Aletho News


Bill Gates’s stranglehold on the MSM: Part 2 – Britain

By Karen Harradine | The Conservative Woman | July 16, 2021

WITH an estimated fortune of $128.9billion, Bill Gates is the fourth richest man in the world, after Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Bernard Arnault and Elon Musk, according to Forbes. 

He’s stepped back from the day-to-day running of Microsoft, the company he founded in 1975, and focuses on his so-called philanthropy through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (GF), and is best known for his worldwide vaccination and anti-malaria programmes.

Less widely known is that he has spent hundreds of millions bankrolling news outlets, in the process turning the GF into one of journalism’s main gatekeepers. According to Tim Schwab of Columbia Journalism Review, by last June more than $250million had gone to news operations including the BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublicaNational Journal, the Guardian, the Financial Times, Univision, Medium, the Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington MonthlyLe Monde, and the Center for Investigative Reporting; and to charitable organisations affiliated with news outlets, like the BBC’s Media Action and the New York Times’s Neediest Cases Fund.

As I reported in Part One of this investigation, most of this funding comes under the fine sounding GF heading of Global Policy and Advocacy, of which the BBC is a major beneficiary. Little wonder that there is little that is dispassionate about its reporting on Covid-19 vaccination or climate change.

It’s not just the BBC that the GF manipulates through these means. Between 2016 and 2020, the Financial Times received $2.3million from the GF, including $1.3million to fund ‘global health awareness’. The Guardian is another recipient of Mr Gates’s largesse. Like the BBC, it sports a ‘Global Development’ site, the common root being GF funding. Its claimed editorial independence is contradicted by its stated sole campaigning purpose to provide special focus on the Millennium Development Goals, eight targets set in 2000 by the United Nations Millennium Declaration. The Guardian has bought into this to the extent that it operates mainly as a deferential PR channel for both the UN and the GF.

The collaboration with the GF to ‘help focus the world’s attention on global development’ goes back 11 years. This is a sophisticated propaganda exercise to convince the public of the beneficial nature of Gates’s investments in a multitude of global development projects including vaccines and solutions for climate change. It helps ensure that any alternative narrative or critique is unlikely to see the light of day in any of the outlets to which he extends his munificence. 

Since August 2011, the GF has given the Guardian $12.2million towards this, the latest grant being almost $2million last September. The Guardian has not only busily promoted the Millennium Development Goals, but also its spawn, the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, yet another dishonest scheme to take guilt money from Western taxpayers and give it to the world’s despots and dictators, all in the name of climate change.

Yet, as I have previously set out: ‘Very little information is available on exactly how the money is invested and who benefits from it. No information is offered to indicate if it has been cost-effective and beneficial to the economies and welfare of the 193 countries signed up to it.’

The British public have been drip-fed this propaganda for years through various GF-funded MSM mouthpieces such as the BBC. Yet it’s the economically fragile West which pays for the 2030 Agenda and its climate change ‘remedies’, draining it of even more of its resources while authoritarian regimes like China benefit financially and increase their dominance over the UN. The MSM barely protests.

The worry is that the GF has not only captured the Left-wing media in Britain: it has also made inroads into the so-called Centre and Right. The Telegraph accepted $3.4million from the GF in November 2017 to ‘raise awareness’ of global health issues. The London Evening Standard was awarded money in the same year too, receiving $20,000 to spread the GF propaganda on the ‘global health crisis’.

The growing financial dependence of the MSM on a combination of Government advertising and GF largesse has already put its impartiality in jeopardy. This is threatened further by the GF’s funding of a global network of young ‘journalists’. This project, called the International Centre of Journalists, has been given $20.4million to promote ‘public awareness’ around global health.  Based in the US, the organisation finances activists to promote ‘better governments’ and make ‘communities safer and healthier’, amongst other woke ideals. Their 2020 annual review predictably emphasises the need to highlight racial injustice and climate change, and combat ‘disinformation’ about Covid-19.

As Robert Kennedy Junior says, Gates’s press bribes have paid off. ‘During the pandemic, bought and brain-dead news outlets have treated Bill Gates as a public health expert despite his lack of medical training or regulatory experience.’

