Personal Interview: Cynthia McKinney -- What Are the Prospects for Peace?

 

Personal Interview: Cynthia McKinney

What are the Prospects for Peace?

by John Rachel / January 15th, 2022

Events are unfolding at a quickening pace. Facing an alarming escalation in tensions around the world, we are looking to our most respected and renowned thought leaders for an honest assessment of both U.S. foreign and military policy to offer their most current thoughts and insights. We know they have some ideas for improving the prospects for peace.

Cynthia McKinney is an American politician and assistant professor at North South University, Bangladesh. As a member of the Democratic Party, she served six terms in the United States House of Representatives, as the first African American woman ever elected to represent Georgia. She was also the first Member of Congress to demand an investigation of the events of 9/11 and the first to file articles of impeachment against George W. Bush. She voted against every war-funding bill put before her. In 2008, Cynthia McKinney won the Green Party nomination and ran for U.S. President. Her responses below are exactly as she provided.

The questions here are not philosophical or abstract. They focus on the realities of the international power struggle unfolding in real time. They directly address the role of the U.S. in the escalating tensions and its capacity to reduce them. We also probe the role of everyday citizens in affecting the relationship the U.S. now has and will have with the rest of the world community.

Here is what Cynthia McKinney had to say.

John Rachel:  The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has recently put the hands of the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds before midnight. Midnight means all out war, probably nuclear holocaust. This is the closest it has ever been. Do you agree with this dire assessment?

Cynthia McKinney:  While I don’t always agree with the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, I have to acknowledge that for many people on the planet, it is already Doomsday; the U.S. is bombing or sanctioning dozens of countries around the world. U.S. bombs and U.S. sanctions have real consequences.  As usual, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has a very Eurocentric view of Doomsday: Iraq was pummeled with depleted uranium munitions.  On a trip to that country three years ago, every member of my delegation arrived home sick after having been in Iraq just over one week.  Depleted uranium used there has resulted in incalculable premature deaths, cancers, deformed babies, and untold general illnesses.  Depleted uranium has been used in Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, as well as in Iraq.  I introduced legislation to prohibit the use of these munitions and was visited by the Pentagon; my Congressional office was event infiltrated by a young, hip-looking intern who was later found rifling through my office files and fired on the spot.  I did not, however, hear a peep from Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

JR:  The U.S. always portrays itself as the greatest force on the planet for peace, justice, human rights, racial equality, etc. Polls tell us that most other nations actually regard the U.S. as the greatest threat to stability. What in your view is the truth here?

CM:  The so-called Spanish Flu actually originated on a military base in Kansas; so, too, the situation with SARS-CoV-2, the so-called China virus, whose bioweapon spike protein originated in the U.S., created with U.S. tax dollars. No one who has lived inside the U.S. would ever seriously declare the U.S. “as the greatest force on the planet for peace, justice, human rights, racial equality, etc.”  Instead, those who know the U.S., know that the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. still ring true today:  that the U.S. is the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet.  Only Israel and apartheid South Africa could rival the U.S. in modern times.  U.S. allies, the colonizing countries, are also responsible for unspeakable horrors in pre-modern times.  Now, certain elements of the U.S. Deep State have declared war against the people of Russia, China, and the bloodstreams of the current global population.  After all, it was the Project for a New American Century that wrote in Rebuilding America’s Defenses on page 60 the following:  “[A]dvanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.”  Every one of the signatories to this document put him- or herself  in a position to make this statement become official U.S. policy.  Hence, official circumvention of the moratorium on gain-of-function research in order to create the bioweapon spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and the mRNA concoctions that are being portrayed as “vaccines.”  In fact, the Spanish Flu became a global phenomenon helped along by a mass inoculation project of the Rockefeller Foundation.  Parallels to today are staggering.

JR:  Here’s a chicken-or-egg question: The U.S. accuses both Russia and China of rapidly expanding their military capabilities, claiming its own posturing and increase in weaponry is a response to its hostile adversaries, Russia and China. Both Russia and China claim they are merely responding to intimidation and military threats posed by the U.S. What’s your view? Do Russia and China have imperial ambitions or are they just trying to defend themselves against what they see as an increasingly aggressive U.S. military?

CM:  Interesting. I have visited Malaysia many times; it has a vibrant population of people from India and China.  Yet, I was in the audience when Tun Dr. Mahathir stated that Malaysians had less to fear from the Chinese than they did from the British.  In fact, the U.S. and their cousin English colonizers are responsible for the trafficking of individual Indians and Chinese all over the world.  Add to that, the annihilations by French conquerors and Spanish Conquistadores—and you’re talking about the murders and subjugation of untold millions of individuals.  The U.S. allies were not the victims of the colonial atrocities of Spain, Britain, France, Belgium, Holland. U.S. allies are the perpetrators of incalculable physical and psychological pain in Africa, Asia, and the Americas.  Interestingly, the friends to the colonized peoples were the Soviet Union and Mao’s China, which was divided as a result of U.S. hegemony over Taiwan and Britain’s sovereignty over Hong Kong.  Neither Russia nor China, at their worst, can count the globally pervasive international crimes against humanity that are owned by the so-called West.  Even worse, the U.S. has turned those reprehensible international behaviors onto the people of the U.S.  Even going so far as testing potential bioweapons on the U.S. domestic population.

JR:  The U.S. always denies that it has imperial ambitions. Most unbiased experts say that by any objective standards, the U.S. is an empire — indeed the most powerful, sprawling empire in history. Does the U.S. have to be an empire to be successful in the world and effectively protect and serve its citizenry?

CM:  Well, it depends on how one defines success and what it means to effectively protect and serve U.S. citizens. Clearly, the U.S. empire is successful for some people and it protects and serves some people.  I have learned to always believe the opposite of U.S. government proclamations.  In the words of a former U.S. President, “Trust, But Verify.”

JR:  The highest ranking commanders of the U.S. military recently sounded the alarm. They have concluded that the U.S. — widely regarded as the most formidable military power in history — can’t defeat either Russia or China in a war. These military commanders are saying we need to dramatically increase our military capabilities. What do you make of this claim and the resulting demand for more DOD spending?

CM:  The “Missile Gap” propaganda won’t work a second time, although it’s probably true this time around! And, more than likely, it would be Russia AND China against the U.S. because U.S. policy has driven the two countries into a “Strategic Partnership.”  The Pentagon shouldn’t receive another penny until they pass an independent forensic audit with prosecutions for fraud.  Military contractors should be treated worse than the insatiable welfare queens that they are.  If the military cannot fight either Russia or China, let alone the two of them together, it is the fault of the military and the Members of Congress who have allowed the complete mismanagement and neglect of true U.S. national security.  Members of Congress and the Executive have misdirected true U.S. national security for generations and gotten away with it.  The impunity must end.  And justice must be meted out to those guilty of the treachery.  Unless stern action is taken, and those who have been irresponsible with taxpayers’ dollars and U.S. national security are confronted publicly with their actions, the only thing that will happen is that yet another generation of criminals will move into positions of public trust.

JR:  In 2009, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton announced a reset with Russia, heralding greater cooperation and understanding. By 2014, Obama had made a sharp reversal. A sweeping regime of sanctions has since been imposed on Russia to cripple its economy. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats now relentlessly demonize Russia and Putin, blaming them for every imaginable ill. Both in the media and from official pronouncements by government officials, Russia has become the favorite whipping boy for both the U.S. and its “special friend”, Great Britain.  Why?  What happened?

CM:  I believe the people of the U.S. would choose peace and a multipolar international political structure rooted in truth, justice, and dignity if they were engaged as important partners in an information-laden, transparent national dialogue.

