Turkey and Syria Both Want the US Military Out of Syria

August 18th, 2024 by Steven Sahiounie

On August 13, US troops in Syria came under attack, according to local media sources, but no details on possible injuries. On August 9, eight US military troops were wounded in a drone attack at Rumaylan base in North East Syria. This was the second major attack in recent days against US forces who are occupying Syrian territory illegally. This incident is the latest in a long line of similar attacks by groups who seek to oust the 900 US troops from their occupation of Syria, and the 2,500 US troops from Iraq. All these attacks come amid soaring tensions in the Middle East because of Israel’s refusal to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza, which the UN has labeled genocide.

Some US personnel at Rumaylan had minor injuries including smoke inhalation, and examinations were being conducted for possible traumatic brain injuries, while some were transported for further evaluation.

Rumaylan holds the greatest concentration of oil and gas wells in Syria, which in the past provided the complete domestic supply for Syria, and created full electricity for the national grid by converting oil and gas to electricity via power stations.  The average home in Syria today receives about 1 ½ hour of electricity in a 24 hour period due to the US occupation and confiscation of the oil resources produced in the north east.

ISIS had been well funded by selling stolen oil taken from oil fields across northern Iraq and Syria. Trump ordered the US troops in Syria to leave following the defeat of ISIS, but the ‘deep state’ refused Trump, and the US troops remained in Syria to confiscate the Syrian oil and deprive the Syrian people from their own energy resources.

On August 5, a rocket strike by a military unit within the Iraqi national army, the Popular Mobilization Forces, wounded five US personnel at Ain al-Asad airbase in western Iraq. The Popular Mobilization Forces were part of the Iraqi military coalition which defeated ISIS.

The Iraqi government requested the US military back to help them fight ISIS in 2014. After the defeat of ISIS, the Iraqi parliament and central government in Baghdad have both requested the US military to leave Iraq, but the US remains belligerently occupying several bases in Iraq.

The US has conducted several military attacks on Iraqi soil, including the US assassination of Iranian commander Qaseem Soleimani, and the assassination of a top military commander, Abu Baqir al-Saadi. Iraq sees the evacuation of the US troops from Iraqi soil as a matter of national security.

Turkish President Recip Tayyip Erdogan had been a close personal friend of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, to the extent of addressing him as ‘brother’ publically; however, that changed in 2011 after the Obama war on Syria began. Erdogan was a US ally, and fellow NATO member, with the largest army in NATO. Erdogan played his role in the script written in the Obama Oval Office. The drama ended in a tragedy for Syria and in a farce for Turkey and the EU as they continue to pay the price of hosting millions of Syrian refugees driven from their homes in search of peace and income.

Erdogan felt betrayed by the US.  He had played their game in Syria, paid the price of hosting international Radical Islamic terrorists, and 3 million Syrian refugees. Erdogan had also hosted the Syrian opposition in Istanbul, the Syrian National Coalition (SNC). Now, the US were playing with fire on the border with Turkey, while supporting the SDF, who are directly linked with the PKK, who have killed over 30,000 people in Turkey over 3 decades of terrorism. Repeatedly, Erdogan asked Washington to stop supporting a Kurdish communist semi-autonomous government in north east Syria, but the State Department’s design to remain in Syria forever was more important than their relationship with Turkey.

Erdogan wants to repair his relationship with Assad.  He seeks reconciliation with Damascus, and Syria has responded positively, but has demanded that Turkey remove all Turkish military from Syrian soil along the northern border first.

Experts have rumored a deal between Turkey and Syria is in the works. The deal on the table is rather simple: Turkey must get the US troops to withdraw completely from Syria, and in return the Syrian Arab Army will disarm the SDF and assure the security of the Turkish border.

Removing foreign troops from occupation can be done peacefully through diplomatic negotiations in which each side benefits.  Or, it can be achieved through violent attacks on the occupation forces in order to make them decide to leave on their own.

Turkey’s largest export market prior to 2011 was Syria.  Since then, Turkey has plunged into an economic crisis.  Turkish citizens have come to resent the 3 million Syrian refugees living among them and seek their repatriation. Erdogan views the Turkish-Syrian border as a national security priority.

Without the US military presence in Syria, the Kurds will be forced to realign with Damascus, and in the process millions of Syrians can return to their homes and the oil and gas wells can once again be an energy source for all the Syrian people, instead of the sole benefit of a minority community of Kurdish communists.

*

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

Industrial cheese production has compromised the quality of cheese. Most cheese is now made using synthetic, lab-produced rennet that alters the nutritional profile

Traditionally made cheese with animal rennet is a superfood, providing benefits like lactoferrin, beneficial saturated fats, vitamin K2, tyrosine and probiotic bacteria

Cheese made from A2/A2 milk from grass fed cows, and using traditional cheesemaking techniques is more nutritious and easier to digest than industrial cheese

Expanding access to traditionally made cheese can help shift consumer preferences toward healthier, more sustainable dairy options

*

Cheese has been a staple in human diets for millennia. However, the advent of industrial cheese production has dramatically altered its quality, making real, traditional cheese increasingly hard to find in the U.S. Instead, the market is now flooded with cheese made using synthetic, lab-produced rennet, which alters its nutritional profile and fails to match the quality and benefits of traditionally made cheese.

Fortunately, exciting developments are underway to make high-quality cheese more accessible to a broader audience. This initiative is spearheaded by Ashley Armstrong, cofounder of Angel Acres Egg Co., which specializes in low-PUFA (polyunsaturated fat) eggs, and the Nourish Cooperative, which provides some of the healthiest food in the United States. Ashley is also an expert on the late Dr. Ray Peat’s principles of bioenergetic medicine.

In our interview above, Ashley and I discuss the crucial differences between traditionally made cheese and its industrial counterparts, and how their efforts to expand the production and distribution of high-quality, artisanal cheese can allow more people to get access to this superfood and help shift consumer preferences toward healthier, more sustainable options.

The Emergence of Synthetic Cheese Rennet

Cheese is often said to be as good as the milk it’s made from, but an equally important factor is the rennet used in its production. Rennet is an enzyme complex responsible for coagulating milk. It comes in four types — animal rennet, vegetable rennet, microbial rennet and fermentation-produced chymosin (FPC), a rennet made from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that is often misleadingly labeled as “plant-based” for greenwashing purposes. Ashley explains:

“In the early 1990s, Pfizer generated FPC … It is produced in a lab from a genetically modified enzyme, so it’s not natural. They take a gene out of an animal cell’s DNA string and insert it into a bacteria, commonly a yeast or a mold.

They take that DNA, put it into the yeast or mold DNA string, and then that will initiate the production of the chymosin enzyme, [which is] what coagulates the milk. That is what’s naturally occurring inside the stomach chamber of a cow. The host culture is then cultivated and fermented.”

In a previous article, Ashley detailed how cheese was traditionally made with animal rennet, which is found naturally in the stomach lining of ruminant animals and is known to produce superior flavor. True vegetable rennet, on the other hand, often compromises the flavor of cheese. This is why most cheeses labeled as “vegetable rennet” today are not made with real vegetable rennet.

There’s no regulation on the terms used for rennet in cheese labeling, so most are actually made with either microbial rennet made from mold or FPC. Nowadays, manufacturers primarily use FPC because it’s cheaper, more stable, and meets the growing demand for vegetarian-friendly cheese. In fact, 90% of cheese produced in the U.S. uses synthetic rennet.1

How GMO Rennet Can Impact Your Health

While “plant-based” GMO rennet may sound like a good option, it can actually compromise your health. Ashley asserts:

“The biggest problem here is that this is made in a lab. Trace amounts of mold and fungus have been found in these enzymes, which are then used to make the cheese. [For] people who are allergic to mold or fungus, it can cause toxicity or allergenic responses …

It’s also been shown to disrupt gut health, likely because you’re inserting strange microbial populations into your gut. So, there are toxicity, allergenic and gut health concerns about FPC.”

Despite the safety of GMO rennet being evaluated only by a 90-day trial in rats,2 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved its use in food. It was also given Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) status, exempting Pfizer from the stringent pre-approval requirements for new food additives.

However, Ashley clarifies that its GRAS status is essentially meaningless, as it simply places all the responsibility on the producer to evaluate its effectiveness. This means we don’t really know the long-term repercussions of consuming GMO rennet.

Even when you start with the finest raw milk to make cheese, the use of GMO rennet can compromise the final product’s quality and nutritional value. In fact, I believe that most of the cheese consumed in this country should be avoided because it contains this ingredient, which is what makes most cheeses today so hard to digest.

How Dairy Misconceptions Contribute to Calcium-to-Phosphorus Imbalance

Ashley emphasizes that one of the key benefits of consuming cheese is its rich calcium content:

“Eating adequate calcium is going to be important for bone health and dental health, but there’s so many other benefits. One of the main things is maintaining that proper cell structure, which can lead to improved energy production, improved metabolism and make it easier to lose weight.

[Eating adequate calcium is] also going to lead to better blood pressure regulation, since low dietary calcium has been shown to increase blood pressure. It’s also going to lower oxalate absorption … [T]he more calcium consume, the less oxalates you absorb through your intestines, so it helps reduce the chances of oxalate toxicity.”

Unfortunately, the vilification of dairy products by the mainstream media has led many to avoid cheese, or to choose plant-based alternatives. This shift, driven by misconceptions that dairy causes digestive problems and calcification, leads to a cascade of health issues. As Ashley explains:

“When your calcium intake is low, it causes the parathyroid hormone (PTH) to rise, and that leads to an influx of calcium into the cells. Meanwhile, phosphorus, which is more readily available in our diet, remains in abundance, creating an imbalance in the calcium-to-phosphorus ratio …

The biggest thing that PTH does is it’s one of the main bone regulators, so when PTH is elevated, that causes an increase in bone resorption and a decrease in bone formation. It’s increasing the body’s requirements to go mine for calcium in your bones because you’re not consuming enough dietarily.”

Ashley also reveals that manufacturers add phosphate to commercial cheese as a preservative and to improve melting capabilities, which further exacerbates the imbalance between calcium and phosphorus.

“It’s becoming increasingly challenging to get [adequate] calcium intake,” Ashley notes. “We want our calcium-to-phosphorus ratio to be as close to 1-1 as possible.” This underscores the need to incorporate traditionally made cheeses into your diet, not just as a “guilty pleasure” but as a staple, health-supporting food choice.

Traditionally Made Cheese Is a Superfood

In addition to having impressive calcium content, high-quality artisanal cheese is also a good source of the following nutrients:

  • Lactoferrin — Lactoferrin is an iron-binding glycoprotein with a range of pharmacological benefits for both infants and adults, including immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antitumor and antimicrobial properties.3

It also plays a role in enhancing iron absorption and regulating cellular functions such as activation, differentiation and proliferation.4 Lactoferrin is significantly reduced during pasteurization,5 hence the importance of choosing raw milk cheese.

  • Saturated fats — One of the standout components in cheese is the odd-chain fat C15:0 (pentadecanoic acid). This essential fat, which is more abundant in milk from grass fed cows, has been associated with an array of health benefits, including improved metabolic health.

According to a 2023 study published in the journal Nutrients,6 low levels of C15:0 are linked to an increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and certain cancers.

The authors concluded there’s strong evidence that this essential nutrient supports healthy aging and longevity in humans, with cell-based activities that are as good as, or better than, leading longevity-enhancing prescription therapeutics.7

  • Vitamin K2 — This form of vitamin K plays a role in calcium metabolism, helping direct calcium to the bones where it’s needed. By doing so, it helps support both bone and cardiovascular health.8
  • Tyrosine — An amino acid that’s found in higher amounts in raw milk cheese than heavily processed ones,9 tyrosine influences your body’s production of important neurotransmitters like dopamine and norepinephrine, which are vital for mood regulation, cognitive function and stress response.10 Tyrosine also contributes to thyroid hormone production, which is essential for regulating your metabolism.11
  • Beneficial bacteria — Raw milk cheeses contain live lactic acid bacteria that can act as probiotics. The consumption of raw cheese has been documented to improve microbiome balance due to these beneficial bacteria, which are typically killed in pasteurized cheeses.12According to a study published in the journal Foods:13

“Current scientific evidence suggests that LAB [lactic acid bacteria], mainly Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium, are beneficial to the host in correcting imbalances in the intestinal microbiota, and consequently in maintaining and regulating health. These bacteria are traditionally associated with fermented foods and are the most studied probiotic organisms.

Probiotic organisms can protect the host from intestinal disease by inhibiting toxin production, producing antibacterial compounds, blocking pathogen adhesion sites, competing for nutrients and stimulating immunity.

In addition to pathogen exclusion, probiotics may offer other beneficial properties to the host’s health, including nutrient synthesis (certain vitamins), reduction in lactose intolerance and production of bioactive compounds such as CLA [conjugated linoleic acid], SCFA [short-chain fatty acids] and EPS [exopolysaccharides].”

The Characteristics of a High-Quality Cheese

High-quality, traditionally made cheese, like the one Ashley aims to provide, is characterized by several key factors:

  • Made from A2/A2 milk — Raw milk (not pasteurized) with the A2/A2 beta-casein protein can be easier to digest if you’re experiencing digestive issues with conventional A1 milk.
  • Sourced from 100% grass fed cows — Cheese made from the milk of vaccine-free cows that are exclusively grass fed on diverse pastures contains higher levels of beneficial nutrients compared to conventionally made cheese, which typically comes from cows fed genetically modified feeds and raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs).
  • Animal rennet — Traditional animal rennet is used instead of synthetic or microbial alternatives, which can lead to better taste, texture and digestibility.
  • Handcrafted using traditional techniques — The cheese is made in small batches using traditional techniques by skilled cheesemakers to avoid compromising the quality.

Artisanal Cheese Boxes Now More Accessible

Ashley and I also discussed her exciting plans to address the increasing demand for high-quality, traditionally made cheese. She reveals that as of today, they are offering delicious cheese boxes sourced from small-scale Amish farmers, now exclusively available to the Mercola audience. You can order here.

These cheeses are made according to the standards mentioned above, preserving the traditional cheesemaking techniques that ensure beneficial enzymes and nutrients remain intact. This approach contrasts sharply with industrial cheese production, which often sacrifices quality and nutritional value for mass production.

While the initial supply is limited to between 1,000 to 1,500 boxes per month, Ashley shares they have plans to gradually increase production. However, she emphasizes that this expansion will not compromise quality. Instead of pushing farms to become industrial complexes, the goal is to increase the number of small-scale producers involved in the project.

Eggshell Powder — An Alternative Source of Calcium

In our interview, Ashley also highlighted another good source of calcium for those who cannot consume dairy products — eggshell powder. Eggshells are primarily composed of calcium carbonate and also contain a variety of trace minerals,14 making them a nutrient-dense supplement. This often-discarded part of the egg can easily be repurposed into a valuable nutritional resource. Ashley explains:

“[I]t’s so easy to make yourself. Save your eggshells in a bag, put it in the freezer. When you have enough of it, you can either boil or lightly bake to sterilize or get rid of any impurities. Grind them in a little coffee grinder, and then you’ve got your eggshell powder.”

This powder can be added to various foods or used as a natural toothpaste when mixed with coconut or MCT oil. It’s been shown to have remineralizing effects on teeth. I personally take a teaspoon of eggshell powder twice a day.

For those raising chickens, Ashley points out that feeding crushed eggshells back to the hens can help ensure they have enough calcium to produce strong eggshells, creating a sustainable cycle that adheres with the principles of regenerative agriculture.

About Angel Acres Egg Co. and the Nourish Cooperative

What your food eats, matters — as pigs and chickens are vehicles for health-harming polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs). If their diet is high in PUFAs, the final product will contain more PUFAs. With the current agriculture system, knowing where your food comes from is vital. Angel Acres Egg Co. specializes in low-PUFA eggs. We discussed the importance of low-PUFA eggs in a previous interview, embedded above for your convenience.

Angel Acres Egg Co. ships low-PUFA eggs to all 50 states — but there is currently a waiting list as she slowly increases the number of chickens within the network to fulfill the demand. Join the waitlist for low-PUFA egg boxes here.

Armstrong also cofounded Nourish Cooperative, which ships the best low-PUFA pork, beef, cheese and A2 dairy, and traditional sourdough to all 50 states. They are also close to accepting new members to the farm cooperative — join the waitlist here: nourishcooperative.com.

In the video segment above, Ashley reflects on the timeline of her decision to invest her free time into regenerative farming, considering how just a few years ago, her health was far from ideal. She struggled with mitochondrial energy production and her body was in a low thyroid state. Your body prioritizes energy for essential tasks, and decision-making requires significant energy.

Your brain consumes about 20% of your body’s energy despite being only 2% of its weight. Ashley simply would not have had enough cellular energy to supply her brain to make a decision like she did unless she improved her health. Factors like excess linoleic acid, estrogen and endotoxins were depleting her cellular energy, which is crucial for making energy-intensive decisions.

Her transformation underscores the power of nurturing your health to gain the energy necessary for making significant life changes. Avoiding dietary pitfalls like seed oils played a key role in this journey, enabling her to tap into a newfound capacity for brave decisions — a testament to the profound impact of regaining cellular energy on her ability to navigate life’s choices.

It is my sincere desire and hope that you consider her journey to inspire and empower you to make similar choices in your own life and reclaim the Joy that you deserve. Imagine experiencing the nearly limitless Joy that Ashley has with her 1,000 chickens and four livestock guard dogs below.

 

*

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

Notes

1 Trends in Food Science & Technology January 2022; 119: 467-475

2 EFSA August 3, 2022

3, 4 Pharmaceutics 2023, 15(6), 1569

5 Animals 2023, 13(10), 1610

6, 7 Nutrients 2023, 15(21), 4607

8 Foods 2024, 13(11), 1646

9 Food Chemistry Volume 460, Part 2, 1 December 2024, 140622

10 Bulletin of Problems in Biology and Medicine, 2023, Issue 3 (170)

11 Mount Sinai, Tyrosine

12, 13 Foods. 2022 Aug; 11(15): 2276

14 J R Soc Interface. 2021 Sep; 18(182): 20210502

Featured image is from Mercola

“A total demolition of the previous forms of existence is underway: how one comes into the world, biological sex, education, relationships, the family, even the diet that is about to become synthetic.” — Silvia Guerini, radical ecologist, in ‘From the ‘Neutral’ Body to the Posthuman Cyborg: A Critique of Gender Ideology’ (2023)  

We are currently seeing an acceleration of the corporate consolidation of the entire global agri-food chain. The big data conglomerates, including Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Google, have joined traditional agribusiness giants, such as Corteva, Bayer, Cargill and Syngenta, in a quest to impose their model of food and agriculture on the world. [1]  

Image source

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and big financial institutions, like BlackRock and Vanguard, are also involved, whether through buying up huge tracts of farmland,  pushing biosynthetic (fake) food and genetic engineering technologies or more generally facilitating and financing the aims of the mega agri-food corporations. [2]  

The billionaire interests behind this try to portray their techno-solutionism as some kind of humanitarian endeavour: saving the planet with ‘climate-friendly solutions’, ‘helping farmers’ or ‘feeding the world’. But what it really amounts to is repackaging and greenwashing the dispossessive strategies of imperialism.  

It involves a shift towards a ‘one world agriculture’ under the control of agritech and the data giants, which is to be based on genetically engineered seeds, laboratory created products that resemble food, ‘precision’ and ‘data-driven’ agriculture and farming without farmers, with the entire agrifood chain, from field (or lab) to retail, being governed by monopolistic e-commerce platforms determined by artificial intelligence systems and algorithms.  

Those who are pushing this agenda have a vision not only for farmers but also for humanity in general.  

The elites through their military-digital-financial (Pentagon/Silicon Valley/Big Finance) complex want to use their technologies to reshape the world and redefine what it means to be human. They regard humans, their cultures and their practices, like nature itself, as a problem and deficient.        

Farmers are to be displaced and replaced with drones, machines and cloud-based computing. Food is to be redefined and people are to be fed synthetic, genetically engineered products. Cultures are to be eradicated, and humanity is to be fully urbanised, subservient and disconnected from the natural world.  

What it means to be human is to be radically transformed. But what has it meant to be human until now or at least prior to the (relatively recent) Industrial Revolution and associated mass urbanisation?  

To answer this question, we need to discuss our connection to nature and what most of humanity was involved in prior to industrialisation — cultivating food.  

Many of the ancient rituals and celebrations of our forebears were built around stories, myths and rituals that helped them come to terms with some of the most fundamental issues of existence, from death to rebirth and fertility. These culturally embedded beliefs and practices served to sanctify their practical relationship with nature and its role in sustaining human life.  

As agriculture became key to human survival, the planting and harvesting of crops and other seasonal activities associated with food production were central to these customs.  

Humans celebrated nature and the life it gave birth to. Ancient beliefs and rituals were imbued with hope and renewal and people had a necessary and immediate relationship with the sun, seeds, animals, wind, fire, soil and rain and the changing seasons that nourished and brought life. Our cultural and social relationships with agrarian production and associated deities had a sound practical base.  

People’s lives have been tied to planting, harvesting, seeds, soil and the seasons for thousands of years.  

Silvia Guerini, whose quote introduces this article, notes the importance of deep-rooted relationships and the rituals that re-affirm them. She says that through rituals a community recognises itself and its place in the world. They create the spirit of a rooted community by contributing to rooting and making a single existence endure in a time, in a territory, in a community.  

Professor Robert W Nicholls explains that the cults of Woden and Thor were superimposed on far older and better-rooted beliefs related to the sun and the earth, the crops and the animals and the rotation of the seasons between the light and warmth of summer and the cold and dark of winter.  

Humanity’s relationship with farming and food and our connections to land, nature and community has for millennia defined what it means to be human.  

Take India, for example. Environmental scientist Viva Kermani says that Hinduism is the world’s largest nature-based religion that:  

“… recognises and seeks the Divine in nature and acknowledges everything as sacred. It views the earth as our Mother and hence advocates that it should not be exploited. A loss of this understanding that earth is our mother, or rather a deliberate ignorance of this, has resulted in the abuse and the exploitation of the earth and its resources.”  

Kermani notes that ancient scriptures instructed people that the animals and plants found in India are sacred and, therefore, all aspects of nature are to be revered. She adds that this understanding of and reverence towards the environment is common to all Indic religious and spiritual systems: Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.  

According to Kermani, the Vedic deities have deep symbolism and many layers of existence. One such association is with ecology. Surya is associated with the sun, the source of heat and light that nourishes everyone; Indra is associated with rain, crops, and abundance; and Agni is the deity of fire and transformation and controls all changes.  

She notes that the Vrikshayurveda, an ancient Sanskrit text on the science of plants and trees, contains details about soil conservation, planting, sowing, treatment, propagating, how to deal with pests and diseases and a lot more.  

Like Nicholls, Kermani provides insight into some of the profound cultural, philosophical and practical aspects of humanity’s connection to nature and food production.  

This connection resonates with agrarianism, a philosophy based on cooperative labour and fellowship, which stands in stark contrast to the values and impacts of urban life, capitalism and technology that are seen as detrimental to independence and dignity. Agrarianism, too, emphasises a spiritual dimension as well as the value of rural society, small farms, widespread property ownership and political decentralisation.  

The prominent proponent of agrarianism Wedell Berry says:  

“The revolution which began with machines and chemicals now continues with automation, computers and biotechnology.”  

For Berry, agrarianism is not a sentimental longing for a time past. Colonial attitudes, domestic, foreign and now global, have resisted true agrarianism almost from the beginning — there has never been fully sustainable, stable, locally adapted, land-based economies.  

However, Berry provides many examples of small (and larger) farms that have similar output as industrial agriculture with one third of the energy.  

In his poem ‘A Spiritual Journey’, Berry writes the following:  

“And the world cannot be discovered by a journey of miles,
no matter how long,
but only by a spiritual journey,
a journey of one inch,
very arduous and humbling and joyful,
by which we arrive at the ground at our feet,
and learn to be at home.”

But in the cold, centralised, technocratic dystopia that is planned, humanity’s spiritual connection to the countryside, food and agrarian production are to be cast into the dustbin of history.  

Silvia Guerini says [3]:  

“The past becomes something to be erased in order to break the thread that binds us to a history, to a tradition, to a belonging, for the transition towards a new uprooted humanity, without past, without memory… a new humanity dehumanised in its essence, totally in the hands of the manipulators of reality and truth”.  

This dehumanised humanity severed from the past is part of the wider agenda of transhumanism. For instance, we are not just seeing a push towards a world without farmers and everything that has connected us to the soil but, according to Guerini, also a world without mothers.  

She argues that those behind test-tube babies and surrogate motherhood now have their sights on genetic engineering and artificial wombs, which would cut women out of the reproductive process. Guerini predicts that artificial wombs could eventually be demanded, or rather marketed, as a right for everyone, including transgender people. It is interesting that the language around pregnancy is already contested with the omission of ‘women’ from statements like ‘persons who can get pregnant’.  

Of course, there has long been a blurring of lines between biotechnology, eugenics and genetic engineering. Genetically engineered crops, gene drives and gene editing are now a reality, but the ultimate goal is marrying artificial intelligence, bionanotechnology and genetic engineering to produce the one-world transhuman.    

This is being pushed by powerful interests, who, according to Guerini, are using a rainbow, transgenic left and LGBTQ+ organisations to promote a new synthetic identity and claim to new rights. She says this is an attack on life, on nature, on “what is born, as opposed to artificial” and adds that all ties to the real, natural world must be severed.  

It is interesting that in its report Future of Food, the UK supermarket giant Sainsburys celebrates a future where we are microchipped and tracked and neural laces have the potential to see all of our genetic, health and situational data recorded, stored and analysed by algorithms that could work out exactly what food (delivered by drone) we need to support us at a particular time in our life. All sold as ‘personal optimisation’.  

Moreover, it is likely, according to the report, that we will be getting key nutrients through implants. Part of these nutrients will come in the form of lab-grown food and insects.  

A neural lace is an ultra-thin mesh that can be implanted in the skull, forming a collection of electrodes capable of monitoring brain function. It creates an interface between the brain and the machine.  

Sainsburys does a pretty good job of trying to promote a dystopian future where AI has taken your job, but, according to the report, you have lots of time to celebrate the wonderful, warped world of ‘food culture’ created by the supermarket and your digital overlords.  

Technofeudalism meets transhumanism — all for your convenience, of course.  

But none of this will happen overnight. And whether the technology will deliver remains to be seen. Those who are promoting this brave new world might have overplayed their hand but will spend the following decades trying to drive their vision forward.  

But arrogance is their Achilles heel.  

There is still time to educate, to organise, to resist and to agitate against this hubris, not least by challenging the industrial food giants and the system that sustains them and by advocating for and creating grass-root food movements and local economies that strengthen food sovereignty.  

*

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

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

Notes

[1] See Food, Dispossession and Dependency: Resisting the New World Order.  

[2] See Sickening Profits: The Global Food System’s Poisoned Food and Toxic Wealth  

[3] A debt of gratitude is owed to Paul Cudenec and his article Truth, reality, tradition and freedom: our resistance to the great uprooting on the Winter Oak website, which provides quotes from and insight into the work of Silvia Guerini. 

A NATO invasion of nuclear Russia is currently underway, and the world is unaware that it is in World War III, as reported by Megatron (14 August 2024).

The Kursk region of Russia is currently full of NATO weapons, troops, logistics, and more, many of them destroyed. See map, below.

 

Ukrainian aims to destabilize Russia with Kursk incursion. (BingMaps/Institute For The Study Of War/USA TODAY)

Video footage comes out of dozens of NATO vehicles, air defense systems, tanks and more; even if destroyed and captured by Russian forces in the Kursk Region.

The Kiev forces of about 11,600 under guidance of NATO troops have not managed to conquer the city of Kurchatov and its nuclear power plant. Apparently, President Zelensky used all of Kiev’s remaining troops, plus extra Polish (NATO) forces. 

Russian General Apti Alaudinov noted that the purpose of invading the Kursk Region was to secure a strong position for upcoming negotiations with Russia. However, with Kiev’s and their western masters’ defeat, the Kiev Regime signed their own death warrant. 

Kiev’s losses are more than 2,000.

General Allaudin further predicts that the Kiev Special Operation will be terminated by the end of 2024, with a total victory of the Russian Army, and the surrender of the Kiev Regime and its masters in Washington and London. (Borzzikman Aug 15, 2024)

Whether surrender by the west will actually happen, remains to be seen. It is not a habit of the west, even in terminal conditions, losing face – thus, more aggressions, perhaps of a NATO direct attack on Russia, is a possibility.

At this point, President Putin still refuses to declare war, although Russia’s territory has been invaded and Russians are killed on their territory by NATO forces. And more direct NATO attacks may be planned. For now, Washington is getting away with “murder”; literally. 

Step by step, Washington and its NATO partners have been crossing one red line after the other.

  • First, NATO weapons in Ukraine;
  • then NATO troops un Ukaine;
  • then F-16 fighter jets in Ukraine;
  • then NATO soldiers commanding the sophisticated weaponry supplied by the west;
  • then NATO troops on Russian territories; then NATO drones and aircraft attacking Russian targets on Russian territory – and finally NATO troops attempting taking over an entire Russian district, taking Russian prisoners, killing Russians.

Airports across Russia have been constantly bombed for several weeks by NATO drones. 

On August 9, 2024, Russian state media reported an explosion, followed by fire at the Russian air base in the Lipetsk region, around 280 kilometers from the border with northeastern Ukraine, as if Ukraine / NATO forces attacked the airfield, and destroyed a warehouse and several other facilities with guided aerial bombs; guided by NATO experts. 

Some speculate that Kiev / NATO may have used a small tactical nuclear weapon. There is however no proof for such an aggression, and Russia remains silent.

According to Russian military, their own (Russian) offensive involved around 1,000 troops and more than two dozen armored vehicles and tanks. See this. (This page was removed by Google, saying the Moscow Times page does not exist anymore – the link is shown, to demonstrate western censoring).

The Russian army is constantly advancing in the Donbass, defending the Russian speaking population from the cowardly Azov-Nazi attacks that killed in the last 10 years about 18,000 people, most of them women and children. 

Russia, on her own territory receives heavy and painful blows from NATO weapons. NATO is everywhere, with communication, logistics and NATO command.

Over 35 countries are investing hundreds of billions in tax payers’ money to supply Ukraine with weapons to carry out these deadly strikes against Russia – on Russian territory, with NATO soldiers, whom the west likes to call “foreign mercenaries”. 

Some 80 years after WWII, when Russia defeated Nazi-Germany, German tanks – given to Ukraine – are again rolling through the Kursk region, where the decisive battle took place; the battle by which Russia defeated Nazi-Germany saving the West from German fascism. 

But fascism today is ticking and is well alive, reminiscing the times of the 1940’s. Now neo-fascism is emanating from Ukraine, an erstwhile ally of Nazi-Germany – the Bandera’s Azov Battalions – that killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Russians during WWII.

Mr. Putin was adamant eradicating Nazism in Ukraine, making Ukraine a neutral and NATO-free country, a key condition for Peace negotiations. 

Many people are still under the illusion that Russia is in a minor military conflict with Ukraine, not realizing that this proxy-war Washington-NATO against Russia is far more dangerous than the WWII situation in 1943.

NATO is attempting to gradually creating brigades in Eastern Europe, aiming at confronting Russia.

It is a game of observation, “how far can we go”, while carefully watching Russia’s reaction. The difficulties they may have, is manning the brigades with soldiers, as young Europeans are unwilling to die for western warmongers and profits of western war industries. 

According to Megatron, there is a high probability that NATO may eventually intend to invade Belarus.

Did Mr. Putin and his advisers miscalculate NATO’s boldness, hoping that they will not cross from Ukraine into Russian territories, to avoid further escalation?

What now, that all the Red Lines have been crossed – and that more than once?

In a recent statement, former Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, said Russia should no longer hold back: 

“From this moment, the [Kiev] Special Military operation should become openly exterritorial in nature,” Medvedev, who serves as deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, argued in a post on Thursday.

“We can and should go further into what still exists as Ukraine. To Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev. To Kiev and further. There should be no restrictions in terms of recognized borders.” See this.

*

If President Putin is holding out for even more western / NATO aggressions on Russian territory, it may be that he has a strong response in store, one that cannot be accused as a response to a “false flag”, because what Kiev-NATO are doing on Russian territories is clearly no “false flag”, but pure provocation. 

Russia has the military capacity to wipe out simultaneously western decision and military centers, as well as financial hubs, with ultra-precise, supersonic tactical nuclear weapons, keeping the loss of life to a minimum, but disabling western power structures.

*

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 is from South Front

Video: Crimes Against Syria

August 18th, 2024 by Mark Taliano

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 in September 17, 2023

*** 

Washington-led Empire’s criminal war on Syria is a war against civilization itself.

Empire, with its legacy media accomplices, hides behind veils of fabricated lies to commit crimes against children, women, men, Muslims, Christians, minorities, secularism, democracy, and the entire fabric of the sovereign nation of Syria itself.

Empire balkanizes, steals, loots, plunders, and supports terrorism of all kinds, even as it imposes colllective punishment in the form of unilateral coercive measures against those in government-secured areas.

“Crimes Against Syria” unmasks the war propaganda apparatus. It presents the evidence-based truth that the West and its agencies seek to obscure.

Big lies of “humanitarian warfare” and the “Global War on Terror” are exposed for all to see. 

Watch the trailer below. 

Watch the full documentary below.

*

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.

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. He writes on his website where this article was originally published.

Featured image is from Syria News


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

**Voices from Syria**

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

Click to order.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Crimes Against Syria
  • Tags:

As investigações ocidentais sobre o que “realmente” aconteceu na explosão do Nord Stream parecem ter sido concluídas. Em vez de uma complexa operação de inteligência usando equipamento naval apropriado e táticas sofisticadas de sabotagem, acredita-se que tudo foi apenas o resultado de uma “noite de bebedeira” quando os oficiais ucranianos simplesmente decidiram destruir a “fonte de financiamento” do Kremlin através de um navio alugado. A ridícula narrativa ocidental sobre o assunto mostra como a grande mídia perdeu o respeito pelo seu próprio público, tratando o público como completos idiotas.

De acordo com um artigo recente publicado pelo Wall Street Journal, a operação de sabotagem do Nord Stream é de inteira responsabilidade da Ucrânia. O ato foi alegadamente o resultado de um plano mal pensado por oficiais ucranianos bêbados durante uma celebração do progresso das tropas de Kiev no campo de batalha – após a retirada estratégica russa de 2022, que os meios de comunicação social relataram como uma “vitória ucraniana”. De acordo com o WSJ, militares ucranianos bêbados decidiram lançar uma operação ousada para prejudicar economicamente a Rússia, visando os gasodutos.

O jornal diz que a operação não custou mais de 300 mil dólares e exigiu apenas os sabotadores e um iate alugado. O WSJ, citando alegadas fontes que “participaram” na operação, afirma que o esquema era ousado, mas simples e fácil de implementar, não necessitando de conhecimentos técnicos avançados ou de grande apoio de agências governamentais.

“Em maio de 2022, um punhado de altos oficiais militares e empresários ucranianos reuniram-se para brindar ao notável sucesso do seu país em travar a invasão russa. Estimulados pelo álcool e pelo fervor patriótico, alguém sugeriu um próximo passo radical: destruir o Nord Stream. os gasodutos gêmeos de gás natural que transportavam o gás russo para a Europa estavam a fornecer milhares de milhões à máquina de guerra do Kremlin. Qual a melhor maneira de fazer Vladimir Putin pagar pela sua agressão? A operação ucraniana custou cerca de $300 mil, segundo pessoas que dela participaram. Envolvia um pequeno iate alugado com uma tripulação de seis pessoas, inclusive treinada por mergulhadores civis”, diz o artigo.

Na prática, é possível dizer que a matéria publicada pelo WSJ tenta minimizar a natureza do ataque ao Nord Stream, descrevendo-o como uma operação simples que teria sido realizada por uma pequena equipe de sabotadores e com baixa qualidade de equipamento. Isto contradiz completamente a opinião de analistas militares experientes, que afirmam que a explosão dos gasodutos não foi uma operação simples e que não poderia ter sido realizada por agentes comuns, mas na realidade exigiu uma elevada capacidade técnica militar.

Em 2022, Douglas McGregor, ex-assessor do secretário de Defesa dos EUA durante o governo de Donald Trump, afirmou que no mundo inteiro apenas as marinhas dos EUA e do Reino Unido teriam capacidade para realizar este tipo de ataque. Na altura, a principal narrativa da comunicação social ocidental era que os russos tinham sabotado a sua própria infraestrutura numa operação de bandeira falsa. Macgregor criticou este argumento, afirmando que os EUA e o Reino Unido são os únicos países cujas marinhas possuem este tipo de capacidade operacional.

“É preciso ver quem são os atores estatais que têm capacidade para fazer isto. E isso significa a Marinha Real [do Reino Unido] e a Marinha dos Estados Unidos <…> Acho que isso está bastante claro”, disse Macgregor na altura.

Isso parece ser típico da prática ocidental desde o início do conflito. Quando um crime é cometido, a primeira ação da imprensa ocidental é culpar a Rússia. Se a narrativa não prevalecer, são realizadas “investigações” longas e obscuras. E então o último mecanismo utilizado é culpar a Ucrânia, excluindo a responsabilidade ocidental. Isto também foi feito em casos de crimes contra indivíduos russos. Por exemplo, quando a jornalista Daria Dugina foi assassinada, a primeira ação ocidental foi afirmar que Moscou a tinha eliminado numa operação de bandeira falsa. Meses mais tarde, o New York Times publicou um artigo afirmando que Kiev tinha levado a cabo o ataque sozinho, sem a participação ocidental.

Tudo o que a imprensa ocidental quer é libertar a OTAN da responsabilidade pelos crimes cometidos na guerra contra a Rússia. O regime neonazista é um mero proxy, não agindo sozinho em nenhuma situação. Todo crime cometido por Kiev tem autorização prévia do Ocidente. Nos EUA e na Europa, os cidadãos comuns começam a compreender esta relação entre a OTAN e a Ucrânia, uma vez que, ao contrário do que pensam os principais jornalistas, a opinião pública não é composta por pessoas ingênuas ou estúpidas, mas por cidadãos pensantes e críticos que duvidam do absurdo dos meios de comunicação social. Assim, tal como as pessoas comuns não acreditavam no passado que os russos tinham destruído os gasodutos, também não acreditarão agora que a Ucrânia realizou esta operação sozinha.

Parece claro para qualquer analista sério que o que aconteceu com o Nord Stream foi resultado de um plano muito bem pensado e executado, e não apenas de uma conversa de bêbados. Certamente, a operação foi planejada durante meses e executada envolvendo os serviços de inteligência e forças armadas de vários países ao mesmo tempo. No mesmo sentido, é absolutamente inútil pensar que o objetivo era prejudicar economicamente a Rússia, uma vez que na altura a Alemanha já sancionava Moscou e as relações entre os dois países estavam gradualmente a diminuir.

O objetivo da sabotagem do Nord Stream era prejudicar a própria Europa. Dada a inevitabilidade de uma vitória russa, os EUA queriam garantir que a Alemanha nunca restabelecesse os laços com Moscou no futuro. Berlim foi condenada pelos EUA à desindustrialização e ao declínio econômico ao ver a sua cooperação com a Rússia sabotada. O alvo não era Moscou, que continua a vender facilmente gás a outros países através de rotas alternativas, mas a própria Alemanha – e toda a Europa.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

 

Artigo em inglês :Western media tries to blame Ukraine for Nord Stream sabotagen, InfoBrics, 16 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

We are still awaiting Iran’s retaliation on Israel for the killing of Hamas’ top political leader Haniyeh in Tehran.

Before taking Iran into further far-reaching hostilities, Iran found it wise first to get prepared. To get over the wasteful talks with US Secretary of State Blinken.

Then present the case for the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), and finally conclude a top-visit by Russia’s Shoigu in Tehran. The latter, Shoigu’s visit, is extremely important, as it contains huge supplies of advanced weapons to Tehran as well as a possible strategic defense agreement between Iran and Russia.

Now that these items are crossed on Iran’s shopping list, Iran can finally get into business.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has assured Khalil al-Hayya, the deputy head of the Hamas political bureau in Gaza, that nothing other than a decisive action could be considered a retaliation for the heartrending target killing of Ismail Haniyeh.

He added that Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf has also underlined during meetings with Hamas officials over the past few days that Iran’s response will be definite, decisive and different in kind and manner.

The representative of Hamas in Tehran says Iran’s response to Israel’s assassination of the head of political bureau of the Palestinian resistance group will be “definite and decisive” and will be carried out at “a substantial level.”

Khaled Qaddoumi made the remarks in an exclusive interview with the Arabic service of Tasnim news agency on Monday, stressing that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has assured Khalil al-Hayya, the deputy head of the Hamas political bureau in Gaza, that nothing other than a decisive action could be considered a retaliation for the heartrending target killing of Ismail Haniyeh.

He added that Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf has also underlined during meetings with Hamas officials over the past few days that Iran’s response will be definite, decisive and different in kind and manner.

“Experience has proven that the Zionist regime will press ahead with its crimes in case it does not receive an answer… The most important reason why a criminal like [Israeli prime minister Benjamin] Netanyahu is forging ahead with its genocide is the absence of diplomatic pressures from the United States. He does not feel such strains,” Qaddoumi said.

The senior Hamas official emphasized that Iran will definitely respond to the Israeli assassination of Haniyeh at a substantial level, and expressed regret that the occupying Tel Aviv regime is not under pressure from any other party, either in West Asia or anywhere else.

PressTV, August 13, 2024

As Israel prepares to be attacked, Israel vows to strike back at Iran no matter the size or result of Iran’s expected retaliation against Israel. See this.

It won’t help Iran to give in for US efforts “restrain” its retaliation against Israel – the result will anyway be a circle of retaliations, likely a full-scale regional war

Escalation is guaranteed.

*

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

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

This scenario carries with it very serious potential consequences.

The report late last month that Ukraine finally received some of its long-awaited F-16s, at least one of which was then spotted flying over Odessa, was followed earlier this week by two related developments. Senator Lindsey Graham revealed during a press conference in Kiev that Zelensky wants to hire retired Western pilots to fly the F-16s until his country trains enough of its own, shortly after which Russia summoned the Moldovan charge d’affaires amidst reports that they’ll be based in his country.

If this comes to pass, then Westerners will soon pilot Ukrainian F-16s out of Moldova for sorties against Russia, including nearby Crimea but also possibly parts of its pre-2014 territory like Kursk Region. This scenario carries with it very serious potential consequences. For starters, while those mercenary pilots wouldn’t officially represent their countries, their participation in the conflict would almost certainly be seen by Russia as further proof of the West escalating everything in the direction of direct involvement.

Flying out of Moldova would be less provocative than flying out of NATO countries like Poland or Romania, though that could still possibly happen if some of Ukraine’s F-16s are stored there. Nevertheless, it’s still not without any risks either since Russia could retaliate against Moldova if any planes from there carry out strikes against its territory, including former Ukrainian lands. That might in turn lead to Moldova invading its breakaway region of Transnistria where Russia troops are still based.

A rekindling of that frozen conflict could involve Ukraine and/or neighboring Romania between whom Moldova is sandwiched. Kiev is looking for another quick morale boost while Bucharest could see an opportunity to forcibly reincorporate its historic region that only became an independent state by chance due to the USSR’s dissolution. Russia’s estimated 1,100 troops there could easily be outmatched if that happens, but the legacy of its modern-day Thermopylae might be long-lasting.

It’s difficult to imagine Russia declining to declare war against Moldova in that scenario since public pressure might become impossible to withstand, in which case Moldova could be destroyed in revenge if Russia finally stops fighting with one hand tied behind its back for political reasons like it presently is. Regardless of whatever happens to all or part of Ukraine in that scenario, there’d still be the risk of a hot war breaking out with NATO if any of its forces inside of Moldova are killed during Russia’s retaliation.

Considering the enormity of what’s at stake, which could include forcible reincorporation into Romania despite the majority of society’s wishes per a reliable poll from August 2023 as well as the risk of World War III being sparked by miscalculation as explained, Moldovans might protest against hosting the F-16s. “Putin Implied The Possibility Of Forthcoming Anti-Elite Protests In Moldova” last fall so his forecast might soon come to pass if it’s confirmed that Moldova will indeed serve as an anti-Russian airbase.  

At the same time, there’s always the possibility that Russia restrains itself for the “greater good” like it’s thus far done in spite of so many other perceived red lines having already been crossed. The rationale might be that it’s not worth turning Transnistria into a modern-day Thermopylae, let alone risking a hot war with NATO, especially if Russia is able to defend itself from this new threat. While some might breathe a sigh of relief, others will worry that this could embolden the West to cross even more red lines.

*

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, Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

– Prossegue a execução de um sistema de controle digital mundial
– A vigilância em massa sob o pretexto sanitário
– Conivência ativa da União Europeia

O EVC, o Cartão Europeu de Vacinação, será lançado em setembro de 2024 em 5 países-piloto. Não só consolidará todos os dados de vacinação num único local, como também fornecerá “metadados” descarregáveis que podem ser partilhados utilizando um código QR.

O projeto faz parte de um programa mais vasto denominado EUVABECO, que visa monitorizar e aumentar a vacinação na UE. Como parte do sistema global de certificação digital da OMS, o EVC acompanhará a introdução da identidade digital europeia e da moeda digital na Europa.

O cartão deverá estar em circulação em todos os Estados-Membros da UE a partir de 2026.

Os cidadãos estão a reagir à ameaça de um maior controlo social. Como é que lidamos com esta nova tendência para um governo global através da saúde?

EUVABECO

Lançado em janeiro de 2024 pela Comissão Europeia, o projeto EUVABECO (European Vaccination Beyond Covid-19) reúne instituições e universidades de 14 países para desenvolver e testar 12 projectos-piloto para a introdução de ferramentas “inovadoras” destinadas a preparar e prevenir pandemias e a estimular a vacinação na UE.

É coordenado pela Universidade de Creta, na Grécia, e dispõe de um orçamento de 8,44 milhões de euros, dos quais 6,75 milhões de euros provêm do programa EU4Health e 1,69 milhões de euros de “parceiros” não especificados.

Estão atualmente a ser estudadas cinco ferramentas:

  1. O Sistema de Decisão Clínica (CDS), uma ferramenta médica concebida para fornecer argumentos e recomendações para a vacinação. O CDS basear-se-á nas práticas em França e no Luxemburgo.
  2. A orientação da população (SCR), uma ferramenta social que consiste em selecionar, identificar e convidar categorias e indivíduos específicos a serem vacinados. Este sistema inspirar-se-á no exemplo belga durante a Covid.
  3. O folheto eletrónico de informação sobre vacinas (ePIL), uma ferramenta industrial para facilitar a transferência de vacinas de um país para outro.
  4. Modelação e Previsão (FOR), uma ferramenta de saúde pública concebida para prever a produção e as encomendas de vacinas com base em dados epidemiológicos. Esta componente basear-se-á no simulador desenvolvido pela Universidade de Saarland, na Alemanha.
  5. O Cartão Europeu de Vacinação (CVE), uma ferramenta (de controlo) “que assegura a continuidade dos cuidados”. Será testado por cinco países-piloto com base no cartão de saúde Covid.

.

O cartão europeu de vacinação

Durante a pandemia de Covid, a Grécia foi o primeiro país a desenvolver um passe sanitário e a solicitar a introdução de um equivalente europeu. O país fez tudo o que estava ao seu alcance para incentivar a população a vacinar-se, chegando mesmo a tomar medidas extremas, como tornar a vacinação obrigatória para as pessoas com mais de 60 anos, com uma multa de 100 euros por mês para quem não cumprisse a obrigação. Graças a esta experiência, a Grécia é atualmente um dos países mais envolvidos nos projectos EUVABECO. Os outros países que irão introduzir o CVE a partir de setembro são a Alemanha, a Bélgica, a Letónia e Portugal.

.

Para já, trata-se de uma iniciativa voluntária por parte dos doentes. Na prática, o cartão de vacinação estará disponível em vários suportes e poderá ser obtido nos pontos de vacinação (estabelecimentos de saúde), por correio ou descarregado digitalmente para um smartphone. Este cartão conterá todos os pormenores do historial de vacinação, incluindo notas pormenorizadas, um código QR e “metadados” descarregáveis. Cada vacinação será igualmente registada na base de dados de um organismo de saúde aprovado pelo sistema.

O código QR dará acesso aos “metadados” para que os profissionais de saúde possam ler, completar e confirmar as entradas de vacinação no seu sistema de registo médico eletrónico.

O “canivete suíço” da saúde digital?

Em que consistem estes misteriosos “metadados”? Poderá ser informação relacionada com o controlo social e o comportamento do doente. Por exemplo, “o paciente recusa a 5ª dose, porque acha que já tomou o suficiente com a 4ª” ou “ela concordou em ser vacinada para proteger o seu bebé”, etc.

Mas é evidente que a interoperabilidade do CVE se destina a alargar o seu âmbito de aplicação para além da vacinação e que se trata sobretudo de criar a base de uma carteira digital que reunirá uma multiplicidade de dados pessoais.

A T-Systems, filial da Deutsche Telekom, que é a principal arquiteta desta plataforma, declarou igualmente que o passe funciona como um verdadeiro “canivete suíço” ao qual podem ser constantemente acrescentadas novas aplicações.

Durante a Covid, centralizou os certificados de vacinação, os resultados dos testes PCR e os certificados de cura da Covid. Mas já poderíamos ter acrescentado aplicações de alerta e de rastreio. Especialmente porque foi também a T-Systems que concebeu o European Federation Gateway Service, o portão de entrada que permitiu que estas funções de localização e seguimento funcionassem nos vários Estados-Membros.

Atualmente, a empresa tem muitas aplicações adicionais em cuidados hospitalares, seguros de saúde e recolha de dados para estudos científicos, para não mencionar outras áreas como os transportes públicos, a administração e os veículos motorizados. Daí a reunir tudo numa única “mega-aplicação” vai um curto passo.

Acima da Europa, a OMS

Por trás destes “metadados” está toda a agenda da saúde digital em que a OMS está a investir tanto esforço. Sabemos que o passe global de vacinas é um dos elementos-chave do “Tratado”, ou melhor, dos “Acordos” da OMS sobre pandemias, que ainda estão a ser negociados. E mesmo que este instrumento não seja adotado, isso não impede os países de se submeterem unilateralmente ao controlo da OMS.

Um exemplo é a Bélgica, que planeou prolongar a validade do passaporte sanitário (o Covid safe ticket) por acordo governamental em fevereiro de 2024. Esta decisão tem efeitos retroactivos a 30 de junho de 2023, data em que o passaporte sanitário europeu chegou ao fim. Acima de tudo, transfere o poder para a OMS, entregando as chaves para a verificação do OCS, que passa a atuar de facto como um organismo de controlo supranacional.

O Cartão Europeu de Vacinação foi, portanto, concebido para integrar a rede mundial de certificação digital em matéria de saúde da OMS, que já utiliza a mesma plataforma. É evidente que esta iniciativa está prevista há muito tempo, uma vez que os registos europeus de vacinação e a ideia de passes de saúde já foram mencionados em dezembro de 2018 nas recomendações do Conselho da Europa para uma cooperação reforçada em matéria de políticas de vacinação.

Por seu lado, a OMS lançou o desenvolvimento de um passe de vacinação global em fevereiro de 2022, assinando umacordo com a T-systems. Por conseguinte, não é surpreendente que, no final de junho de 2023, no dia seguinte ao termo do acordo, a Comissão tenha transferido o cartão europeu de saúde para a T-systems, através de um simples “acordo técnico” assinado por Stella Kyriakides (Diretora da DG Saúde) e Tedros Ghebreyesus.

Cruzamento de dados

Passaporte vacinal europeu.

Outro dos principais projectos da EUVABECO é o cruzamento de dados de saúde para identificar grupos-alvo. A Bélgica tem sido pioneira neste domínio. Durante a pandemia de Covid-19, diferentes bases de dados foram ligadas a nível individual para identificar com precisão os grupos prioritários para vacinação.

O projeto LINK-VACC, liderado pelo Instituto Nacional de Saúde Pública Scienciano, relacionou dados de doentes extraídos de registos de saúde, plataformas de rastreio de doenças e outras instituições públicas e privadas, como registos de seguros e registos médicos de médicos de clínica geral.

O seu objetivo era medir a eficácia da vacinacontra infecções sintomáticas e hospitalizações, monitorizar a cobertura da vacina em diferentes grupos demográficos e socioeconómicos e contribuir para a farmacovigilância.

Estas análises levaram à identificação de grupos prioritários, não só os trabalhadores do sector da saúde e os idosos, mas também as pessoas que sofrem de doenças específicas (por exemplo, diabetes), num total de quase 1,7 milhões de pessoas durante o período da Covid.

O objetivo é obter o maior número possível de dados precisos sobre cada indivíduo, em tempo real. A Bélgica já está bastante avançada neste domínio, com registos médicos já ligados ao bilhete de identidade eletrónico. As receitas em papel pertencem ao passado e tudo pode agora ser feito com o bilhete de identidade: registos médicos, receitas, regimes de medicação e reembolsos do seguro de saúde.

Seleção de alvos para vacinação personalizada

Outra ferramenta desenvolvida pela EUVABECO irá gerar conselhos para decisões clínicas de vacinação, com base no EVC, registos médicos e electrónicos, recomendações locais e reacções dos doentes a vários questionários.

Em seguida, será efectuada uma avaliação exaustiva com base em factores como a demografia, as condições de vida, a situação profissional, o historial médico e de vacinação, acontecimentos familiares como a chegada de um recém-nascido, doenças crónicas e resultados de testes serológicos, assegurando que o CDS oferece aconselhamento preciso e personalizado.

Os doentes e o pessoal de saúde poderão assim tomar decisões informadas.

Vendido como um instrumento de “soberania”

Embora o objetivo continue a ser o mesmo – vacinar toda a gente, em todo o lado, ao longo da vida – como foi sublinhado numa cimeira entre a OMS e a Comissão Europeia, o discurso institucional mudou: a retórica do medo deu lugar à do ganho pessoal.

É de supor que os estudos comportamentais tenham fornecido o seu néctar. No sítio Web da EUVABECO, são envidados todos os esforços para apresentar o Cartão Europeu de Vacinação como uma ferramenta que dá poder ao doente, e há o cuidado de o distanciar dos constrangimentos do passado:

Embora seja semelhante ao certificado digital Covid da UE, na medida em que constitui um registo de vacinação portátil, o EVC tem um objetivo diferente. Ao contrário do cartão de saúde, que era frequentemente uma resposta a obrigações legais, o CVE foi especificamente concebido para permitir que os indivíduos controlem as informações relativas às suas vacinas. Este controlo é essencial para assegurar a continuidade dos cuidados de saúde para as pessoas que atravessam as fronteiras ou que passam de um sistema de saúde para outro.

Reacções à ameaça de um colete de forças digital

Nem todas as pessoas têm memória curta, especialmente aquelas que recusaram as injeções de Covid. Obrigações e suspensões para os prestadores de cuidados, discriminação, multas punitivas, perseguição, isolamento, exclusão de direitos e serviços, linchamento mediático – tudo isto é suscetível de regressar num instante.

Em declarações a The Defender. o Dr. David Bell, médico de saúde pública, consultor de biotecnologia e antigo diretor de tecnologia de saúde global do Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund, afirmou

O mapa de vacinação proposto reflecte um esforço crescente para utilizar os instrumentos de saúde pública como meio de concentrar a riqueza e controlar as populações. Faz lembrar fortemente as abordagens adoptadas em partes da Europa antes da Segunda Guerra Mundial e serve essencialmente um objetivo semelhante: excluir da sociedade os indivíduos que não seguem as instruções do governo.

O ensaio na Europa é o próximo passo óbvio após a recente expansão da vigilância ao abrigo das alterações ao RSI (Regulamento Sanitário Internacional), que aumentam consideravelmente a probabilidade de encerramentos recorrentes para permitir a vacinação obrigatória como forma de forçar a utilização em massa de vacinas e lucrar com elas.

Na Bélgica, Notre Bon Droit, uma das poucas organizações na Europa que conseguiu uma vitória sobre o passe sanitário durante a crise da Covid, alerta os seus leitores para redobrarem os seus esforços. Não só rejeitando este tipo de documentos, mas também intensificando os esforços para expor os efeitos secundários da vacinação.

Ajudar a validar os efeitos secundários da vacinação é outra opção sólida a considerar. Atualmente, o mito da vacinação “segura, inofensiva e eficaz” é utilizado para justificar o desejo de tornar as vacinas obrigatórias.

Só reconhecendo e documentando os potenciais efeitos secundários das vacinas é que poderemos travar este movimento.

Recusar pedir ou autorizar a criação deste passaporte vacinal é já um primeiro passo. Mas requer não só uma compreensão das questões envolvidas, mas também a capacidade de resistir à pressão dos estabelecimentos e do pessoal de saúde. É o caso, nomeadamente, quando as coisas são apresentadas numa linguagem enganadora que sugere que a vacinação é obrigatória, quando não o é.

Outros praticam uma “discriminação virtuosa”, favorecendo os estabelecimentos que deram provas de abertura durante o período da Covid. Deveriam eles ser rotulados como defensores das liberdades?

Na sua página, Florian Philippot lamenta que ninguém fale do regresso do famoso passe, numa altura em que os Jogos Olímpicos fazem renascer os tormentos do controlo social através da tecnologia digital. Como organizar a rejeição total desta ditadura? Tudo o que ele consegue pensar agora é na solução Frexit: sair da União Europeia e da agenda globalista.

Senta Depuydt

06/Agosto/2024

Ver também:

 Senta Depuydt é jornalista.

O original encontra-se em essentiel.news/passeport-vaccinal-europeen-euvabeco-5-pays-pilotes/

Tradução em português :  resistir.info

14/Ago/24

The ostensible purpose of the Stat News essay below is to promote transparency from the government and pharmaceutical industry regarding the risks and drawbacks of whatever injection they have on deck next.

Via Stat News (emphasis added):

In February 2021, I received my second Covid-19 shot — the newly developed vaccine that would eventually save millions of lives worldwide — with great anticipation. It proved to be a life-changing event: Two hours later as I was driving home, the shock of a sudden loud and high-pitched whistling nearly caused me to veer off the road. It was as if an audible dog whistle began blaring right next to me. But it wasn’t a dog whistle. It was the acute onset of tinnitus, a ringing in the ear with no external source.

For several years I had lived with minimal, intermittent tinnitus, but never anything like this, so loud and unrelenting.

Could the Covid-19 vaccine have amplified my tinnitus, or was this just a coincidence? I was suspicious, but at that time no data had demonstrated any relationship between the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines and tinnitus.

When I got my third dose in November 2021, the sound became even louder and more bothersome. This new noise level has continued to this day, nonstop, often keeping me from sleep and sometimes bringing me to tears.”

Yet it segues, bizarrely, as most articles in mainstream media on the topic of COVID shots do, with a meandering caveat about how great they are — even while the author concedes that they caused him personally life-altering effects due to a massive orchestrated cover-up campaign in the media and by Public Health™ authorities, which is, again, the entire ostensible point of the exercise.

Continuing:

“As someone who has studied vaccines for 40 years, I know that the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, and other vaccines, have saved millions upon millions of lives. For the vast majority of people, the benefits of getting vaccinated far exceed the risks…

Although the Covid-19 vaccines were a huge public health success, politicization and opposition to them became weaponized through disinformation for political gain. Whether or not to receive a Covid-19 vaccine became an expression of opinion, rather than an informed health decision, and this has had a trickle-down effect to other vaccines.”

The link between tinnitus and the shots is well-established; the corporate state media, for whatever reason, has even deigned to cover it.

Via NBC News (emphasis added):

Thousands of people say they’ve developed tinnitus after they were vaccinated against Covid

Shaowen Bao, an associate professor in the physiology department of the College of Medicine at the University of Arizona, Tucson, believes that ongoing inflammation, especially in the brain or spinal cord, may be to blame.

Bao, a longtime tinnitus sufferer and a representative of the American Tinnitus Association’s scientific advisory board, has studied tinniuts for more than a decade.

A Facebook group of people who developed tinnitus after getting a Covid vaccine convinced Bao to look into the possible link. He ultimately surveyed 398 of the group’s participants.

The cases tended to be severe. One man told Bao that he couldn’t hear the car radio over the noise in his head while driving.

Along with ringing in their ears, participants reported a range of other symptoms, including headaches, dizziness, vertigo, ear pain, anxiety and depression. Significantly more people first developed tinnitus after the first dose of the vaccine, compared with the second.

This suggests “that the vaccine is interacting with pre-existing risk factors for tinnitus. If you have the risk factor, you will probably get it from the first dose,” Bao said.”

So, the point being: the above admission of COVID shot-induced tinnitus jives with the author’s experience.

Severe tinnitus from an experimental gene therapy pushed through emergency use authorization based on fraud: grounds for a lawsuit, at least, if not summary executions.

But not for the good doctor; he’s more of a masochist, and he loves his Pfizer leather-daddy something fierce. He makes Pfizer Daddy hit him with all of his constant crying. If he would just shut the fuck up and do the dishes, marital harmony might be restored and he wouldn’t have to tell the emergency room staff he fell down the stairs 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 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 is from Dr. Rath Health Foundation


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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

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 more than nine months ago on October 17, 2023 at the outset of Israel’s act of genocide against Palestine. Revised April 2024

Introduction. 

Was it a False Flag? 

 

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance. Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ? Or Was it “A False Flag”.

In the words of Philip Giraldi

“As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.” 

A Tissue of Lies 

“A Tissue of Lies” has served to justify the killing in the Gaza Strip of more than 35,000 civilians, of which 70% are women and children coupled with total destruction and an endless  string of atrocities. 

The Cat is out of the bag. Netanyahu has tacitly acknowledged that it was “A False Flag” which was intent upon justifying a carefully planned genocidal attack against Palestine: 

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

Does this candid statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? 

On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a carefully planned military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”.  

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.

Had  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023. 

South Africa’s  Legal Procedure against The State of Israel 

On January 11, 2024, The Republic of South Africa  presented to The Hague World Court, a carefully formulated Legal Procedure against the State of Israel predicated on  The Genocide Convention.

This legal procedure, however, has not contributed to repealing the ongoing genocide and saving the lives of tens of thousands of civilians.

I should mention that the False Flag issue –which constitutes a crime against humanity– was casually ignored by the ICJ.

Our suggestion is that  an investigation followed by a legal procedure pertaining to the “False Flag” should be undertaken.

The heads of State and heads of government who have endorsed Israel’s Genocidal Acts are from a legal standpoint complicit. 

The ICJ Judgement was contradictory. The Presiding Judge (former legal advisor to Hillary Clinton) was in conflict of interest: 

The ICJ Judgment of January 26, 2024 assigns the Netanyahu government representing the State of Israel –accused by the Republic of South Africa of genocide against the People of Palestine– with a mandate to “take all measures within its power” to “prevent and punish” those responsible for having committed “Genocidal Acts”. (under Article IV of the Genocide Convention)

Sounds contradictory? What the ICJ judgment intimates –from a twisted legal standpoint– is that Netanyahu’s Cabinet which was “appointed” to implement  the “prevent and punish” mandate cannot be accused of having committed “Genocidal Acts”.

See

“Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 24, 2024

 

Our intent is to provide a broad and detailed understanding of the false flag issue: 

The titles of the videos, articles and texts presented below:  

  1. Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let it Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?, by Dr. Philip Giraldi. 
  2. Video: ICJ Hearings in The Hague, 
  3. Text of Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum. Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland
  4. Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, Interview. Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux
  5. “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, by Michel Chossudovsky
  6. Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”, by Philip Giraldi 

 

In solidarity with the People of Palestine.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 11, 2024, April 25, 2024 

 

Part I

Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”?

They Let it Happen?

Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?

by Dr. Philip Giraldi 

October 8, 2023

Am I the only one who read about a speech given by Netanyahu or someone in his cabinet about a week ago in which he/they in passing referred to a “developing security situation” which rather suggests (to me) that they might have known about developments in Gaza and chose to let it happen so they can wipe Gaza off the map in retaliation and, possibly relying on the US pledge to have Israel’s “back,” then implicating Iran and attacking that country.

I cannot find a link to it, but have a fairly strong recollection of what I read as I thought at the time it would serve as a pretext for another massacre of Palestinians.

As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.

And as is also ALWAYS the case Joe Biden is preparing to send some billions of dollars to poor little Israel to pay for “defending” itself.

 

 Part II

VIDEO. ICJ Hearings in The Hague

January 2024

ICJ Hearings 

1. January 11, 2024. Click Here to View the ICJ Hearings,

2. January 12, 2024. Israel’s Legal Team’s response to South Africa, ICJ The Hague at 10 am. Video in Real Time 

3. Video: South Africa’s Closing Argument against Israel for Genocide. January 11 Hearing at the World Court

 

Part III

Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum

Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland

by Michel Chossudovsky

October 2023

 

An official “secret” memorandum authored by Israel’s  Ministry of Intelligenceis recommending the forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”, namely to a refugee camp in Egyptian territory. There are indications of Israel-Egypt negotiations  as well as consultations with the U.S. 

The 10-page document, dated Oct. 13, 2023, bears the logo of the Intelligence Ministry … assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip … It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. … The document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by the ministry, has been translated into English in full here on +972.

See below, click here or below to access complete document (10 pages)

For further details and analysis see:

“Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky

 

Part IV 

Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”

Interview: Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux 

October 17, 2023

 

 

To comment or access Rumble 

 

 

 

 

Part V 

“False Flag”. Wiping Gaza Off the Map

by

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

October 12, 2023

 .

Introduction

.

Early Saturday October 7, 2023, Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” led by Hamas’ Military Chief Mohammed Deif. On that same day, Netanyahu confirmed a so-called “State of Readiness For War”.  

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance (See Netanyahu’s January 2023 statement below). Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ?

U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack. 

“One would have to be almost hopelessly naïve to buy the corporate state media line that the Hamas invasion  was an Israeli “intelligence failure”. Mossad is one of, if not the, most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet.”

Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack which has resulted in countless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians.

Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”? This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite. 

Evidence and testimonies suggest that the Netanyahu government had foreknowledge of the actions of Hamas which have resulted in hundreds of Israeli and Palestinian deaths. And “They Let it Happen”:

“Hamas fired between 2-5 thousand rockets at Israel and hundreds of Israeli are dead, while dozens of Israelis were captured as prisoners of war. In the ensuing air response by Israel, hundreds of Palestinians were killed in Gaza.” (Stephen Sahiounie)  

Following the Al Aqsa Storm Operation on October 7, Israel‘s defence minister described Palestinians as “human animals” and vowed to “act accordingly,” as fighter jets unleashed a massive bombing of the Gaza Strip home of 2.3 million Palestinians…” (Middle East Eye). A complete blockade on the Gaza Strip was initiated on October 9, 2023 consisting in   blocking and obstructing the importation of food, water, fuel, and essential commodities to 2.3 Million Palestinians. It’s an outright crime against humanity. It’s genocide. 

It is worth noting, that Netanyahu’s military actions are not targeting HAMAS, quite the opposite: he is targeting 2.3 million innocent Palestinian civilians, in blatant violation of the Four Basic Principles of  The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC)

“….respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects [schools, hospitals and residential areas], the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” [Additional Protocol 1, Article 48]

Ironically, according to Scott Ritter, Hamas’ has acquired U.S. weapons in Ukraine. 

.

This was Not a “Surprise Attack”

Was the Hamas Attack a “False Flag”? 

“I served in the IDF 25 years ago, in the intelligence forces. There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming.

A cat moving alongside the fence is triggering all forces. So this??

What happened to the “strongest army in the world”?

How come border crossings were wide open?? Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system.

To me this suprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts. 

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say that this feels like the work of the Deep State.  

It feels like the people of Israel and the people of Palestine have been sold, once again, to the higher powers that be. 

(Statement by Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence,  October 7, 2023, emphasis added)

Ironically, the media (NBC) is now contending that the “Hamas attack bears hallmarks of Iranian involvement”

History: The Relationship between Mossad and Hamas

What is the relationship between Mossad and Hamas? Is Hamas an “intelligence asset”? There is a long history. 

Hamas (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 by Sheik Ahmed Yassin. It was supported at the outset by Israeli intelligence as a means to weaken the Palestinian Authority:

“Thanks to Mossad, (Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”), Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation.

Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. (L’Humanité, translated from French)

The links of Hamas to Mossad and US intelligence have been acknowledged by Rep. Ron Paul in a statement to the U.S Congress: “Hamas Was Started by Israel”?

“You know Hamas, if you look at the history, you’ll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat… (Rep. Ron Paul, 2011)

What this statement entails is that Hamas is and remains “an intelligence asset”, namely “an “asset” to intelligence agencies”

See also the WSJ (January 24, 2009) “How Israel helped to Spawn Hamas”. 

Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. (WSJ, emphasis added)

 

“The Hamas Partnership” is confirmed by Netanyahu

 

“The Cat is Out of the Bag”

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

Does this statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? 

“Support” and “Money” for Hamas. 

“Transferring Money to Hamas” on behalf of Netanyahu is confirmed by a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report: 

“Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added)

.

The Dangers of Military Escalation?

 

Let us be under no illusions, this “false flag” operation is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned over several years, in liaison and  coordination with US intelligence, the Pentagon and NATO. 

In turn, this action against Palestine is already conducive to a process of military escalation which potentially could engulf a large part of Middle East.

Israel is a de facto member NATO (with a special status) since 2004, involving active military and intelligence coordination as well as consultations pertaining to the occupied territories.

Military cooperation with both the Pentagon and NATO is viewed by Israel’s Defence Force (IDF) as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.”

The premise of NATO-Israel military cooperation is that “Israel is under attack”. Does Israel’s agreement with the Atlantic Alliance “obligate” NATO “to come to the rescue of Israel” under the doctrine of “collective security” (Article 5 of the Washington treaty)?

In recent developments, U.S. military deployments in the Middle East are ongoing allegedly to avoid escalation.

According to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg:

There is always the risk that nations and/or organisations hostile to Israel will take try to take advantage. And that includes, for instance, organisations like Hezbollah or a country like Iran. So this is a message to countries and organisations hostile to Israel that they should not try to utilise the situation. And the United States have deployed, or has deployed more military forces in the region, not least to deter any escalation or prevent any escalation of the situation. (NATO Press Conference, Brussels, October 12, 2023, emphasis added) 

Netanyahu’s “New Stage”

“The Long War” against Palestine

 

Netanyahu’s stated objective, which constitutes a new stage in the 75 year old war (since Nakba, 1948) against the people of Palestine is no longer predicated on “Apartheid” or “Separation”. This new stage –which is also directed against Israelis who want peace— consists in “total appropriation” as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland:

“These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me [Netanyahu]: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (Netanyahu January 2023. emphasis added)

We bring to the attention of our readers the incisive analysis of  Dr. Philip Giraldi pointing to the likelihood of a “False Flag’”. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 8, 2023, Above text updated on October 12, 2023

.

 

Part VI

Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor?

But Who Actually Did What to Whom?

“This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

by

Dr Philip Giraldi

October 16, 2023

.

“As a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.”

It’s amazing how America’s thought-controlled media is able to come up with a suitable narrative almost immediately whenever there is an international incident that might be subject to multiple interpretations.

***

Since 1948 Israel has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes,

has occupied nearly all of the historic Palestine, has empowered its army to kill thousands of local people, and

has more recently established an apartheid regime that even denies that Palestinian Arabs are human in the same sense that Jews are.

Netanyahu-allied government minister Ayelet Shaked memorably has called for Israel not only to exterminate all Palestinian children, whom she has described as “little snakes,” but also to kill their mothers who gave birth to them.

But when the Arabs strike back against the hatred that confronts them with their limited resources it is Israel that is described as the victimand the Palestinians who are dehumanized and portrayed as the “terrorists.”

Media in the US and Europe were quick to label the Hamas offensive breaching the formidable Israeli border defenses as “Israel’s 9/11” or even “Israel’s Pearl Harbor” to establish the context that the Israelis have been on the receiving end of an “unprovoked” attack by a cruel and heartless enemy.

Israel has responded to the attack with a heavy bombardment of Gaza that has destroyed infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, while also cutting off food supplies, water and electricity.

It has demanded that residents of north Gaza, all 1.1 million of them, evacuate to make way for a possible ground offensive but there is nowhere to go as all the borders are closed, and the United Nations is calling it a demand with “devastating humanitarian consequences.” Journalist Peter Beinart has commented “This is a monstrous crime. It’s happening in plain view, with US support.”

And the United States government is indeed typically on the same page as Israel. President Joe Biden, citing fabricated stories about dead Jewish babies, speaks of how Israel has a “duty” to defend itself, while the Palestinians somehow have no right to protect themselves at all, much less to rise up against their persecutors in a struggle for freedom.

And Washington has also unhesitatingly chosen to directly involve itself in the conflict, completely on the side of the Jewish state, asserting repeatedly that “Israel has a right to defend itself” and telling the Israelis that “we have your back” while also dispatching two aircraft carrier groups to the scene of the fighting as well as the 101st Airborne to Jordan and increasing the readiness of Marines stationed in Kuwait.

The White House could have taken more aggressive steps to encourage a ceasefire and talks but has chosen instead to issue essentially toothless calls to let the trapped civilians escape while also backing a devastating Israeli military response.

 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Oct. 12, 2023. – Secretary Antony Blinken on X

Israel is also hosting the worthless and brain dead Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin who will be providing advice along the lines of his insightful comment that Hamas is “evil” and “worse than ISIS.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken is already in Jerusalem, announcing that the US is there to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unity government “as long as America exists” after first saying “I come before you not only as the United States Secretary of State, but also as a Jew.”

Blinken’s explicit association of his personal religion with his official role as a representative of the US government makes clear that a key element in why he is there is because he is “a Jew.” Perhaps he should recuse himself from policy making involving Israel as being “a Jew” would not appear to be a United States national interest and is likely to produce irrational responses to developing situations.

If all of this sounds a lot like Ukraine it should, except that in Ukraine the US and NATO are fighting against Russia, which is being demonized for occupying what is claimed Ukrainian territory, whereas in Palestine they are supporting the occupier of actual Palestinian territory, Israel.

Funny thing that, and the word “hypocrisy” comes immediately to mind. As it turns out, however, I am somewhat on the same page as much of the media, agreeing that the Hamas incursion is something like 9/11, though I am sure that my take would not be found acceptable to the CNN Jake Tappers of this world.

My thinking is that Israel knew in advance about 9/11 in the United States due to its extensive spying network and chose not to share the information because it was to their advantage not to do so.

Indeed, a pleased Netanyahu even stated several years later that “9/11 was a good thing because it made the United States join us in our fight.”

That the attacks killed 3,000 Americans did not bother the Israeli government as Israel has a long history of killing Americans when it can benefit from so doing, starting with the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 which killed 34 sailors.

So too in this case in Gaza, Netanyahu may have decided to encourage an unexpected development, making it like 9/11, that would enable him to escalate and “mow the grass” as the Israelis put it, in the remainder of Arab Palestine.

And bear in mind that the actual incident that triggered the uprising was a rampage involving at least 800 Israeli settlers in and around the al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, beating pilgrims and destroying Palestinian shops, all without any interference from the nearby Israeli security forces. The rioting was clearly allowed and even encouraged by the government.

Drawing on my experience as a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.

Israel had an extensive electronic and physical wall backed by soldiers and weaponry that completely surrounded Gaza on the landward side, so effective that it was claimed that not even a mouse could get in.

The Mediterranean side of Gaza was also tightly controlled by the Israeli Navy and boats to and from Gaza were completely blocked.

Egypt tightly controlled the southern part of Gaza bordering on the Sinai. So Gaza was under 24/7 complete surveillance and control at all times. Israeli military intelligence also certainly had a network of recruited informants inside Gaza who would report on any training or movements, easy enough to do when you can approach people who are starving and make them an offer they cannot refuse just for providing information on what they see and hear.

And then there was a warning from the Egyptian government to Israel ten days before the Hamas attack, with Egypt’s Intelligence Minister General Abbas Kamel personally calling Netanyahu and sharing intelligence suggesting that the Gazans were likely to do “something unusual, a terrible operation.” Other media accounts reveal how Hamas trained and practiced their maneuvers publicly. There were also assessments made by US intelligence, which were shared with Israel, suggesting that something was afoot. So, given all of the evidence, there likely was no intelligence failure to anticipate and counter the Hamas attack but rather a political decision made by the Israeli government that knew what might be coming and chose to let it proceed to provide a casus belli to destroy Gaza, vowing that “Every member of Hamas is a dead man,” and then go on from there. And “from there” might well include Lebanon, Syria and Iran, possibly with the assistance of the United States to do the heavy lifting. Iran in particular is already being blamed by the usual suspects as a party involved in the Hamas attack, so far without any evidence whatsoever, which is typical of how these stories evolve.

Image: Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir visits Al-Aqsa, 3 January (Social Media)

And Israel has moved far to the right politically to such an extent that it might appreciate a little ethnic cleansing to demonstrate its seriousness. Netanyahu and other senior government officials in his cabinet have recently been making passing references to a “developing security situation” in the country to justify the intensifying of the raids by the army against Palestinian towns and refugee camps. The new government in Israel has also placed police under the control of ultra-nationalist Jewish Power party head Itamar Ben-Gvir as National Security Minister. He has been exploiting his position to call in particular for a war to destroy Hamas in Gaza, which is precisely what is happening. Gaza might be of particular interest to Ben-Gvir and others as it uniquely shelters an armed and organized resistance in the form of Hamas, which, oddly, was founded with the support of Israel to split the Palestinian political resistance with Fatah controlling the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza.

There is another issue relating to the recent fighting that one would like to know the answer to, namely how did Hamas get its weapons in the first place?

Some were clearly manufactured from parts and scrap but others were sophisticated and, as Gaza is blockaded on all sides, smuggling them in becomes problematical. One argument is that they were supplied by Iran and others to be brought in by tunnels, but the tunnels on two sides would end up in Israel and on the third side in Egypt. The fourth side is the Mediterranean Sea. So how did they arrive? Is there a possible triple or even quadruple cross taking place with different parties lying to each other? And should there be concerns that after the American armada arrives off the coast of Gaza there just might be some kind of false flag incident engineered by Netanyahu that will involve Washington directly in the fighting?

And there is what amounts to a related issue that should be of concern to everyone in the US and generically speaking the “Western world” where human rights are at least nominally respected. The message from almost all Western governments is that Israel has a carte blanche to do whatever it likes even when it involves war crimes to include mass forced displacement or genocide. In this case, the coordinated government-media response which is intended to protect Israel from any criticism almost immediately began circulating fabricated tales of atrocities while also delivering a hit on freedom of speech and association. President Biden, who should be trying to defuse the crisis, is instead adding fuel to the flames, saying of Hamas that “Pure, unadulterated evil has been unleashed on the earth!”

In Florida the arch Zionist stooge Governor Ron Desantis met with Jewish leaders in a synagogue to announce draconian measures against Iran to include sanctions on companies that are in any way linked to that country. One might point out that those businesses have done nothing wrong and Desantis also called for “eradication of Hamas from the earth.” His intellectual depth was at the same time revealed when he said the US should not take in any Gazan refugees because they are “antisemites.”

And in South Carolina, America’s favorite he/she Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for a US attack on Iran as well as declaring the war against Hamas to be “a religious war” and urging the Israeli army to invade Gaza and do “Whatever the hell you have to do to” to “level the place.”

And the Europeans are equally spineless in their deference to Israel. The Israeli president declared the that there are no innocent civilians in Gaza, and not long after that top European Union representatives met with him to offer their unqualified support. Meanwhile in France, the spineless and feckless government of Emmanuel Macron has sought to outlaw any gathering that expresses support for Palestinian rights.

And in the UK, the Home Secretary Suella Braverman has proposed criminalizing any protest against Israeli actions or anything in support of Palestine to include banning any public display of the Palestinian national flag, which she regards as a “criminal offense toward the Jewish community in Britain.”

She has also said that “I would encourage police to consider whether chants such as: ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ should be understood as an expression of a violent desire to see Israel erased from the world, and whether its use in certain contexts may amount to a racially aggravated section 5 public order offence.” Berlin’s Public Prosecutor’s Office has also classified the use of the expression as a “criminal offense.” The manner in which most Western political elites are lining up unquestionably and even enthusiastically behind Israel and its craven leaders’ desire for bloody vengeance is truly shocking but comes as no surprise.

Beyond the issue of Gaza itself, some in Israel are arguing that Netanyahu has personally benefitted from the unrest through the creation of the national unity government which has ended for the time being the huge demonstrations protesting his judicial reform proposals. If all of this comes together politically as it might in the next several weeks, we could be seeing the initial steps in what will develop into the complete ethnic cleansing of what was once Palestine, in line with Netanyahu’s assertion that “the Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel.” So all of the former Palestine is now a land to be defined by its Jewishness where Jews are in full control and are free to do whatever they want without any objection, referred to by the Israeli government as “an exclusive right to self-determination.” And it has all possibly been brought to fruition by the enablement provided by the current developments in Gaza.

The original source of Dr. Giraldi’s October 16, 2023 article. 

Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor but Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

By Philip Giraldi, October 16, 2023

***

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

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.

 

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 19th and 20th 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 6th 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.

The Federal Reserve Cartel: The Eight Families

August 17th, 2024 by Dean Henderson

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.

 

*** 

Of relevance to the current crisis, this carefully researched article was first published by Global Research more than ten years ago on June 1, 2011.

***

The Four Horsemen of Banking (Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo) own the Four Horsemen of Oil (Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch/Shell, BP and Chevron Texaco); in tandem with Deutsche Bank, BNP, Barclays and other European old money behemoths. But their monopoly over the global economy does not end at the edge of the oil patch.

According to company 10K filings to the SEC, the Four Horsemen of Banking are among the top ten stock holders of virtually every Fortune 500 corporation.[1]

So who then are the stockholders in these money center banks?

This information is guarded much more closely. My queries to bank regulatory agencies regarding stock ownership in the top 25 US bank holding companies were given Freedom of Information Act status, before being denied on “national security” grounds. This is rather ironic, since many of the bank’s stockholders reside in Europe.

One important repository for the wealth of the global oligarchy that owns these bank holding companies is US Trust Corporation – founded in 1853 and now owned by Bank of America. A recent US Trust Corporate Director and Honorary Trustee was Walter Rothschild. Other directors included Daniel Davison of JP Morgan Chase, Richard Tucker of Exxon Mobil, Daniel Roberts of Citigroup and Marshall Schwartz of Morgan Stanley. [2]

J. W. McCallister, an oil industry insider with House of Saud connections, wrote in The Grim Reaper that information he acquired from Saudi bankers cited 80% ownership of the New York Federal Reserve Bank- by far the most powerful Fed branch- by just eight families, four of which reside in the US. They are 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.

CPA Thomas D. Schauf corroborates McCallister’s claims, adding that ten banks control all twelve Federal Reserve Bank branches.

He names N.M. Rothschild of London, Rothschild Bank of Berlin, Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Warburg Bank of Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers of New York, Lazard Brothers of Paris, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, Israel Moses Seif Bank of Italy, Goldman Sachs of New York and JP Morgan Chase Bank of New York.

Schauf lists William Rockefeller, Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff and James Stillman as individuals who own large shares of the Fed. [3]

The Schiffs are insiders at Kuhn Loeb. The Stillmans are Citigroup insiders, who married into the Rockefeller clan at the turn of the century.

Eustace Mullins came to the same conclusions in his book The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, in which he displays charts connecting the Fed and its member banks to the families of Rothschild, Warburg, Rockefeller and the others. [4]

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 this private central banking cartel as “conspiracy theory”. Yet the facts remain.

The House of Morgan

The Federal Reserve Bank was born in 1913, the same year US banking scion J. Pierpont Morgan died and the Rockefeller Foundation was formed. The House of Morgan presided over American finance from the corner of Wall Street and Broad, acting as quasi-US central bank since 1838, when George Peabody founded it in London.

Peabody was a business associate of the Rothschilds. In 1952 Fed researcher Eustace Mullins put forth the supposition that the Morgans were nothing more than Rothschild agents. Mullins wrote that the Rothschilds, “…preferred to operate anonymously in the US behind the facade of J.P. Morgan & Company”. [5]

Author Gabriel Kolko stated, “Morgan’s activities in 1895-1896 in selling US gold bonds in Europe were based on an alliance with the House of Rothschild.” [6]

The Morgan financial octopus wrapped its tentacles quickly around the globe. Morgan Grenfell operated in London. Morgan et Ce ruled Paris. The Rothschild’s Lambert cousins set up Drexel & Company in Philadelphia.

The House of Morgan catered to the Astors, DuPonts, Guggenheims, Vanderbilts and Rockefellers. It financed the launch of AT&T, General Motors, General Electric and DuPont. Like the London-based Rothschild and Barings banks, Morgan became part of the power structure in many countries.

By 1890 the House of Morgan was lending to Egypt’s central bank, financing Russian railroads, floating Brazilian provincial government bonds and funding Argentine public works projects. A recession in 1893 enhanced Morgan’s power. That year Morgan saved the US government from a bank panic, forming a syndicate to prop up government reserves with a shipment of $62 million worth of Rothschild gold. [7]

Morgan was the driving force behind Western expansion in the US, financing and controlling West-bound railroads through voting trusts. In 1879 Cornelius Vanderbilt’s Morgan-financed New York Central Railroad gave preferential shipping rates to John D. Rockefeller’s budding Standard Oil monopoly, cementing the Rockefeller/Morgan relationship.

The House of Morgan now fell under Rothschild and Rockefeller family control. A New York Herald headline read, “Railroad Kings Form Gigantic Trust”. J. Pierpont Morgan, who once stated, “Competition is a sin”, now opined gleefully, “Think of it. All competing railroad traffic west of St. Louis placed in the control of about thirty men.”[8]

Morgan and Edward Harriman’s banker Kuhn Loeb held a monopoly over the railroads, while banking dynasties Lehman, Goldman Sachs and Lazard joined the Rockefellers in controlling the US industrial base. [9]

In 1903 Banker’s Trust was set up by the Eight Families. Benjamin Strong of Banker’s Trust was the first Governor of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. The 1913 creation of the Fed fused the power of the Eight Families to the military and diplomatic might of the US government. If their overseas loans went unpaid, the oligarchs could now deploy US Marines to collect the debts. Morgan, Chase and Citibank formed an international lending syndicate.

The House of Morgan was cozy with the British House of Windsor and the Italian House of Savoy. The Kuhn Loebs, Warburgs, Lehmans, Lazards, Israel Moses Seifs and Goldman Sachs also had close ties to European royalty. By 1895 Morgan controlled the flow of gold in and out of the US. The first American wave of mergers was in its infancy and was being promoted by the bankers. In 1897 there were sixty-nine industrial mergers. By 1899 there were twelve-hundred. In 1904 John Moody – founder of Moody’s Investor Services – said it was impossible to talk of Rockefeller and Morgan interests as separate. [10]

Public distrust of the combine spread. Many considered them traitors working for European old money. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, Andrew Carnegie’s US Steel and Edward Harriman’s railroads were all financed by banker Jacob Schiff at Kuhn Loeb, who worked closely with the European Rothschilds.

Several Western states banned the bankers. Populist preacher William Jennings Bryan was thrice the Democratic nominee for President from 1896 -1908. The central theme of his anti-imperialist campaign was that America was falling into a trap of “financial servitude to British capital”. Teddy Roosevelt defeated Bryan in 1908, but was forced by this spreading populist wildfire to enact the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. He then went after the Standard Oil Trust.

In 1912 the Pujo hearings were held, addressing concentration of power on Wall Street. That same year Mrs. Edward Harriman sold her substantial shares in New York’s Guaranty Trust Bank to J.P. Morgan, creating Morgan Guaranty Trust. Judge Louis Brandeis convinced President Woodrow Wilson to call for an end to interlocking board directorates. In 1914 the Clayton Anti-Trust Act was passed.

Jack Morgan – J. Pierpont’s son and successor – responded by calling on Morgan clients Remington and Winchester to increase arms production. He argued that the US needed to enter WWI. Goaded by the Carnegie Foundation and other oligarchy fronts, Wilson accommodated. As Charles Tansill wrote in America Goes to War, “Even before the clash of arms, the French firm of Rothschild Freres cabled to Morgan & Company in New York suggesting the flotation of a loan of $100 million, a substantial part of which was to be left in the US to pay for French purchases of American goods.”

The House of Morgan financed half the US war effort, while receiving commissions for lining up contractors like GE, Du Pont, US Steel, Kennecott and ASARCO. All were Morgan clients. Morgan also financed the British Boer War in South Africa and the Franco-Prussian War. The 1919 Paris Peace Conference was presided over by Morgan, which led both German and Allied reconstruction efforts. [11]

In the 1930’s populism resurfaced in America after Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bank and others profited from the Crash of 1929. [12] House Banking Committee Chairman Louis McFadden (D-NY) said of the Great Depression, “It was no accident. It was a carefully contrived occurrence…The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so they might emerge as rulers of us all”.

Sen. Gerald Nye (D-ND) chaired a munitions investigation in 1936. Nye concluded that the House of Morgan had plunged the US into WWI to protect loans and create a booming arms industry. Nye later produced a document titled The Next War, which cynically referred to “the old goddess of democracy trick”, through which Japan could be used to lure the US into WWII.

In 1937 Interior Secretary Harold Ickes warned of the influence of “America’s 60 Families”. Historian Ferdinand Lundberg later penned a book of the exact same title. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas decried, “Morgan influence…the most pernicious one in industry and finance today.”

Jack Morgan responded by nudging the US towards WWII. Morgan had close relations with the Iwasaki and Dan families – Japan’s two wealthiest clans – who have owned Mitsubishi and Mitsui, respectively, since the companies emerged from 17th Century shogunates. When Japan invaded Manchuria, slaughtering Chinese peasants at Nanking, Morgan downplayed the incident. Morgan also had close relations with Italian fascist Benito Mussolini, while German Nazi Dr. Hjalmer Schacht was a Morgan Bank liaison during WWII. After the war Morgan representatives met with Schacht at the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland. [13]

The House of Rockefeller

BIS is the most powerful bank in the world, a global central bank for the Eight Families who control the private central banks of almost all Western and developing nations. The first President of BIS was Rockefeller banker Gates McGarrah- an official at Chase Manhattan and the Federal Reserve. McGarrah was the grandfather of former CIA director Richard Helms. The Rockefellers- like the Morgans- had close ties to London. David Icke writes in Children of the Matrix, that the Rockefellers and Morgans were just “gofers” for the European Rothschilds. [14]

BIS is owned by the Federal Reserve, Bank of England, Bank of Italy, Bank of Canada, Swiss National Bank, Nederlandsche Bank, Bundesbank and Bank of France.

Historian Carroll Quigley wrote in his epic book Tragedy and Hope that BIS was part of a plan,

“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…to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements.”

The US government had a historical distrust of BIS, lobbying unsuccessfully for its demise at the 1944 post-WWII Bretton Woods Conference. Instead the Eight Families’ power was exacerbated, with the Bretton Woods creation of the IMF and the World Bank. The US Federal Reserve only took shares in BIS in September 1994. [15]

BIS holds at least 10% of monetary reserves for at least 80 of the world’s central banks, the IMF and other multilateral institutions. It serves as financial agent for international agreements, collects information on the global economy and serves as lender of last resort to prevent global financial collapse.

BIS promotes an agenda of monopoly capitalist fascism. It gave a bridge loan to Hungary in the 1990’s to ensure privatization of that country’s economy. It served as conduit for Eight Families funding of Adolf Hitler- led by the Warburg’s J. Henry Schroeder and Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam. Many researchers assert that BIS is at the nadir of global drug money laundering. [16]

It is no coincidence that BIS is headquartered in Switzerland, favorite hiding place for the wealth of the global aristocracy and headquarters for the P-2 Italian Freemason’s Alpina Lodge and Nazi International. Other institutions which the Eight Families control include the World Economic Forum, the International Monetary Conference and the World Trade Organization.

Bretton Woods was a boon to the Eight Families. The IMF and World Bank were central to this “new world order”. In 1944 the first World Bank bonds were floated by Morgan Stanley and First Boston. The French Lazard family became more involved in House of Morgan interests. Lazard Freres- France’s biggest investment bank- is owned by the Lazard and David-Weill families- old Genoese banking scions represented by Michelle Davive. A recent Chairman and CEO of Citigroup was Sanford Weill.

In 1968 Morgan Guaranty launched Euro-Clear, a Brussels-based bank clearing system for Eurodollar securities. It was the first such automated endeavor. Some took to calling Euro-Clear “The Beast”. Brussels serves as headquarters for the new European Central Bank and for NATO. In 1973 Morgan officials met secretly in Bermuda to illegally resurrect the old House of Morgan, twenty years before Glass Steagal Act was repealed. Morgan and the Rockefellers provided the financial backing for Merrill Lynch, boosting it into the Big 5 of US investment banking. Merrill is now part of Bank of America.

John D. Rockefeller used his oil wealth to acquire Equitable Trust, which had gobbled up several large banks and corporations by the 1920’s. The Great Depression helped consolidate Rockefeller’s power. His Chase Bank merged with Kuhn Loeb’s Manhattan Bank to form Chase Manhattan, cementing a long-time family relationship. The Kuhn-Loeb’s had financed – along with Rothschilds – Rockefeller’s quest to become king of the oil patch. National City Bank of Cleveland provided John D. with the money needed to embark upon his monopolization of the US oil industry. The bank was identified in Congressional hearings as being one of three Rothschild-owned banks in the US during the 1870’s, when Rockefeller first incorporated as Standard Oil of Ohio. [17]

One Rockefeller Standard Oil partner was Edward Harkness, whose family came to control Chemical Bank. Another was James Stillman, whose family controlled Manufacturers Hanover Trust. Both banks have merged under the JP Morgan Chase umbrella. Two of James Stillman’s daughters married two of William Rockefeller’s sons. The two families control a big chunk of Citigroup as well. [18]

In the insurance business, the Rockefellers control Metropolitan Life, Equitable Life, Prudential and New York Life. Rockefeller banks control 25% of all assets of the 50 largest US commercial banks and 30% of all assets of the 50 largest insurance companies. [19] Insurance companies- the first in the US was launched by Freemasons through their Woodman’s of America- play a key role in the Bermuda drug money shuffle.

Companies under Rockefeller control include Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco, Marathon Oil, Freeport McMoran, Quaker Oats, ASARCO, United, Delta, Northwest, ITT, International Harvester, Xerox, Boeing, Westinghouse, Hewlett-Packard, Honeywell, International Paper, Pfizer, Motorola, Monsanto, Union Carbide and General Foods.

The Rockefeller Foundation has close financial ties to both Ford and Carnegie Foundations. Other family philanthropic endeavors include Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, General Education Board, Rockefeller University and the University of Chicago- which churns out a steady stream of far right economists as apologists for international capital, including Milton Friedman.

The family owns 30 Rockefeller Plaza, where the national Christmas tree is lighted every year, and Rockefeller Center. David Rockefeller was instrumental in the construction of the World Trade Center towers. The main Rockefeller family home is a hulking complex in upstate New York known as Pocantico Hills. They also own a 32-room 5th Avenue duplex in Manhattan, a mansion in Washington, DC, Monte Sacro Ranch in Venezuela, coffee plantations in Ecuador, several farms in Brazil, an estate at Seal Harbor, Maine and resorts in the Caribbean, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. [20]

The Dulles and Rockefeller families are cousins. Allen Dulles created the CIA, assisted the Nazis, covered up the Kennedy hit from his Warren Commission perch and struck a deal with the Muslim Brotherhood to create mind-controlled assassins. [21]

Brother John Foster Dulles presided over the phony Goldman Sachs trusts before the 1929 stock market crash and helped his brother overthrow governments in Iran and Guatemala. Both were Skull & Bones, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) insiders and 33rd Degree Masons. [22]

The Rockefellers were instrumental in forming the depopulation-oriented Club of Rome at their family estate in Bellagio, Italy. Their Pocantico Hills estate gave birth to the Trilateral Commission. The family is a major funder of the eugenics movement which spawned Hitler, human cloning and the current DNA obsession in US scientific circles.

John Rockefeller Jr. headed the Population Council until his death. [23] His namesake son is a Senator from West Virginia. Brother Winthrop Rockefeller was Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas and remains the most powerful man in that state. In an October 1975 interview with Playboy magazine, Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller- who was also Governor of New York- articulated his family’s patronizing worldview, “I am a great believer in planning- economic, social, political, military, total world planning.”

But of all the Rockefeller brothers, it is Trilateral Commission (TC) founder and Chase Manhattan Chairman David who has spearheaded the family’s fascist agenda on a global scale. He defended the Shah of Iran, the South African apartheid regime and the Chilean Pinochet junta. He was the biggest financier of the CFR, the TC and (during the Vietnam War) the Committee for an Effective and Durable Peace in Asia- a contract bonanza for those who made their living off the conflict.

Nixon asked him to be Secretary of Treasury, but Rockefeller declined the job, knowing his power was much greater at the helm of the Chase. Author Gary Allen writes in The Rockefeller File that in 1973, “David Rockefeller met with twenty-seven heads of state, including the rulers of Russia and Red China.”

Following the 1975 Nugan Hand Bank/CIA coup against Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, his British Crown-appointed successor Malcolm Fraser sped to the US, where he met with President Gerald Ford after conferring with David Rockefeller. [24]


Read Part II:

History: The Federal Reserve Cartel: Freemasons and The House of Rothschild

By Dean Henderson, May 08, 2023


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.

Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network and The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries. His Left Hook blog is at www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com

Notes

[1] 10K Filings of Fortune 500 Corporations to SEC. 3-91

[2] 10K Filing of US Trust Corporation to SEC. 6-28-95

[3] “The Federal Reserve ‘Fed Up’. Thomas Schauf. www.davidicke.com 1-02

[4] The Secrets of the Federal Reserve. Eustace Mullins. Bankers Research Institute. Staunton, VA. 1983. p.179

[5] Ibid. p.53

[6] The Triumph of Conservatism. Gabriel Kolko. MacMillan and Company New York. 1963. p.142

[7] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.57

[8] The House of Morgan. Ron Chernow. Atlantic Monthly Press NewYork 1990

[9] Marrs. p.57

[10] Democracy for the Few. Michael Parenti. St. Martin’s Press. New York. 1977. p.178

[11] Chernow

[12] The Great Crash of 1929. John Kenneth Galbraith. Houghton, Mifflin Company. Boston. 1979. p.148

[13] Chernow

[14] Children of the Matrix. David Icke. Bridge of Love. Scottsdale, AZ. 2000

[15] The Confidence Game: How Un-Elected Central Bankers are Governing the Changed World Economy. Steven Solomon. Simon & Schuster. New York. 1995. p.112

[16] Marrs. p.180

[17] Ibid. p.45

[18] The Money Lenders: The People and Politics of the World Banking Crisis. Anthony Sampson. Penguin Books. New York. 1981

[19] The Rockefeller File. Gary Allen. ’76 Press. Seal Beach, CA. 1977

[20] Ibid

[21] Dope Inc.: The Book That Drove Kissinger Crazy. Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992

[22] Marrs.

[23] The Rockefeller Syndrome. Ferdinand Lundberg. Lyle Stuart Inc. Secaucus, NJ. 1975. p.296

[24] Marrs. p.53


Big Oil & Their Bankers In The Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network: Henderson, Dean: 9781453757734: Amazon.com: BooksBig Oil & Their Bankers In The Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network

by Dean Henderson

Publisher: ‎ CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; 3rd edition (September 10, 2010)

Paperback: ‎ 480 pages

ISBN-10: ‎ 1453757732

ISBN-13: ‎ 978-1453757734

Big Oil… pulls back the covers to expose a centuries-old cabal of global oligarchs, whose control over the global economy is based on hegemony over the planet’s three most valuable commodities: oil, guns and drugs- combined with ownership of the world’s central banks.Henderson implicates these oligarchs in the orchestration of a string of conspiracies from Pearl Harbor to the Kennedy Assassination to 911. He follows the trail of dirty money up the food chain to the interbred Eight Families who- from their City of London base- control the Four Horsemen of Oil, the global drug trade and the permanent war economy.”Big Oil… is an extraordinary expose of the powers and events that are exacting a heavy toll on us, the people”.- Nexus New Times Magazine. Australia.”Big Oil… is hair-raising and a masterpiece which deserves not less than the Pulitzer Prize in Journalism. This book should be a requisite for every American to study.”- Dr. Carlos J. Canggiano, M.D., Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico.

Click here to purchase.

One of our most popular articles, first published on March 1st, 2013

***

.

 

.

Update and Analysis

.
On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm.” which was led by its Military Chief Mohammed Deif.  On that same day, Netanyahu confirmed a so-called “State of Readiness For War”. Israel has now (October 7, 2023) officially declared a new stage of its long war against the people of Palestine. 

.

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance (See Netanyahu’s January 2023 statement below). Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ?

U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack. 

Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack?

Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”? This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite. 

Evidence and testimonies suggest that the Netanyahu government had foreknowledge of the actions of Hamas. And “They Let it Happen”:

Following the Al Aqsa Storm Operation on October 7, Israel‘s defence minister described Palestinians as “human animals” and vowed to “act accordingly,” as fighter jets unleashed a massive bombing of the Gaza Strip” (Middle East Eye).

A complete blockade of the Gaza Strip was initiated on October 9, 2023 consisting in  preventing and obstructing the importation of food, water, fuel, and essential commodities to 2.3 Million Palestinians. It’s an outright crime against humanity. 

Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack”?  Was it a false flag?

Netanyahu’s “New Stage” of “The Long War” against Palestine

Netanyahu’s stated objective, which constitutes a new stage in the 75 year old war (since Nakba, 1948, see below) against the people of Palestine is no longer predicated on “Apartheid” or “Separation”. 

This new stage –which is also directed against Israelis who want peace– consists in “total appropriation” as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland. 

The current Netanyahu government is committed to the “Greater Israel” and the “Promised Land”, namely the biblical homeland of the Jews. 

Benjamin Netanyahu is pressing ahead to formalize “Israel’s colonial project”, namely the appropriation of all Palestinian Lands. 

His position defined below several months prior to the October 7, 2023 “State of Readiness For War” consists in total appropriation as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland:

“These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (January 2023)

 

History: The Relationship between Mossad and Hamas

What is the relationship between Mossad and Hamas? Is Hamas an “intelligence asset”? There is a long history. 

Hamas (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 by Sheik Ahmed Yassin. It was supported at the outset by Israeli intelligence as a means to weaken the Palestinian Authority:

“Thanks to Mossad, (Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”), Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation.

Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem,

“Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. (L’Humanité, translated from French)

The links of Hamas to Mossad and US intelligence have been acknowledged by Rep. Ron Paul in a statement to the U.S Congress: “Hamas Was Started by Israel”?

“You know Hamas, if you look at the history, you’ll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat… (Rep. Ron Paul, 2011)

What this statement entails is that  “factions within Hamas” constitute “an intelligence asset”, namely “an “asset” which serves the interests of intelligence agencies. 

See also the WSJ (January 24, 2009) “How Israel helped to Spawn Hamas”. 

Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. (WSJ, emphasis added)

The Nakba

Commemoration on May 13, 2023: The Nakba. 75 years ago on May 13, 1948. The Palestinian Catastrophe prevails. In a 2018 report, the United Nations stated that Gaza had become “unliveable”:

With an economy in free fall, 70 per cent youth unemployment, widely contaminated drinking water and a collapsed health care system, Gaza has become “unliveable”,[in 2018] according to the Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian Territories”

The above UN assessment dates back to 2018. Under Netanyahu, Israel is currently proceeding with the plan to annex large chunks of Palestinian territory “while keeping the Palestinian inhabitants in conditions of severe deprivation and isolation.

Creating conditions of extreme poverty and economic collapse constitute the means for triggering the expulsion and exodus of Palestinians from their homeland.  It is part of the process of annexation.

“If the manoeuvre is successful, Israel will end up with all of the territories it conquered during the 1967 war, including all of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem and most of the Palestinian Territories, including the best sources of water and agricultural land.

The West Bank will find itself in the same situation as the Gaza strip, cut off from the outside world and surrounded by hostile Israeli military forces and Israeli settlements.” (South Front) 

Human rights ended at the Palestinian border. The bought and paid for US Congress couldn’t genuflect enough:

“On July 19, 2023 the US Congress convened a special joint session for Israeli President Isaac Herzog. Both Democrats and Republicans bobbed up and down to applaud him 29 times.”

” Watching Palestine Disappear”, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 12, 2023

“Greater Israel would create a number of proxy states. It would include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of  Iraq and Saudi Arabia.”

“Palestine Is Gone! Gone! راحت فلسطينThe Palestinian plight is savagely painful and the pain is compounded by the bafflingly off-hand dismissal and erasure by Western powers of that pain, Rima Najjar, Global Research, June, 7, 2020 

 

Michel Chossudovsky,  June 10, 2021, October 11, 2023, November 1, 2023, 

 

 


 

Introductory Text on “The Greater Israel Project” 

by Michel Chossudovsky 

 

The following document pertaining to the formation of “Greater Israel” constitutes the cornerstone of powerful Zionist factions within the current Netanyahu government,  the Likud party, as well as within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment. 

President Donald Trump had confirmed in January 2017 his support of Israel’s illegal settlements (including his opposition to UN Security Council Resolution 2334, pertaining to the illegality of the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank). The Trump administration expressed its recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. And now the entire West Bank is being annexed to Israel. 

Under the Biden administration, despite rhetorical shifts in the political narrative, Washington remains supportive of Israel plans to annex the entire Jordan River valley as well the illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Bear in mind: The Greater Israel design is not strictly a Zionist Project for the Middle East, it is an integral part of US foreign policy, its strategic objective is to extend US hegemony as well as fracture and balkanize the Middle East.  

In this regard, Washington’s strategy consists in destabilizing and weakening regional economic powers in the Middle East including Turkey and Iran. This policy –which is consistent with the Greater Israel–  is  accompanied by a process of political fragmentation.

Since the Gulf war (1991), the Pentagon has contemplated the creation of a “Free Kurdistan” which would include the annexation of  parts of Iraq, Syria and Iran as well as Turkey

 

“The New Middle East”:  Unofficial US Military Academy Map by Lt. Col. Ralph Peters

 

According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”  According to Rabbi Fischmann,  “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

When viewed in the current context, including the siege on Gaza, the Zionist Plan for the Middle East bears an intimate relationship to the 2003 invasion of  Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing wars on Syria, Iraq and Yemen, not to mention the political crisis in Saudi Arabia.

The “Greater Israel” project consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of a US-Israeli expansionist project, with the support of NATO and Saudi Arabia. In this regard, the Saudi-Israeli rapprochement is from Netanyahu’s viewpoint a means to expanding Israel’s spheres of influence in the Middle East as well as confronting Iran. Needless to day, the “Greater Israel” project is consistent with America’s imperial design.

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates. According to Stephen Lendman,

A near-century ago, the World Zionist Organization’s plan for a Jewish state included:

• historic Palestine;

• South Lebanon up to Sidon and the Litani River;

• Syria’s Golan Heights, Hauran Plain and Deraa; and

• control of the Hijaz Railway from Deraa to Amman, Jordan as well as the Gulf of Aqaba.

Some Zionists wanted more – land from the Nile in the West to the Euphrates in the East, comprising Palestine, Lebanon, Western Syria and Southern Turkey.”

 

The Zionist project has supported the Jewish settlement movement. More broadly it involves a policy of excluding Palestinians from Palestine leading to the annexation of both the West Bank and Gaza to the State of Israel.

The Project of “Greater Israel” is to create a number of proxy States, which could include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of  Iraq and Saudi Arabia. (See map).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya in a 2011 Global Research article,   The Yinon Plan was a continuation of Britain’s colonial design in the Middle East:

“[The Yinon plan] is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

“Greater Israel” would require the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.

“The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must

1)  become an imperial regional power, and

2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.

Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation…  This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.” (Yinon Plan, see below)

Viewed in this context, the US-NATO led wars on Syria and Iraq are part of  the process of Israeli territorial expansion.

In this regard, the defeat of US sponsored terrorists (ISIS, Al Nusra) by Syrian Forces with the support of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah constitute a significant setback for Israel.

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 06, 2015, updated September 13, 2019

 


 

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East 

Translated and edited by

Israel Shahak

The Israel of Theodore Herzl (1904) and of Rabbi Fischmann (1947)

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

Oded Yinon’s

“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”

Published by the

Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.

Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982

Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)


Introductory Note

by Dr. Khalil Nakhleh

The Association of Arab-American University Graduates finds it compelling to inaugurate its new publication series, Special Documents, with Oded Yinon’s article which appeared in Kivunim (Directions), the journal of the Department of Information of the World Zionist Organization. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. To our knowledge, this document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East. Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the “vision” for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it presents.

The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.

This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme. This theme has been documented on a very modest scale in the AAUG publication,  Israel’s Sacred Terrorism (1980), by Livia Rokach. Based on the memoirs of Moshe Sharett, former Prime Minister of Israel, Rokach’s study documents, in convincing detail, the Zionist plan as it applies to Lebanon and as it was prepared in the mid-fifties.

The first massive Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1978 bore this plan out to the minutest detail. The second and more barbaric and encompassing Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982, aims to effect certain parts of this plan which hopes to see not only Lebanon, but Syria and Jordan as well, in fragments. This ought to make mockery of Israeli public claims regarding their desire for a strong and independent Lebanese central government. More accurately, they want a Lebanese central government that sanctions their regional imperialist designs by signing a peace treaty with them. They also seek acquiescence in their designs by the Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and other Arab governments as well as by the Palestinian people. What they want and what they are planning for is not an Arab world, but a world of Arab fragments that is ready to succumb to Israeli hegemony. Hence, Oded Yinon in his essay, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980’s,” talks about “far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967” that are created by the “very stormy situation [that] surrounds Israel.”

The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of conflict, such as in the 1947-1948 war and in the 1967 war. An appendix entitled  “Israel Talks of a New Exodus” is included in this publication to demonstrate past Zionist dispersals of Palestinians from their homeland and to show, besides the main Zionist document we present, other Zionist planning for the de-Palestinization of Palestine.

It is clear from the Kivunim document, published in February, 1982, that the “far-reaching opportunities” of which Zionist strategists have been thinking are the same “opportunities” of which they are trying to convince the world and which they claim were generated by their June, 1982 invasion. It is also clear that the Palestinians were never the sole target of Zionist plans, but the priority target since their viable and independent presence as a people negates the essence of the Zionist state. Every Arab state, however, especially those with cohesive and clear nationalist directions, is a real target sooner or later.

Contrasted with the detailed and unambiguous Zionist strategy elucidated in this document, Arab and Palestinian strategy, unfortunately, suffers from ambiguity and incoherence. There is no indication that Arab strategists have internalized the Zionist plan in its full ramifications. Instead, they react with incredulity and shock whenever a new stage of it unfolds. This is apparent in Arab reaction, albeit muted, to the Israeli siege of Beirut. The sad fact is that as long as the Zionist strategy for the Middle East is not taken seriously Arab reaction to any future siege of other Arab capitals will be the same.

Khalil Nakhleh, July 23, 1982

 


Foreward

by Israel Shahak

The following essay represents, in my opinion, the accurate and detailed plan of the present Zionist regime (of Sharon and Eitan) for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area into small states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states. I will comment on the military aspect of this plan in a concluding note. Here I want to draw the attention of the readers to several important points:

1. The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha’aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the “best” that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: “The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi’ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part” (Ha’aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old.

2. The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author’s notes. But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the “defense of the West” from Soviet power, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear: To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.

3. It is obvious that much of the relevant data, both in the notes and in the text, is garbled or omitted, such as the financial help of the U.S. to Israel. Much of it is pure fantasy. But, the plan is not to be regarded as not influential, or as not capable of realization for a short time. The plan follows faithfully the geopolitical ideas current in Germany of 1890-1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe. Those aims, especially the division of the existing states, were carried out in 1939-1941, and only an alliance on the global scale prevented their consolidation for a period of time.

The notes by the author follow the text under the title.

To avoid confusion, I did not add any notes of my own, but have put the substance of them into this Foreward and the Concluding Observations at the end. I have, however, emphasized some portions of the text.

Israel Shahak, June 13, 1982 

 


 

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties

by Oded Yinon

This essay originally appeared in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14–Winter, 5742, February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem.

At the outset of the nineteen eighties the State of Israel is in need of a new perspective as to its place, its aims and national targets, at home and abroad. This need has become even more vital due to a number of central processes which the country, the region and the world are undergoing. We are living today in the early stages of a new epoch in human history which is not at all similar to its predecessor, and its characteristics are totally different from what we have hitherto known. That is why we need an understanding of the central processes which typify this historical epoch on the one hand, and on the other hand we need a world outlook and an operational strategy in accordance with the new conditions. The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of the Jewish state will depend upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs.

This epoch is characterized by several traits which we can already diagnose, and which symbolize a genuine revolution in our present lifestyle. The dominant process is the breakdown of the rationalist, humanist outlook as the major cornerstone supporting the life and achievements of Western civilization since the Renaissance. The political, social and economic views which have emanated from this foundation have been based on several “truths” which are presently disappearing–for example, the view that man as an individual is the center of the universe and everything exists in order to fulfill his basic material needs. This position is being invalidated in the present when it has become clear that the amount of resources in the cosmos does not meet Man’s requirements, his economic needs or his demographic constraints. In a world in which there are four billion human beings and economic and energy resources which do not grow proportionally to meet the needs of mankind, it is unrealistic to expect to fulfill the main requirement of Western Society, 1 i.e., the wish and aspiration for boundless consumption. The view that ethics plays no part in determining the direction Man takes, but rather his material needs do–that view is becoming prevalent today as we see a world in which nearly all values are disappearing. We are losing the ability to assess the simplest things, especially when they concern the simple question of what is Good and what is Evil.

The vision of man’s limitless aspirations and abilities shrinks in the face of the sad facts of life, when we witness the break-up of world order around us. The view which promises liberty and freedom to mankind seems absurd in light of the sad fact that three fourths of the human race lives under totalitarian regimes. The views concerning equality and social justice have been transformed by socialism and especially by Communism into a laughing stock. There is no argument as to the truth of these two ideas, but it is clear that they have not been put into practice properly and the majority of mankind has lost the liberty, the freedom and the opportunity for equality and justice. In this nuclear world in which we are (still) living in relative peace for thirty years, the concept of peace and coexistence among nations has no meaning when a superpower like the USSR holds a military and political doctrine of the sort it has: that not only is a nuclear war possible and necessary in order to achieve the ends of Marxism, but that it is possible to survive after it, not to speak of the fact that one can be victorious in it.2

The essential concepts of human society, especially those of the West, are undergoing a change due to political, military and economic transformations. Thus, the nuclear and conventional might of the USSR has transformed the epoch that has just ended into the last respite before the great saga that will demolish a large part of our world in a multi-dimensional global war, in comparison with which the past world wars will have been mere child’s play. The power of nuclear as well as of conventional weapons, their quantity, their precision and quality will turn most of our world upside down within a few years, and we must align ourselves so as to face that in Israel. That is, then, the main threat to our existence and that of the Western world. 3 The war over resources in the world, the Arab monopoly on oil, and the need of the West to import most of its raw materials from the Third World, are transforming the world we know, given that one of the major aims of the USSR is to defeat the West by gaining control over the gigantic resources in the Persian Gulf and in the southern part of Africa, in which the majority of world minerals are located. We can imagine the dimensions of the global confrontation which will face us in the future.

The Gorshkov doctrine calls for Soviet control of the oceans and mineral rich areas of the Third World. That together with the present Soviet nuclear doctrine which holds that it is possible to manage, win and survive a nuclear war, in the course of which the West’s military might well be destroyed and its inhabitants made slaves in the service of Marxism-Leninism, is the main danger to world peace and to our own existence. Since 1967, the Soviets have transformed Clausewitz’ dictum into “War is the continuation of policy in nuclear means,” and made it the motto which guides all their policies. Already today they are busy carrying out their aims in our region and throughout the world, and the need to face them becomes the major element in our country’s security policy and of course that of the rest of the Free World. That is our major foreign challenge.4

The Arab Moslem world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes. The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorites and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging. 5 Most of the Arabs, 118 million out of 170 million, live in Africa, mostly in Egypt (45 million today).

Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria. Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Moslem world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Moslem Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians. In Egypt there is a Sunni Moslem majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt.

All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflict even more than those of the Maghreb. Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.

Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.

All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.

Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus. All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.

Alongside the Arabs, split as they are, the other Moslem states share a similar predicament. Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Moslem majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds. In Afghanistan there are 5 million

Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population. In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.

This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.

In this giant and fractured world there are a few wealthy groups and a huge mass of poor people. Most of the Arabs have an average yearly income of 300 dollars. That is the situation in Egypt, in most of the Maghreb countries except for Libya, and in Iraq. Lebanon is torn apart and its economy is falling to pieces. It is a state in which there is no centralized power, but only 5 de facto sovereign authorities (Christian in the north, supported by the Syrians and under the rule of the Franjieh clan, in the East an area of direct Syrian conquest, in the center a Phalangist controlled Christian enclave, in the south and up to the Litani river a mostly Palestinian region controlled by the PLO and Major Haddad’s state of Christians and half a million Shi’ites). Syria is in an even graver situation and even the assistance she will obtain in the future after the unification with Libya will not be sufficient for dealing with the basic problems of existence and the maintenance of a large army. Egypt is in the worst situation: Millions are on the verge of hunger, half the labor force is unemployed, and housing is scarce in this most densely populated area of the world. Except for the army, there is not a single department operating efficiently and the state is in a permanent state of bankruptcy and depends entirely on American foreign assistance granted since the peace.6

In the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt there is the largest accumulation of money and oil in the world, but those enjoying it are tiny elites who lack a wide base of support and self-confidence, something that no army can guarantee. 7 The Saudi army with all its equipment cannot defend the regime from real dangers at home or abroad, and what took place in Mecca in 1980 is only an example. A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.

The “peace” policy and the return of territories, through a dependence upon the US, precludes the realization of the new option created for us. Since 1967, all the governments of Israel have tied our national aims down to narrow political needs, on the one hand, and on the other to destructive opinions at home which neutralized our capacities both at home and abroad. Failing to take steps towards the Arab population in the new territories, acquired in the course of a war forced upon us, is the major strategic error committed by Israel on the morning after the Six Day War. We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing. 8 Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.

In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. 9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.

(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979. 10

Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-

Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day. 11

The myth of Egypt as the strong leader of the Arab World was demolished back in 1956 and definitely did not survive 1967, but our policy, as in the return of the Sinai, served to turn the myth into “fact.” In reality, however, Egypt’s power in proportion both to Israel alone and to the rest of the Arab World has gone down about 50 percent since 1967. Egypt is no longer the leading political power in the Arab World and is economically on the verge of a crisis. Without foreign assistance the crisis will come tomorrow. 12 In the short run, due to the return of the Sinai, Egypt will gain several advantages at our expense, but only in the short run until 1982, and that will not change the balance of power to its benefit, and will possibly bring about its downfall. Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.

Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run. 13

The Western front, which on the surface appears more problematic, is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front, in which most of the events that make the headlines have been taking place recently. Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today. 14

Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization. 15

The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure. 16

Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run.

There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future. The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan. 17

Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or military constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter. It is no longer possible to live with three fourths of the Jewish population on the dense shoreline which is so dangerous in a nuclear epoch.

Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today. l8

Realizing our aims on the Eastern front depends first on the realization of this internal strategic objective. The transformation of the political and economic structure, so as to enable the realization of these strategic aims, is the key to achieving the entire change. We need to change from a centralized economy in which the government is extensively involved, to an open and free market as well as to switch from depending upon the U.S. taxpayer to developing, with our own hands, of a genuine productive economic infrastructure. If we are not able to make this change freely and voluntarily, we shall be forced into it by world developments, especially in the areas of economics, energy, and politics, and by our own growing isolation. l9

From a military and strategic point of view, the West led by the U.S. is unable to withstand the global pressures of the USSR throughout the world, and Israel must therefore stand alone in the Eighties, without any foreign assistance, military or economic, and this is within our capacities today, with no compromises. 20 Rapid changes in the world will also bring about a change in the condition of world Jewry to which Israel will become not only a last resort but the only existential option. We cannot assume that U.S. Jews, and the communities of Europe and Latin America will continue to exist in the present form in the future. 21

Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and the problem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.

 


 

Concluding Observations 

by Israel Shahak 

Three important points have to be clarified in order to be able to understand the significant possibilities of realization of this Zionist plan for the Middle East, and also why it had to be published.

The Military Background of The Plan

The military conditions of this plan have not been mentioned above, but on the many occasions where something very like it is being “explained” in closed meetings to members of the Israeli Establishment, this point is clarified. It is assumed that the Israeli military forces, in all their branches, are insufficient for the actual work of occupation of such wide territories as discussed above. In fact, even in times of intense Palestinian “unrest” on the West Bank, the forces of the Israeli Army are stretched out too much. The answer to that is the method of ruling by means of “Haddad forces” or of “Village Associations” (also known as “Village Leagues”): local forces under “leaders” completely dissociated from the population, not having even any feudal or party structure (such as the Phalangists have, for example). The “states” proposed by Yinon are “Haddadland” and “Village Associations,” and their armed forces will be, no doubt, quite similar. In addition, Israeli military superiority in such a situation will be much greater than it is even now, so that any movement of revolt will be “punished” either by mass humiliation as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or by bombardment and obliteration of cities, as in Lebanon now (June 1982), or by both. In order to ensure this, the plan, as explained orally, calls for the establishment of Israeli garrisons in focal places between the mini states, equipped with the necessary mobile destructive forces. In fact, we have seen something like this in Haddadland and we will almost certainly soon see the first example of this system functioning either in South Lebanon or in all Lebanon.

It is obvious that the above military assumptions, and the whole plan too, depend also on the Arabs continuing to be even more divided than they are now, and on the lack of any truly progressive mass movement among them. It may be that those two conditions will be removed only when the plan will be well advanced, with consequences which can not be foreseen. 

Why it is necessary to publish this in Israel?

The reason for publication is the dual nature of the Israeli-Jewish society: A very great measure of freedom and democracy, specially for Jews, combined with expansionism and racist discrimination. In such a situation the Israeli-Jewish elite (for the masses follow the TV and Begin’s speeches) has to be persuaded. The first steps in the process of persuasion are oral, as indicated above, but a time comes in which it becomes inconvenient. Written material must be produced for the benefit of the more stupid “persuaders” and “explainers” (for example medium-rank officers, who are, usually, remarkably stupid). They then “learn it,” more or less, and preach to others. It should be remarked that Israel, and even the Yishuv from the Twenties, has always functioned in this way. I myself well remember how (before I was “in opposition”) the necessity of war with was explained to me and others a year before the 1956 war, and the necessity of conquering “the rest of Western Palestine when we will have the opportunity” was explained in the years 1965-67.

Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?

In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak, June 17, 1982 Jerusalem

About the Translator

Israel Shahak is a professor of organic chemistly at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights. He published The Shahak Papers, collections of key articles from the Hebrew press, and is the author of numerous articles and books, among them Non-Jew in the Jewish State. His latest book is Israel’s Global Role: Weapons for Repression, published by the AAUG in 1982. Israel Shahak: (1933-2001)

Notes

 1. American Universities Field Staff. Report No.33, 1979. According to this research, the population of the world will be 6 billion in the year 2000. Today’s world population can be broken down as follows: China, 958 million; India, 635 million; USSR, 261 million; U.S., 218 million Indonesia, 140 million; Brazil and Japan, 110 million each. According to the figures of the U.N. Population Fund for 1980, there will be, in 2000, 50 cities with a population of over 5 million each. The population ofthp;Third World will then be 80% of the world population. According to Justin Blackwelder, U.S. Census Office chief, the world population will not reach 6 billion because of hunger.

 2. Soviet nuclear policy has been well summarized by two American Sovietologists: Joseph D. Douglas and Amoretta M. Hoeber, Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War, (Stanford, Ca., Hoover Inst. Press, 1979). In the Soviet Union tens and hundreds of articles and books are published each year which detail the Soviet doctrine for nuclear war and there is a great deal of documentation translated into English and published by the U.S. Air Force,including USAF: Marxism-Leninism on War and the Army: The Soviet View, Moscow, 1972; USAF: The Armed Forces of the Soviet State. Moscow, 1975, by Marshal A. Grechko. The basic Soviet approach to the matter is presented in the book by Marshal Sokolovski published in 1962 in Moscow: Marshal V. D. Sokolovski, Military Strategy, Soviet Doctrine and Concepts(New York, Praeger, 1963).

 3. A picture of Soviet intentions in various areas of the world can be drawn from the book by Douglas and Hoeber, ibid. For additional material see: Michael Morgan, “USSR’s Minerals as Strategic Weapon in the Future,” Defense and Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C., Dec. 1979.

 4. Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, Sea Power and the State, London, 1979. Morgan, loc. cit. General George S. Brown (USAF) C-JCS, Statement to the Congress on the Defense Posture of the United States For Fiscal Year 1979, p. 103; National Security Council, Review of Non-Fuel Mineral Policy, (Washington, D.C. 1979,); Drew Middleton, The New York Times, (9/15/79); Time, 9/21/80.

 5. Elie Kedourie, “The End of the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No.4, 1968.

 6. Al-Thawra, Syria 12/20/79, Al-Ahram,12/30/79, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79. 55% of the Arabs are 20 years old and younger, 70% of the Arabs live in Africa, 55% of the Arabs under 15 are unemployed, 33% live in urban areas, Oded Yinon, “Egypt’s Population Problem,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No. 15, Spring 1980.

 7. E. Kanovsky, “Arab Haves and Have Nots,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No.1, Fall 1976, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79.

 8. In his book, former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that the Israeli government is in fact responsible for the design of American policy in the Middle East, after June ’67, because of its own indecisiveness as to the future of the territories and the inconsistency in its positions since it established the background for Resolution 242 and certainly twelve years later for the Camp David agreements and the peace treaty with Egypt. According to Rabin, on June 19, 1967, President Johnson sent a letter to Prime Minister Eshkol in which he did not mention anything about withdrawal from the new territories but exactly on the same day the government resolved to return territories in exchange for peace. After the Arab resolutions in Khartoum (9/1/67) the government altered its position but contrary to its decision of June 19, did not notify the U.S. of the alteration and the U.S. continued to support 242 in the Security Council on the basis of its earlier understanding that Israel is prepared to return territories. At that point it was already too late to change the U.S. position and Israel’s policy. From here the way was opened to peace agreements on the basis of 242 as was later agreed upon in Camp David. See Yitzhak Rabin. Pinkas Sherut, (Ma’ariv 1979) pp. 226-227.

 9. Foreign and Defense Committee Chairman Prof. Moshe Arens argued in an interview (Ma ‘ariv,10/3/80) that the Israeli government failed to prepare an economic plan before the Camp David agreements and was itself surprised by the cost of the agreements, although already during the negotiations it was possible to calculate the heavy price and the serious error involved in not having prepared the economic grounds for peace.

The former Minister of Treasury, Mr. Yigal Holwitz, stated that if it were not for the withdrawal from the oil fields, Israel would have a positive balance of payments (9/17/80). That same person said two years earlier that the government of Israel (from which he withdrew) had placed a noose around his neck. He was referring to the Camp David agreements (Ha’aretz, 11/3/78). In the course of the whole peace negotiations neither an expert nor an economics advisor was consulted, and the Prime Minister himself, who lacks knowledge and expertise in economics, in a mistaken initiative, asked the U.S. to give us a loan rather than a grant, due to his wish to maintain our respect and the respect of the U.S. towards us. See Ha’aretz1/5/79. Jerusalem Post, 9/7/79. Prof Asaf Razin, formerly a senior consultant in the Treasury, strongly criticized the conduct of the negotiations; Ha’aretz, 5/5/79. Ma’ariv, 9/7/79. As to matters concerning the oil fields and Israel’s energy crisis, see the interview with Mr. Eitan Eisenberg, a government advisor on these matters, Ma’arive Weekly, 12/12/78. The Energy Minister, who personally signed the Camp David agreements and the evacuation of Sdeh Alma, has since emphasized the seriousness of our condition from the point of view of oil supplies more than once…see Yediot Ahronot, 7/20/79. Energy Minister Modai even admitted that the government did not consult him at all on the subject of oil during the Camp David and Blair House negotiations. Ha’aretz, 8/22/79.

 10. Many sources report on the growth of the armaments budget in Egypt and on intentions to give the army preference in a peace epoch budget over domestic needs for which a peace was allegedly obtained. See former Prime Minister Mamduh Salam in an interview 12/18/77, Treasury Minister Abd El Sayeh in an interview 7/25/78, and the paper Al Akhbar, 12/2/78 which clearly stressed that the military budget will receive first priority, despite the peace. This is what former Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil has stated in his cabinet’s programmatic document which was presented to Parliament, 11/25/78. See English translation, ICA, FBIS, Nov. 27. 1978, pp. D 1-10.

According to these sources, Egypt’s military budget increased by 10% between fiscal 1977 and 1978, and the process still goes on. A Saudi source divulged that the Egyptians plan to increase their militmy budget by 100% in the next two years; Ha’aretz, 2/12/79 and Jerusalem Post, 1/14/79.

 11. Most of the economic estimates threw doubt on Egypt’s ability to reconstruct its economy by 1982. See Economic Intelligence Unit, 1978 Supplement, “The Arab Republic of Egypt”; E. Kanovsky, “Recent Economic Developments in the Middle East,” Occasional Papers, The Shiloah Institution, June 1977; Kanovsky, “The Egyptian Economy Since the Mid-Sixties, The Micro Sectors,” Occasional Papers, June 1978; Robert McNamara, President of World Bank, as reported in Times, London, 1/24/78.

 12. See the comparison made by the researeh of the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and research camed out in the Center for Strategic Studies of Tel Aviv University, as well as the research by the British scientist, Denis Champlin, Military Review, Nov. 1979, ISS: The Military Balance 1979-1980, CSS; Security Arrangements in Sinai…by Brig. Gen. (Res.) A Shalev, No. 3.0 CSS; The Military Balance and the Military Options after the Peace Treaty with Egypt, by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Y. Raviv, No.4, Dec. 1978, as well as many press reports including El Hawadeth, London, 3/7/80; El Watan El Arabi, Paris, 12/14/79.

 13. As for religious ferment in Egypt and the relations between Copts and Moslems see the series of articles published in the Kuwaiti paper, El Qabas, 9/15/80. The English author Irene Beeson reports on the rift between Moslems and Copts, see: Irene Beeson, Guardian, London, 6/24/80, and Desmond Stewart, Middle East Internmational, London 6/6/80. For other reports see Pamela Ann Smith, Guardian, London, 12/24/79; The Christian Science Monitor 12/27/79 as well as Al Dustour, London, 10/15/79; El Kefah El Arabi, 10/15/79.

 14. Arab Press Service, Beirut, 8/6-13/80. The New Republic, 8/16/80, Der Spiegel as cited by Ha’aretz, 3/21/80, and 4/30-5/5/80; The Economist, 3/22/80; Robert Fisk, Times, London, 3/26/80; Ellsworth Jones, Sunday Times, 3/30/80.

 15.  J.P.  Peroncell  Hugoz,  Le  Monde,  Paris  4/28/80;  Dr.  Abbas  Kelidar,  Middle  East  Review,  Summer  1979;

Conflict Studies, ISS, July 1975; Andreas Kolschitter, Der Zeit, (Ha’aretz, 9/21/79) Economist Foreign Report, 10/10/79, Afro-Asian Affairs, London, July 1979.

 16. Arnold Hottinger, “The Rich Arab States in Trouble,” The New York Review of Books, 5/15/80; Arab Press Service, Beirut, 6/25-7/2/80; U.S. News and World Report, 11/5/79 as well as El Ahram, 11/9/79; El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, Paris 9/7/79; El Hawadeth, 11/9/79; David Hakham, Monthly Review, IDF, Jan.-Feb. 79.

 17. As for Jordan’s policies and problems see El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, 4/30/79, 7/2/79; Prof. Elie Kedouri, Ma’ariv 6/8/79; Prof. Tanter, Davar 7/12/79; A. Safdi, Jerusalem Post, 5/31/79; El Watan El Arabi 11/28/79; El Qabas, 11/19/79. As for PLO positions see: The resolutions of the Fatah Fourth Congress, Damascus, August 1980. The Shefa’amr program of the Israeli Arabs was published in Ha’aretz, 9/24/80, and by Arab Press Report 6/18/80. For facts and figures on immigration of Arabs to Jordan, see Amos Ben Vered, Ha’aretz, 2/16/77; Yossef Zuriel, Ma’ariv 1/12/80. As to the PLO’s position towards Israel see Shlomo Gazit, Monthly Review; July 1980; Hani El Hasan in an interview, Al Rai Al’Am, Kuwait 4/15/80; Avi Plaskov, “The Palestinian Problem,” Survival, ISS, London Jan. Feb. 78; David Gutrnann, “The Palestinian Myth,” Commentary, Oct. 75; Bernard Lewis, “The Palestinians and the PLO,” Commentary Jan. 75; Monday Morning, Beirut, 8/18-21/80; Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1980.

 18. Prof. Yuval Neeman, “Samaria–The Basis for Israel’s Security,” Ma’arakhot 272-273, May/June 1980; Ya’akov Hasdai, “Peace, the Way and the Right to Know,” Dvar Hashavua, 2/23/80. Aharon Yariv, “Strategic Depth–An Israeli Perspective,” Ma’arakhot 270-271, October 1979; Yitzhak Rabin, “Israel’s Defense Problems in the Eighties,” Ma’arakhot October 1979.

 19. Ezra Zohar, In the Regime’s Pliers (Shikmona, 1974); Motti Heinrich, Do We have a Chance Israel, Truth Versus Legend (Reshafim, 1981).

 20. Henry Kissinger, “The Lessons of the Past,” The Washington Review Vol 1, Jan. 1978; Arthur Ross, “OPEC’s Challenge to the West,” The Washington Quarterly, Winter, 1980; Walter Levy, “Oil and the Decline of the West,” Foreign Affairs, Summer 1980; Special Report–“Our Armed Forees-Ready or Not?” U.S. News and World Report 10/10/77; Stanley Hoffman, “Reflections on the Present Danger,” The New York Review of Books 3/6/80; Time 4/3/80; Leopold Lavedez “The illusions of SALT” Commentary Sept. 79; Norman Podhoretz, “The Present Danger,” Commentary March 1980; Robert Tucker, “Oil and American Power Six Years Later,” Commentary Sept. 1979; Norman Podhoretz, “The Abandonment of Israel,” Commentary July 1976; Elie Kedourie, “Misreading the Middle East,” Commentary July 1979.

 21. According to figures published by Ya’akov Karoz, Yediot Ahronot, 10/17/80, the sum total of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the world in 1979 was double the amount recorded in 1978. In Germany, France, and Britain the number of anti-Semitic incidents was many times greater in that year. In the U.S. as well there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents which were reported in that article. For the new anti-Semitism, see L. Talmon, “The New Anti-Semitism,” The New Republic, 9/18/1976; Barbara Tuchman, “They poisoned the Wells,” Newsweek 2/3/75.

 

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.

nkrumah mlk

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on African-American History: The Global Dimensions of the Life and Legacy of Malcolm X

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 InstagramTwitter 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 18th 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 C17th, 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 19th 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-18th 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)

Nathan Rothschild.jpg

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 19th 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 19th 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 19th 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.

Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building.jpg

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.’

Bank for International Settlements.png

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 C20th – 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 STOPEU out of FeedMeat taxes & Chicken permitsUp 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’.

Central Bank Digital Currency

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 hoursnow 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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Historical Analysis of the Global Elite: Ransacking the World Economy Until ‘You’ll Own Nothing.’

Mercenários estrangeiros participando na invasão de Kursk.

August 17th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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)


WWIII ScenarioTowards 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    

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

 
 
First published on November 15, 2015, this incisive report was among Global Research’s most popular articles. As a result of media censorship it is no longer featured by the search engines.
 
.

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky

Let us put this in a historical perspective: the commemoration of the War to End All Wars  acknowledges that 15 million lives were lost in the course of World War I (1914-18).

The loss of life in the second World War (1939-1945) was on a much large scale, when compared to World War I: 60 million lives both military and civilian were lost during World War II. (Four times those killed during World War I).

The largest WWII casualties  were China and the Soviet Union: 

  • 26 million in the Soviet Union,  
  • China estimates its losses at approximately 20 million deaths.

Ironically, these two countries (allies of the US during WWII) which lost a large share of their population during WWII are now under the Biden-Harris administration categorized as “enemies of America”, which are threatening the Western World.

NATO-US Forces are at Russia’s Doorstep. A so-called “preemptive nuclear war” against China and Russia is on the drawing board of the Pentagon. 

Germany and Austria lost approximately 8 million people during WWII, Japan lost more than 2.5 million people. The US and Britain respectively lost more than 400,000 lives. 

This carefully researched article by James A. Lucas  documents the more than 20 million lives lost resulting from US led wars, military coups and intelligence ops carried out in the wake of WWII, in what is euphemistically called the “post-war era” (1945- ).

The extensive loss of life in Lebanon,  Syria, Yemen, Ukraine and Libya is not included in this study.

Continuous US led warfare (1945- ): there was no “post-war era.

And now, a World War III scenario is contemplated by US-NATO.  

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable. All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped.

The Dangers of Nuclear War are Real. They are “Profit Driven”. Under Joe Biden, public funds allocated to nuclear weapons are slated to increase to 2 trillion by 2030 allegedly as a means to safeguarding peace and national security at taxpayers expense. (How many schools and hospitals could you finance with 2 trillion dollars?).

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research,  Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2023, December 3, 2023

***

The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

by James  A. Lucas

 

After the catastrophic attacks of September 11 2001 monumental sorrow and a feeling of desperate and understandable anger began to permeate the American psyche. A few people at that time attempted to promote a balanced perspective by pointing out that the United States had also been responsible for causing those same feelings in people in other nations, but they produced hardly a ripple. Although Americans understand in the abstract the wisdom of people around the world empathizing with the suffering of one another, such a reminder of wrongs committed by our nation got little hearing and was soon overshadowed by an accelerated “war on terrorism.”

But we must continue our efforts to develop understanding and compassion in the world. Hopefully, this article will assist in doing that by addressing the question “How many September 11ths has the United States caused in other nations since WWII?” This theme is developed in this report which contains an estimated numbers of such deaths in 37 nations as well as brief explanations of why the U.S. is considered culpable.

The causes of wars are complex. In some instances nations other than the U.S. may have been responsible for more deaths, but if the involvement of our nation appeared to have been a necessary cause of a war or conflict it was considered responsible for the deaths in it. In other words they probably would not have taken place if the U.S. had not used the heavy hand of its power. The military and economic power of the United States was crucial.

This study reveals that U.S. military forces were directly responsible for about 10 to 15 million deaths during the Korean and Vietnam Wars and the two Iraq Wars. The Korean War also includes Chinese deaths while the Vietnam War also includes fatalities in Cambodia and Laos.

The American public probably is not aware of these numbers and knows even less about the proxy wars for which the United States is also responsible. In the latter wars there were between nine and 14 million deaths in Afghanistan, Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, East Timor, Guatemala, Indonesia, Pakistan and Sudan.

But the victims are not just from big nations or one part of the world. The remaining deaths were in smaller ones which constitute over half the total number of nations. Virtually all parts of the world have been the target of U.S. intervention.

The overall conclusion reached is that the United States most likely has been responsible since WWII for the deaths of between 20 and 30 million people in wars and conflicts scattered over the world.

To the families and friends of these victims it makes little difference whether the causes were U.S. military action, proxy military forces, the provision of U.S. military supplies or advisors, or other ways, such as economic pressures applied by our nation. They had to make decisions about other things such as finding lost loved ones, whether to become refugees, and how to survive.

And the pain and anger is spread even further. Some authorities estimate that there are as many as 10 wounded for each person who dies in wars. Their visible, continued suffering is a continuing reminder to their fellow countrymen.

It is essential that Americans learn more about this topic so that they can begin to understand the pain that others feel. Someone once observed that the Germans during WWII “chose not to know.” We cannot allow history to say this about our country. The question posed above was “How many September 11ths has the United States caused in other nations since WWII?” The answer is: possibly 10,000.

Comments on Gathering These Numbers

Generally speaking, the much smaller number of Americans who have died is not included in this study, not because they are not important, but because this report focuses on the impact of U.S. actions on its adversaries.

An accurate count of the number of deaths is not easy to achieve, and this collection of data was undertaken with full realization of this fact. These estimates will probably be revised later either upward or downward by the reader and the author. But undoubtedly the total will remain in the millions.

The difficulty of gathering reliable information is shown by two estimates in this context. For several years I heard statements on radio that three million Cambodians had been killed under the rule of the Khmer Rouge. However, in recent years the figure I heard was one million. Another example is that the number of persons estimated to have died in Iraq due to sanctions after the first U.S. Iraq War was over 1 million, but in more recent years, based on a more recent study, a lower estimate of around a half a million has emerged.

Often information about wars is revealed only much later when someone decides to speak out, when more secret information is revealed due to persistent efforts of a few, or after special congressional committees make reports

Both victorious and defeated nations may have their own reasons for underreporting the number of deaths. Further, in recent wars involving the United States it was not uncommon to hear statements like “we do not do body counts” and references to “collateral damage” as a euphemism for dead and wounded. Life is cheap for some, especially those who manipulate people on the battlefield as if it were a chessboard.

To say that it is difficult to get exact figures is not to say that we should not try. Effort was needed to arrive at the figures of six million Jews killed during WWII, but knowledge of that number now is widespread and it has fueled the determination to prevent future holocausts. That struggle continues.

The author can be contacted at [email protected]

37 VICTIM NATIONS

Afghanistan

The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation. (1,2,3,4)

The Soviet Union had friendly relations its neighbor, Afghanistan, which had a secular government. The Soviets feared that if that government became fundamentalist this change could spill over into the Soviet Union.

In 1998, in an interview with the Parisian publication Le Novel Observateur, Zbigniew Brzezinski, adviser to President Carter, admitted that he had been responsible for instigating aid to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan which caused the Soviets to invade. In his own words:

According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention. (5,1,6)

Brzezinski justified laying this trap, since he said it gave the Soviet Union its Vietnam and caused the breakup of the Soviet Union. “Regret what?” he said. “That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it?” (7)

The CIA spent 5 to 6 billion dollars on its operation in Afghanistan in order to bleed the Soviet Union. (1,2,3) When that 10-year war ended over a million people were dead and Afghan heroin had captured 60% of the U.S. market. (4)

The U.S. has been responsible directly for about 12,000 deaths in Afghanistan many of which resulted from bombing in retaliation for the attacks on U.S. property on September 11, 2001. Subsequently U.S. troops invaded that country. (4)

Angola

An indigenous armed struggle against Portuguese rule in Angola began in 1961. In 1977 an Angolan government was recognized by the U.N., although the U.S. was one of the few nations that opposed this action. In 1986 Uncle Sam approved material assistance to UNITA, a group that was trying to overthrow the government. Even today this struggle, which has involved many nations at times, continues.

U.S. intervention was justified to the U.S. public as a reaction to the intervention of 50,000 Cuban troops in Angola. However, according to Piero Gleijeses, a history professor at Johns Hopkins University the reverse was true. The Cuban intervention came as a result of a CIA – financed covert invasion via neighboring Zaire and a drive on the Angolan capital by the U.S. ally, South Africa1,2,3). (Three estimates of deaths range from 300,000 to 750,000 (4,5,6)

Argentina: See South America: Operation Condor

Bangladesh: See Pakistan

Bolivia

Hugo Banzer was the leader of a repressive regime in Bolivia in the 1970s. The U.S. had been disturbed when a previous leader nationalized the tin mines and distributed land to Indian peasants. Later that action to benefit the poor was reversed.

Banzer, who was trained at the U.S.-operated School of the Americas in Panama and later at Fort Hood, Texas, came back from exile frequently to confer with U.S. Air Force Major Robert Lundin. In 1971 he staged a successful coup with the help of the U.S. Air Force radio system. In the first years of his dictatorship he received twice as military assistance from the U.S. as in the previous dozen years together.

A few years later the Catholic Church denounced an army massacre of striking tin workers in 1975, Banzer, assisted by information provided by the CIA, was able to target and locate leftist priests and nuns. His anti-clergy strategy, known as the Banzer Plan, was adopted by nine other Latin American dictatorships in 1977. (2) He has been accused of being responsible for 400 deaths during his tenure. (1)

Also see: See South America: Operation Condor

Brazil: See South America: Operation Condor

Cambodia

U.S. bombing of Cambodia had already been underway for several years in secret under the Johnson and Nixon administrations, but when President Nixon openly began bombing in preparation for a land assault on Cambodia it caused major protests in the U.S. against the Vietnam War.

There is little awareness today of the scope of these bombings and the human suffering involved.

Immense damage was done to the villages and cities of Cambodia, causing refugees and internal displacement of the population. This unstable situation enabled the Khmer Rouge, a small political party led by Pol Pot, to assume power. Over the years we have repeatedly heard about the Khmer Rouge’s role in the deaths of millions in Cambodia without any acknowledgement being made this mass killing was made possible by the the U.S. bombing of that nation which destabilized it by death , injuries, hunger and dislocation of its people.

So the U.S. bears responsibility not only for the deaths from the bombings but also for those resulting from the activities of the Khmer Rouge – a total of about 2.5 million people. Even when Vietnam latrer invaded Cambodia in 1979 the CIA was still supporting the Khmer Rouge. (1,2,3)

Also see Vietnam

Chad

An estimated 40,000 people in Chad were killed and as many as 200,000 tortured by a government, headed by Hissen Habre who was brought to power in June, 1982 with the help of CIA money and arms. He remained in power for eight years. (1,2)

Human Rights Watch claimed that Habre was responsible for thousands of killings. In 2001, while living in Senegal, he was almost tried for crimes committed by him in Chad. However, a court there blocked these proceedings. Then human rights people decided to pursue the case in Belgium, because some of Habre’s torture victims lived there. The U.S., in June 2003, told Belgium that it risked losing its status as host to NATO’s headquarters if it allowed such a legal proceeding to happen. So the result was that the law that allowed victims to file complaints in Belgium for atrocities committed abroad was repealed. However, two months later a new law was passed which made special provision for the continuation of the case against Habre.

Chile

The CIA intervened in Chile’s 1958 and 1964 elections. In 1970 a socialist candidate, Salvador Allende, was elected president. The CIA wanted to incite a military coup to prevent his inauguration, but the Chilean army’s chief of staff, General Rene Schneider, opposed this action. The CIA then planned, along with some people in the Chilean military, to assassinate Schneider. This plot failed and Allende took office. President Nixon was not to be dissuaded and he ordered the CIA to create a coup climate: “Make the economy scream,” he said.

What followed were guerilla warfare, arson, bombing, sabotage and terror. ITT and other U.S. corporations with Chilean holdings sponsored demonstrations and strikes. Finally, on September 11, 1973 Allende died either by suicide or by assassination. At that time Henry Kissinger, U.S. Secretary of State, said the following regarding Chile: “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist because of the irresponsibility of its own people.” (1)

During 17 years of terror under Allende’s successor, General Augusto Pinochet, an estimated 3,000 Chileans were killed and many others were tortured or “disappeared.” (2,3,4,5)

Also see South America: Operation Condor

China An estimated 900,000 Chinese died during the Korean War.

For more information, See: Korea.

Colombia

One estimate is that 67,000 deaths have occurred from the 1960s to recent years due to support by the U.S. of Colombian state terrorism. (1)

According to a 1994 Amnesty International report, more than 20,000 people were killed for political reasons in Colombia since 1986, mainly by the military and its paramilitary allies. Amnesty alleged that “U.S.- supplied military equipment, ostensibly delivered for use against narcotics traffickers, was being used by the Colombian military to commit abuses in the name of “counter-insurgency.” (2) In 2002 another estimate was made that 3,500 people die each year in a U.S. funded civilian war in Colombia. (3)

In 1996 Human Rights Watch issued a report “Assassination Squads in Colombia” which revealed that CIA agents went to Colombia in 1991 to help the military to train undercover agents in anti-subversive activity. (4,5)

In recent years the U.S. government has provided assistance under Plan Colombia. The Colombian government has been charged with using most of the funds for destruction of crops and support of the paramilitary group.

Cuba

In the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba on April 18, 1961 which ended after 3 days, 114 of the invading force were killed, 1,189 were taken prisoners and a few escaped to waiting U.S. ships. (1) The captured exiles were quickly tried, a few executed and the rest sentenced to thirty years in prison for treason. These exiles were released after 20 months in exchange for $53 million in food and medicine.

Some people estimate that the number of Cuban forces killed range from 2,000, to 4,000. Another estimate is that 1,800 Cuban forces were killed on an open highway by napalm. This appears to have been a precursor of the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991 when U.S. forces mercilessly annihilated large numbers of Iraqis on a highway. (2)

Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire)

The beginning of massive violence was instigated in this country in 1879 by its colonizer King Leopold of Belgium. The Congo’s population was reduced by 10 million people over a period of 20 years which some have referred to as “Leopold’s Genocide.” (1) The U.S. has been responsible for about a third of that many deaths in that nation in the more recent past. (2)

In 1960 the Congo became an independent state with Patrice Lumumba being its first prime minister. He was assassinated with the CIA being implicated, although some say that his murder was actually the responsibility of Belgium. (3) But nevertheless, the CIA was planning to kill him. (4) Before his assassination the CIA sent one of its scientists, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, to the Congo carrying “lethal biological material” intended for use in Lumumba’s assassination. This virus would have been able to produce a fatal disease indigenous to the Congo area of Africa and was transported in a diplomatic pouch.

Much of the time in recent years there has been a civil war within the Democratic Republic of Congo, fomented often by the U.S. and other nations, including neighboring nations. (5)

In April 1977, Newsday reported that the CIA was secretly supporting efforts to recruit several hundred mercenaries in the U.S. and Great Britain to serve alongside Zaire’s army. In that same year the U.S. provided $15 million of military supplies to the Zairian President Mobutu to fend off an invasion by a rival group operating in Angola. (6)

In May 1979, the U.S. sent several million dollars of aid to Mobutu who had been condemned 3 months earlier by the U.S. State Department for human rights violations. (7) During the Cold War the U.S. funneled over 300 million dollars in weapons into Zaire (8,9) $100 million in military training was provided to him. (2) In 2001 it was reported to a U.S. congressional committee that American companies, including one linked to former President George Bush Sr., were stoking the Congo for monetary gains. There is an international battle over resources in that country with over 125 companies and individuals being implicated. One of these substances is coltan, which is used in the manufacture of cell phones. (2)

Dominican Republic

In 1962, Juan Bosch became president of the Dominican Republic. He advocated such programs as land reform and public works programs. This did not bode well for his future relationship with the U.S., and after only 7 months in office, he was deposed by a CIA coup. In 1965 when a group was trying to reinstall him to his office President Johnson said, “This Bosch is no good.” Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Mann replied “He’s no good at all. If we don’t get a decent government in there, Mr. President, we get another Bosch. It’s just going to be another sinkhole.” Two days later a U.S. invasion started and 22,000 soldiers and marines entered the Dominican Republic and about 3,000 Dominicans died during the fighting. The cover excuse for doing this was that this was done to protect foreigners there. (1,2,3,4)

East Timor

In December 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor. This incursion was launched the day after U.S. President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had left Indonesia where they had given President Suharto permission to use American arms, which under U.S. law, could not be used for aggression. Daniel Moynihan, U.S. ambassador to the UN. said that the U.S. wanted “things to turn out as they did.” (1,2) The result was an estimated 200,000 dead out of a population of 700,000. (1,2)

Sixteen years later, on November 12, 1991, two hundred and seventeen East Timorese protesters in Dili, many of them children, marching from a memorial service, were gunned down by Indonesian Kopassus shock troops who were headed by U.S.- trained commanders Prabowo Subianto (son in law of General Suharto) and Kiki Syahnakri. Trucks were seen dumping bodies into the sea. (5)

El Salvador

The civil war from 1981 to1992 in El Salvador was financed by $6 billion in U.S. aid given to support the government in its efforts to crush a movement to bring social justice to the people in that nation of about 8 million people. (1)
During that time U.S. military advisers demonstrated methods of torture on teenage prisoners, according to an interview with a deserter from the Salvadoran army published in the New York Times. This former member of the Salvadoran National Guard testified that he was a member of a squad of twelve who found people who they were told were guerillas and tortured them. Part of the training he received was in torture at a U.S. location somewhere in Panama. (2)

About 900 villagers were massacred in the village of El Mozote in 1981. Ten of the twelve El Salvadoran government soldiers cited as participating in this act were graduates of the School of the Americas operated by the U.S. (2) They were only a small part of about 75,000 people killed during that civil war. (1)

According to a 1993 United Nations’ Truth Commission report, over 96 % of the human rights violations carried out during the war were committed by the Salvadoran army or the paramilitary deaths squads associated with the Salvadoran army. (3)

That commission linked graduates of the School of the Americas to many notorious killings. The New York Times and the Washington Post followed with scathing articles. In 1996, the White House Oversight Board issued a report that supported many of the charges against that school made by Rev. Roy Bourgeois, head of the School of the Americas Watch. That same year the Pentagon released formerly classified reports indicating that graduates were trained in killing, extortion, and physical abuse for interrogations, false imprisonment and other methods of control. (4)

Grenada

The CIA began to destabilize Grenada in 1979 after Maurice Bishop became president, partially because he refused to join the quarantine of Cuba. The campaign against him resulted in his overthrow and the invasion by the U.S. of Grenada on October 25, 1983, with about 277 people dying. (1,2) It was fallaciously charged that an airport was being built in Grenada that could be used to attack the U.S. and it was also erroneously claimed that the lives of American medical students on that island were in danger.

Guatemala

In 1951 Jacobo Arbenz was elected president of Guatemala. He appropriated some unused land operated by the United Fruit Company and compensated the company. (1,2) That company then started a campaign to paint Arbenz as a tool of an international conspiracy and hired about 300 mercenaries who sabotaged oil supplies and trains. (3) In 1954 a CIA-orchestrated coup put him out of office and he left the country. During the next 40 years various regimes killed thousands of people.

In 1999 the Washington Post reported that an Historical Clarification Commission concluded that over 200,000 people had been killed during the civil war and that there had been 42,000 individual human rights violations, 29,000 of them fatal, 92% of which were committed by the army. The commission further reported that the U.S. government and the CIA had pressured the Guatemalan government into suppressing the guerilla movement by ruthless means. (4,5)

According to the Commission between 1981 and 1983 the military government of Guatemala – financed and supported by the U.S. government – destroyed some four hundred Mayan villages in a campaign of genocide. (4)
One of the documents made available to the commission was a 1966 memo from a U.S. State Department official, which described how a “safe house” was set up in the palace for use by Guatemalan security agents and their U.S. contacts. This was the headquarters for the Guatemalan “dirty war” against leftist insurgents and suspected allies. (2)

Haiti

From 1957 to 1986 Haiti was ruled by Papa Doc Duvalier and later by his son. During that time their private terrorist force killed between 30,000 and 100,000 people. (1) Millions of dollars in CIA subsidies flowed into Haiti during that time, mainly to suppress popular movements, (2) although most American military aid to the country, according to William Blum, was covertly channeled through Israel.

Reportedly, governments after the second Duvalier reign were responsible for an even larger number of fatalities, and the influence on Haiti by the U.S., particularly through the CIA, has continued. The U.S. later forced out of the presidential office a black Catholic priest, Jean Bertrand Aristide, even though he was elected with 67% of the vote in the early 1990s. The wealthy white class in Haiti opposed him in this predominantly black nation, because of his social programs designed to help the poor and end corruption. (3) Later he returned to office, but that did not last long. He was forced by the U.S. to leave office and now lives in South Africa.

Honduras

In the 1980s the CIA supported Battalion 316 in Honduras, which kidnapped, tortured and killed hundreds of its citizens. Torture equipment and manuals were provided by CIA Argentinean personnel who worked with U.S. agents in the training of the Hondurans. Approximately 400 people lost their lives. (1,2) This is another instance of torture in the world sponsored by the U.S. (3)

Battalion 316 used shock and suffocation devices in interrogations in the 1980s. Prisoners often were kept naked and, when no longer useful, killed and buried in unmarked graves. Declassified documents and other sources show that the CIA and the U.S. Embassy knew of numerous crimes, including murder and torture, yet continued to support Battalion 316 and collaborate with its leaders.” (4)

Honduras was a staging ground in the early 1980s for the Contras who were trying to overthrow the socialist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. John D. Negroponte, currently Deputy Secretary of State, was our embassador when our military aid to Honduras rose from $4 million to $77.4 million per year. Negroponte denies having had any knowledge of these atrocities during his tenure. However, his predecessor in that position, Jack R. Binns, had reported in 1981 that he was deeply concerned at increasing evidence of officially sponsored/sanctioned assassinations. (5)

Hungary

In 1956 Hungary, a Soviet satellite nation, revolted against the Soviet Union. During the uprising broadcasts by the U.S. Radio Free Europe into Hungary sometimes took on an aggressive tone, encouraging the rebels to believe that Western support was imminent, and even giving tactical advice on how to fight the Soviets. Their hopes were raised then dashed by these broadcasts which cast an even darker shadow over the Hungarian tragedy.“ (1) The Hungarian and Soviet death toll was about 3,000 and the revolution was crushed. (2)

Indonesia

In 1965, in Indonesia, a coup replaced General Sukarno with General Suharto as leader. The U.S. played a role in that change of government. Robert Martens,a former officer in the U.S. embassy in Indonesia, described how U.S. diplomats and CIA officers provided up to 5,000 names to Indonesian Army death squads in 1965 and checked them off as they were killed or captured. Martens admitted that “I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that’s not all bad. There’s a time when you have to strike hard at a decisive moment.” (1,2,3) Estimates of the number of deaths range from 500,000 to 3 million. (4,5,6)
From 1993 to 1997 the U.S. provided Jakarta with almost $400 million in economic aid and sold tens of million of dollars of weaponry to that nation. U.S. Green Berets provided training for the Indonesia’s elite force which was responsible for many of atrocities in East Timor. (3)

Iran

Iran lost about 262,000 people in the war against Iraq from 1980 to 1988. (1) See Iraq for more information about that war.

On July 3, 1988 the U.S. Navy ship, the Vincennes, was operating withing Iranian waters providing military support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. During a battle against Iranian gunboats it fired two missiles at an Iranian Airbus, which was on a routine civilian flight. All 290 civilian on board were killed. (2,3)

Iraq

A. The Iraq-Iran War lasted from 1980 to 1988 and during that time there were about 105,000 Iraqi deaths according to the Washington Post. (1,2)

According to Howard Teicher, a former National Security Council official, the U.S. provided the Iraqis with billions of dollars in credits and helped Iraq in other ways such as making sure that Iraq had military equipment including biological agents This surge of help for Iraq came as Iran seemed to be winning the war and was close to Basra. (1) The U.S. was not adverse to both countries weakening themselves as a result of the war, but it did not appear to want either side to win.

B: The U.S.-Iraq War and the Sanctions Against Iraq extended from 1990 to 2003.

Iraq invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990 and the U.S. responded by demanding that Iraq withdraw, and four days later the U.N. levied international sanctions.

Iraq had reason to believe that the U.S. would not object to its invasion of Kuwait, since U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, had told Saddam Hussein that the U.S. had no position on the dispute that his country had with Kuwait. So the green light was given, but it seemed to be more of a trap.

As a part of the public relations strategy to energize the American public into supporting an attack against Iraq the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S. falsely testified before Congress that Iraqi troops were pulling the plugs on incubators in Iraqi hospitals. (1) This contributed to a war frenzy in the U.S.

The U.S. air assault started on January 17, 1991 and it lasted for 42 days. On February 23 President H.W. Bush ordered the U.S. ground assault to begin. The invasion took place with much needless killing of Iraqi military personnel. Only about 150 American military personnel died compared to about 200,000 Iraqis. Some of the Iraqis were mercilessly killed on the Highway of Death and about 400 tons of depleted uranium were left in that nation by the U.S. (2,3)

Other deaths later were from delayed deaths due to wounds, civilians killed, those killed by effects of damage of the Iraqi water treatment facilities and other aspects of its damaged infrastructure and by the sanctions.

In 1995 the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. reported that U.N sanctions against on Iraq had been responsible for the deaths of more than 560,000 children since 1990. (5)

Leslie Stahl on the TV Program 60 Minutes in 1996 mentioned to Madeleine Albright, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And – and you know, is the price worth it?” Albright replied “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think is worth it.” (4)

In 1999 UNICEF reported that 5,000 children died each month as a result of the sanction and the War with the U.S. (6)

Richard Garfield later estimated that the more likely number of excess deaths among children under five years of age from 1990 through March 1998 to be 227,000 – double those of the previous decade. Garfield estimated that the numbers to be 350,000 through 2000 (based in part on result of another study). (7)

However, there are limitations to his study. His figures were not updated for the remaining three years of the sanctions. Also, two other somewhat vulnerable age groups were not studied: young children above the age of five and the elderly.

All of these reports were considerable indicators of massive numbers of deaths which the U.S. was aware of and which was a part of its strategy to cause enough pain and terror among Iraqis to cause them to revolt against their government.

C: Iraq-U.S. War started in 2003 and has not been concluded

Just as the end of the Cold War emboldened the U.S. to attack Iraq in 1991 so the attacks of September 11, 2001 laid the groundwork for the U.S. to launch the current war against Iraq. While in some other wars we learned much later about the lies that were used to deceive us, some of the deceptions that were used to get us into this war became known almost as soon as they were uttered. There were no weapons of mass destruction, we were not trying to promote democracy, we were not trying to save the Iraqi people from a dictator.

The total number of Iraqi deaths that are a result of our current Iraq against Iraq War is 654,000, of which 600,000 are attributed to acts of violence, according to Johns Hopkins researchers. (1,2)

Since these deaths are a result of the U.S. invasion, our leaders must accept responsibility for them.

Israeli-Palestinian War

About 100,000 to 200,000 Israelis and Palestinians, but mostly the latter, have been killed in the struggle between those two groups. The U.S. has been a strong supporter of Israel, providing billions of dollars in aid and supporting its possession of nuclear weapons. (1,2)

Korea, North and South

The Korean War started in 1950 when, according to the Truman administration, North Korea invaded South Korea on June 25th. However, since then another explanation has emerged which maintains that the attack by North Korea came during a time of many border incursions by both sides. South Korea initiated most of the border clashes with North Korea beginning in 1948. The North Korea government claimed that by 1949 the South Korean army committed 2,617 armed incursions. It was a myth that the Soviet Union ordered North Korea to attack South Korea. (1,2)

The U.S. started its attack before a U.N. resolution was passed supporting our nation’s intervention, and our military forces added to the mayhem in the war by introducing the use of napalm. (1)

During the war the bulk of the deaths were South Koreans, North Koreans and Chinese. Four sources give deaths counts ranging from 1.8 to 4.5 million. (3,4,5,6) Another source gives a total of 4 million but does not identify to which nation they belonged. (7)

John H. Kim, a U.S. Army veteran and the Chair of the Korea Committee of Veterans for Peace, stated in an article that during the Korean War “the U.S. Army, Air Force and Navy were directly involved in the killing of about three million civilians – both South and North Koreans – at many locations throughout Korea…It is reported that the U.S. dropped some 650,000 tons of bombs, including 43,000 tons of napalm bombs, during the Korean War.” It is presumed that this total does not include Chinese casualties.

Another source states a total of about 500,000 who were Koreans and presumably only military. (8,9)

Laos

From 1965 to 1973 during the Vietnam War the U.S. dropped over two million tons of bombs on Laos – more than was dropped in WWII by both sides. Over a quarter of the population became refugees. This was later called a “secret war,” since it occurred at the same time as the Vietnam War, but got little press. Hundreds of thousands were killed. Branfman make the only estimate that I am aware of , stating that hundreds of thousands died. This can be interpeted to mean that at least 200,000 died. (1,2,3)

U.S. military intervention in Laos actually began much earlier. A civil war started in the 1950s when the U.S. recruited a force of 40,000 Laotians to oppose the Pathet Lao, a leftist political party that ultimately took power in 1975.

Also See Vietnam

Nepal

Between 8,000 and 12,000 Nepalese have died since a civil war broke out in 1996. The death rate, according to Foreign Policy in Focus, sharply increased with the arrival of almost 8,400 American M-16 submachine guns (950 rpm) and U.S. advisers. Nepal is 85 percent rural and badly in need of land reform. Not surprisingly 42 % of its people live below the poverty level. (1,2)

In 2002, after another civil war erupted, President George W. Bush pushed a bill through Congress authorizing $20 million in military aid to the Nepalese government. (3)

Nicaragua

In 1981 the Sandinistas overthrew the Somoza government in Nicaragua, (1) and until 1990 about 25,000 Nicaraguans were killed in an armed struggle between the Sandinista government and Contra rebels who were formed from the remnants of Somoza’s national government. The use of assassination manuals by the Contras surfaced in 1984. (2,3)

The U.S. supported the victorious government regime by providing covert military aid to the Contras (anti-communist guerillas) starting in November, 1981. But when Congress discovered that the CIA had supervised acts of sabotage in Nicaragua without notifying Congress, it passed the Boland Amendment in 1983 which prohibited the CIA, Defense Department and any other government agency from providing any further covert military assistance. (4)

But ways were found to get around this prohibition. The National Security Council, which was not explicitly covered by the law, raised private and foreign funds for the Contras. In addition, arms were sold to Iran and the proceeds were diverted from those sales to the Contras engaged in the insurgency against the Sandinista government. (5) Finally, the Sandinistas were voted out of office in 1990 by voters who thought that a change in leadership would placate the U.S., which was causing misery to Nicaragua’s citizenry by it support of the Contras.

Pakistan

In 1971 West Pakistan, an authoritarian state supported by the U.S., brutally invaded East Pakistan. The war ended after India, whose economy was staggering after admitting about 10 million refugees, invaded East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and defeated the West Pakistani forces. (1)

Millions of people died during that brutal struggle, referred to by some as genocide committed by West Pakistan. That country had long been an ally of the U.S., starting with $411 million provided to establish its armed forces which spent 80% of its budget on its military. $15 million in arms flowed into W. Pakistan during the war. (2,3,4)

Three sources estimate that 3 million people died and (5,2,6) one source estimates 1.5 million. (3)

Panama

In December, 1989 U.S. troops invaded Panama, ostensibly to arrest Manuel Noriega, that nation’s president. This was an example of the U.S. view that it is the master of the world and can arrest anyone it wants to. For a number of years before that he had worked for the CIA, but fell out of favor partially because he was not an opponent of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. (1) It has been estimated that between 500 and 4,000 people died. (2,3,4)

Paraguay: See South America: Operation Condor

Philippines

The Philippines were under the control of the U.S. for over a hundred years. In about the last 50 to 60 years the U.S. has funded and otherwise helped various Philippine governments which sought to suppress the activities of groups working for the welfare of its people. In 1969 the Symington Committee in the U.S. Congress revealed how war material was sent there for a counter-insurgency campaign. U.S. Special Forces and Marines were active in some combat operations. The estimated number of persons that were executed and disappeared under President Fernando Marcos was over 100,000. (1,2)

South America: Operation Condor

This was a joint operation of 6 despotic South American governments (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay) to share information about their political opponents. An estimated 13,000 people were killed under this plan. (1)

It was established on November 25, 1975 in Chile by an act of the Interamerican Reunion on Military Intelligence. According to U.S. embassy political officer, John Tipton, the CIA and the Chilean Secret Police were working together, although the CIA did not set up the operation to make this collaboration work. Reportedly, it ended in 1983. (2)

On March 6, 2001 the New York Times reported the existence of a recently declassified State Department document revealing that the United States facilitated communications for Operation Condor. (3)

Sudan

Since 1955, when it gained its independence, Sudan has been involved most of the time in a civil war. Until about 2003 approximately 2 million people had been killed. It not known if the death toll in Darfur is part of that total.

Human rights groups have complained that U.S. policies have helped to prolong the Sudanese civil war by supporting efforts to overthrow the central government in Khartoum. In 1999 U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright met with the leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) who said that she offered him food supplies if he would reject a peace plan sponsored by Egypt and Libya.

In 1978 the vastness of Sudan’s oil reservers was discovered and within two years it became the sixth largest recipient of U.S, military aid. It’s reasonable to assume that if the U.S. aid a government to come to power it will feel obligated to give the U.S. part of the oil pie.

A British group, Christian Aid, has accused foreign oil companies of complicity in the depopulation of villages. These companies – not American – receive government protection and in turn allow the government use of its airstrips and roads.

In August 1998 the U.S. bombed Khartoum, Sudan with 75 cruise míssiles. Our government said that the target was a chemical weapons factory owned by Osama bin Laden. Actually, bin Laden was no longer the owner, and the plant had been the sole supplier of pharmaceutical supplies for that poor nation. As a result of the bombing tens of thousands may have died because of the lack of medicines to treat malaria, tuberculosis and other diseases. The U.S. settled a lawsuit filed by the factory’s owner. (1,2)

Uruguay: See South America: Operation Condor

Vietnam

In Vietnam, under an agreement several decades ago, there was supposed to be an election for a unified North and South Vietnam. The U.S. opposed this and supported the Diem government in South Vietnam. In August, 1964 the CIA and others helped fabricate a phony Vietnamese attack on a U.S. ship in the Gulf of Tonkin and this was used as a pretext for greater U.S. involvement in Vietnam. (1)

During that war an American assassination operation,called Operation Phoenix, terrorized the South Vietnamese people, and during the war American troops were responsible in 1968 for the mass slaughter of the people in the village of My Lai.

According to a Vietnamese government statement in 1995 the number of deaths of civilians and military personnel during the Vietnam War was 5.1 million. (2)

Since deaths in Cambodia and Laos were about 2.7 million (See Cambodia and Laos) the estimated total for the Vietnam War is 7.8 million.

The Virtual Truth Commission provides a total for the war of 5 million, (3) and Robert McNamara, former Secretary Defense, according to the New York Times Magazine says that the number of Vietnamese dead is 3.4 million. (4,5)

Yugoslavia

Yugoslavia was a socialist federation of several republics. Since it refused to be closely tied to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it gained some suport from the U.S. But when the Soviet Union dissolved, Yugoslavia’s usefulness to the U.S. ended, and the U.S and Germany worked to convert its socialist economy to a capitalist one by a process primarily of dividing and conquering. There were ethnic and religious differences between various parts of Yugoslavia which were manipulated by the U.S. to cause several wars which resulted in the dissolution of that country.

From the early 1990s until now Yugoslavia split into several independent nations whose lowered income, along with CIA connivance, has made it a pawn in the hands of capitalist countries. (1) The dissolution of Yugoslavia was caused primarily by the U.S. (2)

Here are estimates of some, if not all, of the internal wars in Yugoslavia. All wars: 107,000; (3,4)

Bosnia and Krajina: 250,000; (5) Bosnia: 20,000 to 30,000; (5) Croatia: 15,000; (6) and

Kosovo: 500 to 5,000. (7)

NOTES

Afghanistan

1.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p.135.

2.Chronology of American State Terrorism
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_
terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

3.Soviet War in Afghanistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

4.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.76

5.U.S Involvement in Afghanistan, Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in Afghanistan)

6.The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, Posted at globalresearch.ca 15 October 2001, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

7.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p.5

8.Unknown News, http://www.unknownnews.net/casualtiesw.html

Angola

1.Howard W. French “From Old Files, a New Story of the U.S. Role in the Angolan War” New York Times 3/31/02

2.Angolan Update, American Friends Service Committee FS, 11/1/99 flyer.

3.Norman Solomon, War Made Easy, (John Wiley & Sons, 2005) p. 82-83.

4.Lance Selfa, U.S. Imperialism, A Century of Slaughter, International Socialist Review Issue 7, Spring 1999 (as appears in Third world Traveler www. thirdworldtraveler.com/American_Empire/Century_Imperialism.html)

5. Jeffress Ramsay, Africa , (Dushkin/McGraw Hill Guilford Connecticut), 1997, p. 144-145.

6.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.54.

Argentina : See South America: Operation Condor

Bolivia

1. Phil Gunson, Guardian, 5/6/02,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/archive /article/0,4273,41-07884,00.html

2.Jerry Meldon, Return of Bolilvia’s Drug – Stained Dictator, Consortium,www.consortiumnews.com/archives/story40.html.

Brazil See South America: Operation Condor

Cambodia

1.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/ .

2.David Model, President Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and the Bombing of Cambodia excerpted from the book Lying for Empire How to Commit War Crimes With A Straight Face, Common Courage Press, 2005, paperhttp://thirdworldtraveler.com/American_Empire/Nixon_Cambodia_LFE.html.

3.Noam Chomsky, Chomsky on Cambodia under Pol Pot, etc.,http//zmag.org/forums/chomcambodforum.htm.

Chad

1.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 151-152 .

2.Richard Keeble, Crimes Against Humanity in Chad, Znet/Activism 12/4/06http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=11560&sectionID=1).

Chile

1.Parenti, Michael, The Sword and the Dollar (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1989) p. 56.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 142-143.

3.Moreorless: Heroes and Killers of the 20th Century, Augusto Pinochet Ugarte,

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/pinochet.html

4.Associated Press,Pincohet on 91st Birthday, Takes Responsibility for Regimes’s Abuses, Dayton Daily News 11/26/06

5.Chalmers Johnson, Blowback, The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2000), p. 18.

China: See Korea

Colombia

1.Chronology of American State Terrorism, p.2

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html).

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 163.

3.Millions Killed by Imperialism Washington Post May 6, 2002)http://www.etext.org./Politics/MIM/rail/impkills.html

4.Gabriella Gamini, CIA Set Up Death Squads in Colombia Times Newspapers Limited, Dec. 5, 1996,www.edu/CommunicationsStudies/ben/news/cia/961205.death.html).

5.Virtual Truth Commission, 1991

Human Rights Watch Report: Colombia’s Killer Networks–The Military-Paramilitary Partnership).

Cuba

1.St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture – on Bay of Pigs Invasionhttp://bookrags.com/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion.

2.Wikipedia http://bookrags.com/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion#Casualties.

Democratic Republic of Congo (Formerly Zaire)

1.F. Jeffress Ramsey, Africa (Guilford Connecticut, 1997), p. 85

2. Anup Shaw The Democratic Republic of Congo, 10/31/2003)http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Africa/DRC.asp)

3.Kevin Whitelaw, A Killing in Congo, U. S. News and World Reporthttp://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/patrice.htm

4.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p 158-159.

5.Ibid.,p. 260

6.Ibid.,p. 259

7.Ibid.,p.262

8.David Pickering, “World War in Africa, 6/26/02,
www.9-11peace.org/bulletin.php3

9.William D. Hartung and Bridget Moix, Deadly Legacy; U.S. Arms to Africa and the Congo War, Arms Trade Resource Center, January , 2000www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/congo.htm

Dominican Republic

1.Norman Solomon, (untitled) Baltimore Sun April 26, 2005
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/history/2005/0426spincycle.htm
Intervention Spin Cycle

2.Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Power_Pack

3.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 175.

4.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.26-27.

East Timor

1.Virtual Truth Commission, http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/date4.htm

2.Matthew Jardine, Unraveling Indonesia, Nonviolent Activist, 1997)

3.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

4.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 197.

5.US trained butchers of Timor, The Guardian, London. Cited by The Drudge Report, September 19, 1999. http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/indon.htm

El Salvador

1.Robert T. Buckman, Latin America 2003, (Stryker-Post Publications Baltimore 2003) p. 152-153.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 54-55.

3.El Salvador, Wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Salvador#The_20th_century_and_beyond)

4.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

Grenada

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p. 66-67.

2.Stephen Zunes, The U.S. Invasion of Grenada,http://wwwfpif.org/papers/grenada2003.html .

Guatemala

1.Virtual Truth Commissiion http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

2.Ibid.

3.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.2-13.

4.Robert T. Buckman, Latin America 2003 (Stryker-Post Publications Baltimore 2003) p. 162.

5.Douglas Farah, Papers Show U.S. Role in Guatemalan Abuses, Washington Post Foreign Service, March 11, 1999, A 26

Haiti

1.Francois Duvalier,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Duvalier#Reign_of_terror).

2.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p 87.

3.William Blum, Haiti 1986-1994: Who Will Rid Me of This Turbulent Priest,http://www.doublestandards.org/blum8.html

Honduras

1.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p. 55.

2.Reports by Country: Honduras, Virtual Truth Commissionhttp://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/honduras.htm

3.James A. Lucas, Torture Gets The Silence Treatment, Countercurrents, July 26, 2004.

4.Gary Cohn and Ginger Thompson, Unearthed: Fatal Secrets, Baltimore Sun, reprint of a series that appeared June 11-18, 1995 in Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, School of Assassins, p. 46 Orbis Books 2001.

5.Michael Dobbs, Negroponte’s Time in Honduras at Issue, Washington Post, March 21, 2005

Hungary

1.Edited by Malcolm Byrne, The 1956 Hungarian Revoluiton: A history in Documents November 4, 2002http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB76/index2.htm

2.Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia,
http://www.answers.com/topic/hungarian-revolution-of-1956

Indonesia

1.Virtual Truth Commission http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

2.Editorial, Indonesia’s Killers, The Nation, March 30, 1998.

3.Matthew Jardine, Indonesia Unraveling, Non Violent Activist Sept–Oct, 1997 (Amnesty) 2/7/07.

4.Sison, Jose Maria, Reflections on the 1965 Massacre in Indonesia, p. 5.http://qc.indymedia.org/mail.php?id=5602;

5.Annie Pohlman, Women and the Indonesian Killings of 1965-1966: Gender Variables and Possible Direction for Research, p.4,http://coombs.anu.edu.au/SpecialProj/ASAA/biennial-conference/2004/Pohlman-A-ASAA.pdf

6.Peter Dale Scott, The United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-1967, Pacific Affairs, 58, Summer 1985, pages 239-264.http://www.namebase.org/scott.

7.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.30.

Iran

1.Geoff Simons, Iraq from Sumer to Saddam, 1996, St. Martins Press, NY p. 317.

2.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html.

3.BBC 1988: US Warship Shoots Down Iranian Airlinerhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/default.stm )

Iraq

Iran-Iraq War

1.Michael Dobbs, U.S. Had Key role in Iraq Buildup, Washington Post December 30, 2002, p A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52241-2002Dec29?language=printer

2.Global Security.Org , Iran Iraq War (1980-1980)globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm.

U.S. Iraq War and Sanctions

1.Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time (New York, Thunder’s Mouth), 1994, p.31-32

2.Ibid., p. 52-54

3.Ibid., p. 43

4.Anthony Arnove, Iraq Under Siege, (South End Press Cambridge MA 2000). p. 175.

5.Food and Agricultural Organizaiton, The Children are Dying, 1995 World View Forum, Internationa Action Center, International Relief Association, p. 78

6.Anthony Arnove, Iraq Under Siege, South End Press Cambridge MA 2000. p. 61.

7.David Cortright, A Hard Look at Iraq Sanctions December 3, 2001, The Nation.

U.S-Iraq War 2003-?

1.Jonathan Bor 654,000 Deaths Tied to Iraq War Baltimore Sun , October 11,2006

2.News http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

Israeli-Palestinian War

1.Post-1967 Palestinian & Israeli Deaths from Occupation & Violence May 16, 2006 http://globalavoidablemortality.blogspot.com/2006/05/post-1967-palestinian-israeli-deaths.html)

2.Chronology of American State Terrorism

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

Korea

1.James I. Matray Revisiting Korea: Exposing Myths of the Forgotten War, Korean War Teachers Conference: The Korean War, February 9, 2001http://www.truman/library.org/Korea/matray1.htm

2.William Blum, Killing Hope (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995), p. 46

3.Kanako Tokuno, Chinese Winter Offensive in Korean War – the Debacle of American Strategy, ICE Case Studies Number 186, May, 2006http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/chosin.htm.

4.John G. Stroessinger, Why Nations go to War, (New York; St. Martin’s Press), p. 99)

5.Britannica Concise Encyclopedia, as reported in Answers.comhttp://www.answers.com/topic/Korean-war

6.Exploring the Environment: Korean Enigmawww.cet.edu/ete/modules/korea/kwar.html)

7.S. Brian Wilson, Who are the Real Terrorists? Virtual Truth Commissonhttp://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

8.Korean War Casualty Statistics www.century china.com/history/krwarcost.html)

9.S. Brian Wilson, Documenting U.S. War Crimes in North Korea (Veterans for Peace Newsletter) Spring, 2002) http://www.veteransforpeace.org/

Laos

1.William Blum Rogue State (Maine, Common Cause Press) p. 136

2.Chronology of American State Terrorismhttp://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

3.Fred Branfman, War Crimes in Indochina and our Troubled National Soul

www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/08/00_branfman_us-warcrimes-indochina.htm).

Nepal

1.Conn Hallinan, Nepal & the Bush Administration: Into Thin Air, February 3, 2004

fpif.org/commentary/2004/0402nepal.html.

2.Human Rights Watch, Nepal’s Civil War: the Conflict Resumes, March 2006 )

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/03/28/nepal13078.htm.

3.Wayne Madsen, Possible CIA Hand in the Murder of the Nepal Royal Family, India Independent Media Center, September 25, 2001http://india.indymedia.org/en/2002/09/2190.shtml.

Nicaragua

1.Virtual Truth Commission
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/.

2.Timeline Nicaragua
www.stanford.edu/group/arts/nicaragua/discovery_eng/timeline/).

3.Chronology of American State Terrorism,
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html.

4.William Blum, Nicaragua 1981-1990 Destabilization in Slow Motion

www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Nicaragua_KH.html.

5.Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair.

Pakistan

1.John G. Stoessinger, Why Nations Go to War, (New York: St. Martin’s Press), 1974 pp 157-172.

2.Asad Ismi, A U.S. – Financed Military Dictatorship, The CCPA Monitor, June 2002, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives http://www.policyaltematives.ca)www.ckln.fm/~asadismi/pakistan.html

3.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p.123, 124.

4.Arjum Niaz ,When America Look the Other Way by,

www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=2821&sectionID=1

5.Leo Kuper, Genocide (Yale University Press, 1981), p. 79.

6.Bangladesh Liberation War , Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_War#USA_and_USSR)

Panama

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’s Greatest Hits, (Odonian Press 1998) p. 83.

2.William Blum, Rogue State (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000), p.154.

3.U.S. Military Charged with Mass Murder, The Winds 9/96,www.apfn.org/thewinds/archive/war/a102896b.html

4.Mark Zepezauer, CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1994), p.83.

Paraguay See South America: Operation Condor

Philippines

1.Romeo T. Capulong, A Century of Crimes Against the Filipino People, Presentation, Public Interest Law Center, World Tribunal for Iraq Trial in New York City on August 25,2004.
http://www.peoplejudgebush.org/files/RomeoCapulong.pdf).

2.Roland B. Simbulan The CIA in Manila – Covert Operations and the CIA’s Hidden Hisotry in the Philippines Equipo Nizkor Information – Derechos, derechos.org/nizkor/filipinas/doc/cia.

South America: Operation Condor

1.John Dinges, Pulling Back the Veil on Condor, The Nation, July 24, 2000.

2.Virtual Truth Commission, Telling the Truth for a Better Americawww.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/condor.htm)

3.Operation Condorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor#US_involvement).

Sudan

1.Mark Zepezauer, Boomerang, (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2003), p. 30, 32,34,36.

2.The Black Commentator, Africa Action The Tale of Two Genocides: The Failed US Response to Rwanda and Darfur, 11 August 2006http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091706X.shtml.

Uruguay See South America: Operation Condor

Vietnam

1.Mark Zepezauer, The CIA’S Greatest Hits (Monroe, Maine:Common Courage Press,1994), p 24

2.Casualties – US vs NVA/VC,
http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html.

3.Brian Wilson, Virtual Truth Commission
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/

4.Fred Branfman, U.S. War Crimes in Indochiona and our Duty to Truth August 26, 2004

www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=6105&sectionID=1

5.David K Shipler, Robert McNamara and the Ghosts of Vietnamnytimes.com/library/world/asia/081097vietnam-mcnamara.html

Yugoslavia

1.Sara Flounders, Bosnia Tragedy:The Unknown Role of the Pentagon in NATO in the Balkans (New York: International Action Center) p. 47-75

2.James A. Lucas, Media Disinformation on the War in Yugoslavia: The Dayton Peace Accords Revisited, Global Research, September 7, 2005 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=
viewArticle&code=LUC20050907&articleId=899

3.Yugoslav Wars in 1990s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_wars.

4.George Kenney, The Bosnia Calculation: How Many Have Died? Not nearly as many as some would have you think., NY Times Magazine, April 23, 1995

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/
war_crimes/srebrenica/bosnia_numbers.html
)

5.Chronology of American State Terrorism

http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/
ChronologyofTerror.html.

6.Croatian War of Independence, Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_War_of_Independence

7.Human Rights Watch, New Figures on Civilian Deaths in Kosovo War, (February 7, 2000) http://www.hrw.org/press/2000/02/nato207.htm.

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

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.


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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.

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.

*

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)

Complete COVID-19 Genetic ‘Vaccines’ Science Update

August 16th, 2024 by Dr. Mark Trozzi

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 

5G: “Potential to Transform” or Digital Prison?

August 16th, 2024 by Children’s Health Defense

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.

undefined

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


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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


WWIII ScenarioTowards 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

Sheikh Hasina Speaks Up on US Plot

August 16th, 2024 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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 StateAmbassador Donald Lu (From the Public Domain)

undefined

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. 

 

undefined

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.

1*zy_8n4kQnW61Oyx8n9qeyw.png

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 

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

August 16th, 2024 by Global Research News

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

Fim das negociações após o massacre ucraniano de civis em Kursk.

August 15th, 2024 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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. 

Global Research Daily Newsletter Interruption

August 15th, 2024 by The Global Research Team

To all GR newsletter subscribers:

Please be advised that we are currently resolving an issue with our newsletter platform. In this regard, there will be a temporary pause in the daily newsletter until further notice.

Kindly visit our homepage at globalresearch.ca to stay updated with our news articles and analyses.

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

 

For peace and justice,
The Global Research Team

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

The FBI’s Raid on Peace

August 15th, 2024 by Scott Ritter

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

Power Struggle in Iran After the Assassinations

August 15th, 2024 by Prof. Akbar E. Torbat

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

Bloody Eschatology: Israel and the Next Big War

August 15th, 2024 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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 21st and July 1st 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 11th 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 8th, 1967 to get the US to attack Egypt which was considered a failure but it was the September 11th 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.

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.

Both of them killed a Palestinian. Both were convicted. But neither of them spent even a year in jail

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.

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.

Netanyahu receives standing ovation from US lawmakers despite war crimes in Gaza

 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

We Are the Bad Guys. Craig Murray

August 15th, 2024 by Craig Murray

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

Who Owns America? Oligarchs Have Bought Up the American Dream

August 15th, 2024 by John W. Whitehead

“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 Tokyo Tribunal: Precedent for Victor’s Justice II

August 15th, 2024 by Prof. Bishnu Pathak

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:

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.

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

The Israeli Terrorist State. Craig Murray

August 14th, 2024 by Craig Murray

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

A frente de fogo avança

August 14th, 2024 by Manlio Dinucci

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