With coverage of the Paris Olympics and the novelty of a woman presidential candidate, and her ever provocative rival former President Trump vying for public attention, it will be some time before much CIA-overseen main stream media attention, if any, will revert to modest coverage of the colossal loss of Palestinian life in Gaza and the West Bank. 

Will Any Powerful Global South Media Source Arise in the Meantime to bring public attention… 

– to the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians with U.S. weapons and ammo? – to the Israeli seizure of Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem? – to the generations long  illegal Israeli military occupation of Palestine? – to Israeli ‘right’ to imprison all of Gaza’s population? – to Israeli denial of Palestinian freedom as a nation. 

BBC, Jun 7, 2024 — The UN has added the Israeli military to a list of offenders failing to protect children. 

CNN, June 7, 2024 — UN adds Israel to global list of offenders that harm children

Will the Global South  See the Murderous Nature of the U.S. Gov. in the Many Thousands of Murdered and Maimed Dear Palestinian Children

Quoting from “Gaza genocide enters month 11 as Israel provokes regional war in Palestine” by Maureen Clare Murphy, 08/08/2024, Counter Currents, Kerala, India

The government media office in Gaza says that since the beginning of Israel’s offensive in early October, more than 39,650 fatalities had been received at hospitals, including 16,365 children and more than 11,000 women, indicating that the vast majority of Palestinians killed were civilians. An additional 10,000 people remain missing under the rubble or their bodies not yet recovered from the streets or inaccessible areas.

The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor estimates that at least an additional 51,000 Palestinians have died as a result of Israel’s siege on Gaza and its deliberate collapse of the medical sector in the territory, as well as the widespread destruction of infrastructure and mass displacement of civilians, leading to the spread of disease.

Nearly three dozen hospitals and 68 health centers in Gaza have been knocked out of service due to Israel’s assault. Israel’s military offensive has inflicted $33 billion in “direct initial losses” overall, the government media office added.

After more than 300 days of genocide, the media office said, more than 91,500 people in Gaza had been injured, at least 36 people had starved to death, while nearly 900 medical workers and nearly 80 civil defense members were killed.

That the Israeli military had dropped 82,000 tons of explosives on Gaza, according to the office, destroying homes, universities, schools, mosques, churches, government buildings, sports and recreation facilities, water and hygiene infrastructure, and archaeological and heritage sites.

Meanwhile, Gaza has gone 300 days without electricity, the government media office said on Friday after Israel cut off the supply of power on 7 October and the only power plant in the territory was forced to shut down four days later after running out of fuel.

In what is widely cited as proof of Israel’s genocidal intent, Ghassan Alian, the head of the military body that deals with the civil administration of the occupation, said back in early October that “Israel has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, no electricity, no water, just damage.”

The absence of electricity has prevented the normal operation of vital infrastructure and services for Gaza’s population, which before the war stood at 2.3 million Palestinians. This includes health, water and sanitation facilities, schools, flour mills and bakeries. The resulting environmental catastrophe has allowed for the spread of diseases and the emergence of the highly infectious polio virus and meningitis.

The devilish commander of this living hell, Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, was recently given standing ovations by most of the senators and representatives of a joint session of the U.S. Congress.

About 90 percent of children in Gaza lack nutrition and face “severe” threats to their “survival, growth and development”, according to the United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF.

The petty suppositions and calumny floated from all angles on mainstream media during the usual U.S. TV exaggerated extravaganza of a presidential election will not make the world at large forget the continuing genocidal inhumanity of the governments of U.S.A. and Israel.

Western media presenting U.S.A. election as of paramount importance will not diminish the ever growing outrage over the ghastly extirpation of the children of Gaza as this genocide gains more and more world wide shocking attention shaming the self-centred preoccupation of Americans and Israelis.

Bombing famine malnutrition disease deaths could reach near million proportion by November.

By November will not most all Jewish American voters will feel shame for the monstrous Israeli/U.S. Palestinian genocide.

On the other hand, will anti-semitism play a role in Trump voter turnout?

As he continues to super champion Israel, might Trump not come to realise that he could awake considerably long-standing traditional anti-Jewish fervour inherent within his far right constituency and thus might lessen voter turnout for Trump in November?

Your writer as a 93 year old is able to remember painfully and calculate approximately how many tens of millions of dear children in poor countries have been put to death by the military forces of his American government during his lifetime, always of course excused as not having been accomplished intentionally, but as “collateral damage” even if it is done day after day, year after year for decades past and/or an indeterminate time in the future in Gaza.

*

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 Countercurrents.

Jay Janson is an archival research peoples historian activist,  musician and writer; has lived and worked on all continents; articles on media published in China, Italy, UK, India, in Germany & Sweden Einartysken,and in the US by Greanville Post, Dissident Voice; Global Research; Information Clearing House; Counter Currents; Minority Perspective, UK,and others; now resides in NYC; First effort was a series of articles on deadly cultural pollution endangering seven areas of life emanating from Western corporate owned commercial media published in Hong Kong’s Window Magazine 1993; Howard Zinn lent his name to various projects of his; Weekly column, South China Morning Post, 1986-87; reviews for Ta Kung Bao; article China Daily, 1989. Is coordinator of the Howard Zinn co-founded King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign, and website historian of the Ramsey Clark co-founded Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now Campaign, https://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com/ which contains a history of US crimes in 19 nations from 1945 thru 2012.  

Featured image source

What a wild coincidence: one branch of government (judiciary) doesn’t mind another branch of government (executive) doing whatever it likes extraconstitutionally.

That’s called Democracy™, boys and girls, and it’s sacred. 

Via Reuters (emphasis added):

“Meta Platforms defeated an appeal by Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine group founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., challenging its censorship of Facebook posts that spread misinformation about vaccines’ efficacy and safety.

In a decision on Friday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California, said the nonprofit did not show that Meta worked with or was coerced by federal officials to suppress views challenging “government orthodoxy” on vaccines.

Children’s Health Defense sued in 2020, saying that Meta had violated its constitutional rights by flagging “vaccine misinformation” as false, and taking away its right to advertise on Facebook.”

Not being a legal scholar, I’m sure there’s a good answer to this, but I’m not clear: why would CHD sue Meta and not the government for violating its First Amendment rights, when it was at the government’s behest that Meta acted?

Via Children’s Health Defense (emphasis added):

“CHD’s suit accused the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other federal agencies of “privatizing” the First Amendment by teaming up with Facebook to censor speech which, “under the Bill of Rights, the Government cannot censor.”

According to the lawsuit, filed in August 2020 — and amended in December 2020 — the CDC and the World Health Organization “collaborated closely with Facebook to suppress vaccine safety speech by using a ‘warning label’ and other similar types of notices which, while purporting to flag misinformation, in reality censor valid and truthful speech, including content posted by plaintiff on its Facebook page regarding vaccines.”

This collaboration amounted to “state action” and was in violation of the First Amendment, CHD said…

The court… ruled that CHD failed to allege any facts that would suggest an agreement between the government and Meta that “required Meta to take a particular action in response to misinformation about vaccines or that the government coerced Meta into implementing a specific policy.””

I must have skipped the day in Constitution Law at Valdosta State University when we learned that the Constitution carves out special powers for the government to interfere in a private company’s affairs in order to cajole them into suppressing speech it finds distasteful. My mistaken impression was that the First Amendment covered that whole issue pretty decisively.

Maybe it’s the ambiguous  “promoting the general welfare” clause, which has been invoked in all manner of absurd government social engineering over the years.

These are not two people “talking to each other.” This is one entity — the government — with immense power to regulate, tax, and even shut down the other entity — Meta — if it doesn’t go with the program a la TikTok.

And Meta is massively exposed in multiple ways: it turns over private user data to shady third parties for cash; it breaches anti-trust laws; it colludes with hostile foreign governments, to name a few. Were the government so inclined, it could flush Meta down the memory hole into oblivion in a heartbeat.

But, this being anarcho-tyranny, it doesn’t, because Meta heels when it’s commanded to heel. Mark Zuckerberg is a good boy who behaves himself for his masters.

*

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 Shutterstock/mundissima

The problem is systemic and due to Serbia’s “national model of democracy” that’s taken root under Aleksandar Vucic during his decade in power as Prime Minister and now President.

The so-called “Bulldozer Revolution” that toppled the erstwhile Yugoslavia’s Slobodan Milosevic in 2000 is considered to be the first Color Revolution even though the concept of weaponized protests predates that drama. It’s for that reason why observers, especially those who support the emerging Multipolar World Order, take claims of another Color Revolution there very seriously. Such was the case over the past week after a Serbian newspaper warned about the opposition’s plot to seize power on Saturday:

“In the last phase of the plan for August 10, the organizers of the protest, if they think that there are enough people in the crowd that ready to resort to violence, will call on protesters to suddenly move toward the presidential palace and, amid unrest, attempt to capture and then assassinate President Vucic.

If they succeed, they will start a campaign of unprecedented proportions through their own media and friendly foreign media, with the aim to show that the assassination was a result of a spontaneous expression of general popular discontent and not an act of organized crime by the opposition and foreigners.

As their ‘reasoning,’ they will use the narrative that the so-called environmental protests were a genuine popular uprising from the beginning, even though so far we have seen and documented countless examples that almost all protests were organized by opposition parties and their satellites.”

Their article was followed the day after by President Aleksandar Vucic telling reporters that Russia passed along intelligence about an impending coup, thus lending credence to this scenario. Earlier that week, Bangladesh’s long-serving Prime Minister was deposed in its own Color Revolution that readers can learn more about here, so observers braced for the worst in Serbia. Although that didn’t transpire, the authorities still claimed that Saturday’s protest followed “the scenario of Color Revolutions”:

“The Serbian Ministry of Interior reports that after the end of protests on Terazije Square, serious violations of public order and law were committed. The organizers and instigators were warned by the police both before and during the protest that their actions were against the law. All those who committed crimes and misdemeanors will be prosecuted.”

What’s missing from their report is the fact that there’s genuine patriotic furor over Serbia’s deal with the German-led EU last month to restore Rio Tinto’s license to extract lithium from the country after it was rescinded in 2022 under popular pressure. President of the Srebrenica Historical Project Stefan Karganovic wrote about this in early July in his analysis for the Strategic Culture Foundation titled “The Lithium cabal defeated in Bolivia, but winning in Serbia.”

He lambasted the Serbian government’s corrupt practices and disregard for the people’s welfare with this deal, which many believe to be economically unfair and fraught with potentially devastating environmental consequences, warning that nationwide protests might follow. There had been two other large-scale protest movements in the past year over gun violence and alleged electoral irregularities, which were analyzed in these two pieces at the time:

• 7 June 2023: “Serbia’s Anti-Government Protesters Are A Mix Of Color Revolutionaries & Patriots”
• 25 December 2023: “The West Isn’t Content With Vucic’s Many Concessions And Wants Full Control Over Serbia”

To summarize, the first drew attention to how patriotic groups participated in last summer’s unrest in order to raise awareness of their concerns that the government is buckling under Western pressure on Russia and Kosovo. Although Serbia hasn’t sanctioned Russia, it voted against it at the UNGA and Vucic expressed a nonchalant attitude towards Serbian arms being funneled to Ukraine. As regards Kosovo, his government doesn’t formally recognize it, but certain moves in the past suggested informal recognition.

Regarding the second analysis, its content is self-explanatory: the West always wants more from its partners, who it treats as vassals, and considers each of their concessions to be a step closer to the goal of full control instead of compromises made under duress out of desperation to relieve pressure. In the Serbian case, they want Vucic to sanction Russia, openly transfer arms to Ukraine, and formally recognize Kosovo, none of which he can do though without risking a patriotic revolt.

This insight places the latest events into context. The Rio Tinto deal served as the trigger event for politically mobilizing a broad swath of anti-government activists, which includes bonafide Western assets, legitimate patriotic forces, and average citizens, each in advance of their own agenda. The involvement of the aforesaid assets suggested that their patrons might try to carry out a Color Revolution, hence Russia’s warning, but not all of the protesters were Color Revolutionaries.

Therein lies the crux though since Color Revolutionaries rely on the participation of other people in order to exploit them as de facto “human shields” behind which the rioters can hide for deterring the state from using forcible measures for restoring order as they try to seize control of the state. At the same time, despite being aware of these mechanisms given the “Bulldozer Revolution” from nearly one-quarter of a century ago, legitimate patriotic forces and average citizens still spilled into the streets.

They didn’t do this to aid the Color Revolutionaries but to make the point that they won’t let a few rotten apples spoil the whole batch and discredit anti-government protests in principle. About that, some have suspected that the government hypes up Color Revolution threats in order to pressure people from participating in protests, which then facilitates their alleged electoral irregularity schemes. After all, speculative rigging is easier to pull off if there aren’t frequent anti-government protests.

In any case, there wouldn’t have been any large-scale protests over the weekend had Serbia not restored Rio Tinto’s lithium extraction license, the decision of which will now be briefly analyzed. Depending on one’s perspective, it was either done with noble intentions, as part of some corrupt pact, or was yet another compromise made under duress out of desperation to relieve Western pressure. Whatever the motive may be, it brought Color Revolutionaries and legitimate patriotic forces alike into the streets.

It’s for this reason that observers can conclude that the Serbian government is inadvertently responsible for the latest Color Revolution intrigue since there wouldn’t have been any protests on Saturday had it not been for clinching that controversial deal last month. By doing so, the state created its own trigger event for politically mobilizing a broad swath of anti-government activists, within which were bonafide Western assets whose participation was hyped up to discredit everyone else’s.

Color Revolutionaries will take advantage of any cause to push their agenda, even patriotic and environmental ones, but that doesn’t mean that legitimate patriotic forces, environmental activists, and average citizens are all part of a foreign regime change plot. The reason why Serbia appears to regularly be on the brink of a Color Revolution is because there aren’t many – some would even that there aren’t any – viable pressure valves that people can resort to for channeling their frustrations with the state.

Protests are seen by some as the only form available for drawing attention to their concerns since most private media is either de facto controlled by the state or the West. Those Serbs who have no regime change intentions and just want to make the state aware of how upset they are with some of its policies can therefore only do so through mass demonstrations that are always at risk of being hijacked by Color Revolutionaries. This in turn creates a self-sustaining cycle of mutual mistrust and political escalation.

The problem is systemic and due to Serbia’s “national model of democracy” that’s taken root under Vucic during his decade in power as Prime Minister and now President. By fearmongering that every protest is a Color Revolution plot and depriving his people of viable pressure valves for channeling their frustrations, he brought a lot of this upon himself and risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Unless this changes, Serbia will always appear (whether rightly or not) to be on the brink of another regime change.

*

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 source

Die Eltern werden gezwungen, die dafür erforderlichen Dokumente herauszugeben. Bereits vor einem Jahr wurde die Tochter – damals 15 – gerichtlich von den Eltern getrennt.

Begonnen hatte das Drama 2021, als die damals 13-jährige Tochter im Zusammenhang mit psychischen Schwierigkeiten am Ende der Pandemie äusserte, ihre Geschlechtsidentität sei männlich.

Die Eltern schickten sie in psychotherapeutische Behandlung. «Aber die Schule führte gemeinsam mit dem Jugendamt und sowie der staatlich finanzierten Transgender-Lobbyorganisation Le Refuge gegen den ausdrücklichen Willen eine ‹soziale Transition› durch», wie die «Alliance Defending Freedom International» (ADF) schreibt. Die Tochter erhielt einen neuen Namen, männliche Pronomen und wurde als Junge behandelt.

Nachdem die Eltern den ärztlich angeordneten Einsatz von Pubertätsblockern ablehnten, wurde ihnen im April 2023 die Tochter per Gerichtsentscheid weggenommen und in einem Heim untergebracht. Sie bliebt aber offensichtlich unter dem Einfluss von Le Refuge, nach eigener Darstellung eine «Anlaufstelle für LGBTIQ+ Jugendliche in Schwierigkeiten», die u.a. vom Bundesamt für Gesundheit und vom Kanton Genf finanziell unterstützt wird.

Heute, mit 16 Jahren will die Tochter offenbar die Geschlechtsumwandlung vornehmen. Damit sie vollzogen werden kann, sind Ausweise nötig, zu deren Herausgabe die Eltern nun vom Berufungsgericht des Kantons Genf gezwungen werden.

Gemäss Artikel 30b des Schweizerischen Zivilgesetzbuchs ist die Zustimmung des gesetzlichen Vertreters für eine Geschlechtsumwandlung nicht erforderlich, wenn die betreffende Person das 16. Altersjahr vollendet hat. Die Entscheidung über die eigene Identität sei ein rein persönliches Recht, das der Tochter zugestanden werden müsse, argumentierte das Gericht.

Gemäss ADF hielt dem die Verteidigung der Eltern entgegen, dass die langfristigen gesundheitlichen Folgen einer „Transition“ von einem Teenager mit psychischen Problemen nicht eingeschätzt werden könnten. Dieser Umstand hätte nach geltendem Recht in Betracht gezogen werden können.

Felix Böllmann, deutscher Anwalt und bei ADF International für den Fall verantwortlich, sagte:

«Das Gericht sollte das Kindeswohl und die Rechte der Eltern hochhalten, statt mit ideologischen Konzepten Kinder und Eltern auseinanderzureissen. Die Schweizer Behörden sollten lieber einen Blick nach UK wagen, wo das Höchstgericht das Verbot von Pubertätsblockern gerade bestätigt hat. Die Schweiz sollte dem britischen Vorbild folgen: Kindeswohl und Elternrechte haben Vorrang.“

Die Eltern erwägen einen Weiterzug an das Bundesgericht.

Ein skandalöser Fall. Im Hintergrund steht die Ideologie, dass das Geschlecht nicht mehr durch die Biologie bestimmt wird, sondern durch eine gefühlsmässige Selbstwahrnehmung, die man dann durch medizinische Eingriffe zur biologischen Realität machen will. Dass das keine gute Idee ist, zeigt eine Studie aus Dänemark von 2023, die erste landesweite ihrer Art. Resultat:

Transgender-Personen versuchen sich achtmal häufiger das Leben zu nehmen als Nichttransgender-Personen, vollendete Selbstmorde sind dreieinhalb mal häufiger. Das wäre doch wieder einmal ein Stück Wissenschaft, das man ernst nehmen sollte.

Quellen:

ADF Int.: Schweizer Gericht verurteilt Eltern zur Herausgabe von Personalausweis für rechtlichen „Geschlechtswechsel“ der 16-jährigen Tochter. 31.7.2024

ADF Int. (youtube): Parents lose daughter to trans ideology: “They took our daughter away”

Infosperber: Die unerwünschten Folgen einer Geschlechtsumwandlung. 30.8.2023

NZZ: Immer mehr Mädchen wollen Jungen sein – und Ärzte geben dem Transgender-Trend trotz Risiken nach. 5.11.2020

Emma: England verbietet Pubertätsblocker. 14.3.2024

Univadis: Stark erhöhte Rate an Suizid-Versuchen unter Transgender-Personen. 29.7.2024

Introduction

This case describes a crime imposed upon the world by the international WOKE agenda, which is against all common laws, superseded by the so-called Rules-based Order — or better, the Rules-based Disorder, made up by a small ultra-wealthy elite, self-declared rulers of the world.

The story is a concrete case happening right on the doorsteps of the Swiss citizenry, but hardly anyone knows about it. The mainstream media does not regularly cover it.

The Swiss Court is citing Article 30b of the Swiss Civil Code, according to which gender changes for persons age 16 and above, do no longer require parental approval.

However, what this Article 30b does not cover is that the LGBTIQ+ propaganda in public schools started at least three years earlier, when the girl was a mere 13 years old, certainly an illegal move, either coming down from the highest level of the Swiss Government, or tolerated by it.

This Woke Agenda is playing out throughout Europe, the United States and the Western world in general.

Why? Is it because Queers and transgender people do not have children?

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Great Reset, as well as the Club of Rome, headquartered in Winterthur Switzerland, outlined in its first infamous report, “Limits to Growth” (1972) that the world is overpopulated and requires a massive population reduction.

See this recent video (also below) by one of the original authors of Limits to Growth – Dennis Meadows, who is also a member of the WEF.

Since this topic is scarcely covered by the media, this concrete case should be brought to international attention, so that citizens of the world may identify with their own cases and resist.

—Peter Koenig, 12 August 2024

***

Geneva court: parents may not prevent sex change for their 16-year-old daughter

By Christoph Pfluger, 4 August 2024, translated from German

The parents are forced to hand over the necessary documents. A year ago, the daughter – then 15 – was separated from her parents by court order.

The drama began in 2021 when the then 13-year-old daughter expressed that her gender identity was male. This, in connection with psychological difficulties at the end of the pandemic.

The parents sent her to psychotherapy. “But the school, together with the youth welfare office and the state-funded transgender lobby organization Le Refuge, carried out a ‘social transition’ against the expressed wishes of her parents.” So, writes the Alliance Defending Freedom International (ADF). The daughter was given a new name, male pronouns and was treated as a boy.

After the parents refused the medically prescribed use of puberty blockers, their daughter was taken away from them by court order in April 2023 and placed in a home. However, she apparently remained under the influence of Le Refuge, a “drop-in center for LGBTIQ+ young people in difficulty”, which is financially supported by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health and the Canton of Geneva, among others.

Today, at the age of 16, her daughter apparently wants to undergo gender reassignment surgery. For it to be carried out, identification documents are required, which the parents are now being forced to hand over by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Geneva.

According to Article 30b of the Swiss Civil Code, the consent of the legal representative is not required for a gender reassignment if the person concerned has reached the age of 16. The court argued that the decision about one’s own identity is a purely personal right that must be granted to the daughter.

According to the ADF, the parents’ defense countered that the long-term health consequences of a “transition” could not be assessed by a teenager with mental health problems. This circumstance could have been taken into consideration under the applicable law.

Felix Böllmann, German lawyer and responsible for the case at ADF International, said:

“The court should uphold the best interests of the child and the rights of the parents instead of using ideological concepts to tear children and parents apart. The Swiss authorities would do better to look to the UK, where the Supreme Court has just upheld the ban on puberty blockers. Switzerland should follow the British example: Child welfare and parental rights take precedence.”

The parents are considering an appeal to the Federal Supreme Court.

A scandalous case. In the background is the ideology that gender is no longer determined by biology, but by an emotional self-perception, which is then to be turned into a biological reality through medical interventions. A study from Denmark in 2023, the first nationwide study of its kind, shows that this is not a good idea.

Results of the study show that transgender people are eight times more likely attempting to take their own lives than non-transgender people, and completed suicides are three and a half times more common. Once again, that would be a piece of science that should be taken seriously.

Sources (in German – for the links see link to German article, at beginning of this English version):

ADF Int: Swiss court orders parents to hand over ID card for 16-year-old daughter’s legal “gender change”. 31.7.2024

ADF Int (youtube): Parents lose daughter to trans ideology: “They took our daughter away”

Infosperber: The undesirable consequences of gender reassignment. 30.8.2023

NZZ: More and more girls want to be boys – and doctors are giving in to the transgender trend despite the risks. 5.11.2020

Emma: England bans puberty blockers. 14.3.2024

Univadis: Highly increased rate of suicide attempts among transgender people. 29.7.2024

*

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

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary 

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 lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

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: © KEYSTONE / PETER SCHNEIDER

The day after the ruling elites of the EU elected pro-Israel Ursula Von der Leyen as President of the European Commission, the International Court of Justice ruled that the occupation of Palestine is illegal. There has been almost no coverage of this historic ruling by the western media. 

In December 2022 the 193 countries of United Nations general assembly agreed to ask the International Court of Justice (ICJ) two questions: 

1. To give its opinion on the policies and practices of Israel towards Palestinians. 

2. The legal status of occupation of the Palestinian territories. 

A record number of countries, over 50, intervened on behalf of Palestine in this case and made arguments at the ICJ. Israel’s backers, the United States, Britain, Germany, Canada, Australia and others voted against it and argued for the court to drop the case. The ICJ rejected their arguments. 

On the 19^th of July 2024 the court gave their opinion, that the ICJ: 

1. Is of the opinion that the State of Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful; 

2. Is of the opinion that the State of Israel is under an obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as rapidly as possible; 

3. Is of the opinion that the State of Israel is under an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers from the Occupied Palestinian Territory; 

4. Is of the opinion that the State of Israel has the obligation to make reparations for the damage caused to all the natural or legal persons concerned in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; 

5. Is of the opinion that all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the continued presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; 

6. Is of the opinion that international organizations, including the United Nations, are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; 

7. Is of the opinion that the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly, which requested this opinion, and the Security Council, should consider the precise modalities and further action required to bring to an end as rapidly as possible the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. 

Israelis have built 160,000 illegal settlements housing 700,000 people in The West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967. 

All countries now are obliged under international law to stop all relations with Israel, no trade, no aid, no complicity, no arms, no assistance of any kind, no money, no actions of any kind to support Israel’s illegal occupation, apartheid and genocide against the Palestinian people. 

A resolution reflecting this will now be put forward at the UN general assembly.   

This is a historic step towards Justice, everything Palestinians have been saying for decades has just been enshrined in law at the highest level. Under international law, Israel does not have a right of “self-defence” against a territory that it occupies and, more than that, people in the occupied territory in Gaza have the right of armed resistance against their occupier. Israel’s propaganda and lies are no more, the ICJ has exposed Israel for what it is, a genocidal apartheid state propped up by EU, US and British Imperialism. 

Palestinian officials have hailed the International Court of Justice ruling as a “watershed moment” in their decades-long fight for justice. Israel quickly condemned Friday’s decision, while its top ally the United States also criticised it. 

The day after the ruling Israel bombed three countries – Yemen, Lebanon and Palestine – killing and maiming many civilians. The genocidal ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people continues and is barely reported by the complicit western media. 

Nothing is going to change without people of the world uniting to put pressure on governments to act and to force Boycott, Divestment and Sanction on Israel until this illegal occupation and slaughter ends. The old world is dying and a new one struggles to be born. 

Don’t stop talking about Palestine!   

*

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 a UN Photo / licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

While the eyes of the world is focused on the Israeli genocide on Gaza, Sudan is facing an unprecedented humanitarian crisis as widespread hunger and malnutrition plague the nation. The Sudan starvation crisis emerged as a direct consequence of armed conflict. There is a need for immediate international intervention to stop the starvation of millions in Sudan.

There are more than nine million people across 18 states of Sudan that are facing food shortages that have caused malnutrition and death. More than 800,000 of those are at risk of immediate starvation.

According to an analysis by Save the Children, some 16.4 million children, or three in every four in the country, are now facing  ‘crisis’, ’emergency’ or ‘catastrophe’ levels of hunger – up from 8.3 million just last December.

The United Nations reported that there are more than 10 million people who have been displaced in Sudan since the conflict began in April 2023 and nearly 25 million people are in need of aid, according to the UN.

A screengrab from VOA’s Number of Refugees Who Fled Sudan for Chad Double in Week. This is a refugee camp in Chad. (From the Public Domain)

Escalating Conflict and Displacement

The Sudanese conflict started in April 2023 between the Sudanese army under Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), led by his former deputy, Mohamed Hamdan Daglo. Sudan’s army suggested to the RSF to unite and form one national army, but General Mohamed Hamdan Daglo “Hemedti” refused and started attacking Sudan’s army.

Sudan has been bearing the brunt of political instability for decades. Internal conflicts, fueled by ethnic tensions, political power struggles, and resource disparities, have created an environment of violence and insecurity. By 2024, these factors reached a boiling point, resulting in widespread displacement of communities, disruption of agricultural activities, and destruction of vital infrastructure. As a consequence, access to food, clean water, and healthcare services significantly diminished, pushing the nation further down a path of starvation.

The Two Sides of the Conflict of Sudan

General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as “Hemedti”, is the leader of  RSF.  He came to prominence as the deputy leader of a transitional council launched after former strongman Omar al-Bashir was overthrown in 2019. Dagalo was born around 1974 into the Mahariya tribe of the Rizeigat community in Darfur, the nephew of a tribal chief in the camel-trading branch of the Rizeigat. According to human rights groups have accused the Janjaweed of war crimes – including killings, rapes and torture of civilians – throughout the conflict in Darfur.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said doctors and nurses have been killed and wounded, and many health facilities have been damaged by shelling and airstrikes since the conflict broke out in mid-April last year.

The first appearance of the RSF was in 2013 under Dagalo’s leadership. It combined elements of the Janjaweed into a new force under the auspices of al-Bashir and his National Intelligence and Security Services.

Abdel Fattah al-Burhan

Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan is known to be a powerful military commander who has for years been a de facto leader of the African nation. Little known before 2019, General al-Burhan rose to power in the tumultuous aftermath of the military-led coup that ousted Omar Hassan al-Bashir, the authoritarian leader who was deposed after popular uprisings in 2019.

Economic Instability and Food Inflation

The Sudanese economy has been marred by mismanagement, corruption, and the effects of economic sanctions, resulting in skyrocketing inflation and a depreciating currency. High food prices have pushed a significant portion of the population into extreme poverty, making it even harder for them to secure adequate nutrition. Basic commodities, including grains and meat, have become unaffordable for the majority of the Sudanese people, pushing them further into the grip of starvation.

According to Sudanese economical experts, the Sudanese pound continues to collapse  against foreign currencies, exacerbating the financial strain on millions of Sudanese who have lost most of their income due to the ongoing conflict. The Sudanese national bank  “Bank of Khartoum” offered to buy dollars at 1,860 pounds and sell them at 1,873 pounds while offering the Saudi riyal for purchase at 501.49 pounds and selling it at 505.25 pounds.

Economic expert Mohamed Al-Nayer told the media that while a decline in the national currency is expected during the war, the government’s inaction in addressing the issue is concerning. Al-Nayer urged authorities to implement measures to halt the currency’s deterioration, such as withdrawing large pound denominations from circulation, restricting luxury imports, boosting exports, rationalizing public spending, and increasing revenue. Mohamed Al-Nayer highlighted that 95% of the money supply being held by the public contributes to the imbalance that fuels the parallel currency market, necessitating urgent intervention.

Health Crisis in Sudan 

Because of the conflict there is More than 70% of health facilities in conflict-affected regions are inoperable or closed. Disease outbreaks, including measles and cholera, are rampant, with the number of suspected cholera cases surpassing 11,000 as of May 2024.

Food Insecurity 

18 million people are experiencing severe levels of acute food insecurity, with 5 million at risk of catastrophic hunger. High rates of malnutrition, a debilitated health system, and low levels of immunization exacerbate the crisis.

The Urgent Need for International Intervention

While the Sudanese government has made efforts to address the growing crisis, the scale and complexity of the situation require immediate international support. The international community must step up efforts to provide humanitarian aid, including food supplies, clean water, and medical resources. Furthermore, long-term investments are crucial to rebuilding Sudan’s agriculture and infrastructure, promoting sustainable livelihoods, and improving climate resilience.

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) is on the ground, providing vital support through economic empowerment services, health and nutrition programs, water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services, and protection and empowerment services for women and children. 

A Sudanese woman, age 46, who escaped from the conflict said that her and her  nine children had to flee their home in Khartoum. Now in Gedaref, they face the challenge of living in temporary housing with limited protection from weather conditions.

Collaborative Efforts and Sustainable Solutions

Sudan’s rival groups have arrived in Geneva after the United Nations invited them  discuss the protection of civilians through possible local ceasefires, UN officials said Thursday. But one side did not show up for the talks on the first day. 

The talks come on the back of two UN Security Council resolutions on Sudan passed earlier this year.

“The focus is based on the resolutions: measures to be undertaken to ensure the distribution of humanitarian assistance to all the Sudanese population in need, and options to ensure the protection of civilians across Sudan,” said Mr. Vellucci, the UN envoy to Sudan.

The conflict in Sudan is not something new. For decades they have been suffering conflicts, starvation, political unrest, and climate change challenges, but because of racism many don’t care about the suffering of the African people in general, and the Sudanese people.     

The 2024 Sudan starvation crisis  paints a grim picture of a nation battling multiple fronts—a complex interplay of armed conflict, economic instability, climate change, and shattered infrastructure. The international community must recognize the urgency of the situation and extend immediate support to alleviate the suffering of millions. Empowering the Sudanese people, aiding in agriculture and economic stability, and promoting sustainable practices will be crucial in building a brighter and more resilient future for Sudan. Let us unite in our efforts to combat starvation and ensure that Sudan’s citizens are not forgotten. 

*

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

Over the course of my life I have watched interest in ideas die. Ideas have been replaced by agendas, and emotion has taken the place of reason.

American political campaigns have always been burdened with mudslinging and misrepresentations, but I can remember when presidential campaigns also involved contrasting ideas about domestic and foreign policies. The issues might have been false ones, like John F. Kennedy’s “missile gap,” but candidates were supposed to have some idea of issues at home and abroad and how to deal with them.

In the current presidential campaign the Democrats’ main issue is that Trump is a dictator who will destroy democracy. This from a Democrat regime that has turned law into a weapon against political candidates such as Trump who is currently fighting four felony indictments and as many civil indictments in the midst of the presidential campaign. Clearly, the Democrat Department of Justice (sic) and the Democrat New York attorney general are using law to interfere in the election. All of this is underway while one of the Democrats’ indictments of Trump is that he interfered in an election by the way he reported a business expense. The corrupt Democrat judge presiding over this farce intends to sentence Trump next month.

The double standards are extraordinary and go far beyond mere mudslinging. We are watching the party in power use the police powers of the state in an effort to control the outcome of an election. As for the Democrats’ commitment to democracy, how strong is this commitment when some of them are saying that they will not accept the election outcome if Trump wins? Doesn’t this make them “January 6 insurrectionists”?

Once you start thinking, you will understand how deplorable our situation is.

I started writing in the 1960s. In the 1960s and first half of the 1970s my writings were mainly in scholarly journals, such as Classica et Mediaevalia, Journal of Political Economy, Journal of Law and Economics, Oxford Economic Papers, Southern Economic Journal, Public Choice, Ethics, Slavic Review, Soviet Studies, and so on. But once I entered the public policy arena my podiums were the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, The Scripps Howard News Service, Creators Syndicate. Afterwards, I returned to scholarly publication with books published by Oxford University Press, Harvard University Press, and articles in journals of monetary economics and scholarly economic journals in Germany and Italy. Subsequently my dozen books have been published in ten languages.

All of this happened because there was interest in ideas. The innovative and dissident ideas that I introduced attracted both supporters and opponents. Today no such thing could happen.

Scholarly journals today are about money, promotion, and advancing the agenda of one’s supporters who provide the research grants. The wide variety of magazines and quarterlies in which ideas and debates flourished have disappeared. Several years ago Ron Unz catalogued online the past issues of the defunct but once abundant publications in which issues were raised and discussed. Two decades ago a friend of mine, a distinguished attorney, complained to me that there is no longer anything to read.

I think it was in the last years of the Clinton regime that ideas began losing ground to agendas. As agendas are independent of truth, the importance of truth declined. Today truth is irrelevant to the media, and I think as well to much of scholarship. Once we spoke of the power of ideas. Now we speak of the power of agendas. As President George W. Bush put it, “you are with us or against us.”

Today it is not only the CIA, FBI, the State Department, and AIPAC who sponsor “fact-checkers” to protect their narratives from the truth, but also corporations and left-wing organizations. The Constitution’s guarantee of free speech notwithstanding, the easiest and most certain way to get into trouble in the US, Canada, UK, and Europe is to tell the truth. Witness the current federal police state attacks on Tulsi Gabbard, Scott Ritter and Donald Trump. If such high profile people can be threatened, anyone can.

Today there are so many governmental agencies, so many advertisers, so many employers that can bring troubles to people and publications that step on their feet. Remember, the editors of the two most prestigious medical journals, The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet said that they had no confidence in the articles they published because 70% of them were written with Big Pharma research grants. Displease your sponsor, and there go your research grants and career.

Once money entered elections, later sanctified by the Supreme Court, it brought the end of any accountability of government to the people. It used to be that votes were bought for 50 cents and a half pint of whiskey. Today it is done differently. For example: see this.

Or they just steal elections by removing or violating safeguards intended to protect the integrity of election outcomes, or they vote illegals.

How can a system be reformed that is so corrupt that so many people and institutions and so much power are dependent on the corruption?

Today when liberal-left Democrats call for the assassination of a presidential candidate out of fear that democracy will elect a leader with a different agenda than theirs, where is the comity required for intelligent debate? Without intelligent debate, how does democracy function?

The Soviet Union collapsed as a result of developments that came from President Gorbachev’s arrest by hardline elements of the Soviet Politburo who were suspicious of Gorbachev’s openings to the West. It was unfortunate, because it removed the constraint on Washington’s unilateralism. The American neoconservatives quickly seized the initiative and declared a policy of US hegemony over the world. The pursuit of this policy has created three formidable and dangerous opponents–Russia, China, and Iran–that Washington is pushing into war with the West.

There are very few Americans who speak out about the unfolding events. Scott Ritter is one of them. John Mearsheimer is one of them. I am one of them. Instead of the Council on Foreign Relations sponsoring a debate between Ritter and an opponent, the American police state seizes Ritter and removes him from an airliner, confiscates his passport, and sends the FBI to raid his home. If Ritter is so wrong and so dangerous, why not allow a debate to bring that out? Suppression and intimidation are the tools of a police state that knows it is wrong and cannot survive expression of the truth.

If people cannot speak outside the official narrative, how do we avoid catastrophic nuclear war that can easily destroy life on earth? Just give a moment to thinking how dependent you are on going to a grocery store, a gasoline station, a doctor’s office for your needs. What do you do, assuming you are still here, when they are not here, when there are no supply chains?

In Washington and throughout the Western world war is now more important than survival. Washington regards people who seek understanding with concocted “enemies” as more dangerous than nuclear war. Washington has all of the European leaders speaking of the need to prepare for war with Russia.

The last thing the West needs is war with Russia as it means the termination of the West. How is it possible that people who challenge this insanity are labeled “Russian agents,” “threats to democracy,” yanked off airliners, and investigated? Doesn’t anyone understand what this means? Are the Western leaders themselves as brainwashed and indoctrinated as their populations?

Perhaps the most disappointing of all peoples in this scenario that is playing out are the American conservatives, the flag wavers who cannot believe anything bad about their country. They dismiss critics as “America-haters,” and tell them to “love it or leave it.” “USA, USA, USA!”

The picture I have presented is merely the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more. There is the enormous US debt, on a per capita basis double that of the most indebted European countries and many times larger than Russia. As long as the US treasury debt serves as reserves of foreign central banks, the US debt can be financed. But sanctions and mindless weaponization of the US dollar have caused a move away from US Treasury debt as central bank reserves. A declining use of the dollar means that the dollar’s value will decline. As the US produces abroad in other currencies a large percentage of the goods and services that it consumes, massive US inflation will be the consequence. We will be like Germany in the 1920s when people went to the grocery store with wheelbarrows of bank notes to purchase a loaf of bread.

The strictly unconstitutional DEI policy imposed by force by the Biden regime has marginalized white people, especially heterosexual white males. The majority population has been demonized and their paths to upward mobility blocked. Unless they are completely stupid, they must wonder what allegiance they owe to Washington.

While Washington concerns itself with Ukraine’s borders it intentionally leaves its own borders wide open. Every year the official account, most likely understated, is that 3.6 million immigrant-invaders enter and overwhelm the cities to which they are assigned with expenses that cannot be met. Native born Americans no longer recognize the country that they live in.

The deceit about the Covid vax and the banning of the effective treatments–Ivermectin and HCQ–have caused widespread mistrust in the medical establishment, which lied through its teeth. Here we have another severe breakdown in Americans’ trust of major institutions.

Indeed, I am unable to identify a single American institution that is worthy of trust. Can you? What does it mean that a people who live in a country cannot trust a single institution? It means that the country in which they live no longer exists.

Americans do not yet realize it, but they soon will. They live in a geographical area that can be held together and ruled by nothing but force. The US Constitution is a dead letter document. Democracy is a joke. There is no accountability of government at any level. Truth is a threat to the ruling elite and every material interest that accommodates elite rule. There is no protection against the exercise of raw power against an American citizen. Just ask Donald Trump, Tulsi Gabbard, Scott Ritter and a large number of others.

The prospect we as a people face is that the 2024 election will again be stolen as were the 2020 and 2022 elections. Just as the American people acquiesced to the 2020 and 2022 thefts, they will acquiesce to the 2024 theft and enter into a life under tyranny with catastrophic war looming ever nearer.

*

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 

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

In February, Ukrainian President Zelensky sacked Valery Zaluzhny as commander-in-chief of Ukrainian forces on the whim of US military commanders. 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 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 admin to keep providing billions of dollars military assistance to Ukraine.

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. But 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.

Image source

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.

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 wretched predecessor.

The Pentagon’s top brass, through NATO’s military command, exercises absolute control over Ukraine’s theater of proxy war. The Zelensky regime and its military commanders are merely expendable pawns beholden to military strategy as devised by master strategists of the Pentagon.

The foremost objective of the US military brass in Ukraine’s proxy war is to degrade Russia’s military capabilities, which alongside China, is deemed an existential threat to US security interests, for which Ukrainian troops and conscripts are being sacrificed as cannon fodder.

Although China, too, matches the conventional warfare capabilities of the Cold War-era arch-rivals, its relatively insignificant nuclear arsenal and delivery systems, long-range ballistic missile program, aren’t in the same “superpower league.”

According to an October 2017 Turkish parliament report, issued following the foiled military coup plot against the Erdogan government in July 2016, there were around 13,000 nuclear warheads at 107 sites in 14 countries, and over 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons belonged to Russia and the US.

Russia currently has 5977 nukes; NATO has 5943, including 5428 in the US, 290 in France and 225 in the United Kingdom; China has 350, Pakistan 165, India 160, Israel 90 and North Korea has 20 nuclear weapons. [China’s nuclear arsenal is rapidly growing. According to recent assessments, it now has over 500 nukes.]

The report added that some 4,150 of the weapons in arsenals were ready to be used at any minute, while 1,800 were in “high alarm” status, which meant they could be prepared for use in a short period of time.

The report also noted that nuclear weapons belonging to the US were deployed in five NATO member states that did not themselves have developed nuclear programs. “There are nearly 150 US nuclear weapons in six air bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey,” it added.

During the Cold War, the US placed nuclear weapons in NATO countries, including Turkey, as part of the organization’s nuclear sharing program. Some of the nuclear weapons placed in the 1960s are still deployed in Turkey.

B61-12 (right)

The safety of fifty American B-61 hydrogen bombs [tactical nuclear weapons ] deployed at Incirlik airbase in Turkey became a matter of real concern during the foiled July 2016 coup plot against the Erdogan government after the commander of the Incirlik airbase, General Bekir Ercan Van, along with nine other officers were arrested for supporting the coup; movement in and out of the base was denied, power supply was cut off and the security threat level was raised to the highest state of alert, according to a report by Eric Schlosser for the New Yorker.

Besides being the world’s leading nuclear power alongside the US, Russia also boasts cutting-edge delivery mechanisms that are enough to give goosebumps to envious adversaries plotting to degrade the Eurasian behemoth’s military capabilities.

Pioneering the hypersonic missile technology that can evade the most advanced missile defense systems, Russia has recently unveiled an array of state-of-the-art products that can make any military technology aficionado leap for joy and rush to the nearest Apple store to claim his iPhone X.

The Kinzhal, or The Dagger, is an air-launched ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers. Currently launched from a MiG-31 fighter, the missile accelerates to speeds between Mach 4 and Mach 10 while performing evasive maneuvers to circumvent air and missile defenses.

The Tsirkon, or Zircon, is a ship-launched hypersonic cruise missile capable of reaching Mach 9 speed to strike ground or naval targets at a range of approximately 1,000 kilometers. The Iskander is a mobile short-range ballistic missile system, traveling at a terminal hypersonic speed of 2,100–2,600 meters per second (Mach 6.2 – Mach 7.6) and can reach an altitude of 50 kilometers and has a range of up to 500 kilometers.

What takes the cake, though, is the doomsday intercontinental ballistic missile named The Sarmat and colloquially referred to as Satan II with an operational range of 18,000 km., and capable of carrying 16 thermonuclear multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) warheads.

For the last couple of years, bratty Zelensky has been throwing temper tantrums and fervently cajoling macho Uncle Sam to provide F-16 aircraft to Ukraine, which have reportedly been delivered last week. But NATO’s fancy albeit outmoded aircraft are simply not a match for venturing into air-to-air dogfights with Russia’s technologically superior Sukhoi fighter jets, globally acclaimed S-400 air defense systems and cutting-edge hypersonic missiles.

Built by Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics in the eighties, over a dozen F-16 aircraft (Left) have crashed in Pakistan alone. Its flight safety record is worse than the flying funeral hearse Boeing 737 Max. Aviation aficionados have recommended that Pakistan Air Force should only induct JF-17s, co-produced with China, instead of wasting billions of dollars foreign exchange on substandard American junk.

As for C-130 transport aircraft and B-52 bombers built in the fifties following the Second World War, those “Hindenburg’s Zeppelins” rightfully belong in vintage aerospace museums rather than being inducted in modern air forces.

The Pentagon publicly confessed to over 30 Broken Arrows, serious nuclear accidents, including accidentally dropping atom bombs on populated areas in the US and Europe that thankfully didn’t explode, though the real number of such nuclear accidents is calculated to be in thousands, particularly at the height of the Cold War during the sixties when such apocalyptic “accidents” were everyday occurrence. What could be more irrefutable rebuttal of much-touted flight safety record of US strategic bombers, transport aircraft and fighter jets?

Notwithstanding, at the height of the Cold War in the sixties when Russia exploded the world’s largest 50-megaton thermonuclear Tsar Bomba in October 1961 and 400,000 US forces were deployed in Europe that were still outnumbered by Soviet troops, the Soviet leadership made repeated requests for signing a “no first use” nuclear treaty precluding the likelihood of pre-emptive nuclear strike, but the United States balked at the proposal due to conventional warfare superiority of the USSR in Europe.

Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev even unilaterally pledged against the first use of nuclear weapons in 1982, though Russia has since dropped the pledge in 1993 following the break-up of the Soviet Union and consequent tilting of balance of power in favor of the United States.

After European powers developed their own military capacity following the devastation of the Second World War, NATO now holds conventional warfare superiority over Russia with a significantly larger number of ground troops and combat aircraft.

NATO’s central rationale in engaging Russia in a protracted proxy war in Ukraine since the Maidan coup in 2014 is to sufficiently degrade Russia’s conventional warfare capabilities in order to coerce the Kremlin to give up its formidable nuclear arsenal in return for economic inducements, as the transatlantic alliance did to several East European client states following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the nineties by incorporating them into the European Union.

*

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.

Global Leadership Failure to Stop the Insanity of War

For over ten months, ferocious conceptions of good and evil push mankind to a tragic abnormality of human suffering being witnessed across Gaza and the West Bank, Palestine. American and Western European leaders use violent assumptions and vivid language to reflect on catastrophic humanitarian cataclysm happening in Gaza, plagued with delusional ideas to spearhead a warmongering culture across the Middle East. They installed modern puppets across the Arab world to follow their dictums.They no longer supply weapons but export full fledged war as the US is doing to support Israel. They know the truth of war and peace but offer paper-based condemnation when massacres of civilians are carried out by Israel. The US and few West European leaders masked their evil-mongering not knowing the consequences of their own viciousness against humanity. When life and human survival faces critical challenges, the thinking people and global institutions should respond with collective will to stop the insanity of war. Not so, in-waiting are the Arab-Muslim leaders to see if anything would happen out of nowhere to stop the Israeli carnage of planned killing and destruction of Gaza and the rest of Palestine. Please see: “How Arab Leaders Betray Islam and Defy the Logice of Political Change, Peace and Security.”

For millions of people nowhere to go, nowhere to find a place of safety and life protection. Even the so-called designated “Safe Zones” are the regular bombing zones under the false pretext of hitting terrorists but essentially targeting the civilians.

Israeli forces scorched even Gaza’s cemeteries to dishonor dead bodies. Pretending to be smart leaders like smart opportunists across the globe – be it the Western world or Arab-Muslim authoritarian regimes contend with issuing fake statements of condemnation when reality on the ground warrants swift action to prevent human casualties and safeguard life and the innocents. Tonight, the Al Tabin School was hit by Israeli missiles at dawn prayer to massacre 100 or so children and women taking shelter in its compound. The UNO, global leaders become silent spectators as if the people of Gaza are not human beings but something else to be bombed and killed by Israeli war machines.

Why did the UNO or the EU or the Arab-Muslim world fail to devise a plan to protect the civilians in the war zones? If the UNO is a living entity to “save the succeeding generations from the scourge of war”, its primary and Charter’s based obligation was to have organized a civilian force to ensure the safety of civilian population of Gaza and Palestine.The war scenario emboldens Netanyahu‘s political absolutism – an egoistic leader with controversial profile will do utmost to regain unbridled ambition either by manipulation, violence or new conflicts. The current paradigm links directly to PM Netanyahu  affiliated with extreme Jewish Ultra Nationalists to deny the Palestinian people their rights of existence as an independent State and to dismantle the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Please see: “Al-Aqsa Mosque Waiting for the Arab Leaders.”

Arab-Muslim Leaders Are  the Puppets of America and Complicit in Israeli War on Gaza

There are no Arab leaders having moral and political integrity to represent the masses and no Arab armies to defend Islam. Simply put, they are puppets and hired agents of the Western imperialism. Israel bulldozed and occupied Egyptian Rafah crossing to Gaza but Egyptian leaders failed to act in defense. The Saudi, the UAE and others stooges kept silent profile while massacres of innocent embolden Israel to put finishing end on Gaza. The foreign mercenaries protect their palaces, not the people. Several thousand of Israeli citizens regularly protest against the Netanyhau Government in Tel Aviv’s military defense complex calling for an immediate ceasefire and return of the 120 hostages and peace talks. Are the historic Israelities (progeny of Jacob) and the followers of Moses versus the Zionists, the same? Avigail Abanenail, a Jewish Peace Activist spells out the problem and looks at peaceful means to a better future. Jews for Peace (USA) organization questions Israel’s motives for war against Gaza and calls for an immediate ceasefire and recognition of equal rights of Palestinians to an independent State.

Why Do Israeli Leaders Want Perpetuated Animosities as the End Game? 

Those bombing and causing catastrophic events to destroy the planet Earth and mankind and all of its treasures and enrichments are not normal human beings. The followers of Moses – the generations of Israelite are reminded by God (Quran 2: 84-85 ): 

And remember, We took a Covenant from the Children of Israel (progeny of Jacob), Worship none but God; ….shed no blood amongst you, Nor displace people from  homes: and Ye solemnly ratified, And to this ye can bear witness…. It was not lawful for you to banish another party, then it is only a part of the Book that ye believe in…. And on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty,For God is not unmindful what ye do. 

The Israeli leaders and the US Biden administration have ignored the ICJ demands for a ceasefire and to stop crimes against humanity. They plan to conquer the whole Arab Middle East after Gaza. By the Divine injunctions, Israelities and Arabs had more things in common than political animosities.

“We have revealed for you (O men!) a book in which is a Message for you, Will ye not then understand?” (Quran: 21: 10).

Was the animosity built-in to the Israeli extreme political psyche and ideology to expel Palestinains from their homeland?

Are the Israeli leaders driven by the lust of American weapons and economic power to commit genocide? Those doing so are not conscious of their own end game. PM Netanyahu and his extremist regime would try to put an end to the freedom of Palestine. Gaza is the experimental lab for that end game. 

We, the People of knowledge speak logically about the Nature of Things affecting lives and our hopes for future to inspirations from the Divine Revelations – the truth and nothing but truth (Quran: 11: 116-117):

Why were there not, 

Among the generations before you, 

Persons possessed of balanced good sense, prohibiting (men)

Form mischief in the earth

Except a few among them

Whom We saved (from harm),

But the wrong-doers pursued the enjoyment of good things

Of life which were given them and persisted in sin.

Nor would thy Lord be the One to destroy communities for a single wrongdoing; If its members were likely to mend.

Caitlin Johnstone (“Opposing The Gaza Genocide While Supporting Biden Is A Dishonest” 04/29/24), sharpens the human intellect of rational thinking.

You really couldn’t put together a more incoherent position if you tried. You can’t acknowledge that Israel is committing genocide without also acknowledging that the Biden administration has been actively participating in that genocide. If you acknowledge that Biden is guilty of genocide, then you are acknowledging that he is guilty of the most horrific crime a state leader can possibly commit short of initiating a nuclear exchange…..Those who are supporting Biden while opposing the destruction of Gaza do not have any kind of integrity. They’re just wearing whatever mask is politically convenient based on the way the winds are blowing on a given moment, while continuing to support the US-centralized empire which cannot be sustained without nonstop tyranny and bloodshed. 

Animals live and do not reflect on the imperatives of life whereas, we, the human beings cannot act like animals as we are supposed to be intelligent and responsible species on this Earth. At the edge of reason, the notion of evil leads to realization of evil and tyranny of war must be stopped by all means and those responsible for the genocide and crimes against humanity must be held accountable to restore the manifestation of a sustainable human 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 

Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including the latest: One Humanity and the Remaking of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution. Lambert Academic Publications, Germany, 12/2019

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from UNRWA

As early as the first month of Israel’s war on Gaza, Sde Teiman, a secretive Israeli military prison in the Negev desert, had been raising alarm bells for Israeli human rights attorney Roni Pelli and other rights advocates.

Pelli and her colleagues started to hear reports from whistleblowers about poor conditions for Palestinians imprisoned inside Sde Teiman. They heard of instances of violence committed by soldiers against detained Palestinians, and, in one case, a Palestinian who died there.

Since then, media reports about the prison have mounted, quoting formerly detained Palestinians and Israeli whistleblowers, who spoke in more detail of the harrowing conditions inside the prison. A CNN investigation in May revealed that Palestinian detainees were restrained and blindfolded, forced to sit and sometimes stand throughout the night beneath flood lights; wounded Palestinians were strapped down onto beds, forced to wear diapers, and fed through straws; soldiers beat detainees motivated by revenge for the October 7 attacks; and prisoners’ limbs were amputated due to untreated wounds from restraints, and such operations took place without anesthesia.

Later in May, an Intercept investigation found that hundreds of Palestinian doctors have disappeared into Israeli detention, and included the testimony of one surgeon who was beaten and abused at Sde Teiman. A month later, a separate report from Haaretz revealed the Israel Defense Forces were investigating 48 deaths of Palestinians from Gaza who were in Israeli custody, among them 36 who were detained at Sde Teiman. Israeli media began to refer to the prison as “Israel’s Guantánamo Bay.”

Prompted by the CNN report, Pelli, who represents the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, filed a petition to Israel’s Supreme Court, on behalf of five human rights organizations, for a government order to close Sde Teiman.

“It was so extreme,” Pelli told The Intercept. “We couldn’t ignore it.”

While rights groups inside Israel moved aggressively to protect the rights of Palestinians detained in both its military camps, as well as prisons within its official government prison system, the United States showed little urgency around the issue.

The U.S. State Department only commented on Sde Teiman when pressed by reporters after the release of the CNN report. In May, Jonah Valdez, deputy spokesperson for the department, said

“we’re looking into these and other allegations of abuse against Palestinians in detention.” He added that the U.S. had been “clear and consistent with any country, including Israel, that it must treat all detainees humanely, with dignity, in accordance with international law, and it must respect detainees’ human rights.”

He then claimed the U.S. had asked the Israeli government to investigate the claims itself.

After the Haaretz report of dozens of deaths, there was no new comment. Later that same week in June, the New York Times published an investigation into the conditions at Sde Teiman, which contained testimony from former prisoners that their Israeli jailors had tortured them with anal rape by a metal rod, among other abuses. These explosive findings were buried in the final section of the nearly 4,000-word story, after an introduction that only mentioned “beatings and other abuses,” and a headline that described Sde Teiman as “the base where Israel has detained thousands of Gazans.” Again, the U.S. government had no words.

It wasn’t until a leaked surveillance video from Sde Teiman was broadcast on Tuesday on Israeli news network Channel 12, showing Israeli soldiers allegedly gang-raping a Palestinian man imprisoned there, and subsequent pressure from reporters, that U.S. officials commented again on Sde Teiman.

The State Department responded by calling on the Israeli military to investigate itself.

Ten Israeli soldiers were arrested and face charges stemming from the alleged gang rape. Another soldier was arrested the following day on suspicion of beating detained Palestinians who were blindfolded and handcuffed. The soldier allegedly filmed himself during the incident.

A new report from Israeli human rights group B’Tselem showed that Sde Teiman was not the only Israeli prison where Palestinians have been tortured, building on years of reports of Palestinians being abused in Israeli prisons.

Released this week, one day before the Channel 12 video leak broadcast, B’Tselem’s report argued that the majority of imprisoned Palestinians have faced abuse and torture within Israeli custody. The report calls on the International Criminal Court to “investigate and promote criminal proceedings against individuals suspected of planning, directing and committing these crimes.” It argued that “Israeli investigative bodies cannot be expected to” hold its government accountable for potential abuses since “all state systems, including the judiciary, have been mobilized in support of these torture camps.”

When asked at a Wednesday press briefing whether the U.S. would call for an independent investigation, referring to the report, State Department spokesperson Matt Miller declined to address the possibility and said, “I would have to look at what the specific independent investigation people are calling for and pass judgment on the merits.” He maintained the Israeli military needs to investigate itself.

The Israeli military and the State Department did not respond to requests for comment by the time of publication.

Evidence of abuse at Sde Teiman and other prisons are only the latest revelations of abuses by the Israeli military, which includes allegations of war crimes leveled against its leaders by the International Criminal Court. Despite the evidence, the U.S. has continued to fund Israel’s war on Gaza, sending more than $15 billion since October 7.

Eitay Mack, another Israeli human rights attorney, who has represented Palestinians incarcerated by the Israeli military in the occupied West Bank, said the U.S should do more in preventing such human rights abuses such as those seen in Sde Teiman.

He pointed to its ability to issue sanctions, which could target specific individual military units. The 10 Israeli soldiers arrested in the alleged gang rape case at Sde Teiman are a part of the Israeli military’s Force 100 unit. The U.S. already has leveled sanctions against Israeli settlers who commit violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. Mack also mentioned the Leahy Law, a 1997 law that prohibits U.S. assistance to “any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.”

President Joe Biden’s administration has shown a resistance to such conditioning of military aid, even in cases where they admitted to supplying Israel with weapons to commit possible violations of international law.

“The U.S. should apply its rules of military aid — they should pressure Israel through it,” Mack said. “I don’t think the governments in the world are acting because of morals,” he added, “but the U.S. government should just follow the law, the Leahy Law, even if it’s just to do the procedure.”

Mack acknowledged that punishing individual units active in Sde Tieman abuses would not address the systemwide abuses in Israeli prisons.

Military prisons, such as Sde Teiman, are holding facilities constructed within Israeli military bases, where detainees are often held for interrogations. They exist separate from Israel Prison Service facilities, which are operated by civilian guards and officials. Long before October 7, prison guards in both have been known to abuse incarcerated Palestinians, and Palestinian prisoners taken from the occupied Palestinian territories are subject to military, rather than civil, courts — a fact that has contributed to findings from organizations like the International Court of Justice that the Israeli legal system is a form of apartheid.

Mack said he has represented a Palestinian man from the occupied West Bank who experienced this abuse while in an IPS prison: An Israeli guard grabbed him by the neck, picked him up, and threw him on the floor of his cell, breaking a bone around his eye.

Even so, IPS facilities historically tended to have better living conditions compared to their military counterparts, such as more adequate beds, food and ability to move, compared to their military counterparts. Since the war in Gaza began, however, Mack and Pelli noted that IPS prisons have shut Palestinians off from the outside world. Detainees have been kept from communicating with their families or attorneys. IPS prisons were placed on lockdowns, restricting movement within the facilities.

Pelli, along with her group, ACRI, filed a separate petition to the Supreme Court that sought to allow the Red Cross into prisons and military camps to offer medical treatment to prisoners, which is required under Israeli and international law. The Red Cross has been denied access to all prisons since the start of the war. The petition cited the deaths of at least two detainees in military camps and another six in IPS prisons with two of them showing “signs of severe violence on their bodies.” The court has yet to rule on the issue as the government continues to ask for extensions in the case.

In April, Pelli filed yet another petition, for the Israel Prison Service to end “a policy of starvation towards Palestinian prisoners and detainees,” which it argued was a form of torture and violated international law. Since October 7, the petition said the policy has left prisoners to suffer from constant and extreme hunger and poor quality of food. The petition included testimony from formerly incarcerated Palestinians who lost dozens of pounds, and a diabetic prisoner who was forced to eat toothpaste to raise his blood sugar.

Since October 7, the number of imprisoned Palestinians has nearly doubled, from 5,192 before the war to 9,623 as of early July, exacerbating a preexisting issue of overcrowding, according to human rights group HaMoked, which tracks Israel’s prison population and was among the groups who petitioned to close Sde Teiman. More than 4,000 detained Palestinians are under administrative detention, in which individuals are infinitely held without being charged. Many are released after weeks of detention without any charges.

The B’Tselem report cited Pelli’s and her group’s petitions, calling the prisons a “normative black hole” where “Palestinians have no rights or protections.”

The report said most of the incarcerated are men and boys, though women and children are among those imprisoned by Israel since October 7.

“Some were jailed simply for expressing sympathy for the suffering of Palestinians,” the report read. “Others were taken into custody during military activity in the Gaza Strip, on the sole grounds that they came under the vague definition of ‘men of fighting age.’ Some were imprisoned over suspicions, substantiated or not, that they were operatives or supporters of armed Palestinian organizations.”

The report highlighted firsthand accounts of 55 Palestinians who were previously detained in Israeli prisons, including 21 Gazans and four Israeli citizens. They shared instances “of frequent acts of severe, arbitrary violence; sexual assault; humiliation and degradation; deliberate starvation; forced unhygienic conditions; sleep deprivation; prohibition on, and punitive measures for, religious worship; confiscation of all communal and personal belongings; and denial of adequate medical treatment.”

One Palestinian who was formerly detained in Sde Tieman told B’Tselem that he and others were led into a warehouse where he was forced to kneel prostrate and naked while soldiers beat them during interrogations. While on the way to another facility, he and other detainees were beaten if they talked or made any noise. During the beatings, he said his left leg was injured. As his leg pain intensified over the next several days, soldiers ignored his complaints and would strike his injured leg. His leg eventually had to be amputated. Even then, the torture continued, the man said, as he was forced to stand on his remaining leg for hours, preventing him from sleeping. He was later released to his family in Gaza with no formal charges against him, the report said.

B’Tselem alleged in the report that the abuses are a part of a systemwide policy meant to torture Palestinians, implemented by Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, who oversees the Israel Prison Service, and with the support of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government.

“The main problem is that it’s not only just the military facilities [like Sde Teiman],” Pelli said. “Nowadays, under these conditions and with this minister, everything is terrible.”

Sde Teiman resurfaced in the public eye in late July when a right-wing mob broke into the base after military investigators showed up to question soldiers suspected in the rape of a Palestinian prisoner. The mob also broke into a separate base where the soldiers were brought for questioning. Ben-Gvir referred to the “spectacle” of police coming to question soldiers, which he called “our best heroes,” as “nothing less than shameful.” The incident highlighted the increased polarization between the prime minister’s far-right government and the country’s military command.

The arrests do not signal any increased accountability within the government, Mack believes, but were political decisions by Maj. Gen. Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, the head military prosecutor in both cases. Even before the video leak, the rape victim received medical treatment in a public, civilian hospital where the medical staff found injuries consistent with sexual assault, Mack said, forcing the military’s hand to investigate.

“It shows a total failure,” he said, blaming Tomer-Yerushalmi for what he saw as a soft response to earlier allegations of prisoner abuse throughout the war.

Hearings around the petition to close Sde Teiman continued this week on Wednesday, during which right-wing protesters disrupted the proceedings. Throughout the case, demonstrators have regularly criticized Pelli and her colleagues as being “traitors” or defenders of Hamas militants, Pelli said.

At the hearing, lawyers for the military argued that there are no longer any issues at Sde Teiman as they have reduced the prison’s population from more than 700 to as few as 30 for short-term, temporary holds. The military said the remaining prisoners were not security risks and were no longer bound or blindfolded, unlike previous detainees at the facility.

Pelli argued to the court that their living conditions were still in violation of international law, as prisoners continued to be kept in cages with no beds or proper sanitation and were still being denied access to the Red Cross or attorneys. She also warned the prison population could increase again at any point during the ongoing war.

“You cannot take this snapshot of this day, if it’s extremely dynamic,” Pelli said. “Because if tomorrow, the IDF will enter [a village] in Gaza and detain all men there, take 200 people … what limits it? The war is not over.”

*

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: A screenshot from the video that appears to show sexual assault of a Palestinian prisoner at Sde Teiman prison in Israel, as it aired on Israel’s Channel 12. Screenshot: Channel 12

Last Monday, the horrific news broke that there had been a knife attack on a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in the English seaside town of Southport. Two children would tragically die at the scene, with another child sadly passing away from her injuries the next day. A total of ten people would be hospitalised as a result of the attack, eight of them being children.

Social media would quickly be overrun by speculation on the identity of the attacker, with the name Ali Al-Shakati, a fictitious asylum seeker supposedly known to MI6, being put forward by the Channel3now website, an outlet with unverified origins, though with an IP address registered in Pakistan. Tensions would quickly grow.

Following a vigil for the victims of the attack, held in Southport the following day, these tensions would erupt. Police would be pelted with stones and bottles and a police van was set alight. A local Mosque would also be targeted. By the end of the night, 53 officers were injured, and seven arrests were made.

This would not be an isolated incident as the next day, further violence broke out in the towns of Hartlepool and Aldershot, and in London, where there would be more than 100 arrests at a protest outside Downing Street. Violence would also spread to the British-ruled north of Ireland, centring on Belfast in particular. Over the course of a week more than 400 arrests were made in both countries, with the unrest in Britain being the most serious in more than a decade. Indeed, a British court would take the unprecedented move of naming the 17-year old suspect as Axel Rudakubana in a bid to curtail the violence, with standard practice usually being to grant anonymity in the case of underage criminal suspects.

10 Downing Street is lit pink as a mark of respect and solidarity with everyone affected by the tragic incidents which took place earlier this week in Southport. Picture by Lauren Hurley / No 10 Downing Street (Licensed under OGL 3)

The events in Britain and Belfast bore a striking similarity to recent scenes in the south of Ireland, in an ongoing period of heightened social unrest since November 2022, when Leinster House began moving vast amounts of male migrants into wildly unsuitable locations such as an inner city office block and children’s school.

One year later, in November 2023, these tensions would ultimately come to a head, when following the stabbing of three children and their teacher in central Dublin by an immigrant previously subjected to a deportation order, violence would sweep the Irish capital, resulting in identical scenes to what has played out in Belfast and Britain over the past week.

In April, violence would once again erupt in the small rural town of Newtownmountkennedy, when Irish riot police and masked security would clear a protest camp, set up in response to plans to house male migrants in a disused hospital, in a heavy-handed morning raid. Similar scenes would play out in the working-class Dublin suburb of Coolock in mid-July, when riot police would once again clear a local protest camp in a similar fashion. The scenes that followed in both locations were akin to Belfast or Derry in the late 60s or early 70s, with local residents being brutalised and pepper sprayed by a heavily-militarised police force.

Indeed, the authoritarian response of the southern Irish state to the unrest also bears a striking similarity to that of Britain, with both governments being headed by WEF-linked Simon Harris and Keir Starmer. Upon Starmer’s recent election, Harris declared that it was time for a ‘great reset’ in relations between both states, a deliberate choice of words that alludes to Davos’ Great Reset initiative, launched in June 2020 amidst global lockdowns, that intends to even further consolidate the influence of the international government-corporate alliance.

In response to the Dublin riots, facial recognition technology laws would be swiftly passed by the southern Irish state, with similar happening in Britain owing to the recent unrest. Facial recognition technology is a key component of the fourth industrial revolution that the Great Reset is intended to implement, allowing for the eventual imposition of a digital surveillance state.

Stringent measures regarding the use of social media have also been put forward by both states in response to the violence. In Ireland, Tánaiste Micheál Martin took aim at Elon Musk, blaming the X owner for fuelling the unrest in both countries. Musk would also be on the receiving end of Starmer’s ire after the entrepreneur posted that civil war was inevitable in Britain, before going on to condemn Downing Street’s authoritarian social media response to the disorder, which has seen Britain’s leading prosecutor declare that merely sharing material related to the violence may lead to arrest. Indeed, this would be the case of Bonnie Spofforth, an English woman who erroneously copied and pasted an initial report that “Ali Al-Shakti” was responsible for the Southport attack, and was subsequently arrested as a result. The tight regulation of supposed ‘disinformation’ in the online sphere was a key component of the Event 201 ‘Pandemic’ simulation by John Hopkins University and the World Economic Forum, held in October 2019, five months before the declaration of the “Covid Pandemic”, and the ensuing mass-censorship of those who dared question the official response of lockdowns and jab mandates.

The burgeoning authoritarianism of Britain and Ireland aside, what was also noticeable in the aftermath of the outbreak of violence in England, was Starmer’s vocal condemnation of the “far-right”. A stark contrast to his unwavering support for the Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which employs the use of neo-Nazi militias such as the Azov Brigade (formerly Battalion) in its ongoing conflict with Russia.

To understand why, one must look at the wider geopolitical factors at play.

In November 2013, following the decision by then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to suspend a trade deal with the EU in order to pursue closer ties with neighbouring Russia, violent riots would soon sweep the former Soviet republic. Despite not being dissimilar to the current unrest sweeping Britain however, Downing Street would openly praise the Euromaidan protests, named after the Kiev square where US Senator John McCain would infamously address demonstrators.

It would soon become apparent that what was billed as a grassroots uprising against government corruption in Ukraine, was in reality an elaborate regime change operation intended to install a western-client government in Kiev. This was to be done with the intention of encircling Russia, a scenario outlined at the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, where a declaration was made that both Ukraine and Georgia would join the alliance.

The violence that swept Ukraine in the aftermath of Euromaidan, and the key involvement of anti-Russian elements in the post-coup government of Petro Poroshenko, would ultimately result in the predominantly ethnic Russian oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk breaking away to form independent republics in April 2014, their residents having little choice lest they face ethnic cleansing at the hands of the new regime, Indeed, this would prove to not be an unfounded concern, when one month later the Trade Unions House in the southern Ukrainian city of Odessa, was torched by Maidan supporters, leading to the deaths of 48 people, the majority of whom were ethnic Russian anti-Maidan protesters.

An immediate war would begin on the two breakaway republics, involving neo-Nazi elements such as Azov Battalion and Right Sector, ultimately leading to 14,000 deaths. Though the Minsk Accords would offer a federalisation resolution to the conflict, in which Donetsk and Luhansk would remain under the rule of Kiev but be granted a degree of autonomy, the continued stalling of negotiations by the west, and the distinct possibility that Ukraine would go on to host US missiles capable of striking Moscow,, would ultimately force Russia’s hand.

In February 2022, Moscow would launch a military intervention into its western neighbour, intended to protect ethnic Russian minorities, and to destroy any military infrastructure intended to be used against Russia had Ukraine gone on to become a NATO member.

Global condemnations and sanctions would follow, and the US and Britain would both pump billions worth of arms into Ukraine in a bid to tie Russia down in an Afghan Bear trap-style quagmire. A lucrative endeavour for the military industrial complex, and one that Starmer’s recently elected Labour government fully intends to continue. Hence, his far-different response to extremists in Ukraine, than to the current disturbances in Britain.

*

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

Gavin O’Reilly is an activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism. Secretary of the Dublin Anti-Internment Committee, a campaign group set up to raise awareness of Irish Republican political prisoners in British and 26 County jails. His work has previously appeared on American Herald Tribune, The Duran, Al-Masdar and MintPress News. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Support him on Patreon. 

Featured image is licensed under CC BY 2.0

Leading pharmaceutical scientists in Japan have just exposed a staggering surge in the risk of heart failure for people who have been injected with a Covid mRNA shot.

According to a team of Japanese researchers from the Division of Pharmacodynamics at Keio University Faculty of Pharmacy and Yokohama General Hospital, the risk of heart failure surges by up to 4,900% after a person receives a Covid mRNA injection.

The research team, led by Professor Keisuke Takada, found that the risk of myocarditis is 20-50 times greater after receiving the shot.

They calculated reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) for the association between the vaccines and myocarditis and pericarditis based on data from the Japanese government’s vaccine adverse event database.

Myocarditis and pericarditis are both forms of inflammation in the heart.

The conditions restrict the heart’s ability to pump blood around the body and can cause blood clots, strokes, cardiac arrest, and ultimately, sudden death.

Both myocarditis and pericarditis are known side effects of Covid mRNA shots.

The team analyzed the official data for April 2004 to December 2023.

Takada and colleagues published a report on the findings of their peer-reviewed study in the prestigious Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy.

The Japanese team evaluated age, sex, onset time, and outcomes in symptomatic patients.

The authors said the underlying mission of this study was to clarify any associations between Covid mRNA shots (Pfizer BNT162b2 and Moderna’s mRNA-1273) and myocarditis/pericarditis plus any influencing factors.

Just as the researchers hoped, this study did bring some clarity.

The study exposes a disturbingly high rate of association between mRNA injections and myocarditis and pericarditis, especially in known risk cohorts.

The associations are so high under normal conditions, that the Covid mRNA shots would likely be withdrawn for study.

The researchers involved in this study are affiliated with Keio University, Yokohama General Hospital, and Teikyo Heisei University.

In Japan, the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) manages the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER), a large-scale database for spontaneous reporting of adverse events.

The database includes information such as adverse events and outcomes associated with vaccination.

Large-scale databases for spontaneous reporting of adverse events, including JADER, are effective resources for studies that systematically explore the association between drugs and adverse events.

They contribute to the accumulation of evidence for safe medication.

Japan had a high vaccination rate.

Nearly 80% of Japan’s population of 125.1 million was vaccinated for Covid.

Among those who received the shots, a staggering 880,999 safety incidents were reported.

For their study, Prof. Takada and his team analyzed 1846 myocarditis and 761 pericarditis reports.

In the study’s paper, the researchers note:

“The adverse events associated with the vaccines included myocarditis (919 cases) and pericarditis (321 cases), with the ROR [95 % CIs] being significant for both (myocarditis: 30.51 [27.82–33.45], pericarditis: 21.99 [19.03–25.40]).

“Furthermore, the ROR [95 % CIs] of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 were 15.64 [14.15–17.28] and 54.23 [48.13–61.10], respectively, for myocarditis, and 15.78 [13.52–18.42] and 27.03 [21.58–33.87], respectively, for pericarditis.”

RORs cited above mean that the odds of the adverse event (or outcome) occurring in the vaccinated group are troublingly higher than in the non-vaccinated (control) group.

This is a substantial increase in risk.

Vaccines are generally expected to have ORs close to 1, indicating no significant increase in the risk of adverse events.

As many studies point to for these cardiovascular incidents, “most cases were ≤30 years or male.”

The period from vaccination to onset was ≤8 days, corresponding to early failure type based on analysis using the Weibull distribution.

Outcomes were recovery or remission for most cases.

However, there were many severe cases, some of which resulted in sudden death.

In the outcomes section of the study’s paper, the authors report recovery and remission in 78 % (595 cases) and 87 % (222 cases) of cases, respectively.

However, a “severe outcome (sequela or non-recovery) after the onset of myocarditis and pericarditis was noted in 11 % (80 cases) and 8 % (20 cases) of cases, respectively.”

Alarmingly, death was reported in 11 % (84 cases), and 5 % (13 cases), respectively.

Similar tendencies were observed in the subgrouping analysis associated with BNT162b2 and mRNA.

The study comes amid growing concerns about the safety of the Covid shots.

As Slay News reported earlier, the lead author behind another major global study of excess death rates in 125 countries has just raised the alarm over the shocking impact of Covid mRNA shots on humanity.

A new study by a team of Canadian researchers into excess mortality found that deaths have surged dramatically since the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, they found that patterns of excess death globally could not be explained by the virus, including long Covid.

As Slay News previously reported, the study, by researchers with Correlation Research in the Public Interest, examined excess mortality in 125 countries during and after the pandemic.

It found that mortality patterns correlate closely with the imposition of restrictions such as lockdowns and with the rollout of Covid mRNA shots.

The investigation determined that pandemic-related restrictions resulted in 30 million deaths globally.

In addition, the researchers found that 17 million deaths can be attributed to the Covid mRNA injections.

Meanwhile, experts are raising the alarm over a devastating crisis emerging in Singapore as deaths continue to skyrocket among the nation’s Covid-vaccinated population.

As Slay News reported, shocking new data has also revealed birth rates are plunging in Singapore, one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, as deaths surge.

Like many other highly-vaccinate nations, excess deaths soared among those who received Covid mRNA shots.

However, birth rates are also plummeting, causing a potentially catastrophic population crisis.

*

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 Slay News

---

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. 

---

My thanks to the Publisher and to the translator Tatsuo Iwana.

.

Harris claims that she and the US President are trying to achieve a ceasefire deal, without forgetting to bring up the release of Israeli captives, yet always making no mention of Palestinian detainees.

US Vice President Kamala Harris told pro-Palestine demonstrators screaming slogans at a campaign gathering in Arizona that it is about time to “get a cease-fire deal and the hostage deal done.”

According to The Hill, Harris replied to pro-Palestine activists screaming “Free Palestine” at the event in Phoenix, saying that she has been clear that “now is the time to get a cease-fire deal and get the hostage deal done.”

“Now is the time,” she repeated.

Harris claimed that she and US President Joe Biden are trying to achieve a ceasefire deal and the release of the captives, while also expressing respect for pro-Palestine activists’ opinions.

While all calls for a ceasefire are always followed by a statement expressing the need for the release of Israeli captives held in Gaza, there is no mention whatsoever of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons, even those abducted by Israeli forces during the ongoing war.

Meanwhile, Harris has yet to showcase such respect for differing opinions. Her comments in Arizona may be due to the backlash she received for snapping at pro-Palestine demonstrators in Detroit recently.

Kamala Harris Is Against Halting Arms Transfers to ‘Israel’: Aide

This comes as a top aide to the Democratic presidential contender and VP Kamala Harris stated on Thursday that she does not favor stopping the transfer of weapons to “Israel” in order to put pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government over the war on Gaza.

Philip Gordon, Harris’ National Security Advisor, posted on X:

“She does not support an arms embargo on Israel,” adding, “She will continue to work to protect civilians in Gaza and to uphold international humanitarian law.”

After Joe Biden withdrew from the race for president and Harris emerged as the Democratic contender, activists and progressive Democrats attempted to persuade Harris to adopt a more outspoken position on the war than Biden.

This serves as the second confirmation after Harris’ team released a statement announcing that she will not be discussing an arms embargo on “Israel” after two far-left activists from the Uncommitted movement claimed she exhibited openness to do so.

The Times of Israel reported, citing The New York Times, that Harris met with two Arab Americans leading the Uncommitted National Movement, who asked her to consider an arms embargo on “Israel”, at a campaign stop in Michigan.

Just before her rally, Harris met with Abbas Alawieh and Layla Elabed, who, according to NYT‘s report, “wanted to support her but… wanted her to consider an arms embargo.” In response, Harris indicated she was “open to it” and introduced the two community leaders to her staff.

Harris’ team statement in response read,

“Since October 7, the vice president has prioritized engaging with Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian community members and others regarding the war in Gaza… In this brief engagement, she reaffirmed that her campaign will continue to engage with those communities.”

It added,

“The vice president has been clear: she will always work to ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. The Vice President is focused on securing the ceasefire and hostage deal currently on the table.”

“As she has said, it is time for this war to end in a way where: Israel is secure, hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinian civilians ends, and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, freedom, and self-determination.”

“Israel” is privately intensifying pressure on the Biden administration and lawmakers on Capitol Hill to expedite weapons approval under the pretext of protecting itself from “Iran and its proxies,” a report by Politico revealed two weeks ago after Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu traveled to the US to perform a show for Congress.

In his speech, Netanyahu addressed the issue of delayed arms transfers, which he has previously criticized the Biden administration for.

*

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: California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris, whose aide Brandon Kiel is accused of forming a fictitious police force with two people, has received regular briefings on the case since his arrest. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

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

First published on November 23, 2023

***

Teenagers and young people in their 20s, 30s and 40s in the U.K. are dying from rapidly metastasizing and terminal cancers at an unprecedented rate since mass COVID-19 vaccination began, according to a new analysis by Edward Dowd.

The 45-page report by Dowd, a former Wall Street hedge fund manager and author of “‘Cause Unknown’: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,” alarmed some oncologists who characterized it as a sharp reversal of decades of mortality data.

Edward Dowd based his analysis on readily available government statistics from the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics.

In an interview with The Defender, Dowd said he and his research partners, who include a handful of high-level scientists, data analysts and financial experts, examined all International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, (ICD-10) codes for cause of death in the U.K. in the study period of  2010-2022 to investigate trends in malignant neoplasms (C00 to C99 codes).

ICD-10 codes are the international physicians’ classification of diagnosis, symptom and procedure for claim processing set by the World Health Organization (WHO). A malignant neoplasm is a cancerous tumor.

Dowd said his research team noticed a striking pattern: While almost all deaths among older people in 2021 and 2022 in Wales and England had been coded, 8% of deaths among 15- to 44-year-olds in 2021, and 30% of deaths in that age group in 2022, hadn’t yet been coded.

“When you die in a hospital, you leave a trail of life and death with indications of what led to the death,” he said. “When a young person dies at the wheel of a car, walking down the street or in their sleep, there’s an investigation” that consumes time to assign the cause of death.

Dowd said the missing codes are “indicative of the problem” of excess deaths among young people.

But even with the caveat of missing codes, he said, the remaining 92% of coded deaths in 2021 and 70% of coded deaths in 2022 revealed “a strong signal of cancer deaths in the young. We show a large increase in mortality due to malignant neoplasms that started in 2021 and accelerated substantially in 2022.

“The increase in excess deaths in 2022 is highly statistically significant (extreme event),” Dowd wrote in his report. “The results indicate that from late 2021 a novel phenomenon leading to increased malignant neoplasm deaths appears to be present in individuals aged 15 to 44 in the UK.”

The study’s results in the rate of cancer deaths above the historic norm in 2022 for ages 15-44 in the U.K. included:

• A 28% rise in fatal breast cancer rates in women.
• An 80% increase in pancreatic cancer deaths among women and a 60% increase among men.
• A 55% increase among men in colon cancer deaths and a 41% increase in women.
• A 120% increase in fatal melanomas among men and a 35% increase in women.
• A 35% increase in brain cancer deaths among men and a 12% rise in women.
• A 60% increase in cancer death rates among men in cancers “without site specification” and a 55% increase among women.

‘Mounting Clinical Evidence’ Led to Study

Dowd produced his report, assembled by Carlos Alegria, one of Dowd’s partners, in his Humanity Projects study of excess deaths in the U.K. and the U.S. using government and insurance industry data.

He said he started his pro bono data-driven project to help guide public policy when he saw how COVID-19 pandemic policies were destroying society’s faith in institutional experts.

Surveying the capture of national and state government regulatory agencies and corporate media by Big Pharma and other global interests, he realized,

“We need independent agents to act as gatekeepers of the public interest.”

“We intend to be such agents, and to provide high-quality research to other individuals and institutions who seek similar outcomes,” he wrote.

The new report is his third in the UK Cause of Death Project, which previously examined “UK – Death and Disability Trends for Cardiovascular Diseases, Ages 15-44,” and “UK – Death Trends for the Cardiovascular System, Ages 15-44, Analysis of Individual Causes.” 

The mounting clinical evidence linking burgeoning cancers in young people to the COVID-19 vaccines led Dowd to his latest study, he said.

“We focus our research on younger individuals, aged 15-44, as presently it is a topic of particular interest due to the rise in anecdotal evidence of many unexplained aggressive and unusual cancers (such as turbo cancers … ) occurring in the population, particularly in younger individuals,” he wrote in the study.

“The focus of this study is not to examine individual claims and anecdotes, but instead to provide a statistical analysis at a population level and clarify if the anecdotal evidence is abnormal or not.”

Dowd said he hopes “the relationships that we uncover in our analysis” are “a basis for a reality check for health professionals to understand underlying trends in individuals’ health.”

Dowd’s method was to analyze the number of deaths attributed to cancer in England and Wales between 2010 and 2022 in the U.K. Office for National Statistics data.

He compared excess death rates, the difference between observed deaths and the baseline for expected deaths, before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

He established a baseline of normal cancer death rates from 2010-2020 that was remarkably consistent with few deviations, he said — until the cancer death rates rose significantly in late 2021 in the U.K. following the vaccine rollout.

Key findings from the report include:

• Breast cancer dominates in women. The most common cause of fatal cancer in women, ages 15-44, is breast cancer, representing about 25% of the total excess death rate caused by malignant tumors in women in 2022. The next most dangerous cancers for women, based on excess death rates, were colon cancer and cancer of the cervix uteri.
• While fatal cancer deaths rose dramatically among both young men and young women in 2022, young men saw a disproportionately higher rise in cancer deaths, but with no dominant cancer comparable to breast cancer in women. Brain cancer, colon cancer and stomach cancer accounted for 30.9% of the rise in fatal cancers in men in 2022.
• Cancers “without specification of site,” indicating rapid metastasis to other organs and commonly called “turbo cancers,” “exploded” in 2022, Dowd said. “These cancers saw very large rise in both women (in 2021 and 2022) and men (in 2022) and were likely metastasized already once they were identified. As the individuals refer to younger individuals who do not require early screening, these cancers were likely of rapid growth.”
• Men experienced a huge rise in skin cancer death rates of 118% in 2022. “Even though these cancers do not account for a large proportion of all cancers,” Dowd said.
• Cancers of the digestive tract “saw explosive changes in 2021 and 2022 relative to the 2010-2019 trend,” Dowd wrote. “Of particular notice are cancers of the colon (internationally coded as C18), stomach (C16) and esophagus (C15). “These cancers related to the digestive tract appear to have risen substantially in importance, and we also notice that they seem to be affecting men in a disproportionate manner.”
• Pancreatic cancer “saw a very large rise in both women (in 2022) and men (in both 2021 and 2022). Why these cancers rose so dramatically and why they rose first in men then women is one of the questions that we believe warrants investigation.”

Dowd emphasized that his research was “a first attempt to bring out some patterns that are observed in trends” in cancer post-2020.

“We hope that medical doctors and specialized researchers perform further investigations based upon these (and other) insights that our data analysis provides,” he wrote.

Link Between COVID Shots and Rise in Cancers ‘Worth Looking At’

Dr. Chris Flowers, an academic physician, radiologist and breast cancer specialist in England who came out of retirement to be the volunteer scientific lead of the War Room/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Analysis Project, told The Defender the U.K. data were “very, very, concerning.”

Flowers said Dowd’s research confirmed similar data on sharp cancer death increases reported by researchers, clinicians and cancer specialists in the U.S., U.K. and across the Western industrialized world since the global rollout of the experimental Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccine. An estimated more than 5.55 billion people, or about 72.3% of the global population, received the shots.

Flowers said he and his colleagues, including pathologists, radiologists, oncologists, internists, critical care doctors and researchers in the U.S. and U.K., have never seen anything like the severity of fatal breast cancers and other cancers in the young that exploded in 2022.

Dowd’s report confirms what Flowers and his colleagues have noticed for more than a year:

“We’re seeing 2 or 3 times the normal rate of cancer.”

“We’re seeing younger people, we’re talking 20- and 30-year-old women, usually after they started menstruating and some form of growth promoter is going on normally, presenting with advanced tumors which are difficult to treat, but also they may have more than one tumor,” Flowers said. “Something that was rare is now relatively common.”

Perhaps most distressing, Flowers said, is the rise in the young of what some oncologists now call “turbo cancers,” a new term.

“Turbo cancer is a popular name that’s been coined to describe several things,” Flowers said. “It is cancers in young people just turning up, one day you’re absolutely fine, the next day you’re told you have terminal cancer and you’re dead in a week. There are many reports of that even in the mainstream media.”

“Tumors are not only faster growing but you’re getting more types of cancer occurring in the same person. It used to be very very rare. Just occasionally I’d see a very, very aggressive inflammatory cancer in young people. But now everyone has stories.”

Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonologist and critical care doctor who is president and medical director of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and treats hundreds of vaccine-injured patients in his practice, said he is “being deluged with reports and consults for help” about cancer increases from colleagues and patients.

David Wiseman, Ph.D., a pharmacist with a doctorate in experimental pathology and a pioneer, originally for Johnson & Johnson, of products to prevent post-surgery internal injuries, said he was alternatively astonished and outraged that governments and mainstream media won’t follow up on research he and Kevin McKernan, a former director of research and development at the MIT Human Genome Project, conducted showing the mRNA shots were contaminated with DNA fragments.

These fragments, Wiseman said, add to the potential damage the vaccines could cause to the human genome and open new doors to an infinite variety of problems, including cancer.

Wiseman told The Defender that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own data show cancer concerns connected to the COVID-19 vaccines.

“We’re seeing an increase in cancers in VAERS,” the official U.S. Food and Drug Administration and CDC site for reporting vaccine injuries, Wiseman said. “The CDC did a PRR analysis, a signal analysis, that found a signal for cancer in the vaccines, which isn’t proof but it means it’s worth looking at.”

*

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.

Mike Capuzzo is the managing editor of The Defender. He is a former prize-winning reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Miami Herald, a science writer, and a regional magazine founding editor and publisher who has won more than 200 journalism awards as a writer, editor and publisher.

Featured image is from CHD

---

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

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

The core polity of the Axis of Resistance is the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the chronically deformed coverage of the Western media, Iran is by far the most demonized country in the world. Iran’s Zionist enemies have worked overtime in their propaganda projects aimed at equating Iran with terrorism.

When anyone with roots in Iran gets interviewed in the Western media, it is almost always an individual or the representative of a group that is hostile to the present government.

Way overrepresented in the media are fans of the now-vanquished Shah of Iran and enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s current leadership.

The only significant exception to this rule has been Seyed Mohammad Marandi, Professor of English Literature and Orientalism as well as Head of the American Studies Department at the University of Tehran.

For a time it seemed like Professor Marandi was the only prominent figure in Iran to be frequently interviewed by the likes of the BBC, CNN, ABC, Sky News, PBS, and Channel 4 in the UK. Then it happened that the National Security apparatus in the USA exercised so much power over Western news media that it’s big venues were persuaded to cancel Prof. Marandi. Indeed, he was cancelled along with anyone manifesting loyalty to Iran in its present form, including within its theocratic framework.

Since October 7 Professor Marandi has been somewhat restored in the English-speaking media. He has been adding commentary to media depictions of the Israeli-US genocide in Gaza and the West Bank.

Netanyahu has made no secret of the fact that his goal in the current conflagration is to draw the United States into a regime-change war directed at Iran and its allies in the Axis of Resistance. This Axis includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, Ansar Allah in the Houthi stronghold of Yemen, as well as Shiite fighting forces in Syria and Iraq.

The Importance of Prof. Marandi’s Voice in an Era When Israel Has Led the Way in the Campaign to Vanquish Iran 

Until he was 13, Mohammad Marandi grew up in Virginia. Then he moved with his family to Iran.

Prof. Marandi is famous for his ability to explain for English-speaking audiences what is really going on in Iran. He takes the time to elaborate on what both regular people and top officials are thinking about and doing to shape the Islamic Republic as a work-in-progress.

Prof. Marandi’s presence on Western media is all-the-more precious at this moment given the thoroughness of the push to eliminate all voices supportive of Iran from venues of mass communications.

At the moment, however, Iran is at the centre of global attention. The world is living on the edge, waiting for some sort of military response which Prof. Marandi claims is in-the-works. In the accompanying video, Professor Marandi leaves little doubt about the imminence of Iranian military retribution to punish Israel for its anti-Iran, anti-Hezbollah executions.

As Professor Marandi explains it, this Iranian response is coming as a response to the Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh while he was a guest of the government in Tehran. Iran is also a victim of Israel’s execution of Hezbollah Commander Fuad Sukr. Commander Sukr was also eliminated by Israeli Armed Forces on July 31.

Russia is becoming deeply involved in this matter by seemingly counselling precision and restraint while simultaneously sharing weapons systems with its Iranian ally.

Prof. Marandi asserts that Hamas has already won the war. Hezbollah has already won the war. He explains in great detail how things have become so dire for Israel that it probably will “fail to sustain itself” in the years ahead.

Prof Marandi emphasizes the significance of recent revelations. He clarifies that the government of Israel has added to its embrace of genocide, its embrace of the concept that rape by prison guards is perfectly fine in Israeli dungeons.

Prof. Marandi presents his tremendously incisive account of what is going on in Iran, the region and the world in the form of responses to Danny Haiphong’s questions. Danny, it seems, is speaking for the Axis of Resistance in the series he is hosting.

*

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 Looking out at the World from Canada.

Dr. Anthony Hall is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982. Dr. Hall, has recently finished a big two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”.

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

Japan’s first-ever alert for a possible Nankai Trough megaquake, announced Thursday evening following a magnitude 7.1 tremor earlier in the day, left many wondering what to make of the relatively unknown warning.

On Thursday, media outlets sent breaking news notifications about the Meteorological Agency’s decision to issue the alert, urging people to step up preparations in case the “Big One” hits.

The impact of Thursday’s quake so far appears to be minor, with 16 injuries and three buildings damaged reported in the regions affected.

But the alert that followed may have put residents on edge. How serious is the situation, and what should people do in the days to come? Here’s what you need to know.

The Alert

At 7:15 p.m. Thursday, over two hours after the quake struck off the coast of Miyazaki Prefecture, the Meteorological Agency issued a megaquake alert.

At a news conference that followed, the agency said the chance of a major earthquake striking along the Nankai Trough is relatively higher than usual, although the alert doesn’t mean a major earthquake will necessarily occur within a specific time-frame.

However, considering that this is the first alert of its kind, the agency is urging people to be prepared for potential disasters while avoiding panic.

Click here to read the full article on The Japan Times.

*

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: Naoshi Hirata (center), chairman of a committee tasked with evaluating the risk of a Nankai Trough earthquake, speaks at a news conference in Tokyo on Friday. | JIJI

Author’s Update

***

“Dystopian” is the term for these Olympics, from the satanic Opening Ceremony, to the Ending celebration, and throughout the games.

The horror stories include:

• A polluted River Seine, the use of which for the triathlon was not recommended, but the warning was partially disregarded, until at least one athlete got sick.
• Western participants being permitted using prescription drugs, what otherwise would be called “doping”, normally reason for immediate disqualification – (see this); just to have a better chance at beating Asian (especially Chinese)  competitors. Sorry, even dishonesty did not pay off.
• The Olympic green-focused kitchen, was raising complaints from athletes that they were not given enough red meat protein (of course, red meat is taboo for Bill Gates’ et al Climate Change agenda).
• Allowing trans-men boxing against women, in at least one case, knocking the real female (Italian) contestant out in less than 45 seconds – and, though protests are heard – the boxing category was not suspended, or at least boycotted, demonstrating the fully indoctrinated Woke agenda – and more. – In a today’s news break – was this trans-man just declared the women’s boxing Olympic champion?
• And, finally culminating in the “secretive” projected apocalyptic Closing Ceremony.

According to many mainstream media, these Paris Olympics are going down as the worst in the Olympic history, since modern Olympics began in 1896 in Athens, Greece.

Ancient Games were staged in Olympia, Greece, from 776 BC through 393 AD. It took 1503 years for the Olympics to return. Are these announced Apocalypse Closing Ceremonies to be seen as what is commonly called “predictive planning”? An end of nation-states; and end of multi-national events?

If the meaning of the apocalyptic end celebration holds, it might be again the last Olympics for a while. But, We, the People, surely can resist the Apocalypse. In the end, we, the 8-plus billion people hold the destiny in our hands, in our souls – and are not to cede our collective Universal Power to a small, sick, dystopian elite.

Actor Tom Cruise, who got a special award in person from the French authorities probably directly from Mr. Macron, the WEF’s Chief-in-“Apocalypse Now”, will be the star of the closing ceremony, together with the French music bands Air and Phoenix.

*

Looking at not-coincidental parallel events that could also be called apocalyptic – in the sense of ending our civilization and cultures as we know them, here is the

• United Nations (UN) Pact of the Future which is currently little known, not, or hardly mentioned by the mainstream, planned to be presented at the UN’s General Assembly (GA) in September 2024 in New York, depicting noble agendas for the environment, peace, human conviviality, and cooperation. It can be seen at the UN’s website, “Summit of the Future” – see here.

At first sight, all reads and sounds good, but when you dig deeper it is a kind of blueprint for a future Artificial Intelligence (AI)-directed One World Order (OWO) with a full digitized One World Government (OWG) and digital money.

Sovereign states are practically being erased, to be replaced by a OWG, carried out by the UN, whose policy-making body may be the World Economic Forum (WEF), in its current or perhaps updated, modernized format (indications to that effect are under way), policed by the Gestapo-WHO, responsible for the dictate on world health (and death), as well as for Climate Change control.

• And, not coincidentally – the official Swiss Government radio hosted a one-hour program on Friday, 9 August 2024, with call / write-in people participating on “what if we were to live in a borderless world?”

That alone speaks for itself. Amazing, the jolly ambiance they created during the chat-hour, with most people happily tagging along the going “borderless” One  World Government (OWG) – as outlined in the UN agenda for the UN September General Assembly. Although, the UN Agenda was, of course, never mentioned.

The OWG is the End of “Representative Democracy”:  “In the words of the late David Rockefeller:

“…The world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries [democracy].” (quoted by Aspen Times, August 15, 2011, emphasis added)

Well done!

Again, the diabolical Cult has spoken – and warned. But hardly anybody noticed.

They are advancing much faster than the WEF’s Great Reset and the UN Agenda 2030 originally planned it, taking people by surprise – attempting at creating a situation of no resistance and no return.

The UN-WEF Partnership

And what better way than accomplishing the utmost cult condition, warning people in advance of their sinister plans, than the Olympics — with the full globalization agenda disguised in symbolic satanic language — ending in apocalyptic songs and closing scenes?

Indeed, the current world order, needs to be apocalypsed before the new one can begin. That is precisely what the planned Olympic Closing Ceremony is supposed to insinuate.

Hollywood star, Tom Cruise is rumored to be one of the highlights of the Paris Olympics Closing Ceremony. He is predicted to engage in a death-defying stunt on the roof of the Stade de France on Sunday, 11 August, ending celebration.

The ceremony also promises a memorable passing of the five-rings flag to Los Angeles, where the next games are planned in 2028, with accent on “planned”. Who knows what will happen from now to then.

The Olympics Artistic Director, Thomas Jolly, has revealed that the closing event will combine “wonder” with “dystopia”, suggesting some darker elements than what Jolly calls the joyful tone of the opening ceremony. 

Who knows what we can expect. Well, the name of the Game is Apocalypse. What else?

In a nt meeting with journalists, Mr. Jolly offered a frank “sneak prevue”, saying, “he saw the games as a “fragile monument” and wanted to imagine what would happen if they “disappeared and someone was rebuilding them in a distant future”.

The closing sequence features “travelers from another space-time who arrive on Earth and discover vestiges from the History of the Olympics“, with acrobats restoring the famous five rings of the games.

It will reportedly feature more than 100 dancers, circus artists and other performers, with the promise of aerial displays, giant sets, and spectacular lighting.

Destination Hollywood

The opening ceremony featured some big stars, including Lady Gaga, Celine Dion and Aya Nakamura, but big celebrities are also expected Sunday.

The closing fiesta has lined up two of France’s biggest musical exports — Air and Phoenix. “Air” is known for electronic pop and space rock; “Phoenix” is Indie pop, and New Wave – very befitting for an apocalypsed civilization.

Actor Tom Cruise has been at several Olympic events and one as of the most daredevil of Hollywood stars, he would be a natural connection between Paris and the 2028 Los Angeles Games. Los Angeles is also the home of Hollywood – no accident – where pedophilia and sex trade are in obscure but high demand.

US media have reported that Tom Cruise has been preparing a spectacular stunt to pick up the Olympic flag and transfer it to LA, with video sequences already filmed on both sides of the Atlantic. (AFP, 7 August 2024).

Only God knows what the Death Cult’s Apocalyptic symbolism – ending Greek Olympia (again) – has in store for Us, the People.

They, the death Cultists – may not know, however, that Apocalypse would also be their Cult’s death.

*

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: 2024 Summer Olympics logo (Licensed under Fair use)

The head of the British Army has said the UK must be prepared to fight a major war in three years and hyped up the threat of a global conflict against Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, The Times reported on Tuesday.

Gen. Roly Walker described the four nations as an “axis of upheaval” and warned they have been working closer together, which is a reaction to US and other Western sanctions.

Walker said no matter how the war in Ukraine ended, Russia would still be “very very dangerous” and “wanting some form of retribution” for the West’s support of the proxy war.

“When you think they are down they [Russia] will come roaring back to get their vengeance,” Walker said.

The Times report said that Walker believes he has until 2027 or 2028 to significantly bolster the UK’s fighting power. He wants to double the British military’s ability to “fight and kill” within three years and triple it by the end of the decade.

“We have just enough time … to prepare, act, and assure the re-establishment of credible land forces to support a strategy of deterrence,” Walker said.

The British Army currently has 72,500 troops in its ranks, which, according to the Times, is the smallest it has been since the Napoleonic era. The UK has also significantly depleted its weapons stockpiles by arming Ukraine.

Earlier this year, a British general acknowledged that the UK wouldn’t last more than two months in a direct war with Russia. Other British officials downplayed Russia’s military superiority over the UK, saying if there was a direct war with Russia, NATO would be involved as well.

Walker’s comments reflect a growing view among military leaders in NATO member states that a direct war with Russia will happen in the future despite the risk of nuclear escalation. US military officials have also been openly preparing for a war with China, another nuclear-armed power.

*

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

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

Featured image: British Army Lt. Gen. Sir Charles Roland Vincent Walker, KCB, DSO (U.S. Army photo by Leroy Council / Public Domain)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

We are commemorating the 79th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This article by Edward Curtin was first published by Global Research in 2018.

“Ahab is forever Ahab, man.  This whole act’s immutably decreed.  ‘Twas rehearsed by thee and me billion years before this ocean rolled.  Fool!  I am the Fates’ lieutenant; I act under orders.” – Herman Melville, Moby Dick   

“The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint…But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.” – C. S. Lewis, author’s preface, 1962, The Screwtape Letters

American history can only accurately be described as the story of demonic possession, however you choose to understand that phrase.  Maybe radical “evil” will suffice.  But right from the start the American colonizers were involved in massive killing because they considered themselves divinely blessed and guided, a chosen people whose mission would come to be called “manifest destiny.”  Nothing stood in the way of this divine calling, which involved the need to enslave and kill millions and millions of innocent people that continues down to today.  “Others” have always been expendable since they have stood in the way of the imperial march ordained by the American god. This includes all the wars waged based on lies and false flag operations. It is not a secret, although most Americans, if they are aware of it, prefer to see it as a series of aberrations carried out by “bad apples.”  Or something from the past.   

Our best writers and prophets have told us the truth: Thoreau, Twain, William James, MLK, Fr. Daniel Berrigan, et al.: we are a nation of killers of the innocent.  We are conscienceless.  We are brutal.  We are in the grip of evil forces.  

The English writer D. H. Lawrence said it perfectly in 1923,

“The American soul is hard, isolate, stoic and a killer.  It has never yet melted.” 

It still hasn’t.

When on August 6 and 9, 1945 the United States killed 200-300 thousand innocent Japanese civilians with atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they did so intentionally.  It was an act of sinister state terrorism, unprecedented by the nature of the weapons but not by the slaughter. The American terror bombings of Japanese cities that preceded the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – led by the infamous Major General Curtis LeMay (image on the right)– were also intentionally aimed at Japanese civilians and killed hundreds of thousands of them. 

Is there an American artist’s painting of Tokyo destroyed by the firebombing to go next to Picasso’s Guernica, where estimates of the dead range between 800 and 1,600?  In Tokyo alone more than 100, 000 Japanese civilians were burnt to death by cluster bombs of napalm.  All this killing was intentional. I repeat: Intentional.  Is that not radical evil?  Demonic?  Only five Japanese cities were spared such bombing.

The atomic bombings were an intentional holocaust, not to end the war, as the historical record amply demonstrates, but to send a message to the Soviet Union that we could do to them what we did to the residents of Japan.  President Truman made certain that the Japanese willingness to surrender in May 1945 was made unacceptable because he and his Secretary-of-State James Byrnes  wanted to use the atomic bombs – “as quickly as possible to ‘show results’” in Byrnes’ words – to send a message to the Soviet Union.  So “the Good War” was ended in the Pacific with the “good guys” killing hundreds of thousand Japanese civilians to make a point to the “bad guys,” who have been demonized ever since.   Russia phobia is nothing new.  

Satan always wears the other’s face.

Many Baby Boomers like to say they grew up with the bomb.  They are lucky. They grew up.  They got be scared.  They got to hide under their desks and wax nostalgic about it.  Do you remember dog tags?  Those 1950s and 1960s?  The scary movies?

 

The children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who died under our bombs on August 6 and 9, 1945 didn’t get to grow up.  They couldn’t hide.  They just went under. To be accurate: we put them under. Or they were left to smolder for decades in pain and then die.  But that it was necessary to save American lives is the lie. It’s always about American lives, as if the owners of the country actually cared about them.  But to tender hearts and innocent minds, it’s a magic incantation.  Poor us!

Fat Man, Little Boy – how the words echo down the years to the now fat Americans who grew up in the 1950s and who think like little boys and girls about their country’s demonic nature.  Innocence – it is wonderful!  We are different now.

“We are great because we are good,” that’s what Hillary Clinton told us. 

The Libyans can attest to that.  We are exceptional, special.  The next election will prove we can defeat Mr. Pumpkin Head and restore America to its “core values.” 

Perhaps you think I am cynical.  But understanding true evil is not child’s play.  It seems beyond the grasp of most Americans who need their illusions.  Evil is real.  There is simply no way to understand the savage nature of American history without seeing its demonic nature.  How else can we redeem ourselves at this late date, possessed as we are by delusions of our own God-blessed goodness?

But average Americans play at innocence.  They excite themselves at the thought that with the next election the nation will be “restored” to the right course.  Of course there never was a right course, unless might makes right, which has always been the way of America’s rulers.  Today Trump is viewed by so many as an aberration.  He is far from it.  He’s straight out of a Twain short story.  He’s Vaudeville. He’s Melville’s confidence man.  He’s us. Did it ever occur to those who are fixated on him that if those who own and run the country wanted him gone, he’d be gone in an instant?  He can tweet and tweet idiotically, endlessly send out messages that he will contradict the next day, but as long as he protects the super-rich, accepts Israel’s control of him, and allows the CIA-military-industrial complex to do its world-wide killing and looting of the treasury, he will be allowed to entertain and excite the public – to get them worked up in a lather in pseudo-debates.  And to make this more entertaining, he will be opposed by the “sane” Democratic opposition, whose intentions are as benign as an assassin’s smile.  

Look back as far as you can to past U.S. presidents, the figureheads who “act under orders” (whose orders?), as did Ahab in his lust to kill the “evil” great white whale, and what do you see?  You see servile killers in the grip of a sinister power.  You see hyenas with polished faces. You see pasteboard masks.  On the one occasion when one of these presidents dared to follow his conscience and rejected the devil’s pact that is the presidency’s killer-in-chief role, he – JFK – had his brains blown out in public view.  An evil empire thrives on shedding blood, and it enforces its will through demonic messages.  Resist and there will be blood on the streets, blood on the tracks, blood in your face. 

Despite this, President Kennedy’s witness, his turn from cold warrior to an apostle of peace, remains to inspire a ray of hope in these dark days. As recounted by James Douglass in his masterful JFK and the Unspeakable, Kennedy agreed to a meeting in May 1962 with a group of Quakers who had been demonstrating outside the While House for total disarmament.  They urged him to move in that direction.  Kennedy was sympathetic to their position.  He said he wished it were easy to do so from the top down, but that he was being pressured by the Pentagon and others to never do that, although he had given a speech urging “a peace race” together with the Soviet Union. He told the Quakers it would have to come from below.  According to the Quakers, JFK listened intently to their points, and before they left said with a smile,

“You believe in redemption don’t you?” 

Soon Kennedy was shaken to his core by the Cuban missile crisis when the world teetered on the brink of extinction and his insane military and “intelligence” advisers urged him to wage a nuclear war.  Not long after, he took a sharp top-down turn toward peace despite their fierce opposition, a turn so dramatic over the next year that it led to his martyrdom.  And he knew it would.  He knew it would.

So hope is not all lost.  There are great souls like JFK to inspire us. Their examples flash here and there. But to even begin to hope to change the future, a confrontation with our demonic past (and present) is first necessary, a descent into the dark truth that is terrifying in its implications.  False innocence must be abandoned.  Carl Jung, in “On the Psychology of the Unconscious,” addressed this with the words: 

It is a frightening thought that man also has a shadow side to him, consisting not just of little weaknesses – and foibles, but of a positively demonic dynamism. The individual seldom knows anything of this; to him, as an individual, it is incredible that he should ever in any circumstances go beyond himself. But let these harmless creatures form a mass, and there emerges a raging monster; and each individual is only one tiny cell in the monster’s body, so that for better or worse he must accompany it on its bloody rampages and even assist it to the utmost. Having a dark suspicion of these grim possibilities, man turns a blind eye to the shadow-side of human nature. Blindly he strives against the salutary dogma of original sin, which is yet so prodigiously true. Yes, he even hesitates to admit the conflict of which he is so painfully aware.

How can one describe men who would intentionally slaughter so many innocent people?  American history is rife with such examples up to the present day.  Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc. – the list is very long.  Savage wars carried out by men and women who own and run the country, and who try to buy the souls of regular people to join them in their pact with the devil, to acquiesce to their ongoing wicked deeds.  Such monstrous evil was never more evident than on August 6 and 9, 1945.

Unless we enter into deep contemplation of the evil that was released into the world with those bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we are lost in a living hell without escape.  And we will pay.  Nemesis always demands retribution.  We have gradually been accepting rule by those for whom the killing of innocents is child’s play, and we have been masquerading as innocent and good children for whom the truth is too much to bear.  “Indeed, the safest road to Hell is the gradual one,” Screwtape the devil tells his nephew, Wormwood, a devil in training, “the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.”  That’s the road we’ve been traveling.

The projection of evil onto others works only so long.  We must reclaim our shadows and withdraw our projections.  Only the fate of the world depends on it. 

*

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

Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is http://edwardcurtin.com/.

On December 7, 1941, Japan carried out a premeditated and ruthless attack on U.S. ships at Pearl Harbor. At the time, America was already in World War II on the side of Britain and Russia. But the unprovoked Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor changed things drastically. At Pearl Harbor, 350 Japanese planes in a premeditated attack on the U.S. Pacific fleet destroyed or crippled 8 battleships. 2,403 Americans were killed. The next day, President Roosevelt declared December 7, 1941, as a day of ‘infamy’ and declared war on Japan. Fateful Decision One of the most barbaric, ruthless, and criminal acts by a nation against the civilians of another nation was the use of two deadly atomic bombs by the United States against the civilians of Japan during the Pacific War. 

Today, August 9^th, 2024, is the 79^th anniversary of the 2^nd atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki by the United States. The first bomb was dropped on the city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. Its population was between 320,000 to 400,000 people. As if this was not enough, three days later on August 9, 1941, a second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, a city of 270,000 people. About 140,000 innocent men, women, and children were killed in Hiroshima. The death toll in Nagasaki was 70,000.

The question is how and why the United States decided to employ such horrendous weapons against Japan, especially against its civilians.

A lot of books, essays, and articles have been written about this event. Yet after some 60 years, the United States government and its compliant mass media have succeeded in hiding the truth from the rest of the world. Due to massive propaganda, the most common belief amongst the people about these horrific acts is that the United States government used the atomic bombs to save from a quarter to half a million American soldiers’ lives by forcing immediate Japanese surrender. Yet the truth of the matter is quite different.

During the Pacific War, which lasted from December 1941 till August 1945, the United States went through two presidents. On April 12, 1944, President Franklin Roosevelt died suddenly and his vice president, an ex-senator from Missouri, took over the presidency. He was especially inexperienced in foreign policy. By all accounts, Truman was an honest, hardworking, and decent man.

But yet, he was far more complex a person. Robert Griffith describes: 

Truman was a complicated, not a simple man; a man at times different and aggressive, capable of both humanity and arrogance; a man who would leap to decisions quickly and perhaps impulsively, but he could also be vacillating and indecisive; a man who always seemed to know his own mind, yet he appears in retrospect to have been highly dependent on those who advised him; a man who valued honesty and plain speaking, but who was also capable of contradiction and deception, including and perhaps especially, self-deception. 

Henry Stimson, who would become the Secretary of War during the Truman Presidency, jotted in his private journal a year before Truman became president:

“Truman is a nuisance and pretty untrustworthy man. He talks smoothly but he acts meanly.”

James Byrnes, who was appointed the Secretary of State soon after Truman became president, had become the main advisor of the president who seemed to be so ill-prepared for the job. Though there were many other advisors to the president, James Byrnes was at the heart of the decision-making process for President Truman.

Roosevelt’s former aide, Harry Hopkins, on a presidential mission to Moscow in May 1945, reported Stalin as saying that

“according to his information the Japanese would not accept unconditional surrender” and that “if we stick to unconditional surrender the Japs will not give up and we will have to destroy them as we did Germany.” 

Yet, despite knowing that with changing the terms of the surrender, the war could be ended, Truman, with the advice of James Byrne refused to alter the terms of surrender!

It was widely believed by many experts, military as well as civilian, that if Japan was offered a simple surrender, if the term ‘unconditional’ was removed from the surrender offer, then it would have surrendered without the use of the atomic bombs. Or if the United States would have clarified the term ‘Unconditional’ or if she would have simply promised Japan that no harm would have come to their Emperor and that they would keep the emperor’s position unchanged, then Japan certainly would have surrendered. Without the promise of the emperor’s position & safety, millions of Japanese soldiers would have kept fighting until death.

Sometime back, the United States had offered Japan an “unconditional surrender”! In the Japanese view the “unconditional surrender” meant the emperor could be arrested, tried, and executed. Th at could also mean the total destruction of their culture and lifestyle. Emperor Hirohito was like a God to most of the Japanese people. No Japanese would agree to their Emperor being insulted, let alone be tried, removed, or executed. Th e U.S. leaders knew well this feeling of the Japanese.

James Byrnes, who was appointed the Secretary of State soon after Truman became president, had become the main advisor of the president who seemed to be so ill-prepared for the job. Though there were many other advisors to the president, James Byrnes was at the heart of the decision-making process for President Truman.

Despite all these expert advice from various prominent people and groups, Byrnes and Truman refused to modify the surrender terms. What did they actually have in their mind? Was it that they had already decided to use the atomic bombs and force an immediate surrender? Was it that they wanted to try this new weapon, on which a lot of money was spent? Or was it because they wanted to show to the world, the Russians in particular, that America was now the Supreme Power, stronger than any other nation in the world?

General MacArthur’s Southwest Pacific Command prepared a “restricted background study” in the summer of 1944 which argued that “although there should be no weakening of the peace terms, to dethrone or hang the Emperor would cause a tremendous and violent reaction from all Japanese. Hanging of the Emperor to them would be comparable to the Crucifixion of Christ to us. All would fight to die like ants. The position of the gangster militarist would be strengthened immeasurably. The war would be unduly prolonged; our losses heavier than otherwise would be necessary.” Even Churchill, at Yalta, in February 1945 had taken up this general line. In fact, as early as this date, he had advocated some modification in the surrender terms.

By May-June 1945, significant development had taken place. Th e United States had broken through the Japanese code! Now, the Americans could clearly hear what the Japanese were saying. There was overwhelming evidence that the Japanese were close to surrender except they only wanted terms which would protect their Emperor.

A series of Japanese peace feelers were noted in Switzerland which OSS Chief William Donovan reported to Truman in May and June. This indicated even at this point that the only serious obstacle to peace was U.S. demand of ‘unconditional surrender’. Allen Dulles at the time chief of OSS operations in Switzerland (and later director of the CIA), in his 1966 book, ‘The Secret Surrender’, recalled that:

“On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to the Secretary Stimson on what I had learned from Tokyo – they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and the constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people.”

The U.S. minister in Stockholm on April 6, 1945, reported that his sources believed it

“Probable that very far-reaching conditions would be accepted by the Japanese by way of negotiation.”20 “However, there is no doubt that ‘unconditional surrender’ terms would be unacceptable to the Japanese because it would mean dishonor. Application of such terms would be fatal and lead to desperate action on the part of the people…The Emperor must not be touched.”

There is a copy of the powerful July 16, 1945 memorandum among Eisenhower’s papers that Stimson wrote for Truman urging multiple workings before the bomb was used. It is unclear though when this was given to him. However, Eisenhower in his book, ‘Crusade in Europe’, includes the following brief account of his ‘personal and immediate’ reaction of hearing of plans for the atomic attack from Stimson:

“I expressed the hope that we would never have to use such a thing (the atomic bomb) against any enemy because I disliked seeing the United States take the lead in introducing into war something as horrible and destructive as this new weapon was described to be…”

It is interesting to read the conversation between General LeMay and The Press: 

LeMay: The war would have been over in few weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. 

The Press: You mean that, sir? Without the Russians and the atomic bomb? 

LeMay: Yes, with the B-29 

The Press: General, why use the atomic bomb? Why did we use it then? 

LeMay: Well, the other people were not convinced…. 

The Press: Had they not surrendered because of the atomic bomb? 

LeMay: The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all. 

—This was September 20, 1945, press conference by Major General Curtis E. LeMay U.S. Army Air Forces.

The leaders of U.S. armed forces were also opposed to the use of this monstrous weapon. (General Douglas) MacArthur once spoke to me very eloquently about it pacing the floor of his apartment in the Waldorf… MacArthur believed that the same restrictions ought to apply to atomic weapons as to conventional weapons, that the military objective should always be limited damage. MacArthur, you see, was a soldier. He believed in using force only against military targets and that is why the nuclear thing turned him off. —Former President Richard M. Nixon, July 1985

George C. Marshall, the military Chief of Staff is also on record as feeling strongly that the atomic bomb should not be used without warning against a city.

Many military leaders had felt that the bomb was not a military necessity. U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey’s study (after-the-fact official studies) conducted closest to the actual events concluded that Japan in all probability would have surrendered by November and the War Department’s Military Intelligence Division judged that it was “almost a certainty that the Japanese would have capitulated upon the entry of Russia into the War.” 

Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, the Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, as reported by the New York Times on September 22, 1945, at a press conference at Pearl Harbor, took the opportunity of adding his voice to those insisting that Japan had already been defeated before the atomic bombings and Russia’s entry into the war. 

Nimitz considered the atomic bomb somehow indecent, not a legitimate form of warfare. Rear Admiral E.B. Fluckey, a submarine commander during the war and later personal aid to Nimitz, recalled that Admiral Nimitz did not think it saved many lives to blow up the Japanese like that. 

Some 69 scientists who were working on the development of the bomb at the Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory signed a petition headed by the leading scientist Leo Szilard. The petition basically said that the atomic bomb should not be used unless the terms to be imposed upon Japan were made public in detail and that after knowing those terms Japan refused to surrender. 

They were against the use of the bomb, without considering the moral issue as well as without changing the surrender terms, and without letting the public and Japanese know the details of these terms, and without giving the Japanese proper opportunity to surrender. Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, the man who chaired the meetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff felt very strongly against using the bomb and advised the President not to. Leahy’s secretary, Dorothy Ringquist remembered vividly that on the day Hiroshima was bombed, Leahy said:

“Dorothy, we will regret this day. The United States will suffer, for war is not to be waged on women and children.”

As the testimony of top military leaders is considered, the evidence clearly confirms that not only was their advice not seriously sought but also (perhaps with one possible ambiguous exception) none of them believed the use of the atomic bomb was dictated by overwhelming military considerations. Several of them even expressed profound revulsion at the idea of targeting a city. 

The highly respected scientist Albert Einstein was vehemently opposed to the use of the bomb. August 10, 1946, headline in the New York Times announced: 

“Einstein Deplores Use of Atom Bomb”. 

The story in the Times reported Einstein’s view that “a great majority of the scientists were opposed to the sudden employment of the bomb.” Einstein felt that political-diplomatic rather than military motives had been major factors. “I suspect that the affaire was precipitated by a desire to end (the) war in the Pacific by any means before Russia’s participation.”

The U.S. religious leaders were also very much opposed to the use of this terrible weapon.

In the last week of July 1945, Truman and Byrnes by now had decided to use the new weapon on Japan. From Stalin they had found out that Russia was going to attack Japan on or around mid-August. But they didn’t want Russia to join the war now. They wanted Japan’s surrender and an end to this war before Russia came in. So, the fateful order to atomic bomb the Japanese cities was likely given on July 25th, a day before the Potsdam Proclamation was issued which was July 26th. The proclamation was supposedly the warning to the Japanese to surrender or face total destruction. Yet the order to atomic bomb them was issued two days before Suzuki’s rejection of the proclamation of 28th July!

After the war was over, the U.S. media and the government pronouncements had falsely convinced the American people that the dropping of the atomic bombs was absolutely essential to ending the war. Polls taken in August 1945 showed that an amazing 85 percent of Americans approved the use of the atomic bomb. Many believed that no matter how dreadful and destructive the new weapon was, the Japanese got what they deserved. 

Unfortunately, for more than half a century, a lie has been perpetrated in the United States that the bomb was necessary to end the Pacific War and that the atomic bombing of Japan saved, depending on who one believes, a quarter to half or even a million American lives! 

The false propaganda and lies started just after the deadly bombing…right from the President onwards. 

On April 28, 1959, Truman told students at Columbia University simply that “the dropping of the bombs stopped the war, saved millions of lives.” 

The actual estimate of casualties from the invasion was 31,000. It was presented to Truman directly on June 18 by General Marshall. On the basis of ratios then common in the Pacific Campaign, this in turn would translate into 7,000-8,000 deaths. But Marshall also had been telling Truman and others that the invasion would cost a ¼ to one million American lives, a highly exaggerated figure. On August 6, 1945, Truman made a public statement calling Hiroshima “an important Japanese army base”, implying that, that was the main reason why it was bombed. 

On August 9, three days later, in his report on the Potsdam Conference, the President offered a similar explanation: 

“The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid in so far as possible the killing of civilians.” What a liar!

Thus, false information and lies upon lies were perpetrated by many top government leaders, including the president, after the deadly bombings. The news media, as always, just carried on these lies to the average Americans. As a result, generations after generations of Americans seem to believe that the atomic bombing of Japan was necessary to end the war and save ¼ to one million American lives!

According to Gar Alperovitz’s detailed book, “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb”, (Alfred A. Knopf, 1995), it is worth examining the underlying reasons behind this horrible crime:

(1) President Truman and Byrnes, the two main actors in the decision to bomb, knew very well that Japan was badly beaten and close to capitulating, if only their Emperor was protected by the surrender terms. But they refused to alter those terms. 

(2) The Potsdam Conference was intentionally delayed so that the bomb would be ready before the conference. 

(3) All the peace initiatives by the Japanese were ignored, including the one by the emperor himself. 

(4) First, they tried to encourage Russia to join the war against Japan. 

(5) Once the atomic bomb test was successful, they had second thoughts. Then they wanted to discourage Russia from joining the war against Japan. 

(6) To atomic bomb Japan was already decided by them. 

(7) But once they knew from Stalin that Russia will declare war on Japan around mid-August, they decided to speed up and give orders to throw the first atomic bomb on August 6, 1945, before Russia had chance to attack Japan. 

(8) They in their decision, not to alter the surrender terms or to use the deadly weapon against Japan, ignored the opinions of overwhelming number of experts in the United States and Britain. 

(9) The Japanese leaders were not given enough time to study the Potsdam Proclamation. 

(10) They had decided to use the atomic bombs well in advance before the Potsdam Proclamation. 

(11) Decision to bomb was not a military necessity. 

(12) U.S. military leaders were not seriously consulted. It was strictly a civilian decision. 

(13) Intentionally, major urban centers such as Hiroshima and Nagasaki and their civilian population were targeted to have maximum impact! 

(14) Though one bomb, a uranium bomb would have produced the surrender, second bomb, a plutonium device was used three days later. 

(15) After the ghastly killings of civilians, a campaign of lies and misinformation was carried out by Truman and his administration with the support of U.S. news media. So, average American has been kept in dark about the actual reasons of such criminal act by a U.S. president.

(16) The bombs were used to force Japan to surrender before Russia entered the war so as to keep Russia out of postwar Japan governance. 

(17) Also, the bombs were used to impress upon the USSR and the rest of the world that America had this powerful weapon and it would not hesitate to use it to pursue its global interests and agenda. 

The claim by President Truman and some of his aids that ¼ to one million American lives were saved if invasion was necessary is highly exaggerated at best. But, as per most experts at the time, no invasion was even necessary. 

The intentional targeting of civilian women and children in a highly populated urban area was intended to create the maximum psychological impact on the minds of the Japanese, the Russians, and the world. 

The instant deaths of thousands of Hiroshima and Nagasaki residents had profound impacts on the minds of people around the globe. 

More than 140,000 of Hiroshima’s 350,000 people and 70,000 of the 270,000 people of Nagasaki perished within five months as a result of the atomic blasts.

There is hardly any logical dissent from the conclusion reached by the members of the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey…

“that surely Japan would have surrendered prior to December 31, 1945, and in all likelihood prior to November 1, 1945. Japan would have surrendered even if atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”

Th e U.S. leaders must have known this before they decided to use the bombs. Then why did they commit such a crime? 

Well, more than anything, they wanted to show Russia the new weapon the United States possessed. They not only wanted to show Russia, but also to proclaim to the world that the United States would not hesitate to use any means to protect and guard its interests! 

They also wanted to curb Russia from exerting its influence in Europe, especially Eastern Europe, and Asia. Also, the atomic bomb would produce both Japanese surrender and subordination to the United States in the post-war period for years to come. It forestalled a possible Russian invasion of Japan, leaving the U.S. free to shape, unilaterally under the occupation, Japan’s postwar course. Also, the bombs as intended sent powerful and electrifying signal to the world and especially to the Soviet leadership of the new powerful weapon and American readiness to deploy it ruthlessly in the pursuit of its global interests. 

Only the utter inhumanity and brutal ruthlessness of man can commit such crimes against civilians of any country!

The Destruction and the Death Toll in Hiroshima: From the estimated 320,000 people, some 80,000 were instantly killed or mortally wounded. About one third of the casualties were soldiers.

Sometime after the moment of detonation which occurred at approximately 08:15 and 43 seconds (local time), with the writing of Paul Tibbets (From the Public Domain)

The stone columns at the entrance to the Shima clinic were rammed straight down into the ground. The whole building had collapsed. All its occupants were instantly vaporized. Out of a total of 90,000, 62,000 other buildings were destroyed. The city’s utility and transportation services were wrecked. The water main suffered over 70,000 breaks. 180 of the city’s 200 doctors had been killed; 1,654 nurses out of 1,780 were also similarly afflicted. From the total of 55 hospitals and first-aid centers, only three remained operational. 

The largest single group of casualties occurred at Hiroshima castle some 900 yards from the hypocenter. There, out in the open, several thousand soldiers and one American POW were exposed directly to the spreading blast. They were instantly incinerated. Their charred bodies were burnt into the parade ground. Similar fates befell thousands of others in the surrounding areas. Hiroshima castle was totally destroyed. Ninety percent of its occupants were killed. Amongst the casualties were the schoolgirls who were on duty in the communications center. 

The radiant heat set alight Radio Hiroshima. It burnt out trucks, tram cars, and railway rolling stock. Stone walls, steel doors, and asphalt pavements; all glowed red hot. The blast transferred clothing on to the skin. Men had their caps etched on their scalps, women their Kimono patterns imprinted on their bodies and children had their socks burned on to their legs. All this happened within seconds from the explosion! 

In both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 50 percent of all who were within three-quarters of a mile of the hypocenter died on the day of the explosion and 80-100 percent of those exposed at this distance eventually succumbed to their wounds. 

According to Richard Rhodes’ estimates, within five years, Hiroshima’s atomic bomb-related deaths numbered nearly 200,000 and Nagasaki’s 74,000. In the annals of warfare, no single attack extracted so heavy a toll in human lives as the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. Victims included not only those who felt the direct effect of the deadly blast but tens of thousands of others including fetuses in the uterus who were exposed to the radiation days after the bombing. Hundreds of thousands have suffered ghastly effects of radiation, ‘death in life’ in subsequent years down to present. 

Thus, Hiroshima was destroyed by a single atomic bomb. Most of the buildings were flattened out. Thousands of them burned and gutted. Besides the estimated 80,000 who were instantly killed, thousands received lethal dosages of radiation. Thousands were badly burned or injured. Some of them with their clothes torn and burned, their skin peeling from their face, hands and legs, and their hair burned. Many looked like ghosts, moving around aimlessly, frightened, zombie like, groaning and asking for help and water. A vast majority of them were children and women who would ultimately die a painful death. 

President Truman learned about the historic explosion while he was finishing lunch with the crew of the ship Augusta as it was sailing through calm waters towards home. 

A map room officer handed him the message which read: 

“Hiroshima was bombed visually…at seven fifteen p.m. Washington time, August five …Fifteen minutes after drop”, Captain Parson reported “Condition normal in airplane following delivery. Results clear cut successful in all respects. Visible effects greater than in any test.” 

Truman looked up, his face alight. “Captain”, he exclaimed to the officer, “this is the greatest thing in history!”

The Destruction of Nagasaki: At 11:02 am, America detonated the Plutonium bomb on Nagasaki.

Nagasaki before and after the bombing, after the fires had burned out (From the Public Domain)

The plutonium bomb, upon exploding above ground, had released enormous energy in the form of light, heat, gamma radiation and pressure. Within 1,000 yards, nearly all living organisms—insects, birds, cats, dogs, chickens and horses—had perished instantly. 

Also, all plants, flowers, grass, and trees wrinkled and died. Wood started burning. Galvanized iron roofs and metal beams started bubbling and the resultant soft gooey masses twisted and formed grotesque shapes. Stones had pulverized. Every cubic inch of air was burned away for a second. Those exposed within this parameter neither knew nor felt anything. Their scorched, blackened, and unrecognizable forms dropped quietly where they stood. 

The heat rays, though very intense, lasted only a few seconds. Then came the blast. Within 800 yards, due to the tremendous pressure created, a hundred times stronger than the strongest typhoon, all the buildings were totally destroyed. Three miles away, the blast effect, traveling outward at a speed of 9,000 miles per hour, blew off the walls and roofs of the houses. 

Of the estimated 55,000 buildings in existence at the time, some 20,000 were destroyed either by fire or by blast. Thousands of people who escaped radiation were hurt badly by flying glass, wood, beams, and other objects. 

About 30,000 people were killed in the first few minutes of the explosion. Three times this number would die in the days, months, and years to come. Urakami branch of Nagasaki prison, some 100 meters north of the epicenter was annihilated along with 134 prisoners and wardens. Urakami Church, 500 meters to the east had collapsed—killing all 200 people and twenty priests inside. At Shiroyama Primary School, 500 meters west of the epicenter, out of about 1,500 children and teachers, about 1,310 died. Also, as many as 1,300 were killed at Yamazato Primary School. At Josei Girls’ School, 212 pupils and nuns perished. Other schools were near the epicenter, each lost between 140 and 220 children and the staff . Over 1,000 doctors, nurses, patients and students were killed in and around the burning structures of Nagasaki College Hospital and the Medical College. Out of 1,800 that were there, over 200 patients and 530 medical students died.

The death and destruction was heart-wrenching. 

In the aftermath, after a few hours and during the next several days, thousands of people, most of them civilians who were terribly burned, were seen slowly crawling, walking or simply lying down on the streets. Their faces were burned, blackened, the hair on their heads and eyebrows burned, the skin from their faces and limbs peeling and their upper body naked as their clothes were burned, they were groaning and moaning in extreme pain. They looked like ghosts with pink color of the inside of their skin showing from some areas of their face, hands, and legs. A terrible calamity that was man-made had befallen on their unfortunate city.

America had succeeded in targeting the civilians to create maximum casualties and have the greatest impact. Of those who died in this explosion, 3 percent were military personnel, 13 percent worked in the war industry. But a vast majority of them, comprising 84 percent, were ordinary people. They were mainly women, girls, children, students, and the elderly.

For generations, the civilian victims of atomic bombs have suffered from the horrific effects of radioactivity where thousands of babies have been born with birth defects attributable to the radiation that hundreds of thousands of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were subjected to. These radiation victims suffered for years and finally succumbed to their agonizing wounds. There is no parallel in history when hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians were subjected to such a tragic fate on such a massive scale. The crime crosses all the limits of barbarity when one realizes that the whole tragedy was avoidable!

*

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 

Chaitanya Davé is an engineer and a businessman. He has authored three books: CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: A Shocking Record of US Crimes since 1776-2007, COLLAPSE: Civilization on the Brink-2010, CAPITALISM’S MARCH OF DESTRUCTION: Replacing it with People and Nature-Friendly Economy. Author of many articles on politics, history, and the environment. Founder/President of a non-profit charity foundation helping the poor villagers of India, Nepal, Haiti, USA-homeless and other poor countries. He can be contacted at [email protected].

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: In this handout picture released by the U.S. Army, a mushroom cloud billows about one hour after a nuclear bomb was detonated above Hiroshima, Japan on Aug. 6, 1945. (AP Photo/U.S. Army via Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, HO) ** NO SALES, CREDIT MANDATORY **

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 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

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

First published on May 4, 2023

The Pandemic Treaty  scheduled for May  2024 must be the object of a Worldwide mass movement against the Globalists’ Power Grab *

** 

Dennis Meadows, one of the main authors of the Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth, is an honorary member of the Club of Rome and a member of the World Economic Forum. If you thought his ideology had softened and become less anti-human since the publishing of his book, you’d be wrong. 

Here’s a 2017 video of Meadows musing over his hopes that the coming inevitable genocide of 86% of the world population could be accomplished peacefully under a “benevolent” dictatorship.

He said:

“We could [ ] have eight or nine billion, probably, if we have a very strong dictatorship which is smart … and [people have] a low standard of living …  

But we want to have freedom and we want to have a high standard of living so we’re going to have a billion people.

And we’re now at seven, so we have to get back down.  I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow and that it can be done in a way which is relatively equal, you know, so that people share the experience.”

As will become apparent at the end of this article, it is no coincidence that Meadows’ words echo the words in the 1995 Global Biodiversity Assessment first presented at the United Nations climate change conference COP1 which stated:

An ‘agricultural world’ in which most human beings are peasants, should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people … In contrast, a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present North American material standard of living would be one billion.

Global Biodiversity Assessment, UNEP, 1995, pg. 773

What the advocates of this ideology seem to omit mentioning is that, according to Worldometer, the population of the world is currently over 8 billion which doesn’t stack up with their fear-mongering predictions. There’s a good reason they avoid real-world scenarios because their models are a sleight of hand, they manipulate the data.

While many are now familiar with the manipulation of predictive modelling by Neil Ferguson during the covid-19 crisis, a network of powerful Malthusians have used the same tactics for the better part of the last century to sell and impose their agenda.

Malthusians are the disciples of Thomas Malthus (1766 – 1834).  Malthus promoted the mathematical thesis that population levels will always tend towards geometric growth, while agricultural resources will tend to arithmetic growth resulting in relatively forecastable “crisis points.” Malthus believed that social engineers representing the British Empire must use these “crisis points” to scientifically manage the “human herd.” Malthus believed that nature bestowed upon the ruling class certain tools that would allow them to accomplish this important task – namely war, famine and disease.

Established in 1968, the Club of Rome quickly set up branches across the Western world with members whom all agreed that society’s best form of governance was a scientific dictatorship.

It is a globalist non-governmental organisation (“NGO”) that convenes meetings between heads of state, members of royal families, business leaders, international financiers, academic scholars, laboratory scientists, and administrators of global governance institutions, such as the United Nations (“UN”), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”), and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”). Modelled after the “Round Table” structure of the Bilderberg Group, the Royal Institute for International Affairs (“RIIA”), and the Council on Foreign Relations (“CFR”), the Club of Rome facilitates meetings where delegates plan the global economy through public-private stewardship of the world’s natural and human resources in accordance with the Malthusian ecology of sustainable development.

In 1972, the Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth published the results of computer-simulated forecasts calculated by a team of statisticians recruited from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”).   It was the culmination of a two-year study undertaken by the MIT team under the nominal heading of Jay Forrester and Dennis Meadows.  The Limits to Growth is arguably the most influential book about “sustainability.”   It became the bible and blueprint of the new anti-humanist movement that birthed today’s Green New Deal agenda.

The Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth is not only Malthusian in principle, but a survey of its bibliography reveals that it is also backed by extensive citations from an array of Malthusian-eugenicists and affiliated institutions that have been dedicated to population control.

A 2012 article celebrating the book’s 40th anniversary stated: “It is worth revisiting Limits [to Growth] today because, more than any other book, it introduced the concept of anthropocentric [human caused] climate change to a mass audience.”  It’s worth revisiting Limits to Growth for other reasons as well.

One reason is that The Limits to Growth was the first of its kind to fuse global temperature with economic variables like population growth, resource loss, and the under-defined category of “pollution.” By utilising linear equations to extrapolate trends into the future, Meadows and his co-authors, one of whom was his wife, had set the stage for two major fallacies:

• The fabric of physical space-time shaping the discoverable universe is intrinsically non-linear and thus not expressible by any form of linear equations regardless of the computing power involved. Human creative mentation is most explicitly non-linear as it is tied to non-formalisable states of existence like inspiration, love of truth, dignity, and beauty which no binary system can approximate.  The Club of Rome programmers ignored these facts and assumed the universe was as binary as their software.
• The data sets themselves could easily be skewed and re-framed according to the controllers of the computer programmers who aspired to shape government policy. We have already seen how this technique was used to drive fallacious results of future scenarios under the hand of Imperial College’s Neil Ferguson and the same technique has been applied in ecological modelling as well.

Another reason to revisit The Limits to Growth is to highlight the influence it had and still has on supranational organisations.  

For decades, New Age guru Barbara Marx Hubbard – who called for one-fourth of the human population to be culled to usher in a New World Order – championed transhumanism and Malthusian sustainable development, which is the crux of The Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.  Hubbard’s Malthusian overpopulation theories were partly inspired by The Limits to Growth. In fact, in Hubbard’s Book of Co-Creation, there are multiple passages which warn of Malthusian “limits to growth” that could lead to ecological catastrophes. She also met personally with Club of Rome co-founder, Aurelio Peccei who prompted the World Economic Forum to adopt the Malthusian tenets of The Limits to Growth at the World Economic Forum’s Third Annual Meeting in 1973.

Last, but not least, we have Club of Rome member and author of Limits to Growth, who manipulated his predictive modelling, hoping that a dictatorship will slowly and “peacefully” cull 86% of the world’s population. 

No one should be celebrating The Limits to Growth or the agenda it’s promoting because it’s promoting your demise.

*

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.

Sources

Dennis Meadows [Club of Rome] ‘6 billion People Have To Go’, Why Not News, 21 April 2022

The Club of Rome and the Rise of the “Predictive Modelling” Mafia, Unlimited Hangout, 21 November 2022

Barbara Malthusian Hubbard: From Limits to Growth to UN Agenda 2030, Unlimited Hangout, 3 March 2023

The Revenge of the Malthusians and the Science of Limits, Unlimited Hangout, 28 June 2022

Featured image is from The Expose

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

First published on February 7, 2023

Author’s Introduction 

My  long-standing commitment is to “the value of human life”,  “the criminalization of  war” , “peaceful co-existence” between nation states and “the future of humanity” which is currently threatened by nuclear war.

I have been researching nuclear war for more than 20 years focussing on its historical, strategic and geopolitical dimensions as well as its criminal features as a means to implementing what is best described as “genocide on a massive scale”.  

What is presented below is a brief history of nuclear war: a succession of U.S. nuclear war plans going back to the Manhattan Project (1939-1945) leading up to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

Unknown to the broader public, the first U.S. Doomsday Blueprint of a nuclear attack directed against the Soviet Union was formulated by the US War Department at the height of World War II, confirmed by “Top Secret” documents on September 15, 1945 when the US and the Soviet Union were allies.

There is an element of political delusion and paranoia in the formulation of US foreign policy. The Doomsday Scenario against the Soviet Union has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for almost 80 years.

Had it not been for the September 1945 plan to  “wipe the Soviet Union off the map” (66 urban areas and more than 200 atomic bombs), neither Russia nor China would have developed nuclear weapons. There wouldn’t have been a Nuclear Arms Race.

Numerous US nuclear war plans have been formulated from the outset, leading up to The 1956  Strategic Air Command SAC Atomic Weapons Requirements Study (Declassified in December 2015) which consisted in targeting 1200 urban areas in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and China.

The World is at a dangerous crossroads: it should be understood that the use of nuclear weapons in relation to the confrontation between US-NATO and Russia would inevitably lead to escalation and the end of humanity as we know it.  

Michel Chossudovsky, Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2024

Scroll down for article 

---

Video: The Dangers of Nuclear War.

Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux

April 23 2024,

 

To Leave a comment or access Rumble click here

Video en français : Les Dangers de la guerre nucléaire

 

Video Odysee

Earlier video interview, April 2022

Click to access full screen

---

What is required is a Worldwide peace movement coupled with the banning of nuclear weapons.  

In recent developments,  several EU-NATO proxy heads of state and heads of government  including President Macron (acting on behalf of powerful financial interests) have candidly intimated the need for NATO to wage war against Russia on behalf of a Neo-Nazi government, which indelibly would lead us into a World War III scenario. 

What is unfolding is not only “the criminalization of  “La Classe politique”,

the judicial system is also criminalized with a view to upholding the legitimacy of the war criminals in high office.

And the corporate media through omission, half truths and outright lies upholds war as a peace-making endeavor. In the words of the Washington Post, “war makes us safer and richer”

 

 

Globe and Mail 

 

Business Insider

 

Washington Post

And Many More…

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 6, 2024

***

The Hiroshima Nagasaki “Dress Rehearsal”: 

Oppenheimer and the U.S. War Department’s 

Secret September 15, 1945 “Doomsday Blueprint” to

“Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”

by

Michel Chossudovsky

February 1, 2023

 

90 Seconds to Midnight according to the Doomsday Clock

The Nobel Peace Laureates are casually blaming Russia, without recalling the history of nuclear war, not to mention Joe Biden’s 1.3 trillion dollar program to develop “more usable”, “low intensity” “preemptive nuclear weapons” to be used on a “first strike basis” against both nuclear and non nuclear states as a means of “self defense”.

This is the nuclear doctrine which currently prevails in US-NATO’s confrontation against Russia.

It is clearly outlined in the NeoCons’ Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

America’s Manhattan Project

Let us recall the history of  the “doomsday scenario” which was part of America’s Manhattan project launched in 1939 with the participation of Britain and Canada. 

The Manhattan Project was a  secret plan to develop the atomic bomb coordinated by the US War Department, headed (1941) by Lieutenant General Leslie Groves.

Prominent physicist  Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer  had been appointed by Lt General Groves to head the Los Alamos Laboratory (also known as Project Y) which was established in 1943 as a “top-secret site for designing atomic bombs under the Manhattan Project”. Oppenheimer was entrusted in recruiting and coordinating a team of prominent nuclear scientists including Italian Physicist and Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Enrico Fermi who joined the Los Alamos Laboratory in 1944. 

Oppenheimer not only played a key role in coordinating the team of nuclear scientists, he was also engaged in routine consultations with the head of the Manhattan project Lieutenant General Groves, specifically with regard to the use of the first atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which resulted in more than 300,000 immediate deaths.

Below is the Transcript of an August 6, 1945 telephone conversation, declassified (Between Gen. Groves and Dr. Oppenheimer) hours after the Hiroshima bombing:

Gen. G. I am very proud of you and your people [nuclear scientists]

Dr. O. It went alright?

Gen. G. Apparently it went with a tremendous bang.

screenshot below, click link to access complete transcript )

 

The September 15, 1945 Blueprint to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map” 

Barely two weeks after the official end of World War II (September 2, 1945), the US War Department issued  a blueprint  (September 15, 1945) to “Wipe  the Soviet Union off the Map” (66 cities with 204 atomic bombs), when the US and the USSR were allies. This infamous project is confirmed by declassified documents. (For further details see Chossudovsky, 2017)

Below is the image of the 66 cities of the Soviet Union which had been envisaged as targets by the US War Department. 

The 66 cities. Click image to enlarge 

The Hiroshima Nagasaki “Dress Rehearsal”

The preparatory documents (see below) confirm that the data pertaining to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks were being used to evaluate the viability as well as the cost of  a much larger attack against the Soviet Union. These documents were finalized 5-6 weeks after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings (6, 9 August 1945).

“To Ensure our National Security”

Note the correspondence between Major General Norstad and the head of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves, who was in permanent liaison with Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer, head of the Los Alamos team of nuclear scientists. 

On September 15, 1945 Norstad sent a memorandum to Lieutenant Leslie Groves requesting an estimate of  the “number of bombs required to ensure our national security”  ( The First Atomic Stockpile Requirements )

Lieutenant General Groves no doubt in consultation with Dr. Oppenheimer responded to Major General Norstad in a Memorandum dated September 29, 1945 in which he refers to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

See section 2, subsections a, b and c.

“It is not essential to get total destruction of a city in order to destroy its effectiveness. Hiroshima no longer exists as a city even though the area of total destruction is considerably less than total.”

Read carefully. The text below confirms that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was “A Dress Rehearsal”.  

Bear in mind the name of the country which is threatening America’s “national security” is not mentioned.

Answering your memorandum of 15 September 1945, [see response below]

The 1949 “Dropshot Plan”: 300 Nuclear Bombs, Targeting More than 100 Soviet Cities

Numerous US war plans (under the Truman presidency) to attack the Soviet Union were “formulated and revised on a regular basis between 1945 and 1950”. Most of them were totally dysfunctional as outlined by J.W. Smith in his book entitled “The World’s Wasted Wealth 2”.

“The names given to these plans graphically portray their offensive purpose: Bushwhacker, Broiler, Sizzle, Shakedown, Offtackle, Dropshot, Trojan, Pincher, and Frolic.

The US military knew the offensive nature of the job President Truman had ordered them to prepare for and had named their war plans accordingly”

Dr. Michio Kaku and Daniel Axelrod in their book entitled: “To Win a Nuclear War: the Pentagon’s Secret War Plans,” provide evidence (based on declassified documents) that the September 1945 blueprint was followed by a continuous plan by USG to bomb the Soviet Union (as well as Russia in the post-Cold War era):

“This book [preface by Ramsey Clark] compels us to re-think and re-write the history of the Cold War and the arms race… It provides a startling glimpse into secret U.S. plans to initiate a nuclear war from 1945 to the present.”

The September 1945 Blueprint (66 Cities) was followed in 1949 by another insidious project entitled the Dropshot Plan: 

According to Kaku and Axelrod, the 1949 DropShot consisted of  a plan directed against the Soviet Union to “drop at least 300 nuclear bombs and 20,000 tons of conventional bombs on 200 targets in 100 urban areas, including Moscow and Leningrad (St. Petersburg).

According to the plan Washington would start the war on January 1, 1957.

The Dropshot Plan was formulated prior to Russia’s August 1949 announcement pertaining to the testing of its nuclear bomb. 

The Cold War List of 1200 Targeted Cities

The initial 1945 Blueprint to attack 66 cities, the subsequent 1949 Dropshot Plan (targeting 100 cities) were updated in the course of the Cold War. The 1956 Plan included some 1200 cities in the USSR, the Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe and China (see declassified documents below).

The bombs slated for the attack significantly more powerful in terms of explosive capacity than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (see below)

We are talking about planned genocide against the Soviet Union, China and Eastern Europe .

Excerpt from list of the 1200 cities targeted for nuclear attack in alphabetical order. National Security Archive, op. cit.

Details pertaining to the “The SAC [Strategic Air Command] Atomic Weapons Requirements Study for 1959, produced in June 1956 were declassified on December 22, 2015 (Excerpts below, click to access full text).

According to the National Security Archive www.nsarchive.org, the SAC, 1956: 

“…provides the most comprehensive and detailed list of nuclear targets and target systems that has ever been declassified. As far as can be told, no comparable document has ever been declassified for any period of Cold War history.

The SAC study includes chilling details. …  the authors developed a plan for the “systematic destruction” of Soviet bloc urban-industrial targets that specifically and explicitly targeted “population” in all cities, including Beijing, Moscow, Leningrad, East Berlin, and Warsaw.  

The SAC document includes lists of more than 1100 airfields in the Soviet bloc, with a priority number assigned to each base. …

A second list was of urban-industrial areas identified for “systematic destruction.”  SAC listed over 1200 cities in the Soviet bloc, from East Germany to China, also with priorities established.  Moscow and Leningrad were priority one and two respectively.  Moscow included 179 Designated Ground Zeros (DGZs) while Leningrad had 145, including “population” targets.  … According to the study, SAC would have targeted Air Power targets with bombs ranging from 1.7 to 9 megatons. 

Exploding them at ground level, as planned, would have produced significant fallout hazards to nearby civilians.  SAC also wanted a 60 megaton weapon which it believed necessary for deterrence, but also because it would produce “significant results” in the event of a Soviet surprise attack. One megaton would be 70 times the explosive yield of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.  (emphasis added).

Read carefully:

Had this diabolical project been carried out against the Soviet Union and its allies, the death toll would be beyond description (ie. when compared to Hiroshima. 100,000 immediate deaths). The smallest nuclear bomb contemplated had an explosive yield of 1.7 megatons, 119 times more “powerful’ than a Hiroshima bomb (15 kilotons of TNT)

The 9 megaton bomb mentioned above was 630 times a Hiroshima bomb, The 60 megaton bomb:  4200 times a Hiroshima bomb. 

The Bulletin: Founded by Manhattan Project Scientists in September 1945

In a bitter irony, in the immediate wake of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded in 1945 in Chicago by Manhattan Project scientists, who had been involved in the development of the atomic bomb.

Two years later, in 1947, The Bulletin devised the Doomsday Clock, “with an original setting of seven minutes to midnight”.

The initiative was formulated at a time when there was no arms race: 

There was only one nuclear weapons state, namely the USA, which was intent upon carrying out a Doomsday scenario (genocide) against the Soviet Union formulated in September 1945.

In 1947, when the Doomsday Clock was created, the “justification” which was upheld by The Bulletin was that:

“the greatest danger to humanity came … from the prospect that the United States and the Soviet Union were headed for a nuclear arms race.”

The underlying premise of this statement was to ensure that the US retain a monopoly over nuclear weapons.

While in 1947, “The Plan to Wipe the Soviet Union of the Map” was still on the drawing Board of the Pentagon, the relevant documents were declassified thirty years later in 1975. Most of the former Manhattan project scientists were unaware of the September 1945 blueprint against the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union emerged as a nuclear power in August 1949, two years after the launching of the Doomsday Clock, largely in view of applying what was later entitled “deterrence”, namely an action to discourage a nuclear attack by the US. At the height of the Cold War and the Arms Race, this concept eventually evolved into what was defined as “Mutually Assured Destruction”.

While several authors and scientists featured by The Bulletin have provided a critical perspective concerning America’s nuclear weapons program, there was no cohesive attempt to question the history nor the legitimacy of  the Manhattan Project.

The broader tendency has been to “erase history”, sustaining the “rightfulness” of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while also casually placing the blame on Russia, as well as China and North Korea.

Nuclear War versus the “Imminent Dangers of CO2”

In the last fews years, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists “seeks to provide relevant information about nuclear weapons, climate change, and other global security issues”.

According to Mary Robinson, Chair of The Doomsday Clock Elders and former President of the Republic of Ireland (2023 statement):

The Doomsday Clock is sounding an alarm for the whole of humanity. We are on the brink of a precipice. … From cutting carbon emissions to strengthening arms control treaties and investing in pandemic preparedness, we know what needs to be done. … We are facing multiple, existential crises. Leaders need a crisis mindset. (emphasis added)

This perspective borders on ridicule. CO2 is casually put forth as a danger to humanity comparable to nuclear war. It becomes an instrument of propaganda. 

The Doomsday Clock is now said to “represent threats to humanity from a variety of sources” according to a collective of Nobel Prize Laureates.

What nonsense.

2023  January Statement, ScreenShot from WP

Presenting C02 or Covid as a danger comparable to nuclear war is an outright lie.

Its intent is to mislead public opinion. It is part of a rather unsubtle propaganda campaign which provides legitimacy to the US doctrine of first strike “preemptive nuclear war”, i.e. nuclear war as a means of “self-defense” (formulated in the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review).

What is of concern is that U.S. decision makers including Joe Biden believe in their own propaganda, that a preemptive first strike nuclear war against Russia is “winnable”. And that tactical nuclear weapons are “instruments of peace”.

Meanwhile history is erased. America’s persistent role in developing “a Doomsday Agenda” (aka genocide) since the onslaught of the Manhattan Project in 1939 is simply not mentioned.

What is of concern is that there is a continuous history of numerous projects and WWIII scenarios consisting in “Wiping Russia off the Map” and triggering  a Third World War.

Nuclear war against Russia has been embedded in US military doctrine since 1945.

---

Related Article

“Preemptive Nuclear War”: The Historic Battle for Peace and Democracy. A Third World War Threatens the Future of Humanity

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 31, 2023

---

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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

This important article first written by the late Stephen Lendman was first published on August 6, 2015. May the Legacy of Steven Lendman live. 

Today, 79  years ago, the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.

***

The atomic age began on August 6, 1945 in real time – after its July 16 pre-dawn open-air birth in successful Alamogordo, NM testing.

At the time, perhaps prophetically General Thomas Farrell said “(w)e were reaching into the unknown, and we did not know what might come of it.”

Called by some “the father of the atomic bomb,” Robert Oppenheimer quoted from the Bhagavad Gita saying: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

August 6 marks the 70th anniversary of one of history’s great crimes, followed three days later by incinerating Nagasaki.

At least 200,000 died, many others scarred for life, future generations to this day harmed by radiologically caused birth defects and other serious health problems.

Big Lies still claim bombing both cities hastened war’s end and saved many lives. Truman informed the public deceitfully saying bombing Hiroshima “destroyed its usefulness to the enemy.”

It was to spare the Japanese people from (further) utter destruction…If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the likes of which has never been seen on this earth.

Nuclear bombing both cities were two of numerous American genocides – beginning with a conquering the new world from sea to shining sea, ravaging and destroying one country after another ever since, endless wars of aggression continuing today.

Japan was defeated ready to surrender when Truman authorized testing America’s new toy in real time – twice, not once. Not to win a war already won. To show Soviet Russia America’s new might, what its leadership already knew, what might follow against its cities if Washington decided to attack its wartime ally.

US leaders always considered human lives expendable. Many thousands of Japanese victims were considered a small price to pay.

Terror bombing is an international high crime. Article 25 of the Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907 Hague IV Convention) states:

The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited.

Post-WW II Geneva IV protects civilians in time of war – prohibiting violence of any type against them, requiring sick and wounded be treated humanely.

The 1945 Nuremberg Principles forbid “crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity,” including “inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war,” – notably indiscriminate killing and “wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.”

In his book, “The Good War: An Oral History of World War II,” the late Studs Terkel explained its good and bad sides through people experiencing it.

The good was America “was the only country among the combatants that was neither invaded nor bombed. Ours were the only cities not blasted to rubble,” said Terkel.

The bad was it “warped our view of how we look at things today (seeing them) in terms of war” and the notion that they’re good or why else fight them. This “twisted memory….encourages (people) to be willing, almost eager, to use military force” to solve problems, never mind how they exacerbate them.

Wars are never just or good. In the nuclear age they’re “lunatic” acts – horrific by any standard.

On February 24, 1945, Japan wanted surrender, asking only to retain its emperor. Roosevelt wanted war continued. So did Truman after his April 1945 death.

The late Howard Zinn said “(t)he bombing of Hiroshima remains sacred to the American Establishment and to a very large part of the population in this country.”

It’s been falsely portrayed as an expeditious way to end war and save lives – a myth believed to this day by most Americans, ignoring appalling gratuitous mass murder by any standard.

“Hiroshima and Nagasaki were unforgivable atrocities,” Zinn explained – “perpetrated on a Japan ready to surrender…a wanton act of gargantuan cruelty (not) an unavoidable necessity.”

What “could be more horrible than the burning, mutilation, blinding, irradiation of hundreds of thousands of Japanese men, women, and children?”

And yet it is absolutely essential for our political leaders to defend the bombing because if Americans can be induced to accept that, then they can accept any war, any means, so long as the war-makers can supply a reason.

Endless US wars of aggression from summer 1945 to this day killed countless millions from conflict, subsequent violence and chaos, starvation, untreated wounds and diseases, as well as overall deprivation.

“There is endless room for more wars, with endless supplies of reasons” justifying the unjustifiable, said Zinn.

Before bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Secretary of War Henry Stimson briefed Dwight Eisenhower on their imminent use, saying: “Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.”

After its use, Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral William Leahy called the atom bomb “a barbarous weapon. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.”

In mid-July, four days before Truman, Churchill and Stalin met in Potsdam to discuss post-war issues (two months after Nazi Germany’s defeat), a Japanese Foreign Minister Togo telegram to ambassador Sato in Moscow discussing negotiated surrender terms said:

“It is his Majesty’s heart’s desire to see the swift termination of the war.” Washington intercepted the message. Japanese codes were broken before war began.

At least from summer 1940, US intelligence began reading Japan’s diplomatic messages. Earlier in 1945, Japan sent peace feelers.

Two days before the February Yalta conference, General Douglas MacArthur sent Roosevelt a 40-page summary of its terms.

They were nearly unconditional. The Japanese would accept an occupation, cease hostilities, surrender its arms, remove all troops from occupied territories, submit to criminal war trials, let its industries be regulated, asking only that their Emperor be retained.

Roosevelt categorically refused. So did Truman. They wanted war continued followed by unconditional surrender.

America “was determined to drop those bombs,” said Zinn. Churchill advisor PMS Blackett called using them “the first major operation of the cold diplomatic war with Russia.”

The bombs of August are an ominous reminder that what happened to Japan can repeat whenever lunatics in Washington believe its to their advantage. Humanity may not survive their madness.

The late Stephen Lendman’s book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

May his Legacy Live 

 

 

In questa puntata drammatiche testimonianze esclusive dall’ultimo Rapporto ONU sulle condizioni dei detenuti palestinesi nelle carceri israeliane. Immagini esclusive sulla strage dei palestinesi che continua a Gaza e si sta estendendo alla Cisgiordania e a Gerusalemme.

“Gli Stati Uniti riconoscono il rivale di Maduro come vincitore delle elezioni venezuelane. Il Segretario di Stato Antony Blinken dichiara che esistono prove schiaccianti della vittoria di Edmundo González, nonostante il presidente Nicolás Maduro abbia rivendicato la vittoria”: così decreta Washington. L’attacco non viene solo dall’amministrazione Biden: Elon Musk, uomo più ricco del mondo, oggi principale sostenitore e finanziatore di Donald Trump (dopo aver sostenuto Biden) paragona Nicolas Maduro a “un asino” e annuncia di essere pronto ad affrontare il “leader autocratico” in un combattimento corpo a corpo.

Allo stesso tempo Washington fomenta violente manifestazioni all’interno del Venezuela, durante le quali viene abbattuta una statua di Hugo Chavez, il leader storico che ha liberato il Venezuela – il paese con le maggiori riserve petrolifere del mondo – dal dominio statunitense. La politica di Washington è chiara: ogni paese che si rende sovrano sottraendosi al dominio statunitense – centro focale del dominio dell’Occidente – diventa un. nemico da combattere e abbattere. Questa è la politica che accende e alimenta le fiamme della guerra che si propagano nel mondo. L’Occidente sta però perdendo il predominio che ha esercitato per secoli. Emblematico il fatto che i BRICS, imperniati sull’alleanza tra Russia e Cina, si sono allargati da cinque a dieci e continuano a estendersi.

In tale quadro si inseriscono sia la guerra contro la Russia, condotta dagli Stati Uniti e dalle potenze europee, sia la guerra fatta divampare da Israele e USA in Medioriente con il principale scopo di colpire Iran. In questa guerra si sta consumando il genocidio del popolo palestinese, condannato come tale dalla Corte internazionale di Giustizia, principale organo giudiziario delle Nazioni Unite. Gli assassini mirati di leader di Hamas ed Hezbollah da parte di Israele hanno innescato una reazione a catena con possibili esiti catastrofici.

Manlio Dinucci

VIDEO : byoblu.com

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.

First [published by Global Research on April 12, 2024

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

The World Health Organization’s Dr. Hanna Nohynek testified in court that she advised her government that vaccine passports were not needed but was ignored, despite explaining that the COVID vaccines did not stop virus transmission and the passports gave a false sense of security. The stunning revelations came to light in a Helsinki courtroom where Finnish citizen Mika Vauhkala is suing after he was denied entry to a café for not having a vaccine passport.

Dr. Nohynek is chief physician at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare and serves as the WHO’s chair of Strategic Group of Experts on immunization. Testifying yesterday, she stated that the Finnish Institute for Health knew by the summer of 2021 that the COVID-19 vaccines did not stop virus transmission. 

 

 

During that same 2021 time period, the WHO said it was working to “create an international trusted framework” for safe travel while EU members states began rolling out COVID passports. The EU Digital COVID Certificate Regulation passed in July 2021 and more than 2.3 billion certificates were later issued. Visitors to France were banned if they did not have a valid vaccine passport which citizens had to carry to buy food at stores or to use public transport.

But Dr. Nohynek testified yesterday that her institute advised the Finnish government in late 2021 that COVID passports no longer made sense, yet certificates continued to be required. Finnish journalist Ike Novikoff reported the news yesterday after leaving the Helsinki courtroom where Dr. Nohynek spoke.

 

 

Dr. Nohynek’s admission that the government ignored scientific advice to terminate vaccine passports proved shocking as she is widely embraced in global medical circles. Besides chairing the WHO’s strategic advisory group on immunizations, Dr. Nohynek is one of Finland’s top vaccine advisors and serves on the boards of Vaccines Together and the International Vaccine Institute.

The EU’s digital COVID-19 certification helped establish the WHO Global Digital Health Certification Network in July 2023.

“By using European best practices we contribute to digital health standards and interoperability globally—to the benefit of those most in need,” stated one EU official.

Finnish citizen Mika Vauhkala created a website discussing his case against Finland’s government where he writes that he launched his lawsuit “to defend basic rights” after he was denied breakfast in December 2021 at a Helsinki café because he did not have a COVID passport even though he was healthy.

“The constitution of Finland guarantees that any citizen should not be discriminated against based on health conditions among other things,” Vauhkala states on his website.

Vauhkala’s lawsuit continued today in Helsinki district court where British cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra will testify that, during the COVID pandemic, some authorities and medical professionals supported unethical, coercive, and misinformed policies such as vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, which undermined informed patient consent and evidence-based medical practice.

You can read Dr. Malhotra’s testimony here.

*

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 source

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

First published on May 17, 2022

***

Introduction and Update 

 

Why has the “Confidential Pfizer report” made public under Freedom of Information (FOI) in October 2021 not been quoted or referred to in parliamentary and public enquiries as a means to refuting the official narrative (which contends that the Covid-19 vaccine is “safe and effective”). Neither has it been the object of media coverage. 

We have documented numerous public enquiries. 

The evidence amply confirms that the Pfizer vaccine is a dangerous substance, resulting in deaths and adverse events. This is confirmed by the Pfizer Confidential Report released under FOI in October 2021. It come’s from the Horse’s Mouth. 

Bombshell Study: Cancer Related Excess Mortality in England and Wales 

A recent study on vaccine related excess mortality conducted by the team of Edward Dowd confirms the nature of the mRNA vaccine.

Dowd’s method was to analyze the number of deaths attributed to cancer in England and Wales between 2010 and 2022 [based on data] from the U.K. Office for National Statistics

He compared excess death rates, the difference between observed deaths and the baseline for expected deaths, before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

He established a baseline of normal cancer death rates from 2010-2020 that was remarkably consistent with few deviations, he said — until the cancer death rates rose significantly in late 2021 in the U.K. following the vaccine rollout” 

The table below pertains to excess deaths related to malignant neoplasm (cancerous tumor) in England and Wales, recorded in three consecutive years: 2020, 2021, and 2022 vs. a 10 year trend (2010-2019).

The data for excess mortality in 2020 (the year prior to the vaccine) are negative with the exception of “malignant neoplasm without specification of site”.

The vaccine was launched in December 2020

The COVID-19 vaccine was rolled-out in several phases in England and Wales starting on December 8, 2020  and extending into March-April 2021. 

The upward movement in excess mortality (%) commences in 2021. The increase in excess mortality related to malignant neoplasm is tabulated for the two first years of the vaccine. 

Video: Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux

The Covid Vaccine and the Secret Pfizer Report 

[Click upper title and right corner to enter fullscreen]

Click here to access Odysee 

The Second Video recorded more recently focusses on the Vaccine and the Process of Depopulation

Video: The Vaccine and the Process of Depopulation

 

To access Rumble or leave a Comment click here

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, November 23, 2023, July 30, 2024 

 

**

What’s Inside Pfizer’s “Secret Report”? 

 

The Confidential report is a bombshell. The vaccine was launched in mid-December 2020. By the end of February 2021, “Pfizer had already received more than 1,200 reports of deaths allegedly caused by the vaccine and tens of thousands of reported adverse events, including 23 cases of spontaneous abortions out of 270 pregnancies and more than 2,000 reports of cardiac disorders.”

This Confidential Pfizer Report provides data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months).

The data from mid-December 2020 to the end of February 2021 unequivocally confirms “Manslaughter”. Based on the evidence, Pfizer had the responsibility to immediately cancel and withdraw the “vaccine”.

Pfizer’s Worldwide marketing of the Covid-19 Vaccine beyond February 28th, 2021, is no longer an “Act of Manslaughter”.

Murder as opposed to Manslaughter implies “Criminal Intent”.

Pfizer’s Covid 19 Vaccine constitutes a Criminal Act. From a legal standpoint it is an “Act of Murder” applied Worldwide to a target population of 8 billion people. Sofar more than 60 percent of the World’s population have been Covid-19 vaccinated.

---

Click here to read the complete Pfizer report.  

also see details in the Appendices

 

Selected Excerpts of the Report

 

 

 

 

 

Video: Interview with Caroline Mailloux, Lux Media: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky on the “Secret” Pfizer Report Puts Forth a Strategy and Legal Procedure to Confront Big Pharma with a view to Withdrawing the Covid-19 Vaccine Worldwide

---

VIDEO: The Covid Vaccine and the Secret Pfizer Report

 

[Click upper title and right corner to enter fullscreen]

Click here to access Odysee 

Among all major Big Pharma actors, Pfizer has a criminal record in the U.S.    (2009 DoD Judgment)

Video: Pfizer Has a Criminal Record. Is It Relevant?

By US Department of Justice, 

Scroll down to continue reading the article

---

For a more detailed and comprehensive analysis (Book released in August 2022)

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

Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression

By Michel Chossudovsky

Translations in several languages are envisaged. The book is available in print form in Japanese. 仕組まれたコロナ危機:「世界の初期化」を目論む者たち

As a means to reaching out to millions of people worldwide whose lives have been affected by the corona crisis, we have decided in the course of the next few weeks to distribute the eBook for FREE.

***

Price: $11.50. FREE COPY Click here to download.

---

Pfizer has a Criminal Record with

The U.S. Department of Justice (2009)

 

Can we trust a Big Pharma vaccine conglomerate which pleaded guilty in 2009 to criminal charges by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) including “fraudulent marketing” and “felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”?

Video. US Department of Justice. 2.3 Billion Medical Fraud Settlement

To consult the Department of Justice’ historic decision click here

---

National Health Authorities

claim that the Covid-19 “vaccine” will save Lives

That’s a Lie

 

There is a worldwide upward trend of vaccine deaths and injuries. The official figures (April 3, 2022) point to approximately: 

69,053 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 10,997,085 injuries  for the EU, US and UK Combined for a population of 830 million people

Based on reported cases. Only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities. Based on historical data (Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS, p. 6): 

This Confidential Pfizer Report released as part of a Freedom of Information (FOI) procedure provides data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months).

---

For details of the report, see

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 29, 2022 

---

Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine

The Legal Implications: Mea Culpa

 

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was launched in the US on the 14th of December after the granting of Emergency Use Authorization on December 11, 2020. 

In a twisted irony, the data revealed in this “insider report” refutes the official vaccine narrative peddled by the governments and the WHO. It also confirms the analysis of numerous medical doctors and scientists who have revealed the devastating consequences of the mRNA “vaccine”. 

What is contained in  Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “Horse’s Mouth” can now be used to confront as well formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.

In a Court of Law, the evidence contained in this Big Pharma confidential report (coupled with the data on deaths and adverse events compiled by the national authorities in the EU, UK and US) is irrefutable: because it is their data and their estimates and not ours. 

Bear in mind: it’s data which is based on reported and recorded cases, which constitute a small percentage of the actual number of vaccine related deaths and adverse events. 

This is a de facto Mea Culpa on the part of Pfizer. #Yes it is a Killer Vaccine

Pfizer was fully aware that the mRNA vaccine which it is marketing Worldwide would result in a wave of mortality and morbidity. This is tantamount to a crime against humanity on the part of Big Pharma.

Pfizer knew from the outset that it was a killer vaccine. 

It is also a  Mea Culpa and Treason on the part of corrupt national governments Worldwide which are being threatened and bribed by Big Pharma.

No attempt has been made by the governments to call for the withdrawal of the killer vaccine.

People are told  that the vaccine is intended to save lives.

Click here to read the Complete Pfizer report.  

Also see details in the Appendices.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

“The opening ceremony of the Olympics felt like the closing ceremony of humanity.”  —@KimDotcom

Fearless Archbishop Vigano has the following to say to the Olympic Games opening ceremony travesty:

“It is no coincidence that the one sponsoring this revolting carnival is an emissary of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Emanuel Macron, … 

—Statement by Archbishop Vigano following the sacrileges and scandals of the Paris Olympic Games

Read this also.

*

The entire opening ceremony was filmed while Paris was under pouring rain – including a blasphemous Last Supper, the setting of Leonardo da Vinci – but with full LGBTQ+ label and characters, with a fat, big-breasted trans-lady in the middle, in Jesus’ place, according to the famous da Vinci painting. Also appearing, a blue gnome dancing with a stiff penis (see picture).

.

.

 

French singer Philippe Katerine during the Paris Olympics opening ceremony(X/@Scipionista)

And to top it off, Marie Antoinette with her cut-off head in her lap, singing the emblematic song of the French Revolution, “Ça ira” (“It’ll be fine”). Marie Antoinette was the wife of King Louis XVI, who was executed by guillotine on 21 January 1793. Her execution by guillotine followed on 16 October 1793, at the Place de la Révolution. 

All accompanied by a hologram of the 4^th Horseman from the apocalypse with the four biblical figures who appear in the Book of Revelation. Each of the horsemen represents a different facet of the apocalypse: conquest, war, famine, and death. The one displayed at the Olympics Opening was the Forth Horseman of Death, depicted by the devil on a horse, draped in an Olympic flag (see picture).

 

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has since deleted all videos of the opening ceremony of the 2024 Summer Games in Paris from its YouTube channel. Committee officials faced massive global public backlash over an alleged LGBTQ-themed parody of ‘The Last Supper’ at the event, which was widely seen by Christians as blasphemous. 

The IOC did not explain the reason for the removal. It was a reaction to numerous politicians, social media users, and influencers expressing outrage over “The Last Super” scene (see RT 28 July 2024). 

At the time of this writing, this short video clip was still available (see below).

What connection to the Olympic Games does this grotesque symbolism have? These games are by themselves a farce – like most sports events to deviate people’s attention, to indoctrinate their thinking, or rather non-thinking, to look for diversion, rather than the substance of what our world has become – and the direction it is going. 

Western summer time, vacation time, no-thinking time, are ideal for these international and regional sports events. Whether people are watching football (soccer), or tennis, or the Olympics, does not really matter. Their heads are turned to an irrelevant sports event. Their emotions run high, especially watching soccer, screaming, yelling, and even physically fighting each other over their teams.

While in the back – invisible to most people – the dark agenda is progressing fast and undisturbed. What is the “dark agenda”? 

It is a multi-purpose program, including attacking humanity simultaneously from different angles with different weapons. Among them, all-digitization, promotion of robotization and Artificial Intelligence (AI), as well as all-digitized money towards a cashless monetary system. 

Once this point has been reached, humanity is fully enslaved, controlled on every step we take. It looks irreversible, unless we find the courage to leave the system behind – and everything we have acquired, learned, and loved in our lives, to start afresh. 

What is better – enslavement or leaving our past behind and having a high-spirited shot at a new civilization, moving our lives onto a higher level, where we do not need the low-vibrating diabolical cultism, we are exposed to now?

Truly, it looks like this world we are in – where most of people still do not see anything wrong, do not see the light, this world structure cannot be reformed. It has gone too far.

We, the People, must choose, rather sooner than later. But this will be a voluntary step. Those, who do not feel the need to start afresh may stay behind until their conscience tells them that something is wrong with this life – a life prepared with a long-arm – for the UN-Agenda 2030 and the WEF’s Great Reset – where at the end a robotized, transhumanized “left-over” population will own nothing but is happy.

The World Health Organization (WHO), created by and sold to the devil under eugenist control, may as well be called World Death Organization (WDO) as it allows and promotes the launching of invented plandemics that will require – mandated by the WDO – “vaccination” with deadly mRNA vaxxes – with the sole purpose and fulfilling the funding eugenists’ depopulation agenda.

An example is the newly appointed, NEVER elected, head of the European Council (EC), Ursula Von Der Leyen (often called “Von der Lying”), has concluded contracts with the pharma industry for a 1 billion “vaxxes”. This is about two jabs per EU inhabitant — for what? A yet to come Plandemic. Maybe the infamously called virus “X” at the WEF’s Davos meeting in January 2024?

Maybe it is the highly propagated “bird flu” that is now manufactured so it can jump from animals to humans and the fearmongers say it is very deadly – comparatively, “covid” was a walk in the park.

So “vaxxes” are of the order – mandate of WHO’s commanding our health and death. And mind you, like in the first run – covid – no over-the-counter very effective medication, no natural healing means are going to be permitted, because as many people as possible must get their potentially deadly shot. 

Yes, deadly because the key objective of the evil agenda is massive but massive depopulation. See this recent short video from an author of the Club of Rome’s most infamous report called, “Limits to Growth” (1972):

The dark diabolical cult which pretends to run our world and which has long prepared the final stage of their full supremacy, UN-Agenda 2030, and The Great Reset, must follow strict Cult rules. Among them is a simple one: they must tell their “victims” – in this case all of humanity — what they are planning to do. 

This Olympics opening ceremony does just that: it tells us that the final stage has begun. Death is on the horizon (the Forth Horseman of the Apocalypse) and that days are counted. 

Most of it is spreading fear – making the populous at large even more vulnerable, fearful people are easily submissive. But this ceremony is very reminiscent of previous weird, Satanic “Openings”, such as the London Olympics of 2012 (see full 4-hour video), as well as the Luciferian opening of the Swiss Gotthard Tunnel in June 2016 – see this 6-min. video clip.

The latter was commented at the time by a Russian Ruptly reporter, “When they are coming out in the open as they do here, then the final phase is close”. He was right.

As a final Anecdote to this diabolical feast called “Paris Olympics 2024”: Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said,

“Russia is ready to grant political asylum to French citizens, who suffered from watching the opening ceremony of the 2024 Olympic Games.” 

The Russian Embassy in Paris has been inundated with calls since the announcement was made. 

*

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

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 licensed under CC BY 4.0

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published on August 5, 2017

***

.

79 years ago. The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima “A Military Base” according to Harry Truman.

The collateral damage concept had yet to be defined. 100,000 civilians were killed in the first seven seconds of the explosion. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2024

***

The dangers of nuclear war are not an object of debate and analysis by the mainstream media.

Public opinion is carefully misled. ” All options on the table”.  Nuclear weapons are portrayed as peace-making bombs.

Did you know that tactical nuclear weapons or so-called mininukes with an explosive capacity between one third and six times a Hiroshima bomb are considered, according to scientific opinion, on contract to the Pentagon as “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”.

It’s a lie.

The US has a vast nuclear arsenal capable of blowing up the planet several times.

The World commemorates the 79th anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (August 6, 9, 1945)

Did you know that  Hiroshima was a “military base”, and that when the first atomic bomb was dropped on two of Japan’s heavily populated areas in August 1945, the objective was, according to president Truman to save the lives of innocent civilians.

“The World will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians..”(President Harry S. Truman in a radio address to the Nation, August 9, 1945, starts at 05.15).

listen to the audio

The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945; the Second on Nagasaki, on August 9, on the same day as Truman’s radio speech to the Nation, starts at 05.15.

Unpunished crimes against humanity, “collateral damage”.

In the words of President Harry Truman in his Diary (emphasis added):

“We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Era, after Noah and his fabulous Ark…. This weapon is to be used against Japan … [We] will use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children.

Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new. …  The target will be a purely military one… It seems to be the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be made the most useful.”

(President Harry S. Truman, Diary, July 25, 1945)

To this date, the US government has not apologized to the people of Japan, nor has the mainstream media acknowledged that Harry Truman was a liar and a criminal.

Truman’s July 25 diary entry (see above), suggests that he was not aware that Hiroshima was a city.

Had he been misled by his advisers that Hiroshima was a military base and that it was ok to bomb, or was he lying to himself?

Was he stupid and uneducated?

Everybody in the high ranks of the U.S military knew that Hiroshima was a populated urban area with approximately 350,000 inhabitants (1945).

The complete text of the radio address entitled Radio Report to the American People on the Potsdam Conference is contained in the  Harry Truman Library and Museum, Public Papers of Harry S. Truman, University of Missouri. 

The reference to Hiroshima and the atomic bomb was mentioned by Truman at the very end of a long radio address largely focussing on Germany and the Potsdam Conference.

It is worth noting that the US chose to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima at the height of peace negotiations in Berlin.

The second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki upon Truman’s return to Washington.

(Listen to the Audio of Truman’s Radio Report from Potsdam August 9, 1945, speech, Hiroshima audio video)

Excerpt regarding The Hiroshima bomb, starts at 05.15

Here is the transcript of Truman’s radio address pertaining to the atomic bomb (emphasis added):

:”The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians. But that attack is only a warning of things to come. If Japan does not surrender, bombs will have to be dropped on her war industries and, unfortunately, thousands of civilian lives will be lost. I urge Japanese civilians to leave industrial cities immediately, and save themselves from destruction.

I realize the tragic significance of the atomic bomb.

Its production and its use were not lightly undertaken by this Government. But we knew that our enemies were on the search for it. We know now how close they were to finding it. And we knew the disaster which would come to this Nation, and to all peace-loving nations, to all civilization, if they had found it first.

That is why we felt compelled to undertake the long and uncertain and costly labor of discovery and production.

We won the race of discovery against the Germans. [Amply confirmed Nazi Germany never contemplated the development of nuclear bombs]

Having found the bomb we have used it. We have used it against those who attacked us without warning at Pearl Harbor, against those who have starved and beaten and executed American prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying international laws of warfare. We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans.

We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan’s power to make war. Only a Japanese surrender will stop us.

The atomic bomb is too dangerous to be loose in a lawless world. That is why Great Britain, Canada, and the United States, who have the secret of its production, do not intend to reveal that secret until means have been found to control the bomb so as to protect ourselves and the rest of the world from the danger of total destruction.

As far back as last May, Secretary of War Stimson, at my suggestion, appointed a committee upon which Secretary of State Byrnes served as my personal representative, to prepare plans for the future control of this bomb. I shall ask the Congress to cooperate to the end that its production and use be controlled, and that its power be made an overwhelming influence towards world peace.

We must constitute ourselves trustees of this new force–to prevent its misuse, and to turn it into the channels of service to mankind.

It is an awful responsibility which has come to us.

We thank God that it has come to us, instead of to our enemies; and we pray that He may guide us to use it in His ways and for His purposes.” 

…

Support Truth in Media. Support the Worldwide movement against nuclear weapons.

The online search engines are intent upon undermining the independent media’s coverage of important world events.

Spread the Truth: Global Research Articles Far and Wide

Support Global Research

 

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Poland became a NATO member in the first controversial eastward expansion of NATO following the collapse of the Soviet Union. In the subsequent controversy over attempts to make Ukraine a NATO member, Poland has been an even more vociferous supporter of the USA than the traditional strong allies of the USA from Western Europe. It can be argued that in the recent Ukraine-Russia conflict, among all leading European countries Poland has taken the most hawkish stand against Russia.

A recent published paper in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (8.8.2024) has raised concerns regarding the closer cooperation of Poland and the USA relating to nuclear power which can have military implications.

This paper titled ‘Eastern Europe’s Purchase of US Nuclear Reactors is Primarily About Military Ties, not Climate Change’ has been written by Maha Siddiqui and M.V.Ramana’ and was first published on August 2, 2024.  Although this paper briefly mentions Romania, mostly it concerns Poland.  

 

Screenshot from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scienstists

 

This paper argues that while outwardly promoting nuclear power as a way to meet climate goals,

“Poland and other countries in Eastern Europe seem to be using nuclear purchases for geopolitical leverage with the United States. That desire is evident in their parallel actions in the military front. Given the ongoing war in Ukraine and tensions in multiple parts of the world, the combination of geopolitics and nuclear technology may prove dangerous, even as it is ineffective at mitigating climate change.”

This important paper informs us that in recent years, Poland has entered into a number of agreements to build nuclear reactors, including the in-vogue small modular reactors (SMRs) from the United States and large reactors from South Korea. In April, Poland President Andrzej Duda publicly expressed a readiness to host NATO nuclear weapons. In an interview published in a Polish news outlet, he revealed that nuclear sharing had been discussed with the United States “for some time.” The previous Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki had also indicated an “interest in hosting nuclear weapons under NATO’s nuclear-sharing policy.”

This paper adds that Poland also tied itself militarily to the United States by becoming part of US missile defence infrastructure. The process started during the George W. Bush administration and continued through the successive US presidencies. Most recently, as part of the Biden administration’s 2024 budget for defence, the Missile Defence Agency requested funding to complete construction of a site in Poland to deploy the Aegis Ashore missile defence system and purchase missiles for this site.

Further the authors tell us that Poland has emerged as one of Europe’s largest importers of military equipment, second only to Ukraine, buying military equipment worth billions of dollars from the United States. In the 2023 fiscal year alone, Poland purchased Apache Helicopters ($12 billion), High Mobility Artillery Rocket System ($10 billion), Integrated Air and Missile Defence Battle Command System ($4 billion), and M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks ($3.75 billion).

Poland’s military spending in 2023 was 75 percent higher than in 2022 and 181 percent higher than in 2014. Poland was also among the world’s 20 largest importers of weapons in the 2019-2023 period, with its share of imports jumping four-fold compared to the previous 2014-2018 period. Of these imports, nearly half came from the United States.

In  the “Integrated Country Strategy” for Poland from June 2022, the US State Department’s top two mission goals were stated to involve military engagement and adoption of new energy technology, including nuclear power. This paper argues that “by all evidence, the focus on nuclear energy in Eastern Europe appears not to be driven mainly by climate change but by old-fashioned geopolitics in significant proportion.”

The authors issue a timely warning,

“Building up military forces using US technology and expanding US military presence in the region, even possibly basing nuclear weapons in Poland, may increase the likelihood of a catastrophic war between Russia and NATO. Such a war would be compounded by the potential for radioactive contamination from deliberate or inadvertent attacks on nuclear reactors, as illustrated by the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in Ukraine, which Russia has occupied since March 2022 and used as a source of leverage.”

The authors conclude,

“Investments in nuclear power in Eastern Europe hide geopolitical and military motivations behind a smoke screen of fighting climate change. When these motivations result in the massive acquisition of military equipment, manufacturing and operating them will increase carbon dioxide emissions. Worse, military build-ups will also increase the risk of conflict, potentially leading to a catastrophic war that could involve nuclear weapons.”

This important paper should be seen as a very timely call, a very important call to avoid creating new risks, very high risks in a geo-politically very sensitive part of the world. In particular this paper deserves serious attention in Europe. Clearly an already deeply troubled world should endeavour actively to avoid creating any more serious risks in sensitive areas. There is need for much higher commitment to peace and it needs to be better recognized more widely that avoiding conflicts and relentless arms race, while being most essential for their own sake, can also contribute greatly to reducing climate change. 

*

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 Planet in Peril, Protecting Earth for Children, Earth without Borders and A Day in 2071. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Ukrainian forces, numbering over a thousand, advanced 10 km. across the border into Russia’s Kursk region on the morning of Tuesday, August 6. Previous incursions from Ukraine into Russia, near the city of Belgorod, have allegedly been led by anti-Kremlin Russian groups.

But this time, the incursion was conducted by Ukrainian forces, using a combination of infantry, armor, drones, electronic warfare and air defense in the attack.

The main operational Russian gas pipeline into Europe runs near Sudzha, where a metering station – reportedly captured by Ukraine – monitors the reduced Russian supplies to countries such as Austria and Hungary.

Russia has declared a state of emergency in Kursk and local officials told the Tass news agency that 3,000 civilians had been evacuated following an attack that has clearly caught Moscow off guard.

.

.

A visibly angry Vladimir Putin convened a televised meeting of Russia’s Security Council on Wednesday, August 7, in which the military’s chief of staff, Valery Gerasimov, told him the advance had been halted and that the Kursk operation would be concluded by “reaching the Russian state border.”

Putin was exasperated for a reason, because only a week ago on August 1, he had displayed tremendous magnanimity and extended a goodwill gesture to the Biden admin by agreeing to a prisoner swap deal, but instead of rapprochement, Washington paid him back by instructing Ukrainian proxy to mount Kursk offensive inside Russia.

The United States and Russia completed their biggest prisoner swap in post-Soviet history on August 1, with Moscow releasing journalist Evan Gershkovich and fellow American Paul Whelan, along with dissidents including Vladimir Kara-Murza, in a multinational deal that set two dozen people free. Releasing Western hostages was clearly an effort by Kremlin to appease Washington after the naval standoff in Cuba in June.

On June 12, a Russian naval fleet comprising a frigate, a nuclear-powered submarine Kazan, an oil tanker and a rescue tug crossed into Havana Bay after drills in the Atlantic Ocean. The next day, on June 13, a U.S. Navy submarine arrived in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as a fleet of Russian warships gathered for planned military exercises in the Caribbean.

U.S. Southern Command announced the USS Helena, a nuclear-powered fast attack submarine, pulled into the waters near the U.S. base in Cuba. A Canadian Navy patrol ship also docked in Havana. Ottawa said the ship arrived on June 14 to signal the “capable and deployable” nature of the Canadian military.

The Russian naval fleet left Cuba on June 17 after a five-day stay but Putin’s hawkish maneuver precipitated a rift between the Biden admin and the Deep State. The Pentagon’s military brass favored a much forceful response to Russia’s provocation amidst Ukraine’s proxy war but Biden got cold feet because brinkmanship could have led to a nuclear standoff with Russia in the election year.

Joe Biden’s ignominious fall from grace was unanticipated and abrupt. It seems quite “a coincidence” that only a day before Russian naval fleet made a port call to Havana and six weeks before Biden decided to drop out of the presidential race on July 21, his cocaine addicted son Hunter was found guilty by a Delaware jury on June 11 for owning a gun as a user of illegal drugs and lying on paperwork about his drug use when he bought the gun.

Hunter Biden faces a maximum prison sentence of 25 years but is likely to receive a lesser sentence. In addition, Hunter also faces federal criminal charges for failing to pay more than $1.4 million in taxes on time. A trial in that case is scheduled to begin in September in Los Angeles.

What’s even more surprising is the fact that Hunter Biden nearly avoided facing trials on both the gun charges and the tax charges. Last year, prosecutor’s office and Hunter Biden’s legal team struck a tentative plea deal in which Hunter would have pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and submitted to drug testing and other monitoring. Under the deal, prosecutors would have deferred the gun charges and eventually dropped them if Hunter had remained out of trouble.

But the deal “miraculously” fell apart in June after the deep state decided that Joe Biden had become a liability as president and needed to be replaced by a security establishment’s stooge, Kamala Harris. Thus, Joe Biden was literally blackmailed by the Deep State to quit the presidential race in exchange for saving the life of his problem child.

Had Joe Biden decided not to quit the race, the security establishment threatened to open host of other criminal cases against Hunter Biden, including the notorious Burisma Holdings case in which Hunter Biden had received millions of dollars in illicit kickbacks from a Ukrainian energy firm from 2013 to 2018 while his father Joe Biden was Obama admin’s vice president.

On Thursday, August 8, Hunter was implicated in another criminal case. Prosecutors in the U.S. criminal tax case against Hunter Biden accused him of accepting millions of dollars in payments from a Romanian businessman who sought to “influence U.S. government agencies” in connection with a criminal probe in Romania.

On the other hand, security establishment via Democratic emissaries assured Joe Biden to use its influence with security agencies, bureaucracy and judiciary to drop all criminal cases against Hunter if Joe Biden agreed to quit the race and kept quiet afterwards.

Kamala Harris, being an Indian immigrant and lacking a significant political constituency in the United States, is an ideal presidential candidate from the perspective of security establishment. During her four-year unremarkable career as vice president and the way she cheered waving Ukrainian flag during President Zelensky’s address to the US Congress, she has proved that she would play into the hands of deep state like a servile puppet.

Furthermore, the attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally on July 13, meant as a psy-ops tactic, served a two-fold objective. Firstly, it created an atmosphere of fear and paranoia, restricted Trump’s movement during the election campaign, as he has since been advised by the Secret Service not to attend outdoor rallies and conveyed a message that red lines shouldn’t be crossed in political speeches.

Secondly, the drastic measure also managed to send a spine-chilling warning to Trump’s political opponent Joe Biden that the deep state was willing to go to any extent to achieve its objectives, even if it had to assassinate sitting US presidents, such as the brutal murders of the Kennedy brothers following the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. Unsurprisingly, panic-stricken Joe Biden decided a week after Trump’s brush with death to leave the White House for his Delaware mansion instead of ending up in the morgue.

Since World War II, the United States has been ruled by the top brass of the Pentagon while presidents have been reduced to the ceremonial role of being public relations’ representatives of the deep state, pontificating and sermonizing like priests to gullible audiences at home and abroad on the virtues of supposed American democracy, rule of law and civil liberties.

Though a clarification is required here that US presidents indeed have the power to order withdrawal of troops from inconsequential theaters of war, such as the evacuation of US forces from Iraq as directed by former President Obama in 2011 or the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan as ordered by President Biden in 2021, as the perceptive military brass is courteous enough to bow to “sane advice” of purported chosen representatives of the people and “toddler-in-chief” of the armed forces in order to maintain the charade of democracy in the eyes of the public.

But in military oligarchy’s perpetual conflict with major world powers deemed existential threats to the US security interests, such as arch-rivals Russia and China, as in the Ukraine War, civilian presidents, whether Biden or Trump, don’t have the authority to overrule the global domination agenda of the Pentagon.

All the militaries of the 32 NATO member states operate under the integrated military command led by the Pentagon. Before being elected president, General Dwight Eisenhower was the first commander of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE).

The commander of Allied Command Operations has been given the title Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), and is always a US four-star general officer or flag officer who also serves as the Commander US European Command, and is subordinate to the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The incumbent Godfather of the Cosa Nostra is Gen. Charles Q. Brown since October 2023 following the retirement of Gen. Mark Milley who completed his tenure of four tumultuous years, including the Ukraine War and the Capitol riots, in September as the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Thus, the Pentagon’s top brass, through NATO’s military command, exercises absolute control over Ukraine’s theater of proxy war. The Zelensky regime and its military commanders are merely servile stooges beholden to military strategy as devised by master strategists of the Pentagon.

The foremost objective of the US military brass in Ukraine’s proxy war is to degrade Russia’s military capabilities, for which Ukrainian troops and conscripts are being used as cannon fodder.

In February, Zelensky sacked Valery Zaluzhny as commander-in-chief of Ukrainian forces on the orders of US military commanders. As he was hesitant to commit more cannon fodder to breach Russia’s defensive lines in Donbas amid much-hyped Ukrainian counteroffensive lasting from June to December last year.

Differences between the two men 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.

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 the Pentagon’s dictates. But if he developed critical faculties, a cardinal sin in military command structure across the world, then he too would meet the same ignominious fate as his predecessor.

*

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

Sunlight’s hidden benefits — Sunlight is crucial for our health, dramatically cutting the risk of dying or getting cancer, yet we’re always told to avoid it

Beyond vitamin D — While we recognize the importance of vitamin D, many other critical functions of light in plants, animals, and humans remain largely unknown and will be explored in this article

Modern light exposure — Our constant exposure to artificial light is mistakenly seen as harmless, but forgotten research shows it’s a root cause of many modern physical and behavioral issues

Light and blood — Blood plays a key role in conducting light throughout our bodies. Disruptions in this process (e.g., from wearing glasses that block certain parts of the light spectrum) can lead to serious health problems

*

I’ve gradually become convinced that sunlight is one of the most vital nutrients for our bodies. For instance, as humans migrated north from Africa and experienced less sun exposure, their skin lightened, suggesting this adaptation likely ensured enough sunlight still entered the body.

Industries with vested interests lobby to hide true causes while diverting attention to easy scapegoats. Since sunlight isn’t profitable, the narrative we hear only focuses on its dangers.

For example, dermatologists transformed themselves from an unwanted career to a coveted (and incredibly lucrative) specialty by branding themselves as cancer fighters, emphasizing the need for regular, often costly, skin cancer exams and expensive skin cancer removals. They portrayed benign cancers as deadly and blamed sunlight for skin cancer, concealing that lack of sunlight leads to fatal skin cancers.¹

This fear mongering hasn’t reduced skin cancer death rates² but has increased harmful diagnoses and treatments even as effective and affordable treatments are hidden from the public.³ Many in turn have fallen victim to the Great Dermatology Scam⁴ (detailed further here). Consider for instance Comedian Jimmy Dore’s recent experience:⁵

Sunlight is free and profoundly beneficial, yet industries profiting from illness directly oppose it. In this article, I’ll explore forgotten knowledge of light’s importance and the remarkable things it does within the body.

The Overlooked Power of Sunlight

Prior to dermatology’s disastrous war on the sun,⁶ the value of sunlight was widely recognized in medicine. For example, in the early 1900s, heliotherapy (sunbathing) was used with great success for treating many (otherwise incurable) conditions, such as the 1918 influenza,⁷ tuberculosis,⁸ and many other diseases.⁹ Sunlight offers immense benefits, yet it’s often undervalued. Consider these points:

What Is Light?

Light is a wave of energy (termed electromagnetic radiation or EMR) that travels through space at the speed of light. Depending on the length or frequency of that wave, its properties change significantly. For instance, when its length is between 380nm-700nm, it is visible to the naked eye and spans a wide range of colors, while outside this range other types of light emerge (e.g., infrared or ultraviolet [UV] light).

Note: Pioneering experiments have shown certain sensitive individuals can see wavelengths outside the visible light spectrum.¹⁶

As light (and other types of EMR) saturate our environment, they have many significant biological effects. Classically, those effects are seen as a product of how much energy they contain and if that energy is sufficient to ionize (break apart) the bonds that hold biological molecules apart, something seen with increasing frequency as one goes towards the gamma ray end of the spectrum.

However, this ignores that waves with much lower energy can also affect biological systems if their wavelength matches a biological structure and through resonance stores within it. For example, consider how radar microwaves affect aphids:

Note: Many individuals are hypersensitive to microwaves and thus radar, cell phones or Wi-Fi.

Likewise, the body requires many of the unique wavelengths found in natural light, which unfortunately are absent in artificial lighting. For example, different types of UV light exist (e.g., UV-A, UV-B, and UV-C), each with unique vital functions.

Biophotons and Mitogenic Radiation

Biophysics reveals that cells emit faint ultraviolet photons to control growth and communicate. Disruptions in these biophoton transmissions can lead to disease, with abnormal emissions seen in conditions like cancer. For example, carcinogens significantly disrupt these biophotons, while non-carcinogens do not.¹⁷

In 1923, Alexander Gurwitsch¹⁸ discovered that cells emit faint ultraviolet light, called mitogenic radiation (MGR), which induces neighboring cells to divide. This light is so faint that it wasn’t detectable until decades later with advanced photomultiplier devices. Key insights from Gurwitsch’s research include:

• Secondary emission — Cells exposed to MGR re-emit it, precisely matching the frequencies needed for optimal biological responses.
• Injury response — Injured or dying cells release a brief MGR flash.
• High emission areas — Brain tissue, corneas, the optic nerve, active muscles, and blood emit more MGR.
• Blood conductance — Blood vessels and energized tissues, influenced by the heart’s charge, conduct MGR efficiently.
• Aging and healing — MGR emissions decrease with age, potentially affecting healing. Restoring MGR in older blood improved senility in early studies.

Despite its potential, MGR research has faded into obscurity. Interestingly, advanced meditators often report perceiving light within their bodies, which biophoton researchers have confirmed using sensitive instruments. This field hints at an unseen world of cellular communication and health diagnostics waiting to be explored. For example, I showed how MGR underlies many of the therapies now used in regenerative medicine here.

John Nash Ott

Plants grow so slowly that they can’t typically be seen. Enter time-lapse photography: by speeding up these microscopic movements, we can see plants in action. John Ott, a pioneer in this field, started experimenting with time-lapse photography back in 1927 while still in high school.

Time-lapse photography was no easy task — it demanded consistent framing and lighting over months or even years. Ott, with his remarkable skills and patience, became a sought-after expert, delivering stunning results where others often failed. His work, such as the footage he created for Disney,¹⁹ or this video²⁰ where he coaxed potted primroses to dance (and then bow) to a classic waltz, thus gained immense popularity.

Through his experiments, Ott realized that plants reacted to the light he used for filming, including specific light filters for different colors. This sensitivity to light extended beyond plants to animals and humans as well (e.g., Ott observed significant psychological disturbances result from wearing pink glasses). One key discovery was that essential UV light doesn’t pass through glass, so Ott used special windows to let in natural light.

Ott’s work opened up a fascinating world where the subtle responses of plants to light became visible, highlighting light’s profound impact on all living things.

“No one in science has made a major breakthrough in science by conducting double-blind studies. Breakthroughs are made by careful observation.” — John Ott

Ott found himself in a unique position: his groundbreaking research faced resistance from mainstream institutions while gaining attention from the scientific community, particularly for his time-lapse photography. Despite some successes, like removing dangerous TVs from the market and promoting full-spectrum lighting, he encountered continual obstacles, often due to institutional reluctance to publish his findings. His work, however, found its way into natural medicine.

Key discoveries:

In summary, Ott highlighted that artificial light, with its specific concentrated wavelengths, due to resonance could disrupt biological processes, causing over-activation or under-activation of certain functions, and showed that even trace amounts of background radiation could have significant biological effects.

Liquid Crystalline Motion

A major mystery in biology is how fluids are able to continually move throughout organisms without a pressure gradient (e.g., one created by a pump) existing to drive that flow. For example, once blood returns to the capillaries, it transitions from no blood pressure to a rapid flow within the veins. Observations like this in turn have led certain schools of medicine to believe the heart’s primary function is not to pump blood through the body.³⁸

Gerald Pollack provided an answer to this vexing question.³⁹ Many throughout history have observed that water often enters a state where it’s neither a liquid or a solid. Pollack discovered that when water interacts with polar surfaces and an energy source, it forms a new state with unique properties:⁴⁰

• Gel-like structure — It behaves like a gel or liquid crystal that continually stabilizes and protects the surface it coats (e.g., a blood vessel or the fascia).⁴¹
• Charge gradient — It has a built-in charge gradient that powers essential physiologic processes.⁴²
• Spontaneous flow — When this gel like water coats a tube, the hydrogen ions it releases repel each, creating a spontaneous flow that acts as a natural fluid pump in plants, cells, and blood vessels.⁴³

Note: This spontaneous flow and its importance is discussed further here.

Sunlight plays a crucial role the body’s circulation by:

• Fueling the creation of gel-state water and thus fluid motion.⁴⁴
• Catalyzing Cholesterol Sulfate Synthesis, creating the polar surface gel-state water forms from.⁴⁵
• It’s UV light improving Zeta Potential, which disperses fluids⁴⁶ (e.g., eliminating microclots), hence eliminating the obstacles to fluid circulation.
• Enhancing nitric oxide production — Dilates blood vessels, improving circulation.⁴⁷

This suggests that the body was designed to harness sunlight for maintaining fluid flow and cardiovascular health.

Blood Conducts Light

Much of Ott’s work revolved around getting the light we needed inside the body. Parallel to this, a variety of other innovators discovered that bringing light inside the body (e.g., with a laser)⁴⁸ yields a variety of meaningful benefits. Similarly, like Ott, they often found illness results from the body’s inability to bring the light it needs into itself (e.g., consider the significant health issues Ott observed from glasses blocking essential wavelengths to the eyes).

One of the oldest approaches to bringing light inside the body was to extract blood from the body and then transfuse it back in, exposing it to light (typically ultraviolet) before it had entered the body and thereby bypassing the barriers skin created to light entering the body. Since 1928, ultraviolet blood irradiation (UVBI) has consistently produced miraculous results, and is now widely used in countries where the practice of medicine has not been monopolized.

When I started using UVBI, I began noticing that I would often see rapid improvements occur which seemed to be occurring too quickly for it to simply have been a product of the irradiated blood circulating through the body and affecting whatever it came into direct contact with.

Note: I have also observed this rapid change with a few other therapies (e.g., certain stem cell preparations), which also emit mitogenic radiation.⁴⁹

When experimenting, I found that turning the external UV light source on and off during treatment (after which the blood takes roughly 30 seconds to enter the circulation) triggered immediate systemic responses, suggesting that blood might conduct light. This means that illuminating one part of the blood could quickly affect the whole system. Presently, I believe this conductivity is due to:

Assuming blood indeed conducts light, this provides an important context to many of the ideas outlined thus far. Understanding this helps clarify why localized light treatments can have such broad effects. Conversely, if you struggle with sunlight tolerance, it might be due:

Improving these aspects can thus enhance sunlight tolerance. For instance, many find correcting dietary issues (e.g., seed oil consumption) or restoring the physiologic zeta potential boosts their ability to handle sunlight.

Conclusion

One of the most controversial moments in Trump’s presidency was his asking about a new COVID-19 treatment which put an ultraviolet light into the body and could disinfect the lungs within a minute.⁵⁷

After Trump said this, the media and many politicians continually (to this day) repeated the false claim that Trump had advocated for injecting bleach into the body, and as a result, many of his supporters objected to how the media portrayed the incident. In my case, there were two reasons I had strong feelings about it.

First, it stigmatized using nasal disinfectants (e.g., iodine, hydrogen peroxide, or hypochlorous acid) to treat COVID-19. This was extremely unfortunate, as when used early in the illness, those disinfectants were one of the safest, most effective and most widely available treatments for COVID-19 — to the point had this approach been widely publicized, it likely would have ended the pandemic.

Second, it stigmatized the idea of putting light inside the body, which in my eyes, is one of the most useful medical therapies ever developed. In the second half of this series (which can be read here), I discuss exactly how that is done, the remarkable results UVBI provides for a wide range of challenging conditions, and just how far the medical industry went to prevent this competing therapy from ever seeing the light of day.

It is hence my sincere hope that the work of pioneers in this field such as Dr. Mercola and readers like you will make the public aware that natural light is critical for cellular health and have the remarkable properties of light no longer a Forgotten Side of Medicine.

*

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

Author’s note: This is an abbreviated version of a full-length article that takes a deeper look into the remarkable effects of light on living organisms. For the entire read with much more specific details and sources, please click here.

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician in the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate his exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and I’m grateful to share them. I also respect his desire to remain anonymous as he is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.

Featured image is from Mercola

Gold fell on August 5 from recent record highs, joining stocks, oil, and other risk assets in retreating amid increasing unemployment in the US and growing market fears over a recession. In fact, one of the most respected economists in the US categorically said that he is “beginning to smell a recession” approaching.

At the close on August 5, benchmark US gold futures for December delivery were at $2,447.80 an ounce, down $22, or 0.9%, on the day. The metal reached an all-time high of $2,522.20 on August 1 before ending the week up 2.7%, the biggest since a 3.3% rally in the week ending May 5. The spot gold price, which reflects real-time bullion trading, held steady at just over $2,407 an ounce, down nearly $36, or 1.5%.

Gold prices plunged as stocks on Wall Street continued their free fall, and crude prices hit their lowest levels for 2024 amid concerns about a possible US recession and the impact it could have on the world’s largest economy and oil consumer.

In the early hours of August 5, the Nikkei, the Tokyo Stock Exchange’s key index, which reflects the fluctuation of the share prices of 225 leading companies in Japan, fell by nearly 4,000 basis points amid investor concerns about a possible US recession and the strengthening of the yen against the dollar.

The drop had reached 13%, representing a decrease of more than 4,000 basis points. This exceeded the worst historical fall of ‘Black Monday’ in 1987, when the collapse was 3,836.33 points.

According to Adam Button, an economist and market commentator on ForexLive, the fluctuations in global markets are due to the increase in the US unemployment rate, which rose to 4.3% in July and given this situation, investors fear that this indicates the risk of recession in the US.

He added, “Gold does well when things are bad, but not when they’re really bad.”

Fears of a US recession have grown since the Labor Department reported in July that only 114,000 non-farm jobs were created, the lowest number since economic recovery began after the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, unemployment rose to 4.3% in July, the highest rate since December 2021, and at a faster pace than analysts had expected, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that “the unemployment rate rose by 0.2 percentage point to 4.3 percent in July, and the number of unemployed people increased by 352,000 to 7.2 million. These measures are higher than a year earlier, when the jobless rate was 3.5 percent, and the number of unemployed people was 5.9 million.”

Among major worker groups, unemployment rates for adult men (4.0%) and whites (3.8%) rose in July, according to the agency’s data. Unemployment rates for adult women (3.8%), teens (12.4%), African Americans (6.3%), Asians (3.7%) and Hispanics (5.3%) all remained unchanged during the month.

Considering these conditions, it is little wonder that John Lonski, a financial markets economist, said on Fox News that conditions are set for an economic recession in the near future.

“I’m beginning to smell a recession coming into view,” said the economist. “This jump by the unemployment rate, my goodness, 4.3 percent, this is up sharply from not long ago.”

For his part, US President Joe Biden reacted to the figures released by the BLS on August 2 and acknowledged that in July, employment is growing more gradually, despite the fact that since he came to power, he said, 16 million jobs have been created and the unemployment rate has been lower than during any other administration in half a century.

“No doubt the US labor market has taken a turn for the worse. The July jobs report stunk. Is a recession coming? Was it as bad [as] it looked?  Maybe not. The big mystery was a huge increase in people who said they couldn’t work due to bad weather. Odd…” said Jeffry Bartash, an analyst at specialist firm MarketWatch.

Despite Biden’s propaganda of strong economic growth and recovery, all indicators point to the US heading towards a severe recession. Instead, he will be remembered as the president who did not improve the US’s declining economic situation as he instead prioritised arming and funding Ukraine to the tune of nearly $200 billion.

*

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 from InfoBrics

It is a matter of deep concern in the USA that the maternal mortality rate of the country has declined alarmingly in recent years. However there is very less realization of this fact or of stagnation of other development indicators of the USA outside this country, except among development academics.  What is no less significant is that around the same time Russia has registered important development gains and in the context of some important indicators it has actually surged ahead of the USA. 

In any comparison of two countries, generally human development indicators are likely to be higher in the richer country, and these are even more likely to be lower for any country facing constraints such as those created by sanctions and hostile policy of more powerful countries. In this context the comparison of the USA and the Russia Federation reveal some interesting aspects.

Child mortality, or under five years of age mortality, measured per 1,000 live births, is widely considered to be a good indicator of health in any country. In this context it is useful to see the UN data which tells us that for the latest year 2021 the child mortality rate was 5.1 in the Russian Federation, while it was 6.2 in the USA. Hence Russia has been able to achieve a lower child mortality rate despite being confronted with very difficult conditions compared to the USA which enjoyed the most favorable and even hegemonic conditions at the world level.

If we see this data for the period 2000-2021, then in the USA this declined from 8 in year 2000 to 6.2 in 2021, while in Russia this declined from 20 to 5.1, a very significant reduction. In comparative terms, Russia was much behind USA in this respect but surged ahead over the first two decades of this century.

In year 2000 Russia trailed behind the USA very significantly, its child mortality rate being 20 compared to 8 for the USA. Yet within two decades, a time when Russia faced several sanctions, Russia managed to acheve a child mortality rate lower than USA. 

In the case of infant mortality (or mortality under 1 year of age per 1000 births), according to Macrotrends data, the infant mortality in Russia declined in a big way from 19 in 2000 to 4.8 in 2023, while during the same period infant mortality in the USA declined from 7.2 to 5.4, so that Russia which had been far behind the USA now had a lower infant mortality rate in 2023.

In the case of maternal mortality rate or MMR (reported per 100,000 births), according to UN data, from year 2000 to 2020, this declined very significantly in Russia from 52 to 14, while that of the USA actually increased from 12 to 21. Thus during this period, according to UN data, Russia was recording a very big decline of 6.66% per year while the USA was recording not a decline, but instead an increase of 2.88% per year in maternal mortality rate. 

According to Macrotrends data, from 2000 to 2017, the maternal mortality rate of the Russian Federation declined from 56 to 17, while this rate increase in the context of the USA was from 12 to 19.          

In both these sets of data, it is common that the Russian Federation starts at MMR much higher than that of the USA, and despite facing difficult conditions, reaches a lower MMR than the USA within two decades or even earlier.

Initially some persons tried to draw attention away from rising maternal mortality in the USA by saying, wrongly, that this is due to late pregnancy, but if this was the case then the MMR would have risen similarly in other rich countries. However as a report in the Scientific American noted (‘Why maternal mortality is getting worse across the USA’) if the MMR for USA is compared with the MMR of comparable rich countries, then it is almost double for the USA (about 24) compared to other rich countries ( about 12). What is more this is, to a considerable extent, due to the higher rates for blacks and even more particularly Native American and Native Alaska communities in the USA. In the case of these natives the MMR almost tripled during 1999-2019.

A study by Northwestern University, reported in Northwestern Now, has also debunked late pregnancy as a cause by pointing out that higher MMR is being reported in all age groups of mothers, including young age groups, in the USA. This study has reported even higher increase of maternal mortality rate between 2014 and 2021 in the USA. The study has also confirmed much higher mortality rate among blacks compared to the national average. Dr. Sadiya Khan who was involved in this study has emphasized that maternal mortality is largely preventable and to achieve lower rates it is important to improve health infrastructure and surveillance.

According to official USA figures for percentage of people in poverty in the USA, this number is 11%. According to official Russian figures for people livig in poverty in the Russian Federation, this is 9%.

According to official figures for the number of homeless people in the USA, this is 653,104. According to official figures for the number of homeless people in Russia this number is 11,300. This may be an underestimate.

Leaving aside comparisons, some other significant development achievements of Russia may be noted.

 During 2000-2019 according to UN data the life-expectancy in the Russian Federation increased significantly from 65.3 years to 73.2 years. According to Macrotrends data, this increase was from 65.4 in 2000 to 72.98 in 2023.

The increase of income or GNI per capita in Russia during this period was very significant—from $1,710 in year 2000 to $4,450 in 2005 to $9,980 in 2010 to $11,610 in 2021. On the contrary when the Russian economy was acting much under western influence earlier during year 1991 to year 2000, there was a huge decline from $3,440 to $1,710.

The Human Development Index of Russia improved from 720 in 2000 to 822 in 2021.

Thus as far as the welfare and progress of the people of the Russian Federation in the first two decades is concerned, this appears to have done remarkably well, despite many hurdles being placed in its path by the most powerful countries, despite constant vilification and  criticism. In some important respects, this performance has been better than that of the richest and the most powerful country. 

However the performance of Russia in some other contexts including reduction of inequalities and democratic reforms has not been encouraging.

The quality of democracy in the USA has also been in decline, causing much concern. Inequalities in the USA are incredibly high.

Some weaknesses of Russia and the USA from a development perspective are common—both have high levels of inequality and both spend a high share of their budgets on weapons and military.  

However a big question remains as to what explains the ability of Russia to emerge ahead of the USA in the context of some important development indicators despite the fact that the USA has much higher GNP per capita and hegemonistc powers at world level, while Russia has suffered under sanctions and other constraints imposed on it, such as the sabotage to destroy its prominent pipelines for supplying energy to Europe.

While development economists and experts will no doubt answer this question in more capable ways, what can be stated even at this preliminary stage is that Russia, its leaders and people, appear to have shown much higher commitment regarding some key national goals.

These important development achievements of the Russian Federation during the 21^st century also reveal how unfair the relentless criticism and vilification of Russia in recent years has been. It would be much better for the USA and  its European allies to see Russia in a much more balanced way, appreciate its real achievements, raise objections only when there are serious problems and try to settle them in peaceful ways, instead of carrying out very dangerous proxy wars, sabotage and relentless disinformation against Russia, very unfortunate and unethical tendencies that can also spiral out of control.   

*

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 Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071, Protecting Earth for Children and Earth without Borders. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Ever since the very idea of F-16s going to Ukraine first appeared, many suggested that they should be based outside of the country.

With the obvious exception of Russia and Belarus, there’s not a single Ukraine’s neighbor that’s not in NATO or at least under its jackboot. The two most important members of the world’s most aggressive racketeering cartel that directly border Ukraine are Poland and Romania. They form the bulk of NATO’s so-called Eastern Flank which stretches from Estonia to Bulgaria. Some members such as Hungary and Slovakia are refusing to directly participate in NATO aggression in Europe and have repeatedly stated they want to avoid a confrontation with Russia. Some are loyal to the alliance, but still somewhat ambiguous, such as Bulgaria and partially Czechia. Others, like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are endemically Russophobic, but are largely militarily inconsequential and don’t border Ukraine.

This leaves only Poland and Romania as serious contenders for the next phase of NATO aggression. However, while Poland is as endemically Russophobic as the Baltic states, Romania is far less black-and-white in this regard. In order to cement Russophobia in the country, the political West wants to escalate a conflict in neighboring Moldova and then drag in both Romania and Russia. NATO and the Kiev regime have been trying to destabilize Transnistria for this exact reason. Kishinev has zero reasons to get involved and unfreeze the conflict that has been dormant for over 30 years. This isn’t even in Romania’s interest, as it can continue peaceful integration with Moldova. It would gain very little with the resumption of hostilities in Transnistria, while also getting Russia as a direct opponent. Thus, trying to maintain peace, even a very fragile one, is the best option for all sides that are directly involved.

However, NATO is not interested in peace. Quite the contrary, just like its geopolitical predecessor, the Nazi German-led Axis powers, it wants to use countries like Romania and Moldova as springboards for a crawling confrontation with Russia. However, the world’s most aggressive racketeering cartel cannot risk a direct war right away, as this would jeopardize its entire Eastern Flank, particularly now that Moscow is responding to NATO aggression with the deployment of medium and intermediate-range missiles such as the heavily upgraded “Iskander” systems and new IRBMs (possibly the RS-26 “Rubezh”). Thus, the immediate basing of the Neo-Nazi junta’s NATO-sourced F-16s in countries such as Poland and Romania will likely be avoided, leaving Moldova as the only option. In the last several decades, the political West invested billions to stir up Russophobia in the former Soviet republic.

This was particularly apparent after the controversial 2020 presidential election, when NATO managed to replace the then-incumbent Igor Dodon with its puppet Maia Sandu. Prior to her involvement in Moldovan politics, Sandu was a World Bank asset, working on turning the unfortunate country into yet another (neo)colony. Since the very beginning, her main job was to destroy Kishinev’s otherwise cordial relations with Moscow, which was to put Moldova firmly into the EU’s (and by extension NATO’s) orbit. This includes the deliberate undermining of press freedom under Brussels’ supervision, with Russian media being particularly targeted for suppression. In addition, Sandu has been promoting absurd conspiracy theories about the Kremlin supposedly “trying to stage a coup with the help of Serbian football fans”. All this effectively turned the two countries into virtual enemies overnight.

Understandably, the people of Moldova haven’t been quite happy with this, particularly after the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict escalated over two years ago, as they don’t want to see their country involved, directly or otherwise. However, it seems that’s exactly where Kishinev is headed, particularly if the latest reports about the likely basing of the Kiev regime’s F-16s there are true.

Namely, various sources say the F-16 that was recently seen over Odessa flew toward Moldova, where it turned off its transponder and disappeared from flight tracking websites. This could indicate that the US-made jets are indeed housed in Moldova. Since Romania operates F-16s, its ground crews could service the jets there, thus maintaining plausible deniability of direct NATO involvement. With some minor differences, Romanian and Moldovan are effectively the same language, so the crews could pass as the locals.

If true, this would mean that Moldova is a party to the conflict. This is particularly dangerous for the small former Soviet republic, as numerous Russian officials have repeatedly stated that any third parties that might house F-16s (or get involved in any other way) will be considered legitimate targets. It can be argued that this is precisely what the political West wants. Firstly, this would drag Moldova into the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, forcing Russia to react, thus shifting its attention and resources away from the Donbass, where the Neo-Nazi junta forces are suffering heavy losses in manpower and equipment, while also losing territory on a daily basis. Secondly, it serves as a test of what exactly Moscow would do. If it retaliates against Kishinev, the Kremlin would be forced to fight another war, although this could discourage NATO from basing the Kiev regime’s F-16s in Poland and Romania.

On the other hand, if Russia decides not to target Moldovan airbases housing the US-made jets, this could encourage the political West to use Romania and Poland for the same purpose. Either way, the potential for escalation in this area is massive, particularly if the deliveries of F-16s also include nuclear weapons. On the other hand, the F-16’s impact on conventional military operations against Russian forces is minimal. Thus, the NATO-backed government in Kishinev is essentially risking the lives of 2.5 million Moldovans who don’t want to take part in any war, particularly not against Russia. Unfortunately, the political West is determined to use the country as a staging ground to project power in the strategically important Odessa oblast (region), which is critical for the Neo-Nazi junta’s maritime access. Moldova itself and the people would not only gain nothing from this, but stand to lose quite a lot.

*

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 is from InfoBrics

*

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

Kim Petersen is an independent writer. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be emailed at: kimohp at gmail.com.

Featured image source

Events of recent days have focused world’s attention on the multi-dimensional crisis situation in Bangladesh, an important country of South Asia having most of its land border with India (a much smaller part with Myanmar) and with a population of over 170 million. Bangladesh has a long coastal stretch and an intricate network of big and small rivers, contributing to beautiful greenery but also exposing the people here to cyclones and floods, all the more so in times of climate change.

In fact the first aspect to which one would like to draw the attention of readers relates to the extremely difficult conditions that prevail here for many people and the record of any government or leaders should be examined keeping in view these difficulties, something that is often forgotten.

Bangladesh was part of colonial India and suffered from the terrible exploitation by British colonial rulers for nearly two centuries. In fact the exploitation of this part of the country was known to be extremely acute, as seen from the very large number of famine deaths, the increasing poverty of peasants and the destruction of once flourishing weaving craft.

With independence in 1947 came the partition of the country, caused by the deliberate provocation of divisions among people caused by colonial rulers who followed a divide and rule policy. This led to large-scale deaths and displacement, coming on top of a mass famine which had just ended.

As a result of partition the new country of Pakistan emerged which in turn consisted of West Pakistan and East Pakistan, separated by a long distance. West Pakistan practiced internal colonialism against East Pakistan so that the sufferings of East Pakistan continued even after the end of British colonial rule.

Image is from the Public Domain

After 24 years matters came to a head when West Pakistan leaders and army rulers refused to hand over the country’s leadership to the charismatic leader from East Pakistan Sheikh Mujibur Rehman whose party the Awami League had won a national level majority in elections. Mujibur Rehman, popularly called Banglabandhu, was instead arrested. A genocidal campaign was launched in East Pakistan by the army of West Pakistan and some local collaborators who generally consisted of the most fanatic and fundamentalist sections of society. Hindu minority families and intellectuals were targeted in particular.

Estimates of the number of people killed from this violence number between three million (the figure accepted by the Bangladesh government) so far and three hundred thousand, with a middle level figure being around 1.5 million to 2 million people. A large number of people also died from hunger and disease. Nearly two hundred thousand to four hundred thousand women were raped. Nearly 10 million people were displaced, a big majority belonging to the Hindu minority, and sought shelter in refugee camps set up across the border in India.

The USA under Nixon (and Kissinger) and China under Mao supported Pakistan all through in this genocide which continued for nearly nine months. Then the Indian army and local Mukti Bahini fighters joined hands to defeat the Pakistani army and secure the surrender of nearly 90,000 Pakistani soldiers.

Thus was born a new country named Bangladesh (former East Pakistan). Mujibur Rehman was released and on assuming leadership of the new country declared commitment to secularism and socialism which was reflected in the constitution too. However after about four years he along with most family members was killed by a group of army officers in August 1975. This was followed by army rule, dictatorships, coups and instability.

The overall result has been that the country and its people have suffered a lot. In addition we have the impacts of climate change which are reflected in more sea-storms, floods and intense heat waves. The angry sea is eating up land while the density of population is already very high, in fact the highest among the larger countries, at about 1,342 people per square km. This can be compared to 37 per square km for USA and 4 per sq. km for Canada. Among western countries the Netherlands is considered to be the most densely populated, but in the case of Bangladesh the density is about 2.5 times that of the Netherlands.

This is why I stated at the outset that the development challenges are really quite tough here. Now in addition let us look at some of the structural problems. The inequalities in the country are high and it is not easy to take actions against the well-entrenched elites without risking hold over power. Conditions of international division of work allow for exports to expand manly in low wage conditions, and the terms of trade are often against the poorer country.

Image is licensed under GODL-India

Hence the evaluation of any leader should be only against the background of all these difficulties. Sheikh Hasina, the longest serving Prime Minister of Bangladesh who has left the country recently in the middle of violent disturbances, was able to provide the country significant achievements in development and stability in the course of nearly two decades. In the context of many important human development indicators, Bangladesh soon surged ahead of Pakistan despite having suffered internal exploitation for nearly 24 years. Bangladesh emerged as a leading center of garment exports. Hence for the greater part of her rule, Sheikh Hasina can be credited with providing reasonably good achievements in difficult conditions.

However serious difficulties started emerging after the COVID 19 disruptions due to which unemployment increased. In such a situation the anger against job reservations for freedom fighter families increased. Sheikh Hasina responded to this by making due changes.

In all democratic systems there are times when people come on the streets for protests. Some of these protests relate to very genuine problems, and as we have already indicated there are many genuine problems from which people suffer here in overall very difficult conditions. A democratic system is generally capable of reaching some agreement with such protesters because the government ultimately wants to settle things and the protesters are satisfied once they get a reasonably satisfactory response.

However things start getting out of hand once there is a foreign hand behind the protests and that too of some very powerful country or countries. Now in this situation the objective of the protests is no longer to ensure the settlement of problems but instead it is to go on inciting violence and disturbances till some other and bigger objective of the foreign hand, like regime change or the ouster of some big leader, is achieved.

Sheikh Hasina faced this kind of a situation in the last days of her rule and it is to a significant extent due to this reason that the protests could not be settled in an amicable way. Of course it can be argued that she and her colleagues could still have found a way out with more skills and patience. To give an example, her government could have tried to separate the genuine protesters like some sincere students from those were following the dictates of the foreign hand and have been known for their cruelty and fanaticism. Under ideal conditions the sincere protesters wanting better democracy and improved job prospects could have been invited to reach an early settlement while a strong stick would have been used only against those undemocratic and fanatic elements which were part of a conspiracy of regime change.

However this is easier said than done. Also one has to remember that in the past not only was the family of Sheikh Hasina murdered by fanatic/cruel elements tied to the foreign hand, in addition assassination attempts had also targeted Sheikh Hasina more than once and even grenades had been thrown on her and her colleagues, leading to the death of several of her colleagues even though she survived somehow. Such past experiences increase the feeling of insecurity and in such conditions if she could not distinguish between some sincere protests and the protests of the fanatic and cruel elements who had always tried to harm her and her family then her difficult situation can be understood.

In due course more will no doubt be revealed about the foreign hand, but for the time being at least this much can be stated that that this was related to a significant extent to the refusal to hand over a base that could be used for strategic purposes, while the other big aim of the foreign pressures was related to weakening the friendly relations and cooperation prevailing between India and Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina had been warning against the foreign pressures on her and the efforts to weaken her.

Ultimately one is left with an overwhelming impression of the extent to which imperialism is responsible for the problems of common people—whether as a result of the long colonial rule of exploitation and ‘divide and rule’ policy, or the impact of the richest industrial countries in causing climate change, or the role of imperialism in pushing the trade and financial systems which place severe constraints on economies like those of Bangladesh, or the impact of imperialism in pushing for distorted health and pandemic policies which caused avoidable disruptions for livelihoods of people, or the hidden hand of imperialism in pushing for regime change and ouster of leaders, by involving even aid agencies and making unprincipled use of even fanatic fundamentalist elements, strengthening them in the process at the cost of secular forces. While imperialism is responsible for so much distress of people and for the harm caused to democracy and secularism, at the same time imperialism works in such a shrewd way that the affected and suffering people generally do not blame the forces of imperialism and instead sections of suffering people keep blaming each other for the distress.

The recent changes in Bangladesh are much more likely to have a negative rather than a positive impact, some signs of which are already evident. As far as the path ahead is concerned, there is absolutely no doubt that conditions for most people can improve on a sustainable basis only by following a path based on justice, peace, inter-faith harmony, democracy and environment protection, these precepts being integrated well with each other on the basis of local conditions.            

*

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, A Day in 2071, Planet in Peril and Man over Machine (Ideas of Mahatma Gandhi for our times). He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Fountain inside the Museum of Independence, Dhaka, Bangladesh. It is the first and only underground museum in the country. (Licensed under CC BY 3.0)

US political and media elites tried but failed to sink the Chinese swimming team at the Paris Olympics.  The Chinese swimmers performed well despite the increased stress caused by media-induced rumors of “Chinese doping”. And now, the tables are being turned as the US anti-doping regime is coming under increasing scrutiny and criticism.

The Media Manufactured Cloud of Suspicion

Just a few months ago the NY Times and German ARD media ignited  the controversy with an “investigation” regarding an incident from December 2021. At that time, 23 Chinese swimmers tested positive for a trace amount of the heart medication Trimetazadine (TMZ) during a swim meet for top swimmers from across the country.  The Chinese Anti Doping Agency investigated and learned that all the positively tested swimmers were staying at the same hotel and eating in the same dining room. The amount of TMZ detected was so low that in some cases it was detected one day, and not the next. Testing in the kitchen revealed that TMZ was on the counters and in the vent hood.

The Chinese Anti Doping Agency (CHINADA) concluded that the athletes had been contaminated through food served in the dining room. They reported the facts to the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and the international swimming federation (World Aquatics, formerly known as FINA). Both organizations concurred with the conclusion that the athletes were innocent and should not be charged with an anti-doping rule violation.

But the NY Times and ARD suggested something shady had occurred and the athletes may not have been innocent. They further suggested that CHINADA and WADA may be in collusion and covering up mass doping.  

This story ignited a storm of accusations with the head of the US Anti Doping Agency (USADA), Travis Tygart, leading the pack. Some prominent international swimmers have joined the fray with suggestions that the Chinese swimming accomplishments at the 2022 Tokyo Olympics were tainted, “not clean,” or based on cheating. The insinuations and suspicions continued into swimming competitions at the Paris Olympics. Many TV commentators at the Olympics referred to the insinuation one way or another. Media kept the suspicion alive by highlighting when a prominent international swimmer said anything about it. American champion swimmer Katie Ledecky said it was difficult to accept coming second behind a Chinese swimmer who might have doped. Legendary US swimmer Michael Phelps said any athlete guilty of doping should be banned forever – “one and done”.

The US Congress got involved with Congressional representatives  to suspend or cancel US contributions to WADA. With the 2019 Rodchenkov Act, the US Congress has granted itself the power to arrest and penalize anyone in the world involved in “doping”.

Paris 2024 Olympics

Image: Pan Zhanle (潘展乐) celebrating at the 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris in August 2024 (Licensed under CC BY 3.0)

Swimming at the 2024 Paris  Olympics is now over. The swimming powerhouses US  and Australia won the most medals with 28  and 18 respectively. But China did well, coming third with 12 swimming medals. China’s Pan Zhanle was one of the superstars of the event, setting a new world record in the 100 m freestyle. He also anchored the Chinese relay team to their victory in the 4 x 100 meter medley relay, an event the US has dominated for 64 years.

Chinese swimmers spoke about feeling additional stress and discomfort because of the accusations and rumors about doping. They were tested much more than any other team, with some 600 doping tests conducted leading into and during the games. There were zero violations. 

The superstar Pan Zhanle was not one of the swimmers who tested positive in 2021. 

So it was left to some critics to say his performance was not “humanly possible”.

Tables Are Turned

Chinese and other media are now pushing back and exposing the hypocrisy and double standards of the US anti-doping regime. Even the mainstream Newsweek magazine headlines “China turns the table on US doping accusations.” 

More significantly, on August 7 the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) publicly denounced USADA for having “allowed athletes who had doped, to compete  for years, in at least one case without ever publishing or sanctioning their anti-doping rule violations, in direct contravention of the World Anti-Doping Code and USADA’s own rules. The USADA scheme threatened the integrity of sporting competition, which the Code seeks to protect.” 

Other international organizations are also reacting negatively to the US efforts to be the global judge and jury. The International Olympic Committee has said that the US may lose hosting of future Olympic Games if the US undermines the global anti doping establishment. 

NY Times Misleading Information

 The NY Times and Germany’s ARD launched and spurred this controversy with misleading reporting. A recent NYT article titled “A Doping Scandal” claims there is “a troubling pattern of positive doping tests in the Chinese swimming program.” Twelve members of the Chinese Olympic team tested positive in recent years for powerful performance-enhancing drugs but were cleared to keep competing.”  They insinuated malfeasance on the part of the Chinese swimmers, China Anti Doping Agency and World Anti Doping Agency.  By implication, the world swimming federation (World Aquatics) was also guilty.

The NY Times claim that Trimetazidine is a “powerful performance-enhancing drug” is false. The medication is helpful for elderly individuals with weak hearts but does nothing for young athletes with healthy hearts.  As noted at SwimSwam magazine, “Dr. Benjamin Levine, a renowned sports cardiologist at UT Southwestern Medical School, says he doesn’t think it provides any benefit.”  If Western athletes doubt this or want to test it, Dr. Levine says they can imbibe RANOLAZINE which is very similar to TMZ and NOT PROHIBITED.  

The insinuation that dozens of Chinese swimmers from diverse parts of the country with different coaches were collectively imbibing a prohibited medication risking their careers and reputations does not pass the sniff test. Simple logic would indicate an accidental contamination of the food they were all eating, confirmed by the presence of the chemical in the dining room kitchen. That is what CHINADA, WADA and World Aquatics all determined. The commitment of Chinese swimmers to anti-doping and clean sport is confirmed by the renowned Australian swim coach Denis Cotterell. 

The Need for Thresholds 

This incident points to the need for there to be appropriate thresholds for determining a doping rule violation. Currently this is inconsistent. There are minimum levels for some chemicals and none for others. Modern test instruments can detect extremely small amounts – molecules – of a chemical. As a scientist at an official doping test laboratory said, “It is very dangerous to not have a minimum threshold because all sorts of chemicals are in the environment.”

How Did the TMZ Get in the Kitchen? 

A very important question remains unanswered: How did TMZ get into the hotel kitchen and the food that was being prepared for consumption by the Chinese athletes?   

There is a curious coincidence. During the same month, December 2021, the Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva – widely recognized as the best in the world – tested positive for a trace amount of TMZ when she was competing in the Russian Nationals in St. Peteresburg.  However  this was not reported by the Swedish laboratory until February,  just in time to disrupt the Beijing Winter Olympics.  Unlike the Chinese swimmers, Valieva was alone and unable to identify where the contamination seven weeks earlier came from. This one positive test for a trace amount of TMZ resulted in huge turmoil in Beijing, assumption of guilt contrary to common sense, and ultimately the destruction of Valieva’s international competitive career. Her suggestion there may have been sabotage was ignored. The NY Times thinks this case is “how it’s supposed to work.” 

Summary 

In Paris unlike Beijing in 2022, the accusations were a distraction but not totally disruptive. The fans in the swimming arena were respectful and appreciative of the Chinese athletes. Some international swimmers also ignored the controversy and did the right thing. They congratulated the Chinese swimmers when they were victorious. Australian Kyle Chalmers congratulated Pan Zhanle.  American Caleb Dressel acknowledged the Chinese swimmers were the best that day they won the 4 x 100m medley.

The attempt to torpedo the Chinese swimmers and undermine China’s international image did not succeed.  

*

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

Rick Sterling is a journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be reached at [email protected] 

Featured image is from the Public Domain

The Pentagon is in the midst of a massive $2 trillion multiyear plan to build a new generation of nuclear-armed missiles, bombers, and submarines. A large chunk of that funding will go to major nuclear weapons contractors like Bechtel, General Dynamics, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. And they will do everything in their power to keep that money flowing.

This January, a review of the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program under the Nunn-McCurdy Act — a congressional provision designed to rein in cost overruns of Pentagon weapons programs — found that the missile, the crown jewel of the nuclear overhaul plan involving 450 missile-holding silos spread across five states, is already 81% over its original budget. It is now estimated that it will cost a total of nearly $141 billion to develop and purchase, a figure only likely to rise in the future.

That Pentagon review had the option of canceling the Sentinel program because of such a staggering cost increase. Instead, it doubled down on the program, asserting that it would be an essential element of any future nuclear deterrent and must continue, even if the funding for other defense programs has to be cut to make way for it. In justifying the decision, Deputy Defense Secretary William LaPlante stated:

“We are fully aware of the costs, but we are also aware of the risks of not modernizing our nuclear forces and not addressing the very real threats we confront.”

Cost is indeed one significant issue, but the biggest risk to the rest of us comes from continuing to build and deploy ICBMs, rather than delaying or shelving the Sentinel program. As former Secretary of Defense William Perry has noted, ICBMs are “some of the most dangerous weapons in the world” because they “could trigger an accidental nuclear war.” As he explained, a president warned (accurately or not) of an enemy nuclear attack would have only minutes to decide whether to launch such ICBMs and conceivably devastate the planet.

Possessing such potentially world-ending systems only increases the possibility of an unintended nuclear conflict prompted by a false alarm. And as Norman Solomon and the late Daniel Ellsberg once wrote,

“If reducing the dangers of nuclear war is a goal, the top priority should be to remove the triad’s ground-based leg — not modernize it.” 

This is no small matter. It is believed that a large-scale nuclear exchange could result in more than five billion of us humans dying, once the possibility of a “nuclear winter” and the potential destruction of agriculture across much of the planet is taken into account, according to an analysis by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

In short, the need to reduce nuclear risks by eliminating such ICBMs could not be more urgent. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ “Doomsday Clock” — an estimate of how close the world may be at any moment to a nuclear conflict — is now set at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it’s been since that tracker was first created in 1947. And just this June, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a mutual defense agreement with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, a potential first step toward a drive by Moscow to help Pyongyang expand its nuclear arsenal further. And of the nine countries now possessing nuclear weapons, it’s hardly the only one other than the U.S. in an expansionist phase. 

Considering the rising tide of nuclear escalation globally, is it really the right time for this country to invest a fortune of taxpayer dollars in a new generation of devastating “use them or lose them” weapons? The American public has long said no, according to a 2020 poll by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation, which showed that 61% of us actually support phasing out ICBM systems like the Sentinel.

The Pentagon’s misguided plan to keep such ICBMs in the U.S arsenal for decades to come is only reinforced by the political power of members of Congress and the companies that benefit financially from the current buildup. 

Who Decides? The Role of the ICBM Lobby

A prime example of the power of the nuclear weapons lobby is the Senate ICBM Coalition. That group is composed of senators from four states — Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming — that either house major ICBM bases or host significant work on the Sentinel. Perhaps you won’t be surprised to learn that the members of that coalition have received more than $3 million in donations from firms involved in the production of the Sentinel over the past four election cycles.  Nor were they alone. ICBM contractors made contributions to 92 of the 100 senators and 413 of the 435 house members in 2024. Some received hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The nuclear lobby paid special attention to members of the armed services committees in the House and Senate. For example, Mike Turner, a House Republican from Ohio, has been a relentless advocate of “modernizing” the nuclear arsenal. In a June 2024 talk at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which itself has received well over a million dollars in funding from nuclear weapons producers, he called for systematically upgrading the nuclear arsenal for decades to come, while chiding any of his congressional colleagues not taking such an aggressive stance on the subject.

Although Turner vigorously touts the need for a costly nuclear buildup, he fails to mention that, with $305,000 in donations, he’s been the fourth-highest recipient of funding from the ICBM lobby over the four elections between 2018 and 2024. Little wonder that he pushes for new nuclear weapons and staunchly opposes extending the New START arms reduction treaty.

In another example of contractor influence, veteran Texas representative Kay Granger secured the largest total of contributions from the ICBM lobby of any House member. With $675,000 in missile contractor contributions in hand, Granger went to bat for the lobby, lending a feminist veneer to nuclear “modernization” by giving a speech on her experience as a woman in politics at Northrop Grumman’s Women’s conference. And we’re sure you won’t be surprised that Granger has anything but a strong track record when it comes to keeping the Pentagon and arms makers accountable for waste, fraud, and abuse in weapons programs. Her X account is, in fact, littered with posts heaping praise on Lockheed Martin and its overpriced, underperforming F-35 combat aircraft.

Today’s tour of @LockheedMartin’s F-35 plant with @SecAFOfficial, @SenTedCruz, and Lockheed leaders Marillyn Hewson and James Taiclet highlights Fort Worth's Texas-sized role in providing for our common defense and the contributions made by our world-class workforce. pic.twitter.com/gEXSRrXSVa

— Rep. Kay Granger (@RepKayGranger) June 12, 2020

Other recipients of ICBM contractor funding, like Alabama Congressman Mike Rogers, have lamented the might of the “far-left disarmament community,” and the undue influence of “anti-nuclear zealots” on our politics. Missing from the statements his office puts together and the speeches his staffers write for him, however, is any mention of the $471,000 in funding he’s received so far from ICBM producers. You won’t be surprised, we’re sure, to discover that Rogers has pledged to seek a provision in the forthcoming National Defense Authorization Act to support the Pentagon’s plan to continue the Sentinel program.

Lobbying Dollars and the Revolving Door

The flood of campaign contributions from ICBM contractors is reinforced by their staggering investments in lobbying. In any given year, the arms industry as a whole employs between 800 and 1,000 lobbyists, well more than one for every member of Congress. Most of those lobbyists hired by ICBM contractors come through the “revolving door” from careers in the Pentagon, Congress, or the Executive Branch. That means they come with the necessary tools for success in Washington: an understanding of the appropriations cycle and close relations with decision-makers on the Hill.

During the last four election cycles, ICBM contractors spent upwards of $226 million on 275 extremely well-paid lobbyists. For example, Bud Cramer, a former Democratic congressman from Alabama who once sat on the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, netted $640,000 in fees from Northrop Grumman over a span of six years. He was also a cofounder of the Blue Dog Democrats, an influential conservative faction within the Democratic Party. Perhaps you won’t be surprised to learn that Cramer’s former chief of staff, Jefferies Murray, also lobbies for Northrop Grumman.

While some lobbyists work for one contractor, others have shared allegiances. For example, during his tenure as a lobbyist, former Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Trent Lott received more than $600,000 for his efforts for Raytheon, Textron Inc., and United Technologies (before United Technologies and Raytheon merged to form RX Technologies). Former Virginia Congressman Jim Moran similarly received $640,000 from Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics.

Playing the Jobs Card

The argument of last resort for the Sentinel and similar questionable weapons programs is that they create well-paying jobs in key states and districts. Northrop Grumman has played the jobs card effectively with respect to the Sentinel, claiming it will create 10,000 jobs in its development phase alone, including about 2,250 in the state of Utah, where the hub for the program is located.

 

A view of the Northrup Grumman Mission Systems headquarters facility on West Nursery Road in Linthicum, Maryland. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

As a start, however, those 10,000 jobs will help a miniscule fraction of the 167-million-member American workforce. Moreover, Northrop Grumman claims facilities tied to the program will be set up in 32 states. If 2,250 of those jobs end up in Utah, that leaves 7,750 more jobs spread across 31 states — an average of about 250 jobs per state, essentially a rounding error compared to total employment in most localities.

Nor has Northrop Grumman provided any documentation for the number of jobs the Sentinel program will allegedly create. Journalist Taylor Barnes of ReThink Media was rebuffed in her efforts to get a copy of the agreement between Northrop Grumman and the state of Utah that reportedly indicates how many Sentinel-related jobs the company needs to create to get the full subsidy offered to put its primary facility in Utah.

A statement by a Utah official justifying that lack of transparency suggested Northrop Grumman was operating in “a competitive defense industry” and that revealing details of the agreement might somehow harm the company. But any modest financial harm Northrop Grumman might suffer, were those details revealed, pales in comparison with the immense risks and costs of the Sentinel program itself.

There are two major flaws in the jobs argument with respect to the future production of nuclear weapons. First, military spending should be based on security considerations, not pork-barrel politics. Second, as Heidi Peltier of the Costs of War Project has effectively demonstrated, virtually any other expenditure of funds currently devoted to Pentagon programs would create between 9% and 250% more jobs than weapons spending does. If Congress were instead to put such funds into addressing climate change, dealing with future disease epidemics, poverty, or homelessness — all serious threats to public safety — the American economy would gain hundreds of thousands of jobs. Choosing to fund those ICBMs instead is, in fact, a job killer, not a job creator.

Unwarranted Influence in the Nuclear Age

Advocates for eliminating ICBMs from the American arsenal make a strong case.  (If only they were better heard!) For example, former Representative John Tierney of the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation offered this blunt indictment of ICBMs:

“Not only are intercontinental ballistic missiles redundant, but they are prone to a high risk of accidental use…They do not make us any safer. Their only value is to the defense contractors who line their fat pockets with large cost overruns at the expense of our taxpayers. It has got to stop.”

The late Daniel Ellsberg made a similar point in a February 2018 interview with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:

“You would not have these arsenals, in the U.S. or elsewhere, if it were not the case that it was highly profitable to the military-industrial complex, to the aerospace industry, to the electronics industry, and to the weapons design labs to keep modernizing these weapons, improving accuracy, improving launch time, all that. The military-industrial complex that Eisenhower talked about is a very powerful influence. We’ve talked about unwarranted influence. We’ve had that for more than half a century.”

Given how the politics of Pentagon spending normally work, that nuclear weapons policy is being so heavily influenced by individuals and organizations profiting from an ongoing arms race should be anything but surprising. Still, in the case of such weaponry, the stakes are so high that critical decisions shouldn’t be determined by parochial politics. The influence of such special interest groups and corporate weapons-makers over life-and-death issues should be considered both a moral outrage and perhaps the ultimate security risk.

Isn’t it finally time for the executive branch and Congress to start assessing the need for ICBMs on their merits, rather than on contractor lobbying, weapons company funding, and the sort of strategic thinking that was already outmoded by the end of the 1950s? For that to happen, our representatives would need to hear from their constituents loud and clear.

*

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

Hekmat Aboukhater is a researcher at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

William D. Hartung, a TomDispatch regular, is a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and the author of that institute’s forthcoming issue brief, “Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests or the Public Interest?” He is also the author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Featured image: US nuclear weapons test at Bikini in 1946 by International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0 / Flickr

---

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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

One thing you can say about the Administration of President Joe Biden is that nearly every week there is something new and exciting to discuss. Galloping dementia recently gifted us with Joe’s 11-minute abdication speech in which he announced that he would not be running for another term as president. He babbled about how he was taking the step in spite of his desire to continue. The president, who is 81 and recently best noted for his failing mental state causing him to fall down stairs, felt compelled to say that he believes that his record as president “merited a second term” but that “nothing can come in the way of saving our democracy.”

He also claimed that “I’m the first president in this century to report to the American people that the United States is not at war anywhere in the world,” even though it is engaged in a military occupation and combat operations in Syria, bombing Yemen and conducting counterterrorism in Iraq as well as supporting logistically and with intelligence the large and growing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza. He has pledged to Israel that he will “defend” it if attacked, presumably no matter what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assassinates or bombs to provoke a war against Lebanon, Syria and Iran.

Joe ended up by celebrating the nomination of Kamala Harris as heir-designate to the Oval Office after disposing of the troublesome and assertive Donald Trump, who presumably is the one who will tear up the US Constitution and “destroy democracy” if given the chance to do so.

But that was two weeks ago. More recently the fun fair on the Potomac turned its guns on a major critic of the federal government’s policies, most notably exercising its proclivity to float a lot of lies to turn anyone who exercises his or her first amendment right to free speech into some kind of traitor who has to be silenced. Many would argue that if the Biden Administration has one major failure beyond losing control over the country’s southern border, it is failure to manage US Foreign Policy in such a fashion as to avoid initiating or expanding existing international conflicts so as to turn them into major wars.

If one considers Ukraine and Gaza, both conflicts that could have easily been stopped or de-escalated if the State Department had stopped acting as a shill for Volodymyr Zelensky and Benjamin Netanyahu and had instead created disincentives to continuing the fighting, the case for US involvement as an antagonist is non-existent. The American people benefit in no way from either war and opinion polls make clear that there is considerable popular opposition to the carnage taking place along both fronts.

Source

On August 7^th, it was reported that Scott Ritter, who I consider a friend, had his house in New York State searched by FBI and police and 25 boxes containing documents and electronic communications devices were reportedly taken away for examination in an “ongoing investigation.”

Scott, a former Marine corps intelligence officer, has anti-war credentials that go way back to before the Iraq War when he, as a United Nations Weapon inspector, declared that Saddam Hussein had no “weapons of mass destruction” (WMD). WMD fear was being promoted in Washington as the reason for attacking and disarming Iraq. Scott was pilloried both by the mainstream media and by the Pentagon’s and White House’s mostly Jewish neocons (Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, Richard Perle and Scooter Libby) who were busy fabricating deliberately misleading information and disseminating it to encourage the George W. Bush administration to start the war, which it obligingly did. Scott nevertheless has continued to be an effective gadfly over war and peace issues ever since that time.

Ritter had earlier a run-in with the Biden regime in June 2024 when he was at the airport in New York City preparing to fly to Istanbul on his way to St. Petersburg to attend the prestigious international Economic Forum that that city hosts annually. A team of three FBI agents accosted him as he was about to board his plane and they confiscated his passport under orders from the State Department. They would neither give him a receipt for the document nor did they produce a warrant. No reason was given for the action, and Scott has since that time been unable to get his passport back.

The passport confiscation and now the house search appear to be connected with what is referred to as a Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) of 1938 investigation. FARA came into being just before the outbreak of the Second World War, when it was feared that “agents” of the Italian and German governments were all too freely spreading their propaganda in the US. In particular, FARA mandates that the finances and relationships of the foreign affiliated organization be open to Department of the Justice inspection. It states that “any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or otherwise acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal.” Those who fail to disclose might be penalized by up to five years in prison and fines up to $250,000.

To be sure, the U.S. government has recently been aggressive in demanding FARA registration for other nations as well as for Americans working for foreign powers. There have been several prominent FARA cases in the news. Major Russian news agencies operating in the U.S. were compelled to register in 2017 because they were funded largely or in part by the Kremlin. Also, as part of their plea deals, the former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn both conceded that they had failed to comply with FARA when working as consultants with foreign governments.

Image: U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii addresses the National Guard Association of the United States 138th General Conference, Baltimore, Md., Sept. 12, 2016. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Sgt. 1st Class Jim Greenhill)

While the Department of Justice is now going after Scott Ritter using FARA presumably because he is an effective critic of Joe Biden’s wars, there are some indications that other elements in the US government security apparatus are going after others who have dared to oppose what the White House and Congress have been up to. On August 6^th, while Democratic nominee Kamala Harris pledged to defend “freedom, compassion, and the rule of law” to cheers in Philadelphia, Hawaii’s former Congresswoman and National Guard officer Tulsi Gabbard described how she was being tracked by teams of government agents in surveilling her and her husband whenever she travels by air. Whistleblowing Air Marshals leaked how Gabbard had been singled out as a “domestic terror threat” under the so-called “Quiet Skies” program. Her boarding passes bear the SSSS notation which makes her subject to additional security searches and questioning. Her probable crime is opposing the war in Ukraine or, possibly, having recently published a book entitled “For Love of Country: Leave the Democratic Party Behind.”

While Attorney General Merrick Garland is active in pursuing individual Americans for possible FARA and “domestic terrorism” violations, he is strangely but predictably reluctant to go after the most corrupt foreign government’s US-domestic lobby which dwarfs all others in terms of illicit cash flow and political impact. It is a foreign government that receives billions of dollars a year in “aid” and other benefits from the United States taxpayer. Consider beyond that, the possibility that that government might take part of the money it receives and secretly recycle it to groups of American citizens in the United States that exist to maintain and increase that money flow while also otherwise serving other interests of the recipient country. That would mean that the United States is itself subsidizing the lobbies and groups that are inevitably working against its own interests. And it also means that those lobbyists though US citizens are acting as foreign agents, covertly giving priority to their attachment to a foreign country instead of to the nation in which they live.

I am, of course, referring to Israel. It does not require a brilliant observer to note how Israel and its allies inside the U.S. have become very skilled at milking the government in the United States at all levels for every bit of financial aid, trade concessions, military hardware and political cover that is possible to obtain. The flow of dollars, goods, and protection is never actually debated in any serious way and is often, in fact, negotiated directly by Congress or state legislatures directly with the Israeli lobbyists. This corruption and manipulation of the US governmental system by people who are basically foreign agents is something like a criminal enterprise and one can only imagine the screams of outrage coming from the New York Times if there were a similar arrangement with any other country.

Recent revelations suggest that Israel’s cheating involves subsidies that are paid covertly by Israeli government agencies to groups in the United States which in turn took direction from the Jewish state, often inter alia damaging genuine American interests. The Israeli Lobby also has been long noted for its interference in American elections, including spending large sums of money to oust politicians who complain about the Jewish state and its behavior. Progressive Congresswoman Cori Bush, a critic of Israel, was recently ousted after her opponent received $8 million and earlier this year Jamaal Bowman lost after a record $15 million went to support another “friendly to Israel” candidate.

Many of the groups receiving Israeli money failed to disclose the payments, which is a felony. At the same time, even the casual observer of government in Washington would inevitably note how Israel’s various friends and proxies, uniquely, have been de facto exempt from any regulation by the US government. The last serious attempt to register a major lobbying entity was made by John F. Kennedy, who sought to have the predecessor organization to today’s American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) comply with FARA. Kennedy was killed before he could complete the process and some have linked his death to efforts to register the Israel lobby elements while also blocking Israeli attempts to illegally and secretly develop nuclear weapons.

If one is requiring all the Israeli proxies that together make up the Israel Lobby to register under FARA, you might start with AIPAC, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) but there will be many, many more before the work is done. And there is Christians United for Israel (CUFI), which also has received funding and material aid directly from Israel. The fundamentalist Christian head cases that place Israel’s interests ahead of those of their own country finally need to have their bell rung.

One might well suggest that the Biden Administration stop harassing ordinary Americans who are exercising their free speech right to critique unnecessary wars and instead go after the Israel Lobby, which is a major contributing factor to why those wars are taking place at all. It would also be nice to end the hypocrisy that surrounds anything having to do with Israel in Washington. The country is no democracy, no ally, and it is a major league war criminal with possibly hundreds of thousands of dead Palestinians as evidence of its genocidal inclinations. Several hundred Congressmen cheering war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu do not change that. Apart from anything else, that the United States is involved in sustaining and providing cover for the slaughter of thousands of innocents while also pursuing its own citizens who are saying “Thou shalt not!” is an abomination.

*

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 Unz Review.

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 regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Iran to Hit Israel Hard with Smart Power

M. K. Bhadrakumar, August 6, 2024

COVID Roundup: New Zealand Codifies Forced Injections in Martial Law ‘Pandemic Plan’

Ben Bartee, August 5, 2024

U.S. Sponsored Regime Change and “Color Revolution” in Bangladesh

Andrew Korybko, August 5, 2024

America Can be a Great Nation If …

Chaitanya Davé, August 5, 2024

The Hiroshima Nagasaki “Dress Rehearsal”: Oppenheimer and the U.S. War Department’s Secret September 15, 1945 “Doomsday Blueprint” to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 6, 2024

An Alleged Earthquake Below the Test Site of Rheinmetall Weapons Manufacturer and Defense Contractor in Unteriberg, Central Switzerland, Was Probably an “Explosion”

Christoph Pfluger, August 4, 2024

The Two Faces of the Olympics

Giorgio Cafiero, August 5, 2024

There Never Was a “New Corona Virus”, There Never Was a Pandemic

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 5, 2024

From the Glass House, a Hail of Stones Rains Down on Venezuela

Stephen Karganovic, August 6, 2024

France – Interpreting the Satanic Olympics Inauguration

Peter Koenig, August 6, 2024

“Anything Could Go Wrong”. Russia’s Drills to Practice the Deployment of Tactical Nuclear Weapons. In Response to the Deployment of Nuclear Capable F-16s.

Drago Bosnic, August 4, 2024

Why Did America Give Away Its Manufacturing Jobs? Paul Craig Roberts

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, August 7, 2024

France – The Satanic Olympics. The Macron Government Belongs to a Diabolical Cult

Peter Koenig, July 30, 2024

The Israeli Terrorist State. Craig Murray

Craig Murray, August 1, 2024

13 Nations Sign Agreement to Engineer Global Famine by Destroying Food Supply

Hunter Fielding, June 18, 2024

BREAKING: Hezbollah Drones Attack Israeli Army Bases, Casualties Confirmed

The Cradle, August 7, 2024

Russia’s Upgraded Su-57s Flying Covert, Deep-strike Missions Over Ukraine

Drago Bosnic, August 2, 2024

US’ Naval Strategy in The Black Sea, East Asia, Japan and the Pacific. Russia’s Response: Putin’s Aide Nikolay Patrushev

Andrew Korybko, August 7, 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 September 30, 2023)

“It appears that Trudeau and Zelensky had arranged to meet this guy ahead of time. Which means that’s a further level of clearance. Meaning that Trudeau and his immediate handlers knew exactly who he was and yet he met with him… When they stood up to applaud a Nazi – a literal Nazi – they claimed that was an accident. There was nothing accidental about it! They knew who they were applauding when they applauded him. They’re just not being honest about it today.”

– Scott Ritter, from this week’s interview

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

At a time the elites in the West have a problematic figure on the world stage, and you are having difficulty mobilizing the working class to put on uniforms and “fight for their country,” it is helpful to have a second class of pawns to do the fighting instead.

Hence, the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, funded by the CIA, contributed to the destruction of Soviet Union. [1]

Today we have the perfect group of stooges to execute an operation against big bad Russia. The same breed of tyrants in Ukraine who joined alongside the Nazis to conquer the U.S.S.R. appear to be active again following the 2014 Maidan and the coup that ensued. And they apparently don’t need much motivation to carry out offensives against the people of the Donbass region. [2]

So if Russia can be persuaded to come to their assistance, the result could well be Afghanistan 2.0! Arm the Slavic men with Howitzers, rocket launchers, missile systems and numerous other military toys while not a single soldier from the U.S. or any other country dives into the breech of the epic fight.

However, it appears that things are not going quite so badly for the Russians as had been originally planned. The great “counter-offensive” waged by President Zelensky’s forces did not amount to much more than a burp. And the NATO members, including Republican opposition members, are getting tired of throwing more weapons and money into the black hole that is Ukraine. [3][4]

Meanwhile, the Canadian Parliament is reeling from the embarrassing spectacle of being seen applauding a Ukrainian-Canadian veteran taking on the Soviets during World War II – who turned out to be serving on Hitler’s side. A Nazi! [5]

With these and other dynamics in play the Global Research News Hour continues to update listeners on the fate of this war, and the reality of the foreign policy of Canada.

In our first half hour, peace activist Tamara Lorincz joins us to analyze the consequences of the Nazi in the House of Commons and the involvement of NATO in essentially taking over our foreign affairs in recent years.

In our second half hour, military analyst and commentator Scott Ritter not only gives total victory by Russia an absolute necessity to end the war, he expands on Zelensky’s background and fate, muses about the true role of Ukraine Reconstruction Bank for power brokers JPMorgan and Blackrock, and much more.

It should also be noted that both guests expand on their own recent voyages to Russia and what we could learn about the prospects for peace from these experiences.

Tamara Lorincz is a member of Canadian Voice of Women for Peace, a PhD candidate, Balsillie School of International Affairs, Wilfrid Laurier University, and a fellow with the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute .

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika: Arms Control and the End of the Soviet Union.’ He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 402)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcript of Scott Ritter, September 27, 2023

GR: The great counter-offensive that we were talking about by the Ukrainians amounted to minor gains and spectacular loss of life. Ukraine deaths, I believe, soar into the hundreds of thousands now. I mean, men are actually grabbed in the street to herd into this war. And Russians have suffered too, of course. And NATO countries are starting to run out of resources to send a diminishing army. I have to ask: from your vantage point, as a military expert, what is your analysis of the war as it stands right now? I mean, can you give us an update?

SR: Well, I mean, what we’re looking at it is the strategic defeat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

I mean, even minor gains is far too optimistic, because a gain has to indicate some sort of progression to an objective. The objective of the counter-offensive was never to capture a village that had a pre-war population of 400. I’m referring to the village of Robotino. That’s in the Zaporizhzhia, that has been at the centre of this counter-offensive since its start back in early June. Robotino was supposed to be the point of entry by Ukraine into the Russian defence network. They should have captured or cleared Robotino on Day 2 of the operation. They should have been at Tokmak, which is the intermediate objective, a town some-20 kilometres beyond the frontline.

And then they should have been at Melitopol’, the major city which was the ultimate, you know, goal of this offensive, that is capturing Melitopol’, severing the land bridge between Russia and Crimea, and putting the Russians in an untenable situation thereby hoping that Russia would come to the negotiating table. And so, unless you take Melitopol’ and sever the land bridge you can’t speak of a “gain,” because the gain has to be seen in the context of the brutality.

The Ukrainians have successfully taken Robotino, but only after they deployed the last three brigades of the 12 brigades they allocated for the task of capturing Melitopol’. And having seized Robotino, they found that they had seized nothing more than a death trap, because Robotino was in the low ground between a series of high grounds continuing to be occupied by the Russians. And when you have the high ground, you have, you know, a superior fire position.

And the Ukrainian counter-offensive is stalled. They have no more reserves, they committed their last reserves. The Russians, meanwhile, continue to hold the totality of their defensive line. They have hundreds of thousands of troops that have yet to be committed into this fighting. Their defence industry is churning out the war material at record numbers with no indication of not being able to sustain this level of production.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s defence industry is non-existent. They’re totally dependent on military production coming from the West, from Europe, from the United States. The Western nations have already indicated they have pretty much exhausted their relevant stockpiles of equipment to send to Ukraine. They are struggling to get new production online. And this means that Ukraine will not be able to replenish the losses that they have suffered. This means as this war goes on and as the, you know, meat-grinder grinds away, gaps will be appearing in the Ukrainian defence line and defence capacity. Gaps that cannot be replenished and these gaps will be further exploited by the Russians, creating more gaps.

And this is a recipe for collapse, and I think that’s the direction that we’re heading on the Ukrainian front. Toward the ultimate collapse of the Ukrainian military’s ability to maintain some sort of cohesive front against the Russians.

GR: Well, with this collapse appearing, you mean a signalling of the end of the war in some sense, it’s got to head somewhere. You’ve got Zelensky still, you know, going around. He was in Canada last week, somewhat infamously, in terms of the Canadian Parliament. And I’m wondering, is he still going to be president a year from now or six months from now? I mean, what do you predict will be his fate with his glorious war, as you said, coming crashing down?

SR: Well, I mean, we need to understand that Zelensky is not Winston Churchill. He is a tool of Western intelligence, of Western governments who used him to manipulate Ukraine into serving as a proxy of NATO in a larger conflict against Russia. He is an actor who has been ably reading scripts handed to him by his CIA and MI6 masters. And he had a successful first season, we could say. The show was well written and the product was seen by the viewership as being worthy of continued support.

But the second season has not been so successful. The second season, I guess we could have called it the “season of the counter-offensive.” And the counter-offensive has failed egregiously, and now the West is stuck with an actor whose script no longer motivates.

When he went on his most recent trip, you know, starting off by travelling to the United Nations where he spoke before the General Assembly. As he left Europe, we saw Poland begin to turn its back on Ukraine. And this is a very problematic issue for Ukraine: Poland is one of the larger supporters of Ukraine. Poland serves as a conduit, a physical conduit, of munitions being sent to Ukraine. Polish personnel have fought by the tens of thousands in Ukraine on the side of the Ukrainian army as mercenaries. Poland has turned over significant numbers of tanks, artillery pieces, and riding vehicles. And now Poland has said it will no longer participate in that, that they will no longer send military equipment to Ukraine. That this military equipment, especially the newer equipment is being used in Poland and being purchased abroad, will be used exclusively for the Polish military.

Moreover, Poland has said that it will not participate in the Black Sea grain deal, meaning that Poland will not allow Ukraine to dump its grain on the Polish, you know, economy. Poland is more concerned about their own farmers, their own agriculture, how to bring those crops to market, how to earn money for these farmers so they can pay taxes so that Poland can do the things that Poland needs to do.

By allowing Ukrainian grain into the Polish market, they really undercut the Polish farmer in terms of pricing. Plus the quality is garbage, much of this grain has been sitting in silos for years and has rotted and is fermented. You know, so it’s sub-quality grain. But this is problematic for Ukraine, because if it can’t bring the grain to market, it can’t generate money that it desperately needs.

And so, having Poland turned its back on Zelensky and on Ukraine was basically the precursor for what turned out to be a disastrous trip. He went to the United Nations General Assembly, spoke before the global community to a largely empty conference room. The people that flocked to hear him in the past no longer care with what he says, because he’s irrelevant. He’s recognized as having zero relevance to this issue. He’s a puppet of the – if you want to negotiate with a puppet, understand that you have to negotiate with the puppet handler. And so, people were starting to say, ‘We’re going to talk with the United States and Europe, we’re not going to talk with Ukraine, because Ukraine doesn’t do anything on its own volition.’ So, a disaster when he went to Washington D.C., he got snubbed by Congress.

The last time he was in Washington D.C. he was able to speak to a joint session of United States Congress. He had Nancy Pelosi infamously hold up a Ukrainian flag signed by so-called Defenders of Bakhmut, many of whom were affiliated with right-wing political parties. He got her to say “Slava Ukraine” which is the war cry of the Banderist movement which Zelensky has been propping for. He went to the Pentagon and was told, you know, you’re going to have to basically get some victories on the battlefield before we can go back to Congress and get more money.

And then, with his tail between his legs he flew off to Canada. Here, he met with Prime Minister Trudeau in the Canadian Parliament and got some arousing ovations from the Parliament as he delivered his presentation. But near the end of his presentation the camera panned to an individual in the audience who stood up to receive the applause of Zelensky, Trudeau, and others, including the totality of the Canadian Parliament. This was a 98-year old former soldier with the 14^th Galician-SS, or Waffen-SS Division, one of, you know, a Nazi formation and everybody who served in it, you know, had to be a Nazi, taken an oath to serve Nazi Germany.

The 14^th Galician Division, you know, had a reputation, well-earned during the war, of killing innocent civilians, killing Jewish women, children, the elder men, killing Poles, killing Belurusians, killing Russians themselves. A very, very criminally-laced organization. In 1945, when the war ended, the Galician Division was captured intact by the British army, I believe. And instead of being turned over to the Soviets for retribution, well-deserved, instead they kept them under British custody, turned them into what they call “displaced persons” who were interned in several camps throughout Germany. And eventually, the Galician Division was dispatched from Germany to Canada en masse, in totality, where they were absorbed by the Western Ukrainian diaspora in Ukraine.

This gentleman was singled out, he stood up, and he received a standing ovation from Parliament. Parliament literally applauded a Nazi.

GR: Yes.

SR: Now, the speaker of the Parliament has quit. He apologized, he puts the blame on him. But I will tell you this: I’ve spoken before the Canadian Parliament before, it was a foreign relations committee, but I had to be thoroughly vetted by the Canadian Royal Mounted Police and by the Canadian intelligence services before I was allowed to enter and have connection with these parliamentarians.

GR: Wow.

SR: The security for Zelensky and for Trudeau is even greater. There’s not a single person in the Parliament that wasn’t known by name to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and to the Canadian Intelligence services. But they had to have their names submitted ahead of time to be vetted. So, the Canadian Security services knew exactly who this guy was and what his background was.

Moreover, it appears that Trudeau and Zelensky had arranged to meet this guy ahead of time, which means that’s a further level of clearance. Meaning that, Trudeau and his immediate handlers knew exactly who he was, and yet he’d met with him. Zelensky knew who he was, and yet they met with him.

So, to say that this was an “accident” where only the Speaker of the House is to blame, the Speaker of the Parliament, that this was his mistake, he resigned, he’s taking a bullet for the boss. But the fact of the matter is Trudeau knew about it, he had to know about it. So did Zelensky and their security, so did the entire Parliament. When they stood up to applaud a Nazi, a literal Nazi, they claim now it was an accident. There was nothing accidental about it, they knew who they were applauding when they applauded him. They’re just not being honest about it today.

This underscores the degree to which Ukrainian nationalists with, you know, very very odious backgrounds, people who fought alongside Nazi Germany as part of the Waffen-SS who committed horrific crimes while they served Nazi Germany. They are alive and they are willing – they are alive and they are living in Canada, in Ukraine. Here in the United States we just turned a blind eye to them.

GR: Wow, that’s amazing. I thank you for bringing that to our attention. You know, just to switch gears again: as you have articulated, there is really no hope of Ukraine pulling off a victory in this battle. So, something else has to happen and if they’re going to win either NATO troops can be convinced to join Ukrainians on the front lines, or God help us, a nuclear war could be triggered. Or some sort of truce could be signed. I think that sums up all the available choices. What is your guess as to which direction this US-NATO actually will go?

SR: Well, let me say right off the bat that this is just going to be unconditional Russian victory. That’s the only way this war ends unless NATO intervenes and then this war ends with a general nuclear exchange and it terminates all life on the planet as we know it. There will be no truce, there will be no ceasefire, there will be no frozen conflict. There will be no forever war. This war is going to end – you know, I can’t give you an exact date and time – but it will end, and it will end with Ukraine’s unconditional surrender to Russia, or it will end with the absolute destruction of Ukraine.

When US Senator Lindsey Graham said that this conflict will be fought to the last Ukrainian, he was serious. Because Americans don’t care about Ukraine or Ukrainians. We only care about Ukrainians sacrificing their lives in furtherance of an American goal of bringing harm, of pain, of hurt to Russia. So, we need to understand that’s the reality. This will not end any other way. Either total Russian victory or general nuclear war.

Now, to avoid a general nuclear war, the West is going to have to accept the reality that Russia is going to win, and they’re going to win on Russian terms. And so, the question is: can NATO, the United States, the collective West, accept a Russian victory, and what will they do in the face of a Russian victory? Will they, you know, abandon Ukraine but then regroup and seek to confront Russia elsewhere? Or will they abandon Ukraine and recognize that the best way to get out of this situation is to learn to peacefully co-exist with Russia and begin negotiations with Russia about a European security framework that would be acceptable both to Europe and to Russia. These are the only options. There is literally the only – you know, in order to have a ceasefire or truce or some sort of negotiating settlement, you have to have all parties talking about this and ultimately be in agreement. Russia is not in agreement. They made it clear there will be no ceasefire. So, all the options you’ve laid out appear to just be laid out for the domestic political benefit of the nations that are willing to talk about it at this stage of the game. But it will have no impact on ultimately how this war ends. This war ends when Russia decides this war ends. And —

GR:  Yeah.

SR: — no other way.

GR: Yeah. I just appreciate your take on another aspect of the war, and that’s the development of the Ukraine Reconstruction Bank. It’s set up with JP Morgan and Blackrock, you know, two of the biggest financial entities in the world. And it’s propped up as the source to allow private investors to rebuild Ukraine after it has already suffered from its rejection by Russia and then now this war. But it’s probably more intended at making big money for the war contractors. I mean, I’m thinking of what Halliburton did in Iraq. What are your thoughts, I guess? I mean, is it as benevolent as its PR says it is? Or is this like the bank and the involvement of JP Morgan and Blackrock an example of the saying by Smedley Butler that “war is a racket”?

SR: Oh, war is a racket and Blackrock is a racketeer. They’re not there to help Ukraine, they’re there to make money. You know, their bet is, as this war goes on, you know, Ukrainian assets that, right now, are worth a lot of money will diminish in value. Of course, Blackrock wants to be there to buy them at the lowest possible value and then reap the rewards through predatory reconstruction.

But the good news for Ukraine is that Blackrock will never have an opportunity to do any of this. Because Ukraine is going to lose the war, and Russia will make null and void any arrangement that Blackrock has signed. The Zelensky government will no longer exist when this war is done and the Ukrainian government that will replace it will not be inclined to honour any agreement made with Blackrock. So, it’s totally irrelevant.

Nothing that Blackrock thinks or hopes will happen from this relationship with the Ukrainian government will ever reach fruition, because in order to reach fruition you need conflict termination on terms that allow not only for the Zelensky government to stay in power, but for the Zelensky government in Ukraine to be in a superior position over Russia, one where these contractual relationships will be enforceable. That just isn’t going to happen.

The Russians will never enforce this, will never agree to this, and neither will any new Ukrainian government. So, I’m surprised at Blackrock for doing this, because it’s a very poor investment and they’re not going to be getting a good return on their dollar.

GR: Okay. I would also like to – before we run out of time. I heard that you spent time in Russia a few months ago. I would appreciate if you could just describe your experiences there. Where you travelled, who you talked to, and what was your impression generally of the country this late into the war.?

SR: Well, I went to Russia in late April. I stayed there for 26 days, returned back to the United States on May 25^th. I visited 12 cities during that time. The purpose of the visit was a book tour. I had just had my book “Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika” translated into Russian and published by a Russian publishing house.

And so, I was doing a book tour. But in the process of doing the book tour, I was – I had the opportunity to see Russia, to meet Russians, and get a first-hand view at what the reality of Russia was. My primary objective wasn’t to do an assessment on where Russia was vis-a-vis the war, but rather to learn more about the Russian people, their history, their culture, the Russian soul. And to capture this information and bring it back here to the United States in an effort to better educate and inform my fellow citizens about the reality of Russia to try and create a vaccine, so to speak, to the disease of Russophobia that has gripped the United States.

But you know, when you do that you get a feel for the reality. And right now, Russia is impacted by the reality of this conflict. It’s everywhere you go, you see the Russian people rallying around their government. Deeply patriotic people. Supporting defence industries, supporting the troops, supporting the Putin government.

I was there for Victory Day, May 9^th is Victory Day, one of the biggest holidays in Russia, of celebrating the victory of the Alliance over Nazi Germany. And what I can say is that, you know, I’ve been involved with a lot of Fourth of July parades here in the United States. I was a volunteer firefighter for many years. And of course, on the Fourth of July we like to parade up and down our town and receive the applause of the admiring citizens and all that. But you know, basically Fourth of July comes and Fourth of July goes. Victory Day is forever, meaning that the Russians never lose sight of the sacrifices made by their ancestors who came before them.

Twenty-seven million Soviet citizens, many of them Russians, but not exclusively so, perished in that conflict. And the Russian people feel indebted to them. So, as they prepare for Victory Day, it is a – it has a deeper meaning to them, it resonates with the average Russian citizen. Victory Day itself is an extremely sombre day. Yes, there’s a parade, yes there’s fireworks. But it’s also a day that people go to the graves, that people lay flowers and monuments.

In years past, the Russians have done a parade of – sort of a spontaneous parade by it’s called the “Immortal Regimen,” it’s become a formal thing. And millions of Russians fill the streets in a parade where they hold up the photograph of a relative, you know, from World War II, somebody who served, and it’s now expanded to anybody who served. This was a hugely emotional moment, where people were actively participating in something. Showing appreciation for their relatives, telling their relatives that the current generation has not forgotten their sacrifices and will never betray the cause which is Mother Russia that people died for. And this extends beyond May 9^th and the days afterwards it still resonated.

And I – if I went to Russia today, it would still be resonating. People would still be talking about the importance. Because this is part of their DNA, this patriotic desire to serve their nation. It’s a real deal, and I witnessed that. You know, it’s imperative to tell the American people that this is not propaganda, this is not Russian propaganda, this is genuine, this is genuine, this is real, this is visceral.

This is who the Russian people are. And also, to report back that Russia is not being negatively impacted by the economic sanctions. That the Russian economy was thriving, without exception, every local economy seemed to be doing well. There was new construction everywhere.

Russia is a clean nation. Russia is a well-functioning nation. Russia is a nation that appears to have compassion for its collective population. I didn’t see homeless camping out under bridges or, you know, in parks or under bushes. I didn’t see drunks and drug addicts crowding the streets, you know, invading parks. The country was full of a vibrant people who are very proud of who they are. This wasn’t a propaganda exercise, this was a Russian reality.

And I would just encourage anybody who could, travel to Russia to see it for yourself. And what you’ll do is come back with a deep appreciation of Russia, its culture, its history, its people. But also a recognition that everything the West, their governments, and Western media have told you about Russia is a lie.

I’m not going to sit here and pretend that Russia is perfect, that it doesn’t have problems, it does. It’s not perfect. I’m not going to pretend that everything that Russia does on the world stage is admiral and beyond critique. No. Some of it is as selfish as what America does. And you know, every nation should be open to be criticized by its own people. But when you do the, you know, the balance sheet between the sins of Russia and you weigh, you know, looked at the sins of America, the sins of Europe, you realize that Russia has very few sins. Whereas Europe and the United States have a tremendous amount of sins. Russia is on the right side of history. They are trying to be good global community members. They don’t want to dominate the world, they just want to be in the world as equals in a world that respects Russia as much as Russia respects them.

GR: I guess in the one minute – we’ve got one minute left in this broadcast. I mean, is there anything you could say to me? Next week is the global day of action to end the war in Ukraine, October 1^st– October 8^th. I was wondering if anything from your knowledge of Russia and their people, what you could say that would maybe emphasize in people’s minds that, yes, peace is on the way if we do things right. What would you say to those activists?

SR: I would tell the activists that the best path to peace is a total Russian victory. That you need to stop arming the Ukrainians. You need to stop funding the Ukrainians. This war is not going to end with some sort of negotiated settlement that – where, you know, everybody feels good about this. Ukraine has lost this war.

And the reason why Ukraine lost this war is because the West pushed it into this conflict and then continued Ukraine full of weapons and money to sustain this war. Russia is not going to end this war without achieving the objectives that it set out to achieve. And therefore, the world needs to respect this. And if you hope we could stop sending them the weapons and the money that is being used by proxy to (inaudible, 28:22). And to ensure that future generations of Ukrainians will grow up in dislocated environment , poor education, no stability, a nightmare. If you care for Ukraine, pray for a Russian victory.

---

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. https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-russia-relations-a-review-of-ukraine-russia-history/5778616
2. https://www.globalresearch.ca/rise-ukraines-neo-nazi-mps-since-2014-pro-democracy-revolution/5675691
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMGW1mpMlHU&t=36s
4. https://www.globalresearch.ca/republicans-ukraine-ad-says-ukraine-war-good-weakens-russia/5833996
5. https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/speaker-s-nazi-veteran-invite-profoundly-embarrassing-trudeau-says-as-rota-faces-calls-to-resign-1.6576350

*

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.

Uriel Araujo, PhD, is an anthropology researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

An earlier version of this post omitted the video. Apologies.

See the search warrant below.

.

.

.

.

Click here to watch the video

Scott will discuss the FBI raid and answer audience questions on Ep. 183 of Ask the Inspector.

 

*

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

Canadian economist Prof. Michel Chossudovsky criticizes the U.S. government for promoting nuclear war propaganda and advocating for the ‘safe use’ of nuclear weapons in conventional war. He highlights the brainwashing of decision-makers and the dangers of their own power.

Chossudovsky discusses the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review and the recategorization of nuclear weapons. 

The short video below also addresses the role of Victoria Nuland in U.S. foreign policy and the neo-Nazi agenda embedded in regime change efforts.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

****

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky 

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable – a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread in terms of radioactive fallout Worldwide .

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped. “Offensive” military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of “self-defense”. 

The  August 6-8 2003 “Privatization of Nuclear’ War secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

It was conducive to a $1.3 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program initiated under the Obama administration, which is slated to increase to 2 trillion dollars by 2030. 

Hiroshima Day, August 6, 2024

Towards a World War III Scenario:

The Privatization of Nuclear War

Michel Chossudovsky

August 7, 2011.

 

Introduction

At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable – a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread in terms of radioactive fallout over a large part of the Middle East.

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as “a weapon of last resort”, have been scrapped. “Offensive” military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of “self-defense”.

The casualties from the direct effects of blast, radioactivity, and fires resulting from the massive use of nuclear weapons by the superpowers [of the Cold War era] would be so catastrophic that we avoided such a tragedy for the first four decades after the invention of nuclear weapons.1

During the Cold War, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) prevailed, namely that the use of nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union would result in “the destruction of both the attacker and the defender”.

In the post Cold war era, US nuclear doctrine was redefined. The dangers of nuclear weapons have been obfuscated.

Tactical nuclear weapons have been upheld as distinct, in terms of their impact, from the strategic thermonuclear bombs of the Cold War era.

Tactical nuclear weapons are identical to the strategic nuclear bombs. The only thing that differentiates these two categories of nuclear bombs are:

1) their delivery system;
2) their explosive yield (measured in mass of trinitrotoluene (TNT), in kilotons or megatons.

The tactical nuclear weapon or low yield mini-nuke is described as a small nuclear bomb, delivered in the same way as the earth penetrating bunker buster bombs.

While the technology is fundamentally different, tactical nuclear weapons, in terms of in-theater delivery systems are comparable to the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The Pentagon’s 2001 Nuclear Posture Review envisaged so-called “contingency plans” for an offensive “first strike use” of nuclear weapons, not only against “axis of evil” countries (including Iran and North Korea) but also against Russia and China.2

The adoption of the NPR by the US Congress in late 2002 provided a green light for carrying out the Pentagon’s pre-emptive nuclear war doctrine, both in terms of military planning as well as defense procurement and production. Congress not only rolled back its prohibition on low yield nuclear weapons, it also provided funding “to pursue work on so-called mini-nukes”. The financing was allocated to bunker buster (earth penetrator) tactical nuclear weapons as well as to the development of new nuclear weapons.3

Hiroshima Day 2003: Secret Meeting at Strategic Command Headquarters

On August 6, 2003, on Hiroshima Day, [twenty two years ago] commemorating when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima (August 6 1945), a secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

Senior executives from the nuclear industry and the military industrial complex were in attendance. This mingling of defense contractors, scientists and policy-makers was not intended to commemorate Hiroshima.

The meeting was intended to set the stage for the development of a new generation of “smaller”, “safer” and “more usable” nuclear weapons, to be used in the “in-theater nuclear wars” of the 21st Century.

In a cruel irony, the participants to this secret meeting, which excluded members of Congress, arrived on the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing and departed on the anniversary of the attack on Nagasaki.

More than 150 military contractors, scientists from the weapons labs, and other government officials gathered at the headquarters of the US Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska to plot and plan for the possibility of “full-scale nuclear war”, calling for the production of a new generation of nuclear weapons – more “usable” so-called “mini-nukes” and earth penetrating “bunker busters” armed with atomic warheads.4

According to a leaked draft of the agenda, the secret meeting included discussions on “mini-nukes” and “bunker-buster” bombs with nuclear war heads “for possible use against rogue states”:

We need to change our nuclear strategy from the Cold War to one that can deal with emerging threats… The meeting will give some thought to how we guarantee the efficacy of the (nuclear) stockpile.5

The Privatization of Nuclear War: US Military Contractors Set the Stage

The post 9/11 nuclear weapons doctrine was in the making, with America’s major defense contractors directly involved in the decision-making process.

The Hiroshima Day 2003 meetings had set the stage for the “privatization of nuclear war”. Corporations not only reap multibillion-dollar profits from the production of nuclear bombs, they also have a direct voice in setting the agenda regarding the use and deployment of nuclear weapons.

The nuclear weapons industry, which includes the production of nuclear devices as well as the missile delivery systems, etc., is controlled by a handful of defense contractors with Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grunman, Raytheon and Boeing in the lead.

It is worth noting that barely a week prior to the historic August 6, 2003 meeting, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) disbanded its advisory committee which provided an “independent oversight” on the US nuclear arsenal, including the testing and/or use of new nuclear devices.6 

The above text is an excerpt from Michel Chossudovsky’s Towards a World War Three Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War.

please note: at the moment, this book is only available in PDF format

Financing the Culture of War

There are more than 5000 US nuclear weapons deployed. And now the US is committed to developing a generation of “more usable” low yield tactical nuclear weapons (bunker buster bombs) which are “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground”.

“Blowing up the Planet” on a first strike basis as a instrument of peace and global security.

Those who decide on the use of nuclear weapons believe their own lies.

And what the US public does not know that is that on September 15, 1945, confirmed by declassified documents, the Truman administration released a secret plan to bomb 66 Soviet cities with 204 atomic bombs, at a time when the US and the Soviet Union were allies.

And those who dare to say that the use of nuclear weapons threatens the future of humanity are branded as “conspiracy theorists”.

The Privatization of Nuclear War 

Video. James Corbett Interviews Michel Chossudovsky 

 

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 is from Countercurrents

---

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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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.

This article was first published on March 9, 2022, revised and expanded on October 5, 2022, minor revisions on May 25, 2023.

 

Introduction

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.

Let us also recall the unspoken history of America’s doctrine pertaining to the conduct of nuclear war. 

Barely six weeks after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. War Department released a Secret Plan on September 15, 1945 to  bomb 66 cities of the Soviet Union with 204 atomic bombs.

The September 1945 Plan was to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map” at a time when the US and the USSR were allies. Confirmed by declassified documents, Hiroshima and Nagasaki served as a “Dress Rehearsal” (see historical details and analysis below).  

Video: The Dangers of Nuclear War: Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux

 

Leave comment Access Rumble 

Putin’s February 2022 Statement

Vladimir Putin’s statement on February 21st, 2022 was a response to US threats to use nuclear weapons on a preemptive basis against Russia, despite Joe Biden’s “reassurance” that the US would not be resorting to “A first strike” nuclear attack against an enemy of America: 

“Let me [Putin] explain that U.S. strategic planning documents contain the possibility of a so-called preemptive strike against enemy missile systems. And who is the main enemy for the U.S. and NATO? We know that too. It’s Russia. In NATO documents, our country is officially and directly declared the main threat to North Atlantic security. And Ukraine will serve as a forward springboard for the strike.” (Putin Speech, February 21, 2022, emphasis added)

In July 2021, the Biden administration launched its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) which was formally announced in October 2022.

The 2022 NPR includes what is described as a “nuclear declaratory policy of the United States”.

The 2022 NPR largely confirms the nuclear options developed by the Obama and Bush administrations predicated on the notion of preemptive nuclear war raised in President Putin’s speech. 

The underlying US nuclear doctrine consists in portraying nuclear weapons as a means of “self defense” rather than as a “weapon of mass destruction”.

The NPR does not rule out the possibility of a “first strike” nuclear attack against Russia. According to the US Congress Research Service:  

“The NPR [2022] suggests that the United States may use nuclear weapons in circumstances that do not involve potential adversaries’ potential use of nuclear weapons. …The review also asserts that an ‘effective nuclear deterrent is foundational to broader U.S. defense strategy,’ but does not elaborate.  (…)”

The Privatization of Nuclear War 

It should be understood, that there are powerful financial interests behind the NPR which are tied into the $1.3  trillion nuclear weapons program initiated under President Obama. 

Although the Ukraine conflict has so-far been limited to conventional weapons coupled with “economic warfare”, the use of a large array of sophisticated WMDs including nuclear weapons is on the drawing board of the Pentagon.

Dangerous narrative: The NPR proposes “increased integration of conventional and nuclear planning”, which consists in categorizing tactical nuclear weapons (e.g. B61-11 and 12) as conventional weapons, to be used on a preemptive basis in the conventional war theater (as a means of self defense)

According to the Federation of American Scientists, the total number of nuclear warheads Worldwide is of the order of 13,000.  Russia and the United States “each have around 4,000 warheads in their military stockpiles”.

 

Earlier Interview: Nuclear Doctrine

April 2023. Comments: Link to Odysee

The Dangers of Nuclear War are Real. Profit Driven. Two Trillion Dollars

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?):

The United States maintains an arsenal of about 1,700 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) and at strategic bomber bases. There are an additional estimated 100 non-strategic, or tactical, nuclear weapons at bomber bases in five European countries and about 2,000 nuclear warheads in storage. [see our analysis of B61-11 and B61-12 below]

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated in May 2021 that the United States will spend a total of $634 billion over the next 10 years to sustain and modernize its nuclear arsenal. (Arms Control)

In this article, I will focus on

• The Post Cold War shift in US Nuclear Doctrine,
• A brief review of the History of US-Russia Relations since World War I, 
• An Assessment of  the history of nuclear weapons going back to the Manhattan Project initiated in 1939 with the participation of both Canada and the United Kingdom. 

Most people in America do not know that the Manhattan Project in the immediate wake of bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki in August 1945, was intended to formulate a nuclear attack against the USSR, at a time when the Soviet Union and the U.S. were allies. 

What I am referring to is the U.S Blueprint of September 15, 1945 according to which the US War Department planned to drop more than 200 atomic bombs on 66 cities of the Soviet Union. This is not mentioned in the history books. See:

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/1945-Atomic-Bomb-Production.pdf 

A Note on the History of US-Russia Relations. The Forgotten War of 1918

From a historical standpoint the US and its Allies have been threatening Russia for more than 104 years starting during World War I with the deployment of US and Allied Forces against Soviet Russia on January 12, 1918, (two months following the November 7, 1917 revolution allegedly in support of Russia’s Imperial Army).  

The 1918 US-UK Allied invasion of Russia is a landmark in Russian History, often mistakenly portrayed as being part of a Civil War. 

It lasted for more than two years involving the deployment of more than 200,000 troops of which 11,000 were from the US, 59,000 from the UK. Japan which was an Ally of Britain and America during World War I  dispatched 70,000 troops. 

US Troops in Vladivostok, 1918

US Occupation Troops in Vladivostok 1918

US and Allied Troops in Vladivostok in 1918

History and the Threat of Nuclear War

The US threat of nuclear war against Russia was formulated more than 76 years ago in September 1945, when the US and the Soviet Union were allies. It consisted in a “World War III Blueprint” of nuclear war against the USSR, targeting 66 cities with more than 200 atomic bombs. This diabolical project under the Manhattan Project was instrumental in triggering the Cold War and the nuclear arms race. (See analysis below).

Chronology

1918-1920:  The first US and allied forces led war against Soviet Russia with more than 10 countries sending troops to fight alongside the White Imperial Russian army. This happened exactly two months after the October Revolution, on January 12, 1918, and it lasted until the early 1920s.

The Manhattan Project initiated in 1939, with the participation of the UK and Canada. Development of the Atomic Bomb. 

Operation Barbarossa, June 1941. Nazi Invasion of the Soviet Union. Standard Oil of New Jersey was selling oil to Nazi Germany.

February 1945: The Yalta Conference. The meeting of Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin.

“Operation Unthinkable”: A Secret attack plan against the Soviet Union formulated by Winston Churchill in the immediate wake of the Yalta conference. It was scrapped in June 1945.

April 12, 1945: The Potsdam Conference. President Harry Truman and Prime Minister Winston Churchill approve the atomic bombing of Japan.

September 15, 1945: A World War III Scenario formulated by the US War Department: A plan to  bomb 66 cities of the Soviet Union with 204 atomic bombs, when the US and USSR were allies. The Secret plan  (declassified in 1975) formulated during WWII, was released less than two weeks after the official end of WWII on September 2, 1945

1949: The Soviet Union announces the testing of its nuclear bomb.

Post Cold War Doctrine: “Preemptive Nuclear War”

The Doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) of the Cold War Era no longer prevails. It was replaced at the outset of the George W. Bush Administration with the Doctrine of Preemptive Nuclear War, namely the use of nuclear weapons as a means of “self-defense” against both nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states.

In early 2002, the text of George W. Bush’s Nuclear Posture Review had already been leaked, several months prior to the release of the September 2002 National Security Strategy (NSS) which defined, “Preemption” as:

“the anticipatory use of force in the face of an imminent attack”. 

Namely as an act of war on the grounds of self-defense

The MAD doctrine was scrapped. The 2001 Nuclear Posture Review not only redefined the use of nuclear weapons, so-called tactical nuclear weapons or bunker buster bombs (mini-nukes) could henceforth be used in the conventional war theater without the authorization of the Commander in Chief, namely the President of the United States.

Seven countries were identified in the 2001 NPR (adopted in 2002) as potential targets for a preemptive nuclear attack 

Discussing “requirements for nuclear strike capabilities,” the report lists Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and Syria as “among the countries that could be involved in immediate, potential, or unexpected contingencies.”  …

Three of these countries (Iraq, Libya and Syria) have since then been the object of US-led wars. The 2001 NPR also confirmed continued nuclear war preparations against China and Russia.

“The Bush review also indicates that the United States should be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China, citing “the combination of China’s still developing strategic objectives and its ongoing modernization of its nuclear and non-nuclear forces.”

“Finally, although the review repeats Bush administration assertions that Russia is no longer an enemy, it says the United States must be prepared for nuclear contingencies with Russia and notes that, if “U.S. relations with Russia significantly worsen in the future, the U.S. may need to revise its nuclear force levels and posture.” Ultimately, the review concludes that nuclear conflict with Russia is “plausible” but “not expected.” [that. was back in 2002] ( Arms Control) emphasis added.

The Privatization of Nuclear War

With tensions growing in major regions of the World, a new generation of nuclear weapons technology was unfolding making nuclear warfare a very real prospect. And with very little fanfare, the US had embarked on the privatization of nuclear war under a first-strike “preemptive” doctrine. This process went into full swing in the immediate wake of the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (2001 NPR) adopted by the US Senate in 2002.

On August 6, 2003, on Hiroshima Day, commemorating when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima (August 6 1945), a secret meeting was held behind closed doors at Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska. Senior executives from the nuclear industry and the military industrial complex were in attendance.

This mingling of defense contractors, scientists and policy-makers was not intended to commemorate Hiroshima. The meeting was intended to set the stage for the development of a new generation of “smaller”, “safer” and “more usable” nuclear weapons, to be used in the “in-theater nuclear wars” of the 21st Century.”

“Nuclear war has become a multibillion dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defense contractors. What is at stake is the outright “privatization of nuclear war”. 

Nuclear War against both China and Russia is contemplated

Russia is tagged as  “Plausible” but “Not Expected”. That was back in 2002.

Today at the height of the Ukraine war, a Preemptive Nuclear attack against Russia is on the drawing of the Pentagon. That does not however mean that it will be implemented.

A Nuclear War Cannot be Won?

We recall Reagan’s historic statement: “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. The only value in our two nations possessing nuclear weapons is to make sure they will never be used.”

Nonetheless, there are powerful voices and lobby groups within the US establishment and the Biden administration that are convinced that “a nuclear war is winnable”.

Flashback to Inter-War Period: Wall Street Finances Hitler’s Election Campaign 

According to Yuri Robsov, Wall Street and the Rockefellers were funding Germany’s war machine as well as Adolf Hitler’s election campaign:

American cooperation with the German military-industrial complex was so intense and pervasive that by 1933 the key sectors of German industry and large banks such as Deutsche Bank, Dresdner Bank, Danat-Bank (Darmstädter und Nationalbank), etc.  were under the control of American financial capital.

The political force that was intended to play a crucial role in Anglo-American plans was being simultaneously prepared. We are talking about the funding of the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler personally.

“Operation Unthinkable”: A World War III Scenario Formulated During World War II

Churchill’s “Operation Unthinkable” against Soviet Forces in Eastern Europe (see above) was abandoned in June 1945.

During his mandate as Prime Minister (1940-45), Churchill had supported the Manhattan Project. He was a protagonist of nuclear war against the Soviet Union, which had been contemplated under the Manhattan project as early as 1942, when the US and the Soviet Union were allies against Nazi Germany.

A  Blueprint for a Third World War using nuclear weapons against 66 major urban areas of the Soviet Union was officially formulated on September 15, 1945 by the US War Department (see section below).

The Potsdam Conference

Barely two weeks after the official end of World War II (September 2, 1945), the US War Department issued  a directive  (September 15, 1945) to “Erase the Soviet Union off the Map” (66 cities with 204 atomic bombs), when the US and USSR were allies, confirmed by declassified documents. (For further details see Chossudovsky, 2017)

According to a secret (declassified) document dated September 15, 1945, “the Pentagon had envisaged blowing up the Soviet Union  with a coordinated nuclear attack directed against major urban areas.

All major cities of the Soviet Union were included in the list of 66 “strategic” targets. The tables below categorize each city in terms of area in square miles and the corresponding number of atomic bombs required to annihilate and kill the inhabitants of selected urban areas.

Six atomic bombs were to be used to destroy each of the larger cities including Moscow, Leningrad, Tashkent, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa.

The Pentagon estimated that a total of 204 atomic bombs would be required to “Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map”. The targets for a nuclear attack consisted of sixty-six major cities.

One single atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima resulted in the immediate death of 100,000 people in the first seven seconds. Imagine what would have happened if 204 atomic bombs had been dropped on major cities of the Soviet Union as outlined in a secret U.S. plan formulated during the Second World War.

Hiroshima in the wake of the atomic bomb attack, 6 August 1945

The document outlining this diabolical military agenda had been released in September 1945, barely one month after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (6 and 9 August, 1945) and two years before the onset of the Cold War (1947).

The secret plan dated September 15, 1945 (two weeks after the surrender of Japan on September 2, 1945 aboard the USS Missouri, see image below) , however, had been formulated at an earlier period, namely at the height of World War II,  at a time when America and the Soviet Union were close allies.

The Manhattan project was launched in 1939, two years prior to America’s entry into World War II in December 1941. The Kremlin was fully aware of the secret Manhattan project as early as 1942.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Dress Rehearsal for Planned Nuclear Attack against the Soviet Union

Were the August 1945 Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks used by the Pentagon to evaluate the viability of  a much larger attack on the Soviet Union consisting of more than 204 atomic bombs? The key documents to bomb 66 cities of the Soviet Union (15 September 1945) were finalized 5-6 weeks after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings (6, 9 August 1945):

“On September 15, 1945 — just under two weeks after the formal surrender of Japan and the end of World War II — Norstad sent a copy of the estimate to General Leslie Groves, still the head of the Manhattan Project, and the guy who, for the short term anyway, would be in charge of producing whatever bombs the USAAF might want. As you might guess, the classification on this document was high: “TOP SECRET LIMITED,” which was about as high as it went during World War II. (Alex Wellerstein, The First Atomic Stockpile Requirements (September 1945)

The Kremlin was aware of the 1945 plan to bomb sixty-six Soviet cities.

The documents confirm that the US was involved in the “planning of genocide” against the Soviet Union. 

Let’s cut to the chase. How many bombs did the USAAF request of the atomic general, when there were maybe one, maybe twobombs worth of fissile material on hand? At a minimum they wanted 123. Ideally, they’d like 466. This is just a little over a month after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Of course, in true bureaucratic fashion, they provided a handy-dandy chart (Alex Wellerstein, op. cit)

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/1945-Atomic-Bomb-Production.pdf 

Soviet Cities to be targeted with Atomic Bombs

 

Map of 66 Soviet Urban Strategic Areas to be Bombed with 206 atomic Bombs (Declassified September 1945) 

Access all the documents of the September 15, 1945 Operation

The Nuclear Arms Race

Central to our understanding of the Cold War which started (officially) in 1947, Washington’s September 1945 plan to bomb 66 cities into smithereens played a key role in triggering the nuclear arms race.

The Soviet Union was threatened and developed its own atomic bomb in 1949 in response to 1942 Soviet intelligence reports on the Manhattan Project.

While the Kremlin knew about these plans to “Wipe out” the USSR, the broader public was not informed because the September 1945 documents were of course classified. They were declassified 30 years later in September 1975

Today, neither the September 1945 plan to blow up the Soviet Union nor the underlying cause of the nuclear arms race are acknowledged. The Western media has largely focussed its attention on the Cold War US-USSR confrontation. The plan to annihilate the Soviet Union dating back to World War II and the infamous Manhattan project are not mentioned.

Washington’s Cold War nuclear plans are invariably presented in response to so-called Soviet threats, when in fact it was the U.S. plan released in September 1945 (formulated at an earlier period at the height of World War II) to wipe out the Soviet which motivated Moscow to develop its nuclear weapons capabilities.

The assessment of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists mistakenly blamed and continue to blame the Soviet Union for having launched the nuclear arms race in 1949, four years after the release of the September 1945 US Secret Plan to target 66 major Soviet cities with 204 nuclear bombs:

“1949: The Soviet Union denies it, but in the fall, President Harry Truman tells the American public that the Soviets tested their first nuclear device, officially starting the arms race. “We do not advise Americans that doomsday is near and that they can expect atomic bombs to start falling on their heads a month or year from now,” the Bulletin explains. “But we think they have reason to be deeply alarmed and to be prepared for grave decisions.” (Timeline of the Doomsday Clock, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 2017)

IMPORTANT: Had the US decided NOT to develop nuclear weapons for use against the Soviet Union, the nuclear arms race would not have taken place. 

Neither The Soviet Union nor the People’s Republic of China would have developed nuclear capabilities as a means of “Deterrence” agains the US which had already formulated plans to annihilate the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union lost 26 million people during World War II.

The Cold War Era

The Nuclear Arms Race was the direct result of America’s September 1945 plan to “blow up the Soviet Union”, formulated by the US War Department.

The Soviet Union tested its first nuclear bomb in 1949. Without the Manhattan Project and the War Department’s September 15, 1945 “World War III Blueprint”, the Arms Race would not have occurred.

The September 15, 1945 War Department set the stage for numerous plans to wage World War III against Russia and China:

The Cold War List of 1200 Targeted Cities

This initial 1945 list of sixty-six cities was updated in the course of the Cold War (1956) to include some 1200 cities in the USSR and the Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe (see declassified documents below). The bombs slated for use were more powerful in terms of explosive capacity than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Excerpt from list of 1200 Soviet cities targeted for nuclear attack in alphabetical order. National Security Archive, op. cit.

“According to the 1956 Plan, H-Bombs were to be Used Against Priority “Air Power” Targets in the Soviet Union, China, and Eastern Europe. Major Cities in the Soviet Bloc, Including East Berlin, Were High Priorities in “Systematic Destruction” for Atomic Bombings.  (William Burr, U.S. Cold War Nuclear Attack Target List of 1200 Soviet Bloc Cities “From East Germany to China”, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 538, December 2015

Source: National Security Archive

 

Rand Corporation

During the Cold War, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) prevailed, namely that the use of nuclear weapons would result in “the destruction of both the attacker and the defender”.

In the post Cold war era, US nuclear doctrine was redefined.  “Offensive” military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of “self-defense”.

Humanitarian Nuclear Warfare under Joe Biden

 US-NATO led military Interventions (Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen) which have resulted in millions of civilian casualties are heralded as Humanitarian Wars, as a means to ensuring Peace.

This is also the discourse underlying US-NATO intervention in Ukraine.

“I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we’re really talking about peace” said George W. Bush

“Humanitarian Nuclear Bombs”

This kind of window dressing of “humanitarian nuclear bombs” is not only embedded into Joe Biden’s foreign policy agenda, it constitutes the mainstay of US military doctrine, namely the so-called Nuclear Posture Review, not to mention the 1.2 trillion nuclear weapons program initiated during the Obama administration.

The B61 Mini-nukes Deployed in Western Europe

The latest B61-12 “mini nuke” is slated to be deployed in Western Europe, aimed at Russia and the Middle East (replacing the existing of B61 nuclear bombs).

B-61-12 is portrayed as a “more usable” “low yield” “humanitarian bomb” “‘harmless to civilians”. That’s the ideology. The reality is “Mutual Assured Destruction” (MAD).

The B61-12 has a maximum yield of 50 kilotons which is more than three times that of a Hiroshima bomb (15 kilotons) which resulted in excess of 100,000 deaths in matter of minutes.

If a preemptive attack using a so-called mini nuke were to succeed, targeted against Russia or Iran, this could potentially lead humanity into a WW III scenario. Of course these details are not highlighted in mainstream media reports.

F-15E Eagle Strike Eagle Fighter for the Delivery of the B-61-12 

Low Yield Nukes: Humanitarian Warfare Goes Live

And when the characteristics of this “harmless” low yield nuclear bomb are inserted into the military manuals, “humanitarian warfare” goes live: “It’s low yield and safe for civilians, let’s use it” [paraphrase].

The US arsenal of B61 nuclear bombs directed against the Middle East are currently located in the military bases of 5 non-nuclear states (Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Turkey). The command structure pertaining to the B61-12 is yet to be confirmed. The situation with regard to Turkey’s Incirlik base is unclear.

Upholding WMDs as Instruments of Peace is a Dangerous Gimmick

Throughout History, “Mistakes” have Played a Key Role 

We are at a Dangerous Crossroads. There is no Real Anti-war Movement in Sight.

Why? Because War is Good for Business!

And the powers of Big Money which are behind US-NATO led wars control both the anti-war movement as well as the media coverage of US led wars. That’s nothing new. It goes back to the so-called Soviet-Afghan War (1979-) which was spearheaded by US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

Through their “philanthropic” foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Soros et al) the financial elites have over the years channelled millions of dollars into financing so-called “progressive movements” including the World Social Forum (WSF)

It’s Called “Manufactured Dissent”: Big Money is also behind numerous coups d’état and color revolutions.

Meanwhile, important sectors of the Left including committed anti-war activists have endorsed the Covid mandates without verifying or acknowledging the facts and the history of the so-called pandemic.

It should be understood that the lockdown policies as well as the Covid-19 “Killer Vaccine” are an integral part of the financial elite’s “broader arsenal”. They are instruments of submission and tyranny. 

The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset is an integral part of  the World War III scenario which consists in establishing through military and non military means an imperial system of  “global governance”.

The same powerful financial interests (Rockefeller, Rothschild, BlackRock, Vanguard, et al) which are supportive of the US-NATO military agenda are firmly behind  the “Covid Pandemic Op”.

***

The Historic Battle for Peace and Democracy. A Third World War Spells the End of Humanity?

Relentless War Propaganda and Media Disinformation Is the Driving Force. It Must be Confronted. 

Is “Peaceful Coexistence” and Diplomacy between Russia and the U.S. an Option? 

“War is Good for Business”: Corrupt Governments which Uphold the Interests of Big Money Must be Challenged

---

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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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