JR:  The number of spy missions, nuclear-armed bomber flights, and war games near Russia’s borders have vastly increased over the past year. Same with China. Is all of this just business-as-usual geopolitical posturing? Or does it represent a dangerous escalation and a new ominous direction in U.S. strategic positioning? What is the justification for what Russia and China see as provocations and aggressiveness, if not actual preparation for a war?

CM:  Yes; Yes; There is none.

JR:  Between the FONOPS in the South China Sea and the recently expressed enthusiasm for Taiwan’s independence, the risk of military conflict with China keeps increasing. Where is this headed? If People’s Republic of China decides to use military force for full reunification of Taiwan, do you see the U.S. going to war in an attempt to prevent it?

CM:  No.

JR:  The U.S., against the clear objections of the government in Syria, is occupying valuable land, stealing the country’s oil, and preventing access to the most agriculturally productive region, effectively starving the population. The world sees this for what it is, a cruel game sacrificing innocent people for some perceived geopolitical advantage. Is this the kind of reputation the U.S. wants? Or does it simply no longer care what the rest of the world community thinks?

CM:  In as much as the controllers of the U.S. Deep State are carrying out these actions, clearly, it means that they are shameless and don’t care what the world thinks of them. This is not new.  This is what the U.S. really is.  Too bad the people of the U.S. haven’t cared enough since the 1960s to stop it, and when they did care enough to resist these policies, the Deep State of the U.S. resorted to deception, neutralization, and murder of its own citizens as policy.  One thorough read of the COINTELPRO Papers and the Senator Frank Church Select Committee Reports discloses the extent to which the U.S. Deep State was willing to go to war against the peace-loving people of the U.S. in order to continue its rapacious plunder of the world outside of Europe.

JR:  In a democracy, at least in theory, citizens have a say in all matters of public policy. Yet, in the end none of the recent military campaigns and undeclared wars seem to achieve much popular favor or support. What is and what should be the role of everyday citizens in determining the foreign policy and military priorities of the country? Or are such matters better left to the “experts”?

CM:  All official papers should be declassified and the current state of media in the U.S. should be completely and totally revamped. The Big Six should be dismantled; the airwaves should be democratized; foundations and corporations should be forced out of the media business.  Big Tech should be dismantled and social media should become a free market of ideas, big conversations, and big decisions. Peer-to-peer technologies and decentralization should become the new organizing principles on a foundation of freedom and responsibility.  Direct Democracy should be the decision-making process for most issues of high state importance with adequate debate on the topics under consideration so that informed votes are cast.

JR:  Related to that, the citizenry and most of Congress are kept in the dark with respect to special missions, proxy funding, CIA operations, and swaths of unknown unknowns constituting psyops, cyber ops, and regime change ops, all done in our name as U.S. citizens. The funds to support this sprawling “dark world” of sabotage and terror being inflicted on the rest of the planet, is also a secret.  Now there’s pervasive spying on U.S. citizens right here at home.  What place does any of this have in “the land of the free”? Does this mean government of the people, by the people, for the people is just a sham?

CM:  None; Yes.

JR:  Recently we’ve seen some token but precedent-setting direct payments to citizens in the form of Covid relief. There is also the ongoing discussion about reparations to descendants of slaves. If it could be unequivocally established that the government has abused DOD funding, misused and squandered vast sums of money to promote unjustified wars, purchase unneeded equipment, unnecessarily expand U.S. military presence across the globe, and regularly lied to the American public to manufacture consent for these misadventures and fraudulent activities, practical and political considerations aside, do you see any constitutional or other legal barriers to the public identifying, expecting, or even demanding proper compensation? A cash refund or citizen reparations for massive, authenticated abuse of power?

CM:  A novel idea; I like it. I also like the idea of seizing the ill-gotten gains of billionaires and redistributing that wealth to U.S. citizens or residents in need.  A rebate to taxpayers for the years of abuse suffered by them at the hands of a compromised and complicit Congress is certainly in order.  Only a sick society would put a banker between a student and her professor and an insurance bureaucrat between a doctor and his patient.  The United States has reached the outer limits of Constitutionalism and is now on the verge of becoming a completely unrecognizable polity.  We the People must stop this slide to tyranny now, or forever be trapped inside its matrix.

*****

John Rachel:  We are grateful to Cynthia McKinney for her thought-provoking views. The interview was arranged by John Rachel, Director of the Peace Dividend Project. This effort embraces a powerful, unprecedented, end-to-end strategy for challenging the tyranny of neocon warmongers in Washington DC, ending the endless wars, and reversing the self-destructive foreign policy and military paradigm which now poisons U.S. relations with the rest of the world. We hope to further interview Cynthia for the full-length Peace Dividend documentary film, a devastating indictment of the corruption and fraud built into our excessive military budgets and imperial overreach. This movie will inform, unite and empower everyday citizens to have a voice in determining the future they want for themselves and their children.

 

Source: Dissident Voice

"The Double Helix of Entwined Pandemic and Economic Strategy" by Alastair Crooke

 

The Double Helix of Entwined Pandemic and Economic Strategy

Alastair Crooke

January 10, 2022

The corollary to the collapse of the technocratic initiative to liquify the over-leveraged economy might well be recession, Alastair Crooke writes.

Three years ago, I said to an American Professor from the US Army War College in Washington, in respect to the campaign to return American lost Blue Collar jobs to Asia, that these jobs would never return.  They were gone for good.

He retorted that that was precisely so, but I was missing the point, he said. America did not expect, or want, the majority of those humdrum manufacturing jobs back. They should stay in Asia. The Élites, he said, wanted only the commanding heights of Tech. They wanted the intellectual property, the protocols, the metrics, the regulatory framework that would allow America to define and expand across the next two decades of global technological evolution.

The real dilemma however, he said was, “What is to be done with the 20% of the American workforce that would be no longer needed: that was no longer necessary to the functioning of a tech-led US economy?”

In fact, what the Professor said was but one facet of a fundamental economic dilemma. From the seventies and eighties onwards, US corporations were busy offshoring their labour costs to Asia. Partly, this was to cut costs and increase profitability (which it did) — but it also represented something deeper. 

From the outset, the US has been an expansionary empire ever digesting new lands, new peoples, and their human and material resources. Forward motion, the continuous military, commercial, and cultural expansion became the lifeblood of Wall Street and of its foreign polity. For, absent this relentless expansion, the civic bonds of American unity fall into question.  An America not in motion is not America.  This forms the very essence of US leitkultur.

Yet it only added further to the dilemma highlighted by my friend above. The expansion was accompanied by a flood of Wall Street credit expansion across the globe.  The debt burden exploded, and has become top heavy, balancing unsteadily on a pinhead of genuine underlying collateral.

It is only now – for the first time since WW2 – that this relentless US strategic expansionary impulse has been challenged by the Russia-China axis.  They have declared ‘enough’.

Yet, there was always another side to this dynamic of western structural transition. Its foundations, as the Professor suggested, no longer lay with the socially necessary labour contained in manufacturing drab products such as cars, telephones, or toothpaste. But rather, the core of it largely has come to reside in highly flammable debt-leveraged speculations on financial assets like stocks, bonds, futures, and especially derivatives, whose value is securitised indefinitely.  In this context, the 20% (or more likely 40%) of the workforce, simply becomes redundant to this highly complex, hyper-financialised, networked economy.

So, here we have the second dilemma: Whilst the structural shrinking of the work-based economy inflates the financial sector, the latter’s complex volatility can only be contained through a logic of perpetual monetary doping (perpetual liquidity injections), justified by global emergencies, requiring ever greater stimulus.

How to face this dilemma?  Well, there’s no going back.  That’s not an option.

In this context, the Pandemic regimen becomes symptom of a world so far removed from any real economic self-sufficiency – adequate to sustain its existing workforce – that the dilemma may only be resolved (in the view of the élites) through facilitating the continuing attenuation of the old economy, whilst financial assets must be replenished with regular additions of liquidity.

How to manage it? With the gradual abolishing of the traditional labour content to commodities (either from automation, or off-shoring), corporations have used the woke ideology to reinvent themselves. No longer do they produce just ‘things’ – they manufacture social output. They are stakeholders in society, ‘manufacturing’ socially desirable outcomes: diversity, social inclusivity, gender balance and climate responsible governance. Already, this transition has produced a cornucopia of new ESG liquidity flowing through calcified economic arteries.

And the Pandemic, of course, justifies the monetary stimulus, whilst the follow-on climate ‘health’ emergency is prepared in order to legitimise further debt expansion, for the future.

Financial analyst Mauro Bottarelli summarised the logic of this as follows: “A state of semi-permanent health emergency is preferable to a vertical market crash that would turn the memory of 2008 into a walk in the park.” 

Professor of Critical Theory and Italian at Cardiff University, Fabio Vighi, has noted too the “Incurability” of what he calls “the Central Banker’s Long-Covid” condition” — that the injection of such a huge monetary stimulus as we have seen, was only possible by turning the engine of Main Street ‘off’, as such a cascade of liquidity ($6 Trillion) could not be allowed to flow willy-nilly into the Main Street economy (in the view of the Central Bankers), as this would cause an inflationary tsunami à la Weimar Republic. Rather, its’ main thrust has served to further inflate the virtual world of ever more complex financial instruments.

Inevitably however, coupled with supply-chain bottlenecks, the gush of liquidity has caused Main Street inflation to rise, and hence imposed further hurt on the ground.  The aim of managing the manufacturing attenuation on the one hand (small business ‘lockdown’), whilst liquidity flowed freely to the financialised sphere (to postpone a market crash) has failed.  Inflation is accelerating, interest rates will rise, and this will bring adverse social and political consequences in its wake: i.e. anger, rather than compliance.

At the heart of the predicament for those who run the system is that, should they to lose control of liquidity creation – either as a result of interest rate rises, or from increasing political dissent – the ensuing recession would take-down the entire socio-economic fabric below.

And any severe recession would likely wreak havoc on the western political leadership, too.

They have opted therefore instead, to sacrifice the democratic framework, in order to roll out a monetary regime rooted in a cult of corporate-owned science & technology, media propaganda, and disaster narratives – as the means to progress towards a technocratic ‘aristocratic’ takeover over the heads of the people. (Yes, in certain ‘circles’, it is thought of as a newly rising aristocracy of money).

Professor Vighi again:

“The consequences of emergency capitalism are emphatically biopolitical. They concern the administration of a human surplus that is growing superfluous for a largely automated, highly financialised, and implosive reproductive model. This is why Virus, Vaccine and Covid Pass are the Holy Trinity of social engineering.

‘Virus passports’ are meant to train the multitudes in the use of electronic wallets controlling access to public services and personal livelihood. The dispossessed and redundant masses, together with the non-compliant, are the first in line to be disciplined by digitalised poverty management systems directly overseen by monopoly capital. The plan is to tokenise human behaviour and place it on blockchain ledgers run by algorithms. And the spreading of global fear is the perfect ideological stick to herd us toward this outcome”.

Professor Vighi’s point is clear. The vaccine campaign and the Green Pass system are no stand-alone health disciplines.  They are not about ‘the Science’, nor are they intended to make sense.  They are primordially connected to the élites’ economic dilemma, and serve as a political tool too, by which a new monetary dispensation can displace democracy.  President Macron spoke the unstated out loud, when he said: “As for the non-vaccinated, I really want to piss them off. And we will continue to do this, to the end. This is the strategy”.

Italian PM Draghi similarly has escalated attacks on the unvaxxed, making vaccines mandatory for all the over 50s, and imposing significant restrictions on anyone over 12. Again, though ‘following the science’ is the mantra, these measures make no sense: the Omicron variant predominantly infects the double vaxxed, not the unvaxxed. 

Two days ago, a leading Nobel Prize winning Virologist, Dr Montagnier and a colleague, confirmed this “obsolete” aspect of vaccine mandates. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, they write: 

” … mandating a vaccine to stop the spread of a disease requires evidence that the vaccines will prevent infection or transmission (rather than efficacy against severe outcomes like hospitalization or death). As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. 

The little data we have suggest the opposite. One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection, and after 90 days, their effect went negative—i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection. Confirming this negative efficacy finding, data from Denmark and the Canadian province of Ontario indicate that vaccinated people have higher rates of Omicron infection than unvaccinated people”.

This is rarely, if ever, admitted. Both Macron and Draghi are desperate: They need to ‘liquify’ their economies – and soon.

Indeed, Dr Malone, leading US the father of the mRNA vaccines, wrote of those who point out such inconsistencies and illogicalities – just two months before his Twitter account was suspended – in a rather prophetic Twitter post:

“I am going to speak bluntly,” he wrote.

“Physicians who speak out are being actively hunted via medical boards and the press. They are trying to delegitimize us and pick us off, one by one.”

He finished by warning that this is “not a conspiracy theory” but “a fact.” He urged us all to “wake up.”

As the Telegraph has noted, British Scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behaviour during the Covid pandemic have admitted its work was “unethical” and “totalitarian”. The scientists warned in March 2021 that ministers in the UK needed to increase “the perceived level of personal threat” from Covid-19, because “a substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened”. Gavin Morgan, a psychologist on the team, said: “Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism”.

Another SPI-B member said: “You could call [it] psychology ‘mind control’. That’s what we do … clearly we try and go about it in a positive way, but it has been used nefariously in the past”. Another colleague cautioned that “people use the pandemic to grab power, and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise … We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in”.

The problem goes deeper than a little ‘nudge psychology’ however. In 2019, the BBC established the Trusted News Initiative (TNI), a partnership that now includes many main-stream media. TNI was ostensibly designed to counter foreign narrative influence during election times, but it has expanded to synchronise all elements of messaging, and to eliminate deviation across the broad realm of media and tech platforms.

These synchronised ‘talking-points’ are more powerful (and insidious) than any ideology, as it functions not as a belief system or ethos, but rather, as objective ‘science’. You cannot argue with, or oppose, Science (with a capital ‘S’). Science has no political opponents. Those who challenge it are labelled “conspiracy theorists,” “anti-vaxxers,” “Covid deniers,” “extremists,” etc. And, thus the pathologized New Normal narrative also pathologizes its political opponents: stripping them of all political legitimacy. The aim obviously, is their forced compliance. Macron made that plain.

Separating the population on the basis of vaccination status is an epoch-making event. If resistance is quashed, a compulsory digital ID can be introduced to record the ‘correctness’ of our behaviour and regulate access to society. Covid was the ideal Trojan horse for this breakthrough. A global system of digital identification based on blockchain technology has long been planned by the ID2020 Alliance, backed by such giants as Accenture, Microsoft, the Rockefeller Foundation, MasterCard, IBM, Facebook, and Bill Gates’ ubiquitous GAVI. From here, the transition to monetary control is likely to be relatively smooth. CBDCs would allow central bankers not only to track every transaction, but especially to turn off access to liquidity, for any reason deemed legitimate.

The Achilles’ heel to all this however, is the evidence of genuine popular resistance to the suppression by the tech platforms of all dissenting opinion (however well-qualified its source); by the refusal to allow people informed choice about their medical treatment; and by arbitrary restrictions that may involve loss of livelihood being imposed by decree, and underpinned by emergency laws, restricting popular protest.

But more significantly and paradoxically, the Omricon variant may cut the legs from under those political leaders intent on doubling-down.  It is quite possible that this mild (barely lethal), yet highly contagious variant, may prove to be Nature’s ‘vaccine’, giving us a wide measure of immunity – ostensibly better than that offered by the ‘vaccines’ from Science! 

Already, we observe European states are confused and at odds with each other – taking diametrically opposed policy lines: some ending restrictions, and some decreeing more and more. Other countries, like Israel, are reducing restrictions and shifting to a herd immunity policy.

Of course, the corollary to the collapse of the technocratic initiative to liquify the over-leveraged economy might well be recession.  That unfortunately, is the logic of the situation.

 

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation

"The Online Safety Bill: Government’s pledge to protect us from our right to free speech and thought" by Rusere Shoniwa

 

The Online Safety Bill: Government’s pledge to protect us from our right to free speech and thought

Rusere Shoniwa 

14 January 2022

Read Time:12 Minutes

Image source: Dan McCall Libertymaniacs.com

On 13 January 2022 Parliament debated a backbench report on the Online Safety Bill, which was published last year. There is a vote on these new regulations, which fundamentally limit free expression on the internet under the guise of an entirely new concept of censoring content which can ‘harm adults’, coming soon. So far, all major parties have enthusiastically backed the bill and the report and debate on 13 January simply recommended extending its powers further. The pro-freedom left must rally against this new legislation which sanctifies the censorship of non-mainstream views by Big Tech and requires all tech companies to crack down on ‘misinformation’ in the same way. The article below was originally published on Rusere Shoniwa’s blog on 22 November 2021. Left Lockdown Sceptics welcomes more contributions which oppose against the latest attack on our basic freedoms.

---

Big Media to public: Don’t exceed your think limit!

In July 2020, the mainstream media clearly signposted the direction of travel in relation to curtailing independent critical analysis of Covid and other science underpinning Government policy. The instruction given to the public in the title of a Forbes article was unequivocal: “You must not ‘do your own research’ when it comes to science.”

Regarding the question of whether to “research both sides and make up your own mind”, the article’s verdict was clear: “when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, it can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly.”

The message and tone of the article are supercilious, arrogant, condescending, paternalistic and, for all those reasons, a grave insult to your intelligence. But above all, it is potently anti-democratic. Government policy based on the prevailing science has an enormous impact on your life, wellbeing and, as Covid has demonstrated, your liberty. But, if Forbes gets its way, under no circumstances will the stupid citizenry be permitted to weigh up ‘both sides’ of a debate for itself. You will not be permitted to democratically challenge the machinery of government that grinds out the law and statutes which govern your every waking hour.

You are being told to leave the ‘dangerous, destructive, and even deadly’ business of deciding what’s good for you to the scientists and to the Government who, after filtering it with immaculate benevolence, will deliver only what it deems good for you and which, by complete happenstance, will align perfectly with Government policy and objectives. There’s just one small problem with that process: it’s called censorship, and it’s the slip road taking us onto the highway to tyranny.

Science is a process for getting closer to the truth. It is always evolving and almost no debate terminates at a truth that remains immutable for all time. Dissenting views are vital because they lead to new avenues of truth that often prove the consensus wrong. Dissent has negative connotations only to authoritarians. To true democrats, it is a welcome opportunity to test the veracity of claims made and to further the cause of truth and enlightenment.

Crucially, it is the voting public’s democratic right to be the final arbiter of how, and indeed even whether, The Science should be used to determine how we live. With the growing politicisation of science, we will not be free to choose if the choices put before us are controlled and censored.

The disingenuous moral panic about ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ is a deceitful denial of the fact that error is the unavoidable consequence of debate and understanding. In the words of former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption, “We cannot have truth without accommodating error. It is the price that we pay for allowing knowledge and understanding to develop and human civilisation to advance.” Stifling dissenting viewpoints is the surest way to intellectual stagnation and spiritual atrophy.

The Online Safety Bill – the funeral pyre for free speech

Big Brother Watch, a UK civil liberties campaign group, is at the forefront of the fight to defend free speech. In its report ‘The State of Free Speech Online’, it reminds us that, up until very recently, the internet has been a democratising force placing the opportunity of instantaneous global communications at our fingertips. Social media platforms are increasingly becoming our public squares. To the extent that uncensored news disseminated in these public digital squares serves democracy by holding power to account, it is a public utility. However, this public utility is in the hands of a private monopoly, as our communications are largely controlled by powerful corporate intermediaries.

Under the auspices of Big Tech, industrial scale censorship implemented through nebulous ‘community guidelines’ is now the norm. This process began in 2020 when the alignment of pro-lockdown governments’ interests with those of Big Tech was evidenced by the full-throated cries of lawmakers everywhere for Big Tech to join them in the noble cause of supressing dissent. In March this year, Ireland’s Justice Minister enjoined Big Tech to do its bit in curbing public protest, while here in the UK, MP David Lammy went a step further by accepting money from Facebook for promotional services rendered while publicly exhorting the platform to increase its already heavy-handed levels of censorship.

As of October YouTube boasted that it had deleted more than a million videos under its “COVID misinformation policy.” In Australia it has removed 75% of video ads posted by the anti-lockdown party United Australia Party (UAP) since September.

Brute censorship on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter has been effective in muting dissent but not effective enough for the overzealous authoritarians allied to Big Tech and Big Pharma. The public understands that Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four was a warning to us of how governments could control both the individual’s mind and society at large by obliterating pathways to information and truth. The Government, however, appears to be using Nineteen Eighty-Four not as a warning but as an instruction manual to manifest the dystopian vision we were warned about.

Cloaked in the Orwellian language of providing ‘safety’, Big Brother’s infantilising embrace will now see an Online Safety Bill curbing free speech ostensibly “to protect adult online safety” and to tackle “content that is harmful to adults” (page 86 of the linked report).

The hounding of dissenting voices from dominant platforms like YouTube and Facebook has spawned the growth of platforms dedicated to free speech like Rumble, Odysee and Telegram. These relatively new players are behaving like true platforms and not publishers – they are committed to free speech and will only act if content is illegal under existing legislation. Aware that the vacuum of truth left by Big Tech censorship is being filled by new players, the Government is taking decisive action with this legislation to capture all platforms in a diabolical censorship net.

The UK already has extensive communications and other legislation to reinforce the principle that what is unlawful offline should also be unlawful online. If anything, existing legislation goes too far since the Communications Act (2003) criminalises communications that are deemed to be “grossly offensive”, although in practice the Human Rights Act 1998, which protects freedom of expression, can nullify action taken against “grossly offensive” but lawful speech. However, this overarching duty to comply with the Human Rights Act would not apply to online platforms under the Online Safety Bill.

Big Brother Watch has spelt out the broad aim of the Online Safety Bill:

“The legislation introduces state-backed censorship and monitoring on a scale never seen before in a liberal democracy… This regulation would deputise private companies like Facebook to be the speech police of the internet. Government has designed the plans not only to deal with crime online, but to explicitly target lawful speech.” [emphasis added]

So bold is the Government’s overreach with this Bill that it makes no effort to hide the fact that it is tackling legal content: the Bill instructs Ofcom to draft codes that require platforms to address content that is “legal but harmful” (page 88-89 of the linked report). So chilling is its scope that it will extend to surveillance of private messaging between individuals (page 104 of the linked report). This Bill is the blueprint for totalitarian control of information.

The Bill defines ‘harmful’ content as that which presents “a material risk of the content having, or indirectly having, a significant adverse physical or psychological impact on an adult of ordinary sensibilities”. Why have such infantilising sentiments directed at adults found expression in government legislation? It is beyond preposterous to suggest that it is now the Government’s or any other institution’s responsibility to protect adults of ‘ordinary sensibilities’ from psychological harm through exposure to the written word.

Up until now, the discourse around online harm has been understandably focused on those that society would reasonably perceive to be at risk – children and young teenagers. The deliberate shift to include adults has nothing to do with whom the government wishes to protect but rather with the nature of the content it wishes to control. If the Government is to effectively guide your thinking on key policy issues like lockdowns, vaccinations, biometric digital ID passes, climate change and Central Bank Digital Currencies, then thought control will need to be directed at the voting-age public.

We should not be fooled into thinking that the Government cares about a deterioration of your mental health should you accidentally click the wrong link while browsing on Amazon. Recall that, according to Forbes, the real issue at stake here is that “when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, it can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly” to do your own thinking. Not deadly to you as they would have you believe, but deadly to the government’s ability to implement and enforce corporate-friendly policies that keep you in your proper place as a compliant consumer.

Framed as something designed to protect the public from being ‘misinformed’ and harmed, the reality is that this Bill lays down the foundations for wholesale government and corporate disinformation campaigns directed at voting adults. It would be far more ‘harmful’ to the Government than to you if you did not ‘think correctly’ on the big issues looming on the horizon.

Depending on your level of cynicism, the impossibility of defining ‘harmful’ content is either a gaping error in the Bill or a deliberate design flaw to give the private censorship enforcers carte blanche to remove pretty much anything that might conceivably bring a tear to the eye of an adult of ‘ordinary sensibilities’. Once you add to that the threat of heavy financial and other penalties to be meted out to platforms for not enforcing removal of such ill-defined ‘harmful’ content, private platforms are all but guaranteed to take an even bigger sledgehammer to online content than they already are.

This Bill is the funeral pyre for lawful free speech. There is no other way to interpret it.

Is extrajudicial state censorship already taking place?

The UK Government, via the Department of Digital Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), is already actively violating free speech through its involvement in the removal of lawful online content. The DCMS operates a unit with the sinister name of ‘Counter Disinformation Cell’ (page 106 of linked report) to combat all manner of ‘disinformation’, with a feverish focus on what it deems ‘anti-vax’ content. In an unconscious acknowledgement of its potentially illicit role in extrajudicial state censorship, the unit has styled itself as a ‘cell’, a term normally applied to terrorism and other clandestine activities. In the words of the responsible DCMS director, the cell “encourages swift takedown” of content during “daily interactions with almost all the platforms”.

The current tsunami of deleted content across platforms like YouTube includes verifiable facts that the public has a right to know. A recent YouTube post showed an eminently qualified expert, Dr Peter Doshi, articulating information about the Covid vaccines – namely that certain manufacturers’ claims to efficacy are not supported by the actual trial data and that we might want to critically assess whether these vaccines warrant categorisation as vaccines owing to their very different nature in comparison to traditional vaccines. YouTube deleted the video of Dr Doshi giving evidence on Capitol Hill to an expert panel on Covid vaccines. You can watch a fellow medical professional articulating why this deletion is so shocking and you can view the original video on Brandnewtube here.

Big Tech has boldly confirmed that climate change ‘misinformation’ is the next big censorship target. How, or even if, you can travel, what to eat and how often you can eat it —these are the issues that will be decided for you, and under no circumstances are you to ‘do your own research’! With Big Tech and the Government putting themselves between you and harm’s way, the coming edicts on climate change should all make perfect sense.

We must act to halt the global war on free speech and democracy

The war on free speech and democracy is unmistakably a global one, with many Western governments using Covid as a trojan horse to entrench censorship through the statute book. Legislators in Canada and Ireland are in sync with the UK’s efforts to attack free speech. In New Zealand, government agencies including the police can issue a ‘takedown notice’ for any online publication that meets the ridiculously low bar of merely being “objectionable”.

Lawmakers in Greece are attempting to criminalise journalists for publishing “false news”. Germany seems to have inspired authoritarian lawmakers elsewhere with its Network Enforcement Law (NetzDG) targeting hate speech and fake news on social media. Police in Australia are using citizens’ Facebook posts to quell lockdown dissent.

In short, the entire Western world, with very few exceptions, is taking on the character of a giant banana republic with its claim to democracy growing more farcical by the day.

In the UK, we have a government that, on the one hand, denies its responsibility for directly causing real-life harm to vast numbers of people through recklessly destructive lockdowns and yet, on the other hand, makes a cynical pretence of caring about digital online ‘harm’ to citizens by imposing on companies an absurd psychological duty of care over digital interactions between members of the public. Each of these acts taken individually poses a serious blow to accountability and democracy. But the rank hypocrisy implicit in the combination of the two assaults on liberty is a clear indication of a psychopathy not exhibited before by Western governments in recent history. Write to your MP and visit Big Brother Watch to help their campaign to defend freedom of speech. We must not allow this dire assault on our liberty to stand.

You can read more of Rusere’s work at https://plagueonbothhouses.com

 

Source: Left Lockdown Sceptics

"Why does the US Need Wars and Armed Conflicts?" by Vladimir Danilov

 

12.01.2022 Author: Vladimir Danilov

Why does the US Need Wars and Armed Conflicts?

Column: Society

Region: USA in the World

During the last thirty years after the collapse of the USSR, the world, renamed by the West into a “Euro-Atlantic” one, began to change drastically, giving itself a completely different substance than Washington and the “renewed Europe” organized by America wanted it to be. It began to swell with a completely different meaning, the balance of forces in it began to change, and the East, together with Russia and China, announced that a new future was coming. Even India, Iran, Brazil, and South Africa have grown economically and militarily and politically aware of their place in modern history, demonstrating to the West that their time is running out. Completely different countries, previously classified by the West as the so-called “third world”, are determined to define a new world order.

Realizing its collapse, the US and NATO countries dependent on the USA now see the unleashing of world military hysteria as the only chance they have to retain at least some influence on the minds of the international community by actively engaging in an information war and unsuccessfully trying to present Russia and China as the main adversaries and “axis of all evil in the world.” Hence the recently intensified attacks by the West on Beijing and Moscow, the active sabre rattling by the United States and NATO on the borders of China and Russia, and the involvement of various countries in new military alliances, the latest of which was AUKUS.

Although Washington is aware of its inability to win any direct military action against Russia or China, and even more so against these two countries simultaneously with their advanced weapons) it is nevertheless carries on the strategy of unleashing wars far away from its borders. Against the background of the devastating loss of the leading position in the world economy and high-tech technologies for the country of the Stars and Stripes, the militant sentiment is fueled by the deepening significant economic crisis in the United States. The turbulent transition from a unipolar world to a multipolar one and the large-scale spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Unleashing another war, Washington primarily thinks not about victory but the profits of the military-industrial complex. Whenever there is a war in the name of national security of the United States, the Pentagon, waving its stars and stripes, throws away taxpayer money on weapons and development. After all, the war gives lucrative contracts for the supply of weapons, which can be promoted by Congress’s corrupt henchmen. Military conflicts automatically postpone difficult decisions about cutting defence spending and closing excessive military bases.

Nor should it be forgotten that, as shown by historical experience, launching a military machine has always been a way to gain popularity for leaders of states and to present the outbreak of foreign wars as a concern for the peace and safety at home. American presidents often used this factor to improve their public image. Over the past 120 years, 21 presidents have been elected in the United States, 12 Republicans and 9 Democrats. Of the 55 wars, armed conflicts and military operations unleashed by the United States or with American participation, 33 began under Republican presidents, 23 under Democrats. On average, there are 2.75 – 2.88 wars for any American president. Of the 12 leaders of State elected from the Republican Party, only three have not unleashed a single war or conducted a single military operation: Warren Harding (held office from 1921 to 1923), Herbert Hoover (1929-1933) and Gerald Ford (1974 -1977).

Eight Democratic presidents used military force one way or another against other countries. It was often under the Democrats that Washington entered into the longest and bloodiest armed conflicts. So, under the democrat Lyndon Johnson (1963-1969), the United States entered the Vietnam War in 1964, while under him, the Americans invaded Laos (where they remained until 1973). By bombing the border territories, they dragged Cambodia into the Vietnam War and once again occupied the Dominican Republic.

Under Democrat President John F. Kennedy (1961-1963), perhaps one of the most dangerous and large-scale military and political crises after World War II occurred. The Cuban Missile Crisis, preceded by the Bay of Pigs Invasion, was a disastrous operation in 1961, which John F. Kennedy gave an order to initiate.

Under Democrat Bill Clinton, the United States bombed Yugoslavia. Under Barack Obama (who even became a Nobel Prize winner, being awarded by the politically spineless Nobel Committee), the war began in Libya.

As for the rating of the current US President, Democrat Joe Biden, only 44% of Americans declared their support for his policies in December, according to a poll conducted by NBC. His rating fell back to 46% in the fall against the backdrop of the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. In December, it fell by another two percentage points. Moreover, as the German  Der Spiegel  emphasizes, according to a survey conducted by Axios and the Momentive center, more than 40% of Americans do not believe that Joe Biden came to power legally.

Therefore, Biden also has a special interest in unleashing another war.  However, only time will tell whether he is going to take advantage of this opportunity.

But we must not forget that besides the US President, there is a lot of “lesser men” surrounding him interested in unleashing armed conflicts. First of all, this is the so-called community in Washington, particularly intellectuals speaking on television or giving lectures.  Congressmen and those who consider themselves politicians follow the news about enemies, and those who do not join this paranoia may be condemned for aiding the enemy. Television and the media are basking in profits on such news. Significant funds are allocated from the national budget for travel with significant retinues to the theater of war. Recall, particularly, the recent trips of Antony Blinken, or Josep Borrel from Europe to Ukraine, while demonstrating their alleged peacekeeping intentions. They were openly scared to meet with residents of the DPR or LPR who were subjected to armed aggression by Kyiv to condemn the recent outright fascist torchlight march in the Ukrainian capital. The main thing is that such trips can be used for advertising: more viewers, more income.

And on the hype and such “advertising”, you can “play” with the prices of oil and gas resources on the stock exchanges or other securities of gullible shareholders.

Against this background, private “contractors” profit from the ongoing military crises, the military make a career: some soldiers and officers are killed, others take their place.

At the same time, it is noteworthy that people who did not serve in the army have become US presidents over the past decades.  So, when his draft-age approached, Clinton was afraid to go to Vietnam and at first joined the officer’s school, but soon his high-ranking uncle promised him an excuse from the army in general. The son of a World War II hero, George W. Bush, chose the same path of evading service in Vietnam as Clinton: he entered military school, and while he was studying, the war ended. Although he was obliged to do so, Barack Obama did not bother to register. Donald Trump became the most hyped mower from the army with his alleged heel spur (this diagnosis was made to a young graduate of the University of Pennsylvania by a doctor who, by strange coincidence, rented an office in a building owned by Trump’s dad). Joe Biden also avoided military service because he was in law school and was diagnosed with asthma.

But all this did not prevent the highest representatives of American society, who did not have their own army experience, pouring rivers of blood over the whole world, blessing the US Army to participate in wars around the world: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, Syria, Yemen. Hundreds of thousands of people perished everywhere, and countries were destroyed.

By and large, all of them are puppets in the hands of moneybags who earn their capital in wars. Hence their carefree attitude to new military conflicts.

Vladimir Danilov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

 

Source: New Eastern Outlook

 

Also on this topic

What is Behind the “Persecution of K-pop” in China?

CSTO is a True Defender of the Interests that Regional Players Share

The New Afghanistan: Why We’ve Heard It all Before and Again!

China and Latin America: Washington is Losing Ground

Ethiopia Enjoys a Temporary Lull

MTC between India and Russia: A Stable Development Against the Backdrop of New Threats

Why Do NATO States Commit Energy Hara Kiri ?

 

 

 

"Dog Gone" by James Howard Kunstler

 

Dog Gone

---

So much chatter in the news media these days about who will be “Joe Biden’s” running mate in 2024 — not that there’s anything wrong with his current sidekick — but I’ve got half a mind to throw my own hat in the ring. That’d make two of us with half a mind and a shot at the so-far elusive ideal to govern least… and therefore govern best!

Alas, I lack the connections and the ground-game of a seasoned pol such as Liz Cheney, the current favorite, who dragged her esteemed old daddy, Dick Cheney (“George W. Bush’s brain”) up to Capitol Hill this week, for to schmooze up the Progressive caucus and raise morale among the walking dead. Where Dick Cheney treads, you know war can’t be far behind. That must be what America really needs to pep her up in these days of sagging poll numbers and inflating dollars. War, the ivermectin of politics!

But shall it be a foreign war or a civil war? Isn’t that the question? From the looks of things around “Joe Biden’s” White House, where a weird concrete fortification is being hoisted up on the north lawn as I write, it looks like they’re planning for action on the home front, perhaps a full-out assault by the lurking forces of white supremacy — painted savages in horned head-dresses screaming MAGA-MAGA-MAGA as they loot Dr. Jill’s walk-in closet.

The Attorney General, Mr. Garland, has been warning us about this Satanic host of backward-facing demons. They breed like botflies in the red state hills and hollers, swarm and buzz in the school board meetings, caress their AR-15s in prostrate worship of their Trump bobbleheads, scheming to deprive BIPOCs of their votes. They’d like to tie Democracy to the back bumper of a Ford Alpha F-150, drag it over seven miles of broken Southern Comfort bottles, and feed whatever’s left to the hogs. They must be stopped!

Except… what if they fail to materialize? Maybe a foreign war would play better on social media and The View. Our arch-enemy, Vlad Putin, election-meddler supreme, is fixing to invade Ukraine, we’re told. Obviously, that would interfere with “Joe Biden’s” plan to make Ukraine America’s fifty-first state. When Sec’y of State Tony Blinken mentioned that to Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister blew mineral water through his nose all over the conference table. Would a friendly little tussle over that sad-sack country lift America’s animal spirits… like, get the economy firing on all cylinders? Roust up all those work-force dropouts who disdain fine jobs waiting for them in the Amazon warehouses and the fry-lanes of Mickey-D? Put the brakes on all this fentanyl snorting…? All this porn-watching…? Turn around America’s long sickening slide into its own Hollywood fantasy of the zombie apocalypse?

Well, I must be frank: probably not. Probably only hasten America’s journey to the political pits of hell (and Ukraine’s to its special sub-hell). What would be our strategy in this war over Ukraine? Arm Ukraine with the all the latest US gee-whiz fighting gear and let them have a go at the Russian army poised along the border of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts? That’ll work, I’m sure. Call it Operation Russian Roulette, only with a bullet in every chamber. You see, it is not a generally-accepted fact among world military professionals that Ukraine has — how you say? — a well-disciplined, experienced fighting force. I hope that does not offend.

If that doesn’t seem like a viable game-plan, do “Joe Biden,” Tony Blinken, and Lloyd Austin really suppose we would transport x-number of US troop divisions six thousand miles from Kansas to slug it out with those Russian divisions poised at the edge of their own homeland? Have a look at the world map and contemplate the logistical picture. Not so favorable for us, wouldn’t you agree? A long way to re-supply our boys, gals, and theys in uniform with fresh Kit-Kat bars.

Okay, say that dog don’t hunt, what else then? Default to our trusty old ICBMs, waiting patiently in their rusty silos lo these many decades for the chance to do their thing? That is, turn the world into an ashtray? I give you: Dr. Strangelove re-made as a documentary…. We are livin’ the dream, all right.

How’s this for an idea: just leave Ukraine alone. If Russia intends to dominate it, so what? For most of our lives Ukraine was a virtual province of Russia, so to speak, and it didn’t hurt us none. Ditto our grandparents and all the ranks of our ancestors. And now it’s a problem? Could it be possible that Ukraine is just none of our business (in the most literal way)?

Meanwhile the business of Covid-19 flares spectacularly in omicron drag — but not vary harmfully — around the world, presaging a welcome end to this contrived global emergency, and yet the member nations of the Western Civ club (including many also enlisted in NATO) drive deeper with their experiment in tyranny even as the end of Covid is in sight. Despite overwhelming proof that the mRNA vaccines don’t work, and actually induce much serious harm to people, Western Civ still strives insanely to vaxx-up every last citizen. The Supreme Court shot down “Joe Biden’s” vaxx mandate for businesses yesterday, and the “president” actually declared that companies should ignore the decision and compel employees to get vaxxed anyway.

If that is not something like peak insane, what is? At least, among the cohort in our land who are susceptible to that madness, which is actually not a majority of the people in this land. Hence, I have news for you: we are now at the turning point. Americans are rejecting blue insanity. We are fixing to drag that old blue dog to the doghouse, where it can cool out for two years before we put it down for good. And a couple more things: “Joe Biden” is done running for president, and Liz Cheney is done running for Congress, or anything else. Welcome back to reality. Let the sun shine in.

 

Source: Clusterfuck Nation

“'Bastille 2022': Building a Worldwide Movement Against 'Corona Tyranny'” by Michel Chonnudovsky

 

“Bastille 2022”: Building a Worldwide Movement Against “Corona Tyranny”

The "Unelected Corona Public-Private Partnership”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, January 11, 2022

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.

***

 

What is presented in this article is a preliminary draft: suggested concepts and ideas pertaining to the formulation of a Worldwide People’s Movement.

***

The Storming of the Bastille occurred in Paris on the afternoon of July 14, 1789. The Bastille was a medieval armory, fortress, and political prison. It was the symbol of Royal Authority under the reign of King Louis XVI. 

The French monarchy was obliged to accept the authority of the newly proclaimed National Assembly as well endorse the Fundamental Rights contained in the “Declaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen” (Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen), formulated in early August 1789.   

More than 230 years later, these Fundamental Rights (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) are now being contravened by corrupt  governments around the World on behalf of a totalitarian and illusive financial establishment.

Bastille 2022

Bastille 2022 pertains not only to the restoration of these fundamental rights. It seeks to reverse and disable the criminal COVID-19 agenda which in the course of the last two years has triggered economic, social and political chaos Worldwide in 193 member states of the United Nations, coupled with bankruptcies, unemployment, mass poverty and despair. Famines have been reported in 25 countries. 

Starting in November 2020, an experimental mRNA vaccine launched by our governments (allegedly with a view to combating the spread of the virus) has resulted in an ascending Worldwide trend of vaccine related deaths and injuries. It’s a killer vaccine. It’s a crime against humanity. 

Bastille 2022 is not a “protest” movement narrowly defined.

We do not seek to negotiate with corrupt government officials. We question their legitimacy. They are liars.

Our intent is to confront the powerful actors behind this criminal endeavor which is literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide, while creating divisions within society. The impacts on mental health on population groups Worldwide are devastating.  

The numerous lockdowns (stay at home of the work force), fear campaigns, COVID-19 policy mandates imposed on 193 member states of the United Nations have also contributed to undermining and destabilizing:

1. The very fabric of civil society and its institutions including education, culture and the arts, social gatherings, sports, entertainment, etc. 
2. All public sector activities including physical and social infrastructure, social services, law enforcement, etc.
3. All major private sector activities which characterize national, regional and local economies including small, medium and large corporate enterprises, family farms, industry, wholesale and retail trade, the urban services economy, transport companies, airlines, hotel chains, etc.
4. The structures of the global economy including international commodity trade, investment, import and export relations between countries, etc. The entire landscape of the global economy has been chattered. 

In turn, a process of enrichment by the elite billionaires together with widening social inequalities has unfolded. The massive debts incurred by the Nation-State resulting from corruption as well fiscal collapse have skyrocketed. Increasingly national governments are in a straitjacket, under the brunt of powerful creditor institutions. Mounting debts at all levels of society are the driving force. 

The Creation of a Mass Movement 

What is at stake is the creation of a mass movement (Nationally and Worldwide) which questions the legitimacy and authority of the architects of this insidious project which broadly speaking emanates from: Big Money, Big Pharma, the Information Technology Conglomerates, the Security Apparatus, Intelligence, the Military Industrial Complex, Big Energy, the Corporate Media.

Ironically, the architects of the COVID-19 “pandemic” are now actively involved in formulating the “Solution”. The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset consists in installing a Worldwide totalitarian regime. What is contemplated is a system of “Global Governance”.

A 190+ UN member nation states are slated to be weakened and undermined. They are under the grip of the most serious debt crisis in World history. Under the Great Reset, the institutions of parliamentary democracy and the Welfare State are to be replaced by an unelected “public-private partnership” dominated by the upper echelons of the financial establishment. 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.” (quoted by Aspen Times, August 15, 2011, emphasis added)

The Global Governance scenario imposes an agenda of social engineering and economic compliance:

It constitutes an extension of the neoliberal policy framework imposed on both developing and developed countries. It consists in scrapping “national auto-determination” and constructing a Worldwide nexus of proxy regimes controlled by a “supranational sovereignty” (World Government) composed of leading financial institutions, billionaires and their philanthropic foundations. (See Michel Chossudovsky E-book, Chapter XIII)

Restoring Real Democracy

We will seek all avenues through peaceful means to disable and undermine this totalitarian project including dialogue with and within public and private institutions, law enforcement officials, members of the military and the judicial.

What is required is to break down the structures of corruption, hierarchy and abusive authority, namely to pursue what might be described as:

“the democratization of decision-making within our institutions”.

The Art of Deception

We must nonetheless understand the limitations of conducting effective judicial procedures against national governments. The judges are often pressured, threatened and corrupt, aligned with both dominant financial interests and politicians.

Moreover, inasmuch as this insidious project is enforced by national governments Worldwide, the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is officially “independent” in regards to the UN Security Council, has a longstanding record of side-stepping US-NATO war crimes. The ICC is controlled by the same financial elites which control the governments.

We must also understand the complexities of  this carefully designed and coordinated totalitarian project, namely the role of various fraudulent financial institutions, corporate advisory and lobby groups, consultants, “scientific advisors’, etc. acting as intermediaries on behalf of Big Pharma and the financial elites. 

There is a hierarchy in the structures of authority. This complex and intricate decision making process is used to co-opt, bribe and manipulate government officials. Almost identical policy mandates (emanating from higher authority) are implemented simultaneously in numerous countries, requiring active coordination.   The same powerful lobby firms are acting at one and the same time in different countries (e.g. in North America and the European Union).

An extensive multi-billion dollar budget has been allocated to the implementation Worldwide of COVID-19 policy mandates. The latter have been conducive to the destabilization of civil society and its institutions including the disruption of health services, education, sports, cultural activities, etc.

The legitimacy of politicians and their powerful Big Money sponsors must be challenged, including the police state measures adopted to enforce the imposition of a digital vaccine passport as well as the wearing of the face mask, social distancing, etc.

What are our Priorities? Counter Propaganda 

More than 7 billion people Worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis. Several billion people have already been vaccinated by an “unapproved” experimental mRNA “vaccine”, which has resulted in a Worldwide wave of mortality and morbidity.

While this tendency is confirmed by official figures pertaining to vaccine-related deaths and adverse events, the mainstream media and the governments are in a state of denial.

The devastating health impacts of the COVID-19 vaccine are rarely acknowledged. It’s the same catch phrase (which is an outright lie) repeated ad nauseam: “the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine”.

“we actually have more safety data on the vaccine than the virus, and already see that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine. (Intercare)

Dr. Alan Schroeder thinks it’s very natural for parents to worry, but said for teens, the virus is more dangerous than the vaccine. (NBC)

Doctors are on the lookout for it in children, but the bottom line remains that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine.

“The mutations in the omicron variant make it [the virus] more prolific, dangerous, and elusive“

etc.

This propaganda consensus must be broken. With regard to the vaccine, informing people across the land regarding the data on deaths and adverse events is the first step.

The COVID Crisis initiated in January 2020 is unprecedented in World History. Propaganda under Nuremberg is a Crime.

Dismantling the propaganda apparatus is crucial.  Counter-propaganda plays a key role in revealing the lies used to justify the policy mandates.

Without persistent media disinformation, the official COVID narrative falls flat.

First and foremost we must forcefully challenge the mainstream media, without specifically targeting mainstream journalists, who have been instructed to abide by the official narrative. We should in this regard favor dialogue with individual (independent) journalists.

We must ensure that people Worldwide achieve an understanding of the history and devastating impacts of the COVID crisis supported by scientific concepts, analysis, testimonies and data.  This endeavor will require a parallel process at the grassroots level, of sensitizing fellow citizens and establishing dialogue on the nature of  the alleged pandemic, the mRNA vaccine, the RT-PCR test, as well as the devastating economic and social impacts of the lockdowns.

While we must put an end to the fear campaign, we must nonetheless inform our fellow citizens regarding the dangers of the mRNA vaccine as well as the engineered chaos of this totalitarian agenda of “global governance” on the very structures of civil society.

The “fear campaign” is to be replaced by  “information, concepts, analysis and data” as well as “strategies” to confront Big Pharma, corrupt officials in high office as well as their Big Money sponsors.

We must also ensure the conduct of dialogue and debate at the grassroots of society.

Putting an End to The “Killer Vaccine”

Our first task is to immediately halt and cancel the so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” which has triggered a wave of mortality and morbidity Worldwide. 

According to Dr. Thomas Binder: 

“The gene injections are unsafe. They can cause anaphylactic reactions, thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and myocarditis in the short term.

There is possible immunosuppression and antibody-dependent enhancement, ADE, in the medium-term.

And in the long term there are possible autoimmune diseases, cancer and infertility, risks that have not been ruled out yet.”

According to Doctors for COVID Ethics, in the EU, UK and US the data respectively tabulated by EudraVigilance, MHRA (UK) and VAERS (US):

“have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-19 “vaccine” roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began”

With regard to the mRNA “vaccine”, the catastrophic number of injection related deaths has NOT been reported by the mainstream media, despite the official figures being publicly available.

“The signal of harm is now indisputably overwhelming, and, in line with universally accepted ethical standards for clinical trials, we demand that the COVID-19 “vaccination” programme be halted immediately worldwide.

Continuation of the programme, in the full knowledge of ongoing serious harm and death to both adults and children, constitutes Crimes Against Humanity/Genocide, for which those found to be responsible or complicit will ultimately be held personally liable”

 

Video: The COVID-19 vaccine was launched in mid to late December 2020. 

In many countries, there was a significant shift in mortality following the introduction of the mRNA vaccine

The Pfizer Confidential Report

It is worth noting that a 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):  

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. (Analysis  of Pfizer Confidential Report)

It is an admission on the part of both the governments and Big Pharma that the COVID-19 vaccine is a criminal undertaking “Pfizer knew from the outset that it was a killer vaccine. No attempt has been made by the governments to call for the withdrawal of the killer vaccine.”

It is with noting that Pfizer has a criminal record (2009) with the US  Department of Justice on charges of “fraudulent marketing”.

 

As part of the 2009 DoJ settlement, Pfizer was put on parole:

“Pfizer also has agreed to enter into an expansive corporate integrity agreement … [which] provides for procedures and reviews to be put in place to avoid and promptly detect conduct similar to that which gave rise to this matter.”

But we are no longer dealing with “fraudulent marketing”:

“Killing is Good for Business”: The vaccine is a multibillion dollar operation worldwide. It’s manslaughter.

Once the “vaccine” has been halted, the criminality of Big Pharma will be fully revealed and understood. In turn, the legitimacy of the official COVID narrative based on lies and fake science will inevitably be impaired. This is the first step towards breaking the “official” COVID narrative. 

The Truth is an important peaceful weapon. Without propaganda and media disinformation, the architects of this project do not have a leg to stand on.

Let us break the “official” COVID-19 consensus and the propaganda apparatus which provides “legitimacy” to a criminal agenda.

Once it collapses, it will open up the road towards reversing the broader process of economic, social and political chaos generated in the course of the last two years.

The Geopolitical Dimension

What is unfolding is a new and destructive phase of US imperialism. It’s a totalitarian project of economic and social engineering. 

The Biden administration has endorsed the COVID Agenda, which has been used to destabilize and weaken national economies including those of “enemy nations”.

We cannot divorce our understanding of the COVID Crisis from that of US foreign policy and America’s hegemonic agenda: e.g.  US-NATO confrontation with Russia in Eastern Europe, the militarization of the South China Sea directed against China, Iran and the geopolitics of the Middle East, the ongoing sanctions regimes against Venezuela and Cuba, etc.

“Big Money including the billionaire foundations are the driving force. It’s a complex alliance of  Wall Street and the Banking establishment, The Big Oil and Energy Conglomerates, the so-called “Defense Contractors”, Big Pharma, the Biotech Conglomerates, the Corporate Media, the Telecom, Communications and Digital Technology Giants, together with a network of think tanks, lobby groups, research labs, etc. The ownership of intellectual property  also plays a central role.

This powerful digital-financial decision-making network also involves major creditor and banking institutions: The Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB), the IMF, the World Bank, the regional development banks, and the Basel based Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which plays a key strategic role.

In turn, the upper echelons of the US State apparatus (and Washington’s Western Allies) are directly or indirectly involved, including the  Pentagon, US Intelligence (and its research labs), the Health authorities, Homeland Security and the US State Department (including US embassies in over 150 countries).” (Michel Chossudovsky, E-book, Chapter XIII)

Integrating All Sectors of Society

It should be noted that organized opposition in many Western countries is weak. Why? Because “progressive forces” including left intellectuals, NGO leaders, trade union and labor leaders both in Western Europe and North America have  from the outset endorsed the official COVID narrative. Many of these progressive movements are supported by corporate foundations. 

The same billionaire foundations (Rockefeller, Ford, Gates, et al) which are the unspoken architects of the “Great Reset” and “Global Governance” are also involved in (generously) financing various social movements. “They control the opposition”.  

What this means is that  grassroots activists are often misled and betrayed by their leaders who are routinely coopted by their billionaire sponsors.

It is essential that these grassroots activists be integrated into the mainstay of the movement against the COVID-19 consensus.

The Road Ahead

What is required is the development of a broad based grassroots network which confronts both the architects of this crisis all well as all levels of government (i.e. national, states, provinces, municipalities, etc.) involved in imposing the vaccine as well carrying out the lockdown and closure of economic activity.

This network would be established (nationally and internationally) at all levels of society, in towns and villages, work places, parishes. Trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, veterans associations. Church groups would be called upon to integrate this movement.

“Spreading the word” through social media and independent online media outlets will be undertaken bearing in mind that Google as well as Facebook are instruments of censorship.

Legal procedures and protests are unfolding in all major regions of the World. As part of a Worldwide network of initiatives, it is important to establish mechanisms of communication, dialogue and exchange within and between countries. 

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites, Big Pharma, et al., as well as the structures of political authority at the national level, is no easy task. It will require a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in World history.

What is required is the breaking down of political and ideological barriers within society (i.e. between political parties) and acting with a single voice towards Building a Worldwide Consensus against Tyranny. 

Worldwide Solidarity and Human Dignity is the Driving Force.

***

See Michel Chossudovsky’s E-Book (13 Chapters) entitled

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

About the Author

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (1979, 1983)

He is the author of 13 books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at crgeditor@yahoo.com

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

 

Source: Global Research