsylvania University develops artificial intelligence.
• Stanford University develops technology for chemical warfare and so many other war goods and service that it is considered to be in partnership with war corporations
• Harvard University develops educational materials for the war and it is the main source providing human resources to the war industries. By the way, it produced the napalm bomb widely used in the Korean War, Vietnamese War and other wars
• John Hopkins University makes tools needed for the evaluation of alternative offensive capability needed for battles in air sea, cyberspace

The sad story is that American universities depend on war money so much that they are losing their original mission.

Christian Sorensen (Understanding the War Industry, Clarity Press 2022) has something to say about this problem. He seems to think that universities are neglecting their original mission of producing and diffusing truth.

“But its intricate ties to the War Department show the university’s true colour carrying more about government funding than the nobility of academia.” (Sorenson: p.221)

By the way, I have found many useful information, data and ideas in Sorensen’s book, which is surely a significant addition to the critical literature of perpetual wars.

The information-technology corporations are also actively participating in the American wars. In fact, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google provide, for the military, clout computing which facilitates the reduction of human and material cost of wars.

Demand for War Products and Services

What distinguishes the war economy from the peace economy is the amazing fact that the supply generates the demand.

In the American war economy, the final demand for war goods and services is determined by the Pentagon (the Department of Defence) and some foreign countries.

However, the Pentagon does not have all the information needed to estimate the demand for war so that it relies on the information provided by the war corporations.

Therefore, the war corporations which are supplier of war goods and services have the amazing role of determining the demand.

In this way, in the market of war goods and services, the supply determines the demand.

This is the root of perpetual nature of American wars and the making of profit going to the APWC.

Now, to have war, one has to have enemies. But, the war corporations do not have the research capacity to find real enemies or produce fabricated enemies. The role of finding or fabricating enemies goes to the think tanks which are lavishly funded by the war corporations.

When the think tanks find or manufacture enemies, new wars or the continuation of old wars are justified.

Now, on the other hand, the pressure groups put pressure on law makers and policy makers to recognize the identities of enemies produced by the think tanks; this is done through lobbying (bribes giving).

As for the media, they have the role of preparing the mind and the souls of Americans to accept the monstrous defence budget without being aware of the destructive consequences of the perpetual wars.

It goes without saying that both the pressure groups and the media are funded by the war corporations.

The demand for war goods and services created by these pro-war individuals and organizations is translated into the annual defence budget of the U.S amounting, in 2023, to as much as $886 billion.

Imagine this. Washington’s 2023 defence budget is 50% of South Korea’s 2023 GDP of $1.8 trillion. The American defence budget is 40 % of the global defence budget of $ 2.2 trillion.

The big five: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon Technologies, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics gets as much as $150 billion out of the defence budget.

Think Tanks

The think tanks play major role in perpetuating the American wars. Their function is to produce reports and papers to show the seriousness of crisis and the need for increasing military budget so that the crisis can be tackled by military force.

The following shows how some major think tanks are lavishly funded by war corporations. The data are provided by a Global Research paper (Amanda Yee: Six War Managing Think Tank and the Military Contractors that fund them, March 7, 2023).

The Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS)

The CSIS received in 2022  $100,000 or more from following war corporations: Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, SAIC, Bechtel, Cummings, Hitachi, Hanhwa Group, Huntington Ingalls Industries, Mitsubishi Corp., Nippon Telegraph and Telephone, Raytheon, Samsung.

The Center for a New American Security (CNAS)

The CNAS received in 2021, $50,000 or more from the following war corporations: Huntington Ingalls Group, Neal Blue, BAE System, Booz Allen, Hamilton Intel Corp, General Dynamics.

Hudson Institute (HI)

The HI got, in 2021, $50,000 or more from the following war corporations: General Atomics, Linden Blue, Neal Blue, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Mitsubishi.

The Atlantic Council (AC)

In 2021, the AC received $50,000 or more from the following war corporations: Airbus, Neal Blue, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and SAIC.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS)

The IISS was given, in 2021, $25,000 or more by the following war corporations: BAE System, Boeing, General Atomics, Raytheon, Rolls-Royce, Northrop Grumman.

There was a case where a think tank expressed an “expert opinion” in order to protect the interest of its sponsor (war corporation). It happened on August 12, 2021.

The huge military contractor CACI which had a contract of $907 million for 5 years in Afghanistan was disappointed of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, which meant its profit loss.

Its think tank was the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). The president of ISW, Kimberly Kagan declared that the U.S. withdrawal would make Afghanistan become a second ground of Jihadism. By the way, retired General Jack Keane is a member of IWS.

Pressure Group

The pressure groups are led by individuals well connected to war corporations, the Pentagon and the congress. The following is the partial list of pressure groups.

• The Aerospace Industry Association(AIA): Its CEO is the former vice-president of a company producing rockets. AIA represents more than 340 aerospace and defence corporation
• The National Defence Industry Association (NDIA) has 1,600 members
• The political Action Committee
• The Association of United States Army(AUSA): It produces Industry Guide for war corporations
• Business Executives for National Security (BENS), It is composed of non-profit 450 business executives who discuss security issues
• The Association of Old Crows (AOC), It is a brotherhood of electronic war veterans and leaders of war. It is supported by war corporations such as AECOM and Raytheon
• The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronomics (AIAA)
• The National Security Resource Board
• The War Dept Defence Policy Board

Pro-War Media

Most of American media are pro-war.  There are several reasons why the media are not critical of the perpetual war, if not being outright pro-war.

First, Being corporate media, they are mainly concerned with making money rather than being concerned with the collective wellbeing of the American society.

The Corporate Media including CNN, MSMBC, Fox News attach program priority to the rating.

They have no opinion about the awfully destructive consequences of the perpetual war. Even if they have some useful opinions they do not dare to express them. When they express an opinion, they are usually referring to the opinion of the elite class.

Second, it has been the long tradition in the U.S. that the media do not criticize the government.

Third, the government censor the media, especially, the off-line media.

Fourth, the numbers of media are directly related to the war industry. For example, in Defence News, T. Michael Mosely, retired 4-star Air Force general wrote in April 2019 that the Air Force was woefully under equipped.

There is a long list of pro-war media mostly armed forces related media.

Fifth, war corporations openly put pressure on the media not to mention the root of war. For example,

“General Dynamics wants corporate media never to question the root cause of the war.” (Sorensen p: p.72)

Sixth, the Smith Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 allows greater propaganda on corporate media.

To sum up, the demand for war is formed by the coordinated pro-war opinions created by the war corporations, the think tanks, the pressure groups and the media.

These opinions are transmitted to the Pentagon, which determine the size of financial and human resources to be allocated to the war.

The remarkable coordination among these individuals and organizations looks like a well prepared symphony orchestra.

The think tanks play violin to make sweet sound for the war corporations;

The pressure groups play trumpet to make the sound louder;

The media play drums to draw attention of the public to the necessity of wars.

All these players are conducted by the war corporations.

What is the purpose of  American wars?

There can be defensive purposes and offensive purposes of war. The defensive purposes can include the protection of national territory and national values such as religion, democracy and national assets representing the national tradition.

Then, there can be offensive purposes of war which can include the imperial invasion of a foreign country in order to change the political and economic regime, change religion, to appropriate the foreign country’s natural resources and maintain America’s hegemonic domination.

There is one more offensive purpose, namely,

In all probabilities, the defensive purposes are not relevant. No country dares to challenge American territory and its values. On the other hand, all of offensive purposes are relevant.

However none of the offensive “purposes” of American wars seem to have been attained.

• Christianity had for a long time hidden its presence.
• American democracy is falling rapidly.
• Regime-change war has ended up with regime destruction.
• America’s global hegemony has to overcome several challenges.

As for the expropriation of foreign countries natural resources, American imperialism should have been a success made possible through the worldwide value chain. Its main beneficiaries are American multinational corporations.

Now, with regard to the impact of the Perpetual American war on the American economy, the usual analysis model is  military Keynesianism. A series of economic studies show that it can have a short run positive effect on the national economy, but in the medium term, it will harm the economy’s growth potential. In other words, war is harmful to the national (civilian) economy.

“After initial demand stimulus, the effect of increased defence spending turns negative around six years .After 10 years of higher defence spending, there would be 464,000 jobs less than the base line scenario with lower spending.” (Dean Baker, economist quoted in journals.openedition.org)

In short, American wars are not needed for the realization of defensive objectives.

Nor are they useful means for the materialization of offensive ends with the exception of the expropriation of natural resources of foreign countries.

Then, why does the U.S. continue its wars?

If the war continues despite its dubious results, there must be some people who find in the war some benefits. The inevitable conclusion is that these same people are the members of the American Pro-War Community (APWC).

Who are the Beneficiaries of American wars?

In order that the AWPC receive benefit from wars, the profit of war corporations must be abnormally maximized. In fact, the profit of war corporations must be very high due to these reasons.

First, war corporations receive the Pentagon’s research grants and tax incentives from the federal government.

Second, the use of Artificial Intelligence-based production systems can save greatly the cost of the war corporations’ production of war goods and services.

Third, war corporations enjoy the quasi monopoly status through corporate merging in the sector of highly specialized weapon production. The merging of Lockheed with Martin is a typical example.

Fourth, in a situation of Pentagon-war corporation collusion, the Pentagon’s acceptance of a high contractual price is of significance.

The Privatization of War. The Everlasting Corruption Culture

Once the high corporate profit is assured, the next step of keeping perpetual wars is the intra-AWPC sharing of the corporate profit.

This is done through bribes. Having received bribes, pro-war policy makers and pro-war law makers must go along with war corporations lobbying in favor of “more wars”.

Bribes are given to the policy makers and law makers so that they accept what the war corporations ask for. This is the beginning of an everlasting corruption culture.

The following cases illustrate some of the dimensions of the corruption culture:

In 2012, the war corporations gave $30 million and in 2014 they gave $ 25.5 million to the Senate Armed Service Committee.

Christian Sorensen shows the source of corporate funds given to the 25 members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The following gives some examples.

• John McCain (R): General Electric, Raytheon and several other war corporations
• Jeanne Shaheen (D): Boeing General Electric
• Lindsey Graham (R): Northrop Grumman, Raytheon
• Bill Nelson (D): Lockheed Martin, Raytheon

A former CIA lobbyist made a meaningful statement regarding the state of corruption:

“Years of legalized bribery had exposed me to the worst elements of our country’s political working. Not even my half million-a-year salary could weigh my conscience…Today, most lobbyists are engaged in a system of bribery but it is legal kind, the kind that runs rampant in the corridors of Washington.” (Sorensen: p.65)

For the last presidential election, Lockheed Martin donated $ 91 million. Fifty eight members of the House Armed Service Committee received in average $79,588 from the sector (war industry), or three times more than other representatives. Lobbying expenditures by the member of the warmongering community was $247 billion during the last two presidential elections.

The Swinging-Door Relationship

However, in addition to the bribe system, there is the swinging-door relationship between the war industry and the Pentagon.

The swinging-door relations result in the industry’s direct participation in the defence policy making. In fact, the decision makers in the Pentagon and the decision makers in the war industry are  the same people.

The first swinging door allows the two way traffic of corporation leaders and the Pentagon leaders. Here are some cases of swinging door system of decision making.

• Ryan McCarthy assistant to Robert Gate, War Secretary went back to Lockheed Martin. He is now Under Secretary of Army.
• General James Mattis is now on the Board of Directors of General Dynamics, then, he became Secretary of War, then back to General Dynamics
• An Assistant Secretary of War was president of Goldman Sachs focus on oil and gas
• An administrator of the Defence Technical Information (DTC) has directorship in multiple corporations
• The Under Secretary of War in charge of the finance of the Pentagon was partner of an accounting firm, Kearney which has strong business with the Pentagon
• Lester Lyle, director general of General Dynamics was Air Force National Commander
• Wilbur Ross, US Commerce Secretary had the following members of his advisory group: CEOs of Apple, Visa, Walmart, Home Depot, IBM, US Chamber of Commerce, the Association of Community College.

There are also what we might describe as the “three way traffic swinging-doors”, namely

“The Corporations, Pentagon and  Think Tanks Triad” 

Some of the key members of the Washington war camp work for war corporations, the Pentagon and think tanks. In this dynamics, The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is often implicated.

The bribery system and the swinging-door apparatus of policy making is necessarily supportive of the culture of corruption.

“Corporate America as a whole was also corrupting hearts and minds numbing the public with entertainment and deluging with commercialism.” (Sorensen: p.60)

What are the negative impacts of American wars?

There are internal and external negative impacts of American wars. The internal negative impacts of the American wars include human cost and economic cost.

The human cost of American perpetual war is high. Nobody knows how many Americans are killed or wounded. But some estimates say that as many as 50,000 Americas have been wounded in addition to tens of thousands of GIs who have been killed due to the perpetual wars.

“There is no honest accounting of the where how and why we are killing-how United States citizens are being protected and what security benefits are actually accruing to the United States in continuing perpetual war.” (William M. Arkin: Newsweek)

The economic and social costs are high. The destruction of America’s potential economic growth is attributable to insufficient investments in education, health and infrastructure. 

The U.S. invests almost $1.0 trillion a year to sustain its perpetual wars, forcing Americans to contribute $2,200 a year (in taxes) to finance the wars.

The opportunity cost of American wars is high. The opportunity cost means investments which have been avoided due to the wars.

Here are some examples of “opportunity costs”:

• $70 billion to fight poverty;
• $42 billion to repair 43, 586 deficient bridges;
• $10.6 billion for the proposed program for the Center for Disease Control;
• $11.9 billion for the Environment Protection Agency;
• $17 billion for children who are starving.

Besides, Washington needs money to save 100,000 Americans who die every year from drug overdoses.

Washington must finds way to eliminate street killings which happen four times every single day.

More than 10 % of Americans are not covered by medical insurance. Even those who do have medical insurance, the insurance cost is beyond the reach of the majority of Americans.

Another serious internal negative impact of the war is increasing public debt.

In 2023, the U.S. public debt is $ 31 trillion as against $ 27 trillion for its GDP. This means that public debt is 14.8% more than GDP.

A good part of this debt is attributable to wars. In fact, the Iraq war produced a U.S. public debt of $3 trillion.

This is a very dangerous situation, because with this kind of public debt, the country’s fiscal policy becomes utterly useless.

Now, as for the external negative impact of American wars, the impacts are beyond description. 

Almost 1.3 million people were killed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan alone, not to mention. the flow of millions of refugees.

Over the years, the perpetual American wars have ruined national economies; they have undermined religions and traditional values; they took away the hope for better life of the people of the countries which have been the targets of American wars.

What is really disturbing is this. The American wars are supposed to promote and keep world safer. But, in reality, the American wars have instead worsened global security and safety of civilians.

“After two decades of fighting, in fact, not one country in the Middle East – not a country in the world – can argue that it is safer than it was before 911. Every country that is now a part of the expanding battle field of perpetual war is a greater disaster than it was than decade ago.” (newsweek.com ibid).

So, who are benefitting from American wars? Sorensen offers an answer.

“The only people who ultimately benefit from militarized drugs war are perfidious flag officers, the D.C. regime executives, war corporations and a few native American elites.” (Sorenson: p. 298)

I may go further. I say that the beneficiaries are the members of the APWC.

Will the American wars continue?

Despite its terribly negative impact, these wars will continue, because it is beneficial to the APWC.

The perpetual war requires the following strategies: perpetual existence of enemies on the one hand and, on the other, the adoption of invisible and politics-free war.

If there is no demand for the war, there will be no war.

Hence, in order that the war perpetuates, there must be sustained demand for war.

But, in order that there be demand for war, there must be crisis and there should be crisis making countries or individuals. These countries and individuals become enemies of America.

There have allegedly been several waves of military crises in the eyes of APWC.

The first wave of crisis: the spread of communism, 1950-1989

The second wave of crisis: the threat of terrorism, 1990-present

The third wave of crisis: danger of nuclear proliferation, 1950-present

The fourth wave of crisis: the war on drugs, 1990-present

The fifth wave of crisis: human right violations 2001-present

Thus, there are several ongoing crisis and enemies. Hence, the APWC has little to be concerned with the lack of enemies.

According to William M Arkin, Washington has bombed or is bombing these countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Niger, Mali, Uganda Moreover, there are ten more countries which might be bombed. These are mostly African countries including Cameron, Chad, Kenya and 7 other countries.

Moreover, the APWC is used to invent enemies. The probable next crisis target could be the “Yellow-Peril crisis” involving China and other Asian countries.

President, Joe Biden has decided to intervene in case of “crisis” in foreign countries even without the authorization of the countries involved. This can provide a lot of potential enemies.

Anyway, as far as the existence of enemies is concerned, the AWPC has little to be worried about. There will be plenty of them, if not, the APWC will invent them.

For instance, not-being pro-U.S. could be treated as crisis and crisis-maker, categorized as an enemy of America.

The next hurdle to overcome for APWC is to tackle the anti-war movement in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world.

The solution is to find ways of making wars invisible, saving American lives but profitable. This can be done through the use of unmanned weapons and production cost saving by using AI-based technology, which allows long-distance warfare by virtue of “hub-spoke” war strategy under which one can attack the enemy without being present at the battle ground.

More and more, war is undertaken by a system of hub-spoke.  In the current war against terrorism, hubs are located in several Middle East countries, Kuwait being the Army hub and Bahrain being the Navy hub. The spokes are spread throughout the world, especially in the Middle East and Africa.

William M. Arkin describes the efficiency of the hub-spoke model of war.

“It is so little understood, so invisible, so efficient,, even so as four successive presidents have promised and then tried to stop warfare, the spokes have grown and expanded.”

The reason for developing this type of warfare is the need for being free from anti-war public and anti-war politics.

“The War Brings Money”. The Vicious Circle of Human Greed

But the most important reason for the perpetuity of America wars is the vicious circle of human greed.

• The war brings money;
• Money invites wars;
• Wars bring in more money;
• More money leads to even more wars and ad infinitum.

This is the vicious circle of human greed.

Since human greed has no boundary, American wars will remain perpetual.

Thus, American wars can go on and on until there will be no more valuable enemies.

In other words, the war will go on until the total destruction of the world.

So, to save the world, the perpetual American wars should be stopped.

*

 

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

Dr. Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM), he is member of the Center of Research on Integration and Globalization of (CEIM-UQAM). He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from The Unz Review

---

AI 번역

 

미국의 영원한 전쟁: 독특한 질문

(조셉) 희수 정 교수에 의해

 

 

모든 글로벌 리서치 기사는 저자 이름 아래에 있는 웹사이트 번역 버튼을 활성화하면 51개 언어로 읽을 수 있습니다.

글로벌 리서치의 일간 뉴스레터(선택된 기사)를 받아보시려면  여기를 클릭하세요 .

위의 공유 버튼을 클릭하여 이 기사를 친구와 동료에게 이메일/전달하세요. Instagram  과  Twitter 에서 팔로우 하고 Telegram 채널 을 구독하세요 . Global Research 기사를 자유롭게 리포스트하고 널리 공유하세요.

2023년 6월 12일에 처음 출판된 이 통찰력 있고 시의적절한 기사는  2024년 10월에 세상을 떠난 고(故) 조셉 정 교수 가 쓴 것으로 , 미국의 끊임없는 전쟁에 대한 주의 깊게 기록된 역사를 제공합니다.

정 교수님의 유산과 평화에 대한 헌신이 영원히 지속되길 바랍니다. 

*** 

소개

전 미국 대통령 지미 카터는 2018년에 미국은 242년 전에 독립한 이후로 226년간 전쟁을 치렀고, 평화로운 기간은 단 16년뿐이라고말했습니다 .

2차 세계 대전 이후로 수십 개국이 개입한 32건의 미국 군사 갈등이 있었습니다. 이러한 군사 갈등 중 일부는 20년 이상 지속되었고 일부는 여전히 계속되고 있습니다.

다시 말해, 미국은 끊임없는 전쟁의 나라입니다. 전쟁은 끔찍하게 파괴적인 인간 활동입니다. 수백만 명의 인간이 희생되었습니다. 수십조 달러 상당의 주택, 학교, 공장, 병원 및 기타 인프라 시설이 미국 군사 공격의 표적이 된 국가에서 파괴되었습니다.

끊임없는 전쟁은 자유와 민주주의의 기반을 파괴했습니다 . 그것은 세계의 건강하고 공평한 경제 발전을 방해했습니다. 그것은 인권 침해로 이어졌고, 많은 나라의 전통적 가치들을 파괴했으며, 무엇보다도 오래 지속되는 인간 고통을 초래했습니다.

수조 달러에 달하는 미국의 끊임없는 전쟁으로 인해 수백만 명의 미국인이 적정 소득, 적절한 주택, 필요한 식량, 필수적인 건강 관리, 거리의 안전, 신뢰할 수 있는 사회 기반 시설, 필수 교육 및 인간다운 삶에 필요한 기타 상품과 서비스를 얻지 못하고 박탈당했습니다.

더 나아가기 전에 드와이트 아이젠하워 대통령 의 역사적 발언을 인용하고 싶습니다 .

“만들어진 모든 총, 발사된 모든 군함, 발사된 모든 로켓은 궁극적으로 굶주리고 먹을 것이 없는 사람들, 추워서 입을 것이 없는 사람들로부터 훔친 것을 의미합니다. 무장한 이 세계는 돈만 쓰는 것이 아니라 노동자들의 땀, 과학자들의 천재성, 아이들의 희망을 쓰고 있습니다. (드와이트 아이젠하워 대통령이 북미 뉴스 편집자 협회에 한 연설, 1953년 4월 16일)

이 논문에서 저는 다음의 여섯 가지 질문을 던지고자 합니다.

• 2차 세계 대전 이후 미국은 몇 번의 전쟁을 치렀나요?
• 미국의 전쟁은 어떻게 조직되나요?
• 미국 전쟁의 목적은 무엇인가?
• 미국 전쟁의 수혜자는 누구였는가?
• 미국 전쟁의 부정적인 영향은 무엇인가?
• 미국의 전쟁은 계속될까?

2차 세계 대전 이후 미국은 몇 번의 전쟁을 치렀나요?

의심할 여지 없이 전쟁을 정의하는 방법은 여러 가지가 있습니다. 이 논문에서 저는 전쟁을 미국의 군사 개입의 관점에서 정의합니다. 이렇게 정의한 결과, 저는 2차 세계 대전 이후 미국이 수행한 전쟁을 32개로 집계했습니다.

저는 이러한 전쟁을 다음과 같은 범주로 분류했습니다.

• 침략 (23건)
• “내전” (7건) 과
• 다중 대상 전쟁 (2),

이는 2차 세계 대전 이후 소위 ‘전후 시대’  에 일어난 32개의 전쟁을 나타냅니다. 

191개국 1,000개 기지에 분산된 전쟁 계약자와 특수 작전 부대가 수행한 선언되지 않은 군사 개입이 여전히 많이 있다고 믿을 만한 이유가 있습니다. 다음은 미국의 전쟁 목록을 보여줍니다.

침략 ,

• 한국전쟁(1950-1953),
• 베트남 전쟁 (1955-1975);
• 쿠바, 돼지의 만(1961),
• 레바논 (1982-1984),
• 그레나다(1983),
• 리비아 폭탄 테러(1984년)
• 탱커 전쟁-페르시아만(1984-1987),
• 파나마(1989-1990),
• 걸프 전쟁(1989-1991)
• 이라크 전쟁(1991-1993),
• 보스니아 전쟁(1992-1995)
• 아이티(1994-1999),
• 코소보 (1998-1999),
• 아프가니스탄(2001-2021),
• 예멘(2002-현재),
• 이라크 (2003-2011),
• 파키스탄(2004-2018),
• 소말리아(2007-현재)
• 리비아(2011),
• 니제르(2013-현재)
• 이라크(2014-2021),
• 시리아(2014-현재),
• 리비아(2015-2019).
• [우크라이나, 아직 분류되지 않음]

내전 :

인도차이나(1959-1975),

인도네시아 (1958-1961)

레바논(1958),

도미니카 공화국 (1968-1966),

한국 DMZ (1966-1969),

캄보디아 (1967-1975)

소말리아(1991년~현재).

다중 타겟 전쟁 :

오션 실드 작전: 지역, 인도양(2008-2016), 옵저번트 컴퍼스 작전: 지역, 우간다 및 중앙아프리카(2011-2017).

미국의 전쟁은 어떻게 조직되나요?

미국에서 끊임없이 벌어지는 전쟁의 본질과 그 의미를 이해하려면 미국의 전쟁 찬성 공동체 (APWC)라는 개념을 소개할 필요가 있습니다.

문학과 미디어에서 우리는 군산복합체 (MIC) 라는 개념을 사용하여 미국의 영구 전쟁이라는 광대한 시스템을 설명합니다. 하지만 실제로 영구 전쟁 시스템은 MIC보다 훨씬 더 많은 개인과 조직을 포함합니다.

APWC는 일반 미국인의 복지와 대상 국가 국민의 이익을 희생하여 자신의 이익을 증진하는 긴밀한 커뮤니티입니다. 조직이 잘 되어 있고 뿌리가 깊으며 강력해서 해체하기가 거의 불가능합니다.

AWPC의 핵심 그룹은 국방부, 의회, 상원 및 기타 정부 기관이 이끄는 전쟁 기업과 연방 정부로 구성됩니다.

모든 종류의 기관과 조직으로 구성된 두 개의 지원 그룹이 있습니다.

전쟁 물자와 서비스의 공급을 지원하는 단체가 있습니다.

그리고 전쟁 물자와 서비스에 대한 수요 창출을 지지하는 단체도 있습니다.

전쟁 물자와 서비스를 생산하고 판매하는 전체 시스템의 효율성은 핵심 그룹과 지원 그룹이 전쟁의 목표, 즉 이윤 극대화와 APWC 내부 이윤 공유를 달성하기 위해 얼마나 조화롭게 일할 수 있느냐에 달려 있습니다.

전쟁물품 및 서비스 공급

전쟁 물자와 서비스의 공급은 무기를 생산하는 전쟁 기업, 온갖 건물을 짓고 관리하는 건설업체, 군인들에게 음식과 음료를 제공하는 케이터링 서비스 회사, 전쟁에 필요한 정보를 제공하는 정보 회사, 심지어 아이디어와 기술을 제공하는 학계에 의해 보장됩니다.

미국에서는 40개의 주요 전쟁 기업의 연간 매출이 거의 6,000억 달러에 달합니다.

다음 표는 미국에서 가장 중요한 5대 전쟁 기업의 중요성을 보여줍니다.

표 1. 5대 주요 전쟁 기업: 연간 매출(10억 달러) 2022년 및 성장률(최근 연도: %)

참고: LM(Lockheed Martin), NG(Northrop Grumman); GD(일반 역학)  소스

2022년 상위 5대 기업의 연간 매출을 합치면 무려 2,418억 달러에 달했는데, 그 중 1,833억 달러가 군수품 및 서비스 판매에 해당합니다. 이는 전체 매출의 75.8%에 해당합니다.

전쟁 물자와 서비스의 공급은 원자재와 중간 제품의 해외 및 국내 공급자를 포함하는 광범위한 생산 체인에 의존합니다. 또한 학계와 정보 회사는 무기 생산에 필요한 정보, 기술 및 기타 서비스를 제공합니다.

다음은 미국 전쟁에 깊이 관여한 잘 알려진 대학 목록입니다. 이 대학들은 각각 전쟁 산업을 위해 다양한 전쟁 제품과 서비스를 생산합니다.

본 논문에서는 각 학술 기관별로 대표적인 제품이나 서비스 하나만 언급했습니다.

대학 연구 프로젝트의 최소 70%는 국방부에서 자금을 지원받습니다.

• 보스턴 칼리지는 공군을 돕습니다.
• 매사추세츠 로웰대학교가 군대를 위한 단일기술을 개발합니다.
• 터프츠 대학, 군인들의 인지 및 신체적 성능 향상
• MIT는 너무나 많은 전쟁 물자와 서비스를 생산해서 “전쟁 기업”으로 알려져 있습니다.
• 콜롬비아 대학교와 브라운 대학교는 DARPA(국방 고등 연구 계획국)를 위해 신경 공학 시스템을 개발합니다.
• 프린스턴 대학, 오픈소스 집적회로 설계 및 검증을 위한 하드웨어 생산
• 다트머스 대학교, 머신러닝 판매
• 펜실베이니아 대학에서 인공지능을 개발했습니다.
• 스탠포드 대학은 화학전 기술과 수많은 다른 전쟁 물품 및 서비스를 개발하여 전쟁 기업과 협력하는 것으로 간주됩니다.
• 하버드 대학은 전쟁을 위한 교육 자료를 개발하고 전쟁 산업에 인력을 공급하는 주요 출처입니다. 그런데 한국 전쟁, 베트남 전쟁 및 기타 전쟁에서 널리 사용된 네이팜탄을 생산했습니다.
• 존스홉킨스 대학은 공중, 해상, 사이버 공간에서의 전투에 필요한 대체 공격 능력 평가에 필요한 도구를 제작합니다.

슬픈 사실은 미국의 대학들이 전쟁 자금에 너무 많이 의존하다 보니 본래의 사명을 잃어가고 있다는 것입니다.

Christian Sorensen ( Understanding the War Industry, Clarity Press 2022)은 이 문제에 대해 말할 것이 있습니다. 그는 대학이 진실을 생산하고 확산하는 본래의 사명을 소홀히 하고 있다고 생각하는 듯합니다.

“그러나 전쟁부와의 복잡한 관계는 대학의 진정한 색채가 학문의 고귀함보다 정부 자금 지원에 더 많이 관련되어 있음을 보여줍니다.”(Sorenson: 221쪽)

그런데 저는 소렌센의 책에서 많은 유용한 정보, 데이터, 아이디어를 발견했는데, 이 책은 영구전쟁에 대한 비평적 문헌에 큰 도움이 될 것임이 분명합니다.

정보기술 기업들도 미국 전쟁에 적극적으로 참여하고 있습니다. 사실, Amazon, Microsoft, Google은 군대에 클로우트 컴퓨팅을 제공하여 전쟁의 인적 및 물질적 비용을 줄이는 데 도움이 됩니다.

전쟁 제품 및 서비스에 대한 수요

전쟁 경제 와 평화 경제 의 차이점은 공급이 수요를 창출한다는 놀라운 사실입니다 .

미국의 전쟁 경제에서 전쟁 물자와 서비스에 대한 최종 수요는 국방부와 일부 외국에 의해 결정됩니다.

그러나 국방부는 전쟁 수요를 추산하는 데 필요한 모든 정보를 갖고 있지 않기 때문에 전쟁 기업이 제공하는 정보에 의존하고 있습니다.

그러므로 전쟁 물품과 서비스를 제공하는 전쟁 기업은 수요를 결정하는 놀라운 역할을 합니다.

이런 식으로 군수품과 용역 시장에서는 공급이 수요를 결정합니다 .

이것이 미국이 끊임없이 전쟁을 치르는 이유이고 APWC에 이익을 가져다주는 이유입니다.

이제 전쟁을 하려면 적이 있어야 합니다 . 하지만 전쟁 기업은 진짜 적을 찾거나 조작된 적을 만들어낼 연구 능력이 없습니다. 적을 찾거나 조작하는 역할은 전쟁 기업이 막대한 자금을 지원하는 싱크탱크에 있습니다.

싱크탱크가 적을 발견하거나 만들어낼 경우 새로운 전쟁이나 옛 전쟁의 지속이 정당화됩니다.

반면, 압력단체들은 이제 입법자와 정책입안자들에게 싱크탱크가 배출한 적들의 정체를 인식하라고 압력을 가하고 있다. 이는 로비(뇌물 제공)를 통해 이루어진다.

언론의 역할은 끊임없는 전쟁의 파괴적인 결과를 알지 못한 채 엄청난 방위 예산을 받아들이도록 미국인의 정신과 영혼을 준비하는 것입니다.

말할 것도 없이 압력 단체와 언론은 모두 전쟁 기업의 자금 지원을 받습니다.

전쟁을 지지하는 개인과 단체가 생산한 전쟁 물자와 서비스에 대한 수요는 미국의 연간 국방 예산으로 환산되며, 2023년 기준 그 예산은 무려 8,860억 달러에 이릅니다.

상상해보세요. 워싱턴의 2023년 국방 예산은 한국의 2023년 GDP 1.8조 달러의 50%입니다. 미국의 국방 예산은 세계 국방 예산 2.2조 달러의 40%입니다.

5대 기업인 록히드마틴, 레이시온 테크놀로지스, 보잉, 노스롭 그루먼, 제너럴 다이내믹스는 국방 예산에서 최대 1,500억 달러를 조달받습니다.

싱크탱크

싱크탱크는 미국 전쟁을 영속시키는 데 중요한 역할을 합니다. 그들의 기능은 위기의 심각성과 군사 예산을 늘려 위기를 군사력으로 해결할 수 있도록 하는 보고서와 논문을 작성하는 것입니다.

다음은 일부 주요 싱크탱크가 전쟁 기업으로부터 호사스러운 자금을 받는 방식을 보여줍니다. 이 데이터는 Global Research 논문(Amanda Yee: Six War Managing Think Tank and the Military Contractors that fund them , 2023년 3월 7일)에서 제공합니다.

전략 국제 연구 센터(CSIS)

CSIS는 2022년에 다음 전쟁 기업으로부터 10만 달러 이상을 받았습니다: 노스럽 그루먼, 제너럴 다이내믹스, 록히드 마틴, SAIC, 베히텔, 커밍스, 히타치, 한화그룹, 헌팅턴 잉걸스 인더스트리, 미쓰비시, 닛폰 전신전화, 레이시온, 삼성.

새로운 미국 안보 센터(CNAS)

CNAS는 2021년에 다음 전쟁 기업으로부터 5만 달러 이상을 받았습니다: Huntington Ingalls Group, Neal Blue, BAE System, Booz Allen, Hamilton Intel Corp, General Dynamics.

허드슨 연구소(HI)

HI는 2021년에 다음 전쟁 기업으로부터 5만 달러 이상을 받았습니다: General Atomics, Linden Blue, Neal Blue, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Mitsubishi.

대서양 협의회(AC)

2021년에 AC는 다음 전쟁 기업으로부터 5만 달러 이상을 받았습니다: 에어버스, 닐 블루, 록히드 마틴, 레이시온, SAIC.

국제 전략 연구소(IISS)

IISS는 2021년에 다음 전쟁 기업으로부터 25,000달러 이상을 지원받았습니다: BAE System, Boeing, General Atomics, Raytheon, Rolls-Royce, Northrop Grumman.

싱크탱크가 후원자(전쟁 기업)의 이익을 보호하기 위해 “전문가 의견”을 표명한 사례가 있었습니다. 2021년 8월 12일에 발생했습니다.

아프가니스탄에서 5년간 9억 700만 달러 규모의 계약을 맺었던 대형 군수 계약업체 CACI는 미국이 아프가니스탄에서 철수하면서 수익 손실이 발생하자 실망감을 느꼈습니다.

그 싱크탱크는 전쟁 연구소(ISW)였습니다. ISW의 킴벌리 카간 회장은 미군 철수로 아프가니스탄이 지하디즘의 두 번째 근거지가 될 것이라고 선언했습니다. 그런데 은퇴한 잭 킨 장군은 IWS의 회원입니다.

압력 집단

압력 집단은 전쟁 기업, 펜타곤, 의회와 긴밀한 관계를 맺은 개인이 이끈다. 다음은 압력 집단의 일부 목록이다.

• 항공우주산업협회(AIA): CEO는 로켓을 생산하는 회사의 전 부사장입니다. AIA는 340개 이상의 항공우주 및 방위 기업을 대표합니다.
• 국방산업협회(NDIA)에는 1,600명의 회원이 있습니다.
• 정치 행동 위원회
• 미국 육군 협회(AUSA): 전쟁 기업을 위한 산업 가이드를 제작합니다.
• 국가 안보를 위한 기업 임원 모임(BENS)은 안보 문제를 논의하는 비영리 450명의 기업 임원으로 구성되어 있습니다.
• Old Crows 협회(AOC)는 전자 전쟁 참전 용사와 전쟁 지도자들의 형제단입니다. AECOM과 Raytheon과 같은 전쟁 기업의 지원을 받습니다.
• 미국 항공우주학회(AIAA)
• 국가안보자원위원회
• 전쟁부 국방 정책 위원회

전쟁 지지 미디어

미국 미디어 대부분은 전쟁을 지지합니다. 미디어가 영구전쟁을 비판하지 않는 데에는 몇 가지 이유가 있습니다. 완전히 전쟁을 지지하는 것은 아니지만요.

첫째, 기업 매체이기 때문에 미국 사회의 전체적 복지에 관심을 두기보다는 주로 돈을 버는 데 관심이 있습니다.

CNN, MSMBC, Fox News를 포함한 기업 미디어는 프로그램을 시청률에 우선시합니다.

그들은 영구전쟁의 끔찍하게 파괴적인 결과에 대해 아무런 의견도 없습니다. 그들이 유용한 의견을 가지고 있다 하더라도 감히 표현하지 않습니다. 그들이 의견을 표현할 때, 그들은 보통 엘리트 계층의 의견을 말합니다.

두 번째로 , 미국에서는 언론이 정부를 비판하지 않는 것이 오랜 전통이다.

셋째 , 정부는 미디어, 특히 오프라인 미디어를 검열합니다.

넷째 , 미디어의 숫자는 전쟁 산업과 직접 관련이 있습니다. 예를 들어, Defence News에서 은퇴한 4성 공군 장군 T. Michael Mosely는 2019년 4월에 공군이 비참하게 장비가 부족하다고 썼습니다.

전쟁을 지지하는 미디어는 많고, 주로 군대와 관련된 미디어가 많습니다.

다섯째 , 전쟁 기업은 전쟁의 근원은 말할 것도 없고 언론에 공개적으로 압력을 가했습니다. 예를 들어,

“제너럴 다이내믹스는 기업 미디어가 전쟁의 근본 원인에 대해 결코 의문을 제기하지 않기를 원합니다.”(소렌슨, p.72)

여섯째 , 2012년 스미스 문트 현대화법은 기업 매체의 선전을 더욱 확대하는 것을 허용합니다.

요약하자면, 전쟁에 대한 요구는 전쟁 기업, 싱크탱크, 압력 단체, 언론이 조율하여 만들어낸 전쟁 찬성 의견에 의해 형성됩니다.

이러한 의견은 국방부에 전달되고, 국방부는 전쟁에 할당할 재정 및 인적 자원의 규모를 결정합니다.

이러한 개인과 조직 간의 놀라운 협력은 잘 준비된 심포니 오케스트라와 같습니다.

싱크탱크들은 전쟁 기업들을 위해 달콤한 음악을 만들기 위해 바이올린을 연주한다.

압력단체들은 소리를 더 크게 하기 위해 트럼펫을 연주한다.

언론은 전쟁의 필요성에 대해 대중의 주의를 끌기 위해 북을 연주합니다.

이 모든 행위자들은 전쟁 기업에 의해 수행됩니다.

미국의 전쟁의 목적은 무엇인가?

전쟁에는 방어적 목적 과 공격적 목적이 있을 수 있다 . 방어적 목적에는 국가 영토와 종교, 민주주의, 국가적 전통을 대표하는 국가적 자산과 같은 국가적 가치의 보호가 포함될 수 있다.

그러면, 전쟁의 공격적 목적이 있을 수 있는데, 여기에는 정치적, 경제적 체제를 바꾸거나, 종교를 바꾸거나, 외국의 천연자원을 약탈하거나, 미국의 패권적 지배를 유지하기 위해 외국을 침략하는 제국주의적 행위가 포함될 수 있습니다.

또 다른 공격적인 목적은 다음과 같습니다.

모든 가능성에서 방어적 목적은 관련이 없습니다. 어떤 나라도 미국 영토와 그 가치에 도전할 용기가 없습니다. 반면에 모든 공격적 목적은 관련이 있습니다.

하지만 미국의 전쟁의 공격적인 “목적”은 하나도 달성되지 않은 듯합니다.

• 기독교는 오랫동안 그 존재를 숨겨왔습니다.
• 미국의 민주주의는 급속히 쇠퇴하고 있다.
• 정권교체를 위한 전쟁은 정권 파괴로 끝났습니다.
• 미국의 세계적 패권은 여러 가지 과제를 극복해야 합니다.

외국의 천연자원을 수탈하는 것에 관해서, 미국 제국주의는 세계적 가치 사슬을 통해 가능해진 성공이어야 했습니다. 그것의 주요 수혜자는 미국의 다국적 기업입니다.

이제, 미국 경제에 대한 영구 미국 전쟁의 영향 과 관련하여 , 일반적인 분석 모델은   군사 케인즈 주의입니다 . 일련의 경제 연구에 따르면, 그것은 단기적으로 국가 경제에 긍정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있지만, 중기적으로는 경제의 성장 잠재력에 해를 끼칠 것입니다. 즉, 전쟁은 국가(민간) 경제에 해롭습니다.

“초기 수요 자극 이후, 국방비 지출 증가 효과는 약 6년 후에 부정적으로 돌아선다. 10년 동안 국방비 지출이 증가하면 지출이 감소한 기준 시나리오보다 일자리가 464,000개 줄어들 것이다.”( 경제학자 딘 베이커 , journals.openedition.org에서 인용)

간단히 말해서, 미국의 전쟁은 방어적 목표를 실현하는 데 필요하지 않습니다.

또한 외국의 천연자원을 수용하는 것을 제외하면 공격적인 목적을 실현하는 데 유용한 수단도 아니다.

그렇다면 미국은 왜 전쟁을 계속하는가?

모호한 결과에도 불구하고 전쟁이 계속된다면, 전쟁에서 어떤 혜택을 찾는 사람들이 있을 것입니다. 피할 수 없는 결론은 이 사람들이 바로 미국 전쟁 찬성 커뮤니티(APWC)의 구성원이라는 것입니다.

미국 전쟁의 수혜자는 누구인가?

AWPC가 전쟁에서 이익을 얻으려면 전쟁 기업의 이익이 비정상적으로 극대화되어야 합니다 . 사실, 전쟁 기업의 이익은 이러한 이유로 매우 높아야 합니다.

첫째 , 전쟁 기업은 연방 정부로부터 국방부 연구 지원금과 세금 혜택을 받습니다.

두 번째 , 인공지능 기반 생산 시스템을 활용하면 전쟁 기업의 전쟁 물품 및 서비스 생산 비용을 크게 절감할 수 있습니다.

셋째 , 전쟁 기업은 고도로 전문화된 무기 생산 분야에서 기업 합병을 통해 준독점적 지위를 누린다. 록히드와 마틴의 합병이 전형적인 예이다.

넷째 , 국방부-기업 간 공모 전쟁 상황에서 국방부가 높은 계약 가격을 수용한 것은 중요한 의미를 갖습니다.

전쟁의 사유화. 영원한 부패 문화

기업의 높은 이익이 보장되면, 영구전쟁을 유지하기 위한 다음 단계는 기업 이익을 AWPC 내부에서 공유하는 것입니다.

이는 뇌물을 통해 이루어진다. 뇌물을 받은 전쟁 지지 정책 입안자와 전쟁 지지 입법자는 “더 많은 전쟁”을 지지하는 전쟁 기업의 로비에 동참해야 한다.

정책 입안자와 입법자에게 뇌물을 주어 전쟁 기업이 요구하는 것을 받아들이게 합니다. 이것이 영원한 부패 문화의 시작입니다.

다음 사례는 부패 문화의 몇 가지 측면을 보여줍니다.

2012년에 전쟁법인들은 3,000만 달러를, 2014년에는 2,550만 달러를 상원 군사위원회에 기부했습니다.

크리스찬 소렌슨은 상원 군사위원회 위원 25명에게 제공된 기업 자금의 출처를 보여줍니다. 다음은 몇 가지 예입니다.

• 존 매케인(공화당) : 제너럴 일렉트릭, 레이시온 및 기타 여러 전쟁 기업
• Jeanne Shaheen (D) : Boeing General Electric
• 린지 그레이엄(R) : 노스럽 그러먼, 레이시온
• 빌 넬슨(D): 록히드 마틴, 레이시온

전 CIA 로비스트는 부패의 실태에 관해 의미심장한 성명을 발표했습니다.

“수년간의 합법화된 뇌물 수수로 인해 저는 우리나라 정치 활동의 최악의 요소에 노출되었습니다. 연봉 50만 달러도 제 양심을 저울질할 수 없었습니다… 오늘날 대부분의 로비스트는 뇌물 수수 시스템에 관여하고 있지만 그것은 합법적인 종류이며 워싱턴 복도에서 만연하는 종류입니다.”(소렌슨: 65쪽)

지난 대선에서 록히드 마틴은 9,100만 달러를 기부했습니다. 하원 군사위원회 위원 58명은 해당 부문(전쟁 산업)에서 평균 79,588달러를 받았는데, 이는 다른 의원보다 3배 더 많은 금액입니다. 호전적인 커뮤니티 구성원의 로비 지출은 지난 두 차례의 대선에서 2,470억 달러였습니다.

스윙 도어 관계

그러나 뇌물 시스템 외에도 군수 산업과 국방부 사이에는 엇갈리는 관계가 있습니다.

스윙 도어 관계는 산업이 방위 정책 결정에 직접 참여하는 결과를 낳았습니다. 사실, 국방부의 의사결정권자와 전쟁 산업 의 의사결정권자 는 같은 사람들입니다.

첫 번째 스윙 도어는 기업 리더와 국방부 리더의 양방향 통행을 허용합니다. 다음은 스윙 도어 시스템 의사 결정의 몇 가지 사례입니다.

• 라이언 매카시 로버트 게이트 의 보좌관 , 전쟁 장관은 록히드 마틴으로 돌아갔습니다. 그는 현재 육군 차관보입니다.
• 제임스 매티스 장군은 현재 제너럴 다이내믹스 이사회에 있으며, 그 후 전쟁 장관을 거쳐 다시 제너럴 다이내믹스로 돌아왔습니다.
• 전쟁부 차관보는 골드만삭스의 석유 및 가스 사업에 집중하는 회장이었습니다.
• 국방기술정보(DTC) 관리자는 여러 회사의 이사직을 맡고 있습니다.
• 국방부 재정을 담당하는 전쟁부 차관은 국방부와 긴밀한 사업을 맺고 있는 회계 회사인 Kearney의 파트너였습니다.
• 제너럴 다이내믹스(General Dynamics)의 사령관인 레스터 라일(Lester Lyle) 은 공군 사령관이었습니다.
• 미국 상무부 장관 윌버 로스의 자문 그룹에는 다음과 같은 구성원이 있었습니다: 애플, 비자, 월마트, 홈디포, IBM, 미국 상공회의소, 커뮤니티 칼리지 협회의 CEO들.

또한 우리가 ” 3방향 교통 스윙 도어” 라고 설명할 수 있는 것도 있습니다 .

“기업, 국방부, 싱크탱크 3인조” 

워싱턴 전쟁 캠프의 핵심 구성원 중 일부는 전쟁 기업, 국방부, 싱크탱크에서 일합니다. 이러한 역학에서 전략 및 국제 연구 센터(CSIS)는 종종 연루됩니다.

뇌물 수수 시스템과 정책 결정의 스윙도어 장치는 필연적으로 부패 문화를 뒷받침합니다.

“미국 기업 전체도 대중을 오락으로 마비시키고 상업주의로 범람시켜 마음과 정신을 타락시켰습니다.”(소렌센: 60쪽)

미국의 전쟁의 부정적 영향은 무엇인가?

미국 전쟁에는 내부적, 외부적 부정적 영향이 있습니다. 미국 전쟁의 내부적 부정적 영향에는 인적 비용과 경제적 비용이 포함됩니다.

미국의 끊임없는 전쟁으로 인한 인적 비용은 높습니다. 얼마나 많은 미국인이 죽거나 다쳤는지 아무도 모릅니다. 하지만 일부 추정에 따르면, 끊임없는 전쟁으로 인해 죽은 수만 명의 GI 외에도 5만 명에 달하는 미국인이 다쳤다고 합니다.

“우리가 왜, 어디서, 어떻게 사람을 죽이고 있는지, 미국 시민이 어떻게 보호받고 있는지, 그리고 지속적인 영구 전쟁에서 미국에 실제로 어떤 안보적 이점이 돌아가고 있는지에 대한 정직한 설명이 없습니다.”( William M. Arkin : Newsweek )

경제적, 사회적 비용이 높습니다. 미국의 잠재적 경제 성장이 파괴된 것은 교육, 건강, 인프라에 대한 투자가 부족하기 때문입니다.

미국은 영구전쟁을 유지하는 데 매년 약 1조 달러를 투자하고 있으며, 미국인들은 전쟁 자금을 조달하기 위해 매년 2,200달러(세금)를 납부해야 합니다.

미국 전쟁의 기회 비용은 높습니다. 기회 비용은 전쟁으로 인해 회피된 투자를 의미합니다.

다음은 “기회 비용”의 몇 가지 예입니다.

• 빈곤 퇴치에 700억 달러
• 43,586개의 하자가 있는 교량을 수리하는 데 420억 달러를 투자했습니다.
• 질병통제센터의 제안된 프로그램에 106억 달러가 투자되었습니다.
• 환경보호청에 119억 달러
• 굶주리는 어린이들을 위해 170억 달러가 지원됩니다.

게다가 워싱턴은 매년 약물 과용으로 인해 사망하는 10만 명의 미국인을 구하기 위해 돈이 필요합니다.

워싱턴은 매일 4번씩 일어나는 거리 살인을 근절할 방법을 찾아야 합니다.

미국인의 10% 이상이 의료 보험에 가입되어 있지 않습니다. 의료 보험에 가입한 사람들조차도 보험 비용은 대부분의 미국인이 감당할 수 없는 수준입니다.

전쟁으로 인한 또 다른 심각한 내부적 부정적 영향은 공공부채의 증가입니다.

2023년 미국의 공공부채는 GDP의 27조 달러에 비해 31조 달러입니다. 이는 공공부채가 GDP보다 14.8% 더 많다는 것을 의미합니다.

이 부채의 상당 부분은 전쟁에 기인합니다. 사실, 이라크 전쟁은 3조 달러의 미국 공공 부채를 낳았습니다.

이는 매우 위험한 상황입니다. 이런 종류의 공공부채로 인해 국가의 재정 정책은 완전히 무용지물이 되기 때문입니다.

이제 미국의 전쟁이 외부적으로 끼친 부정적 영향에 대해 말씀드리자면, 그 영향은 형언할 수 없을 정도입니다.

이라크, 아프가니스탄, 파키스탄에서만 거의 130만 명이 사망했고, 수백만 명의 난민이 유입되었습니다.

오랜 세월에 걸쳐 끊임없이 계속된 미국의 전쟁은 국가 경제를 파괴했습니다. 전쟁으로 인해 종교와 전통적 가치가 훼손되었고, 미국의 전쟁의 표적이 된 나라 사람들의 더 나은 삶에 대한 희망이 사라졌습니다.

정말 불안한 것은 이것입니다. 미국의 전쟁은 세계를 더 안전하게 만들고 유지해야 합니다. 하지만 실제로 미국의 전쟁은 오히려 세계적 안보와 민간인의 안전을 악화시켰습니다.

“사실, 20년간의 싸움 끝에 중동의 어느 나라도 – 세계의 어느 나라도 – 9.11 이전보다 더 안전해졌다고 주장할 수 없습니다. 현재 영구 전쟁의 확대되는 전장에 속한 모든 나라는 10년 전보다 더 큰 재앙입니다.”(newsweek.com ibid)

그렇다면, 누가 미국의 전쟁에서 이익을 얻고 있을까요? 소렌슨이 답을 제시합니다.

“궁극적으로 군사화된 마약 전쟁에서 이익을 얻는 사람은 배신적인 기수 장교, DC 정권 간부, 전쟁 기업 및 소수의 아메리카 원주민 엘리트뿐입니다.”(소렌슨: 298쪽)

더 나아가서, 수혜자는 APWC 회원이라고 말하고 싶습니다.

미국의 전쟁은 계속될까?

이러한 전쟁은 엄청나게 부정적인 영향을 끼쳤음에도 불구하고 계속될 것입니다. 이는 APWC에 이롭기 때문입니다.

영구전쟁에는 다음과 같은 전략이 필요합니다. 한편으로는 적의 끊임없는 존재, 다른 한편으로는 정치와 무관한 눈에 보이지 않는 전쟁의 채택입니다.

전쟁에 대한 수요가 없다면 전쟁은 없을 것이다.

따라서 전쟁이 지속되기 위해서는 전쟁에 대한 수요가 지속적으로 있어야 합니다.

하지만 전쟁에 대한 수요가 있으려면 위기가 있어야 하고 위기를 만드는 국가나 개인이 있어야 합니다. 이런 국가와 개인은 미국의 적이 됩니다.

APWC는 여러 차례 군사적 위기가 있었다고 주장 합니다 .

첫 번째 위기의 물결: 공산주의의 확산, 1950-1989

두 번째 위기의 물결: 테러 위협, 1990-현재

세 번째 위기의 물결: 핵확산의 위험, 1950년대부터 현재까지

네 번째 위기의 물결: 마약 전쟁, 1990년~현재

위기의 다섯 번째 물결: 인권 침해 2001-현재

따라서 현재 진행 중인 위기와 적들이 몇 가지 있습니다. 따라서 APWC는 적이 없는 것에 대해 걱정할 것이 거의 없습니다.

윌리엄 M 아킨 에 따르면 , 워싱턴은 아프가니스탄, 이라크, 시리아, 파키스탄, 소말리아, 예멘, 리비아, 니제르, 말리, 우간다 등 이 나라들을 폭격했거나 폭격하고 있습니다. 게다가 폭격을 받을 수 있는 나라가 10개국 더 있습니다. 이들은 대부분 카메론, 차드, 케냐, 그리고 다른 7개국을 포함한 아프리카 국가들입니다.

게다가 APWC는 적을 만들어내는 데 사용됩니다. 다음 위기 대상은 중국과 다른 아시아 국가를 포함하는 “Yellow-Peril 위기”일 가능성이 있습니다.

조 바이든 대통령은 관련 국가의 승인 없이도 외국의 “위기”에 개입하기로 결정했습니다. 이는 많은 잠재적 적을 제공할 수 있습니다.

어쨌든, 적의 존재에 관한 한, AWPC는 걱정할 것이 거의 없습니다. 적들은 많을 것이고, 그렇지 않다면 APWC가 만들어낼 것입니다.

예를 들어, 미국에 호의적이지 않은 태도는 위기와 위기를 조장하는 것으로 간주되어 미국의 적대자로 분류될 수 있습니다.

APWC가 극복해야 할 다음 과제는 미국과 세계 다른 지역의 반전 운동에 맞서는 것입니다.

해결책은 전쟁을 보이지 않게 하고, 미국인의 생명을 구하면서도 수익성 있는 방법을 찾는 것입니다. 이는 무인 무기를 사용하고 AI 기반 기술을 사용하여 생산 비용을 절감함으로써 이루어질 수 있으며, 전장에 있지 않고도 적을 공격할 수 있는 “허브 스포크” 전쟁 전략 덕분에 장거리 전쟁이 가능합니다.

점점 더 허브-스포크 시스템에 의해 전쟁이 수행되고 있습니다. 현재의 테러와의 전쟁에서 허브는 여러 중동 국가에 위치하고 있으며, 쿠웨이트는 육군 허브이고 바레인은 해군 허브입니다. 스포크는 전 세계, 특히 중동과 아프리카에 퍼져 있습니다.

윌리엄 M. 아킨은 허브-스포크 전쟁 모델의 효율성을 설명합니다.

“그것은 너무나 적게 이해되고, 너무나 눈에 띄지 않으며, 너무나 효율적입니다. 심지어 4명의 대통령이 전쟁을 약속하고 중단하려고 시도했지만, 그 스포크는 커지고 확장되었습니다.”

이런 종류의 전쟁이 발전한 이유는 반전 여론과 반전 정치로부터 자유로워야 한다는 필요성 때문입니다.

“전쟁은 돈을 가져온다”. 인간의 탐욕의 악순환

그러나 미국에서 전쟁이 끊임없이 일어나는 가장 중요한 이유는 인간의 탐욕이라는 악순환 때문 입니다 .

• 전쟁은 돈을 가져온다.
• 돈은 전쟁을 부른다.
• 전쟁은 더 많은 돈을 벌어들인다.
• 더 많은 돈은 더 많은 전쟁으로 이어지고, 그것은 무한정 이어진다 .

이것이 바로 인간 탐욕의 악순환입니다.

인간의 탐욕에는 경계가 없기 때문에, 미국의 전쟁은 계속해서 일어날 것이다.

따라서 미국의 전쟁은 더 이상 가치 있는 적이 없을 때까지 계속될 것입니다.

즉, 전쟁은 세계가 완전히 파괴될 때까지 계속될 것입니다.

그러니까 세계를 구하기 위해서는, 끊임없는 미국의 전쟁을 멈춰야 합니다.

*

 

독자 여러분께: 위의 공유 버튼을 클릭해 주세요. Instagram과 Twitter에서 저희를 팔로우하고 Telegram 채널을 구독하세요. Global Research 기사를 자유롭게 리포스트하고 널리 공유하세요.

Joseph H. Chung 박사는 몬트리올의 퀘벡 대학교(UQAM) 경제학 교수이며, CEIM-UQAM의 통합 및 세계화 연구 센터 회원입니다. 그는 세계화 연구 센터(CRG)의 연구원입니다.

추천 이미지는 The Unz Review 에서 가져왔습니다.