Gates also funds an army of independent fact checkers including the Poynter Institute and Gannett which, Kennedy points out, use their platforms to silence detractors and to debunk as ‘false conspiracy theories’ and ‘misinformation’ charges that Gates has championed and invested in sinister endeavours like biometric chips, vaccine passports and satellite systems.

Yet all the evidence is available at a click of a mouse button. Last March, Gates began his vaccine passport campaign. The GF-funded Guardian and the BBC have unquestionably cheered on this digital slavery. In 2018, Gates gave a satellite start-up $1billion to build a system which broadcasts real-time videos globally. What better way to ensure that the little people are behaving themselves than by funding a satellite system to monitor us all? Despite the vehement denials of the GF funded ‘fact checkers’, Gates has built his Covid-19 vaccine factories, and seemingly now seeks a return on his investments. 

Many lament the decline of journalistic standards in our New Dark Age. Of those responsible for turning a once-brilliant British media into an uncritical disseminator of propaganda, the GF must be placed centre stage. Now the MSM, like the Government, are often nothing more than useful idiots for the GF and its destructive policies, mindlessly chanting the GF narrative on development, climate change and Covid-19; and whose ‘solutions’ to these are destroying the free and prosperous West.

Don’t expect our MSM journalists to protest: they have long since been bought, paid for and brainwashed.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Compelling Case Against COVID ‘Vaccine’ Approval

By Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn | NOQ Report | July 16, 2021

When I read this headline, I connected to the current struggle by many medical experts urging FDA to hold off granting full approval to COVID vaccines: “US ranks last among 46 countries in trust in media.”

Here are some disturbing details. The United States ranks last in media trust — at 29% — among 92,000 news consumers surveyed in 46 countries, a report found. That’s worse than Poland, worse than the Philippines, worse than Peru and far worse that Finland that leads at 65%. We must use alternative news websites like this one and podcasts to get the truth.

There is no better reason for Americans to distrust mainstream and corporate social media than the combination of propaganda for COVID vaccines and holding back key information on what medical experts for several months have been doing in their fight against full approval of them. We are in a corrupt world of vaccine fanaticism.

This article lays out the case against granting full approval and why pro-approval shills use big media endlessly.

Understanding the Approval Battle

This is a classic battle between good and evil. On the good side are medical articles and petitions to FDA to stop the COVID vaccine public health disaster by better assuring safety. On the evil side are big drug companies and big media arguing that there is no time to waste. In their world view until full FDA approval happens many people will justify avoiding getting jabbed. That ignores medical freedom giving people the right to decide what medicine or vaccine to take.

What should greatly trouble Americans is that at least 7,000 deaths have been connected to COVID vaccines and about 500,000 injuries have also resulted. Sure, compared to millions of vaccinated people these number may not seem critically important. Unless you or your family have been negatively impacted. To see reality, you have to read the stories of the many thousands of people who have suffered terrible health impacts from being jabbed. Often very young people. None of these nightmares are covered by big media.

There are three things that pro approval articles stay away from mentioning or seriously analyzing that reveal gross bias and dishonesty.

  • First, one word rarely seen in big media stories pushing for full FDA approval is the word “experimental” to describe currently used COVID vaccines allowed under an emergency use authorization.
  • Second, the enormous number of frightful stories of serious health impacts from getting vaccinated are avoided like the proverbial plague. To see detailed stories, go to Health Impact News.
  • Third, there is no mention of major medical reports and major petitions to FDA by very credible health experts that demand more serious studies by FDA of a multitude of safety issues and concerns.

All three of these should make Americans seriously doubt the integrity of the FDA and its supporters. All that pro-approval entities embrace is getting more people vaccinated and the dubious claim that artificial immunity obtained from vaccines gets all the credit for better looking COVID cases and deaths. Left out is acknowledgement of the benefits of natural immunity for about half the population obtained from being infected by the COVID virus without, in nearly all cases, any serious health harm.

Below I will briefly indicate what pro-approval people and media are saying. Then, more importantly, I will provide coverage of a number of very important reports and petitions by medical experts trying to inform the public why FDA should seriously examine many safety issues and concerns about the COVID vaccines before giving full approval. For about two months, big media has kept all these hidden from public view. Keep in mind that this aspect of the cancel culture is also aimed at preventing attention to the various early home/outpatient treatments to cure and prevent COVID infection. These are a legitimate alternative to vaccines. They are described in detail in Pandemic Blunder and a new review of ivermectin use.

Pro-Approval Propaganda

The most significant big media propaganda was a July 1 opinion article in the New York Times : “It’s Time for the F.D.A. to Fully Approve the mRNA Vaccines” by the biggest shill for approval Dr. Eric Topol of Scripps Research who has served on multiple FDA advisory committees.

Much more was not revealed about him and his objectivity. In 2016, Topol received $207 million from NIH in addition to other grants of $35 million and $17 million from NIH.  In August 2020 he publicly criticized FDA’s emergency use authorization of hydroxychloroquine. He has had financial involvement in six companies, including Walgreens and Quest Diagnostics. He is Editor-in-Chief of Medscape, a publication that has not revealed all the disturbing facts about COVID vaccines, as given below.

Interestingly, in 2020 Topol revealed his “liberal” political position when he was big media’s go-to guy for months for “authoritative” medical objections to Trump’s program to rapidly produce COVID vaccines. His argument was that, if it is fast — that is, a crash program — it is suspect. In September, Topol led a campaign accusing FDA head Stephen Hahn of being a tool of Trump in the push for a vaccine, and calling upon him to resign.

Topol is pure “establishment.” Like Fauci, he is a physician that the public should not trust.

His current biggest claim or assertion is this: “vaccines have overwhelmingly been proved safe and effective by clinical trials, independent research and the experience of millions of people around the world who received them.” Understand this: a great many medical experts totally disagree with this. And if you choose to check out what I give below, so will you.

And here is the mainstay of approval proponents. “Some people… are waiting for full F.D.A. approval before they receive a shot. Others may not get immunized unless their employers require it, and many organizations —including, reportedly, the military —are waiting for the vaccines to be fully approved before instituting such mandates.” Meantime everywhere you look there is coercion to get the jab.

Here are views from two other pro approval shills: “Gigi Gronvall, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said that while there should not be “political pressure” on the FDA, “I would be interested in knowing what the holdup is. It could have a big impact on people getting [vaccinated] if it is FDA approved,” she said. “I think it’s worth asking why it hasn’t happened yet.” You will get answers below.

Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, on the wrong side of all pandemic issues, was more direct. “1 out of 3 American adults still unvaccinated. Data is in. Vaccines are safe and effective. It’s time for full approval.” No, it is not. This guy has been wrong on all pandemic issues and is a favorite of Democrat media.

The position of approval advocates is explained by this: “A Kaiser Family Foundation poll in May found that about a third of unvaccinated people — 32 percent — said they would be more likely to get the shots if a vaccine received full approval. That was a higher percentage than those saying paid time off, a free ride to the vaccination site, or getting $100 from the state would make them more likely to get vaccinated.” I say that if more people became informed about what is given below, they would become even more disinclined.

Yahoo news story invoked fear about the Delta variant and had this to say: “Now that the Delta coronavirus variant is posing a serious risk to unvaccinated Americans, some experts are calling for the Food and Drug Administration to fully approve the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, which are currently being used under emergency use authorization. Vaccine holdouts are potentially at great risk of contracting the Delta variant, which is quickly becoming dominant in the United States. But Americans who have received the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines are extremely unlikely to get sick from Delta or any other coronavirus variant.” That last statement ignores considerable data about breakthrough infections in vaccinated people.

It also ignores some important new data on Delta. Here are the details: “A briefing from Public Health England (PHE) shows that as a hospital patient, you are six times more likely to die of the COVID Delta variant if you are fully vaccinated, than if you are not vaccinated at all. The information shows up for confirmed Delta cases from February 1, 2021, to June 7, 2021. Of 33,206 Delta variant cases admitted to the hospital, 19,573 were not vaccinated. Of those, 23 (or 0.1175%) died… Of the 1,785 patients who had both vaccine doses 14 days or more before admission, 12 (or 0.6722%) died. This death rate is 5.72 times higher than that for unvaccinated patients.”

Yahoo also said “billions of people worldwide have now been vaccinated without any complications, a sure sign… that they are ‘incredibly safe.’” That is a boldface lie.  Hundreds of thousands of deaths and injuries have resulted from vaccinations.

Recently Dr. Peter Marks, the vaccine chief at FDA said this: “But after hundreds of millions of vaccine doses administered around the world — and intense safety monitoring — few serious risks have been identified.” This is a lie. At the same time CDC reported to FDA a total of 704 serious adverse events among younger people age 12 to 25 through May 31, defined as death, life-threatening illness, hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, permanent disability, congenital anomaly or birth defect. In fact, there were 14 reports of death and 216 cases of heart inflammation after first dose (age 12 to 94) and 573 (age 14 to 87) after second dose—also known as myocarditis or pericarditis.

Strong Case Against Approval

Now let’s get to the most important information, the case for full approval dissenters. Unlike the pro side, big media has successfully blocked public access to the following.

In early May the headline was “57 leading scientists, doctors, and public policy experts call for IMMEDIATE HALT to Covid vaccine programs.” A medical article was published with this title: “SARS-CoV-2 mass vaccination: Urgent questions on vaccine safety that demand answers from international health agencies, regulatory authorities, governments and vaccine developers.” This was the main perspective: “The lack of thorough testing in animals prior to clinical trials, and authorization based on safety data generated during trials that lasted less than 3.5 months, raise questions regarding the safety of these vaccines.”

This too was noted: “Despite calls for caution, the risks of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have been minimized or ignored by health organizations and government authorities. We appeal to the need for a pluralistic dialogue in the context of health policies, emphasizing critical questions that require urgent answers if we wish to avoid a global erosion of public confidence in science and public health.”

On the critical issue of vaccination for children this was emphasized: “There is a lack of scientific justification for subjecting healthy children to experimental vaccines, given that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that they have a 99.997% survival rate if infected with SARS-CoV-2. Not only is COVID-19 irrelevant as a threat to this age group, but there is no reliable evidence to support vaccine efficacy or effectiveness in this population or to rule out harmful side effects of these experimental vaccines. In this sense, when physicians advise patients on the elective administration of COVID-19 vaccination, there is a great need to better understand the benefits and risk of administration, particularly in understudied groups.”

This is how the report ends: “We are convinced that humanity deserves a deeper understanding of the risks than what is currently touted as the official position. An open scientific dialogue is urgent and indispensable to avoid erosion of public confidence in science and public health and to ensure that the WHO and national health authorities protect the interests of humanity during the current pandemic. Returning public health policy to evidence-based medicine, relying on a careful evaluation of the relevant scientific research, is urgent. It is imperative to follow the science.” If only Fauci would listen.

Instead, we get the usual garbage talk from him. Fauci said during a White House Covid-19 briefing recently that it would be “most unusual for the FDA to refuse full approval for coronavirus vaccines being used under emergency use authorization. You never want to get ahead of the FDA, but it would really be a most unusual situation not to see this … get full approval. I believe it’s going to happen.” He clearly is not paying any attention to the many experts fighting full approval.

In early June an urgent British report called for complete cessation of COVID vaccines in humans. The big conclusion was that the British regulatory agency like the FDA “has more than enough evidence … to declare the COVID-19 vaccines unsafe for use in humans. It is now apparent that these [vaccine] products in the blood stream are toxic to humans. An immediate halt to the vaccination programme is required whilst a full and independent safety analysis is undertaken to investigate the full extent of the harms, which [regulatory] suggest include thromboembolism, multisystem inflammatory disease, immune suppression, autoimmunity and anaphylaxis, as well as Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE).”

Also, in early June a very important petition to FDA by 27 medical experts made these critical points in a published article: “Why we petitioned the FDA to refrain from fully approving any covid-19 vaccine this year.” “We are part of a group of clinicians, scientists, and patient advocates who have lodged a formal “Citizen Petition” with the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), asking the agency to delay any consideration of a “full approval” of a covid-19 vaccine.

The message of our petition is “slow down and get the science right—there is no legitimate reason to hurry to grant a license to a coronavirus vaccine. We believe the existing evidence base—both pre- and post-authorization—is simply not mature enough at this point to adequately judge whether clinical benefits outweigh the risks in all populations.”

“The covid-19 vaccines in widespread use have emergency authorizations (EUA), not actual approvals, a crucial regulatory distinction that reflects major differences in the level of regulatory scrutiny and certainty about the risk-benefit balance.”

“We also call on FDA to require a more thorough assessment of spike proteins produced in-situ by the body following vaccination—including studies on their full biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, and tissue-specific toxicities. We ask the FDA to demand manufacturers complete proper biodistribution studies that would be expected of any new drug and request additional studies to better understand the implications of mRNA translation in distant tissues.

We call on data demonstrating a thorough investigation of all serious adverse events reported to pharmacovigilance systems, carried out by independent, impartial individuals, and for safety data from individuals receiving more than two vaccine doses, in consideration of plans for future booster shots. We ask the FDA to request necessary studies in specific populations, including those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, pediatric subjects, and those with immunological or other underlying medical complexities. Given the nature of the novel vaccine platforms, our petition asks for experts in gene therapy to be included among the external committee advising the FDA.”

Here is a very important contribution by this petition which is the invalid reason to approve the COVID vaccines. “To bolster public confidence. Like mandates, approving a medical product in order to bolster public confidence is backward logic and is outside the FDA’s purview. Approving before substantial evidence that population-based evidence of clinical effectiveness is superior to harms may contribute to public wariness and hesitancy, not only about COVID-19vaccines, but other vaccines and public health authorities more broadly. An approval may bolster public confidence, but it is not a valid reason to approve.

A key signatory to this petition is the highly regarded Dr. Peter McCullough who said this: “US experts have expressed grave concerns over the safety of the mRNA and adenoviral COVID-19 vaccines. These products trick the body into an uncontrolled biologic frenzy and produce the dangerous Wuhan spike protein, which is the product of bioterrorism research from the Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China… the products are not sufficiently safe nor effective for full FDA approval. Many open, unanswered questions surrounding the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines must be answered before the FDA considers granting a full approval. “

Yet another petition to FDA was submitted in mid-May by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Meryl Nass, an esteemed medical expert, on behalf of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), asking the agency to immediately revoke the Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for COVID vaccines and to refrain from licensing [approving] them.

Two of the most respected pandemic experts, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine Dr. Joseph Lapado and Yale School of Public Health Dr. Harvey Risch wrote this in a key Wall Street Journal article: “Another reversal in thinking may be imminent.  Some scientists have raised concerns that the safety risks of Covid-19 vaccines have been underestimated. But the politics of vaccination has relegated their concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking—for now. The large clustering of certain adverse events immediately after vaccination is concerning, and the silence around these potential signals of harm reflects the politics surrounding Covid-19 vaccines.  Stigmatizing such concerns is bad for scientific integrity and could harm patients,” they continued.

They also noted: “Prior research has shown that only a fraction of adverse events are reported, so the true number of cases is almost certainly higher. This tendency of underreporting is consistent with our clinical experience.” And most importantly, they noted: “the risks of a Covid-19 vaccine may outweigh the benefits for certain low-risk populations, such as children, young adults and people who have recovered from Covid-19.” The latter would have natural immunity.

And on that topic, they emphasized: “While you would never know it from listening to public-health officials, not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from Covid-19 vaccination. That this isn’t readily acknowledged by the CDC or Anthony Fauci is an indication of how deeply entangled pandemic politics is in science.” The politics are pushing for approval. A sign of a corrupt system.

An impressive 2017 analysis found considerable evidence to reach this conclusion about the CDC system reporting ill impacts from vaccine use: “By far, the most dire failure of the VAERS system is the vast underreporting of vaccine adverse effects which leads to a dangerous false security in vaccine safety and an erroneous assumption that the benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks.”

It found a congressional report that said: “Former FDA commissioner David A. Kessler has estimated that VAERS reports currently represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events.” Another important revelation: “The IOM [Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences} has been telling the CDC for over 23 years that they have inadequate information (and none at all in some cases) to advise on the causal relationship between vaccines and adverse events for a majority of adverse events reported.”

It also dug out data from a three-year study by a Harvard University medical practice group that found adverse vaccine impacts for 2.6 percent of jabs. CDC refused to use the Harvard system to update theirs.  Indeed, a Harvard report criticized the CDC system and found “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” The Harvard data indicate a possible level of adverse events for the COVID vaccines of close to 3 million, far above official CDC data.

Additionally, a very strong, detailed analysis of vaccine safety has been done. Here is a big conclusion: “The number of previously healthy Americans killed by the vaccines so far appears to be over 25,000 and the number of Americans who have been significantly injured could well be over 1M.” Moreover, this too was said: “we can show causality for a variety of very serious neurological and cardiovascular events. Our methods include methods similar to what the FDA itself used to ascribe excess myocarditis events to the vaccine (i.e., showing an incidence rate significantly above baseline).

The analysis here raises serious issues that are impossible to ignore. The precautionary principle of medicine says that until more definitive analysis is available, we should assume the current analysis is correct. This means we should not mandate forced vaccinations for students or employees anywhere in the world until these issues are clearly resolved.”

Another important observation in this paper: “So the vaccine deaths are simply categorized as deaths from the virus.” If true, this is yet another big government lie. And most important: “If you believe early treatment works (which it does), nobody should get vaccinated.  Lower risk, higher benefit from early treatment.” I agree. Add this nugget of reality: The incredible frontline doctor George Fareed “reports a ratio of 10:1 of vaccine side-effect visits to COVID visits in urgent care.”

Dr. Martin Makary, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University who has spoken pandemic truth is urging his colleagues to “think twice” before recommending universal COVID-19 vaccination of healthy kids. Given the data in hand, “there’s no compelling case for it right now,” he wrote in MedPage. He has called for more thorough examination of the safety data. “We’ve converted now from being pro-vaccine to vaccine fanaticism,” he said. He has also stressed the importance of natural immunity and questioned the need for vaccination: “Several studies demonstrate that natural immunity should protect those who had Covid-19.” And, on all the hysteria about the delta variant Makary recently smartly observed: “I think it’s used to manipulate people to get vaccinated. I’m for vaccines, but this is turned into a tool to try and coax people into it.” In other words, coercion.

The great Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccines and a truly honest, ethical expert has spoken out about the downside of the COVID vaccines. Here are some of his important points that support opposition to full approval of them. Early on, he advised FDA about potential health risks for them, but he was not taken seriously. Here are his statements from an extensive interview in early July.

On vaccine ill effects: “So we end up relying on really outdated, antiquated systems that have been set up a decade or more ago for the most part or some systems that are self-reported like V-safe at the CDC. But those typically capture 1 per cent of the events because they’re all self-reported.”

On rapid development of the vaccines: “My fear has been with rushing this through, we would end up with problems. How can you not end up with problems if you cut corners and rush these things, particularly the safety issues?”

On risk and obeying federal law: “if you’re going to be administering experimental products to patients, that falls under clinical research, and medical research. And so you have to follow the guidance for medical research. [in] the Common Rule [as] codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. The first clause, importantly, in the Common Rule, is there has to be complete disclosure of risk.” [But] we are not meeting the criteria for full disclosure of risk.”

On coercion to get vaccinated: “All of this messaging that the vaccine is safe, and all the peer pressure that’s happening around the vaccine is coercion. ‘We all have to get vaccinated so we will reach herd immunity.’ That’s the logic. The problem is that this is a fallacy. We have not even gathered the data to be able to calculate in these clinical trials what would give us herd immunity.”

On medical freedom: “You have the right to accept or not accept a vaccine product, particularly an experimental one. You make your own decision. I can’t advise you, in the end, neither can your physician completely advise you.”

Dr. Mercola wrote about Malone’s views and noted: “He believes the risks outweigh the benefits in children, teens and young adults, and that those who have recovered from natural SARS-CoV-2 infection should not get the injection.”

Bottom line: It should now be clear that there is more than enough reason to reject all the propaganda by big media backing the full approval of COVID vaccines. More reason than ever for people to reject getting the jab, especially if you have natural immunity or want to use early home/outpatient treatments that cure and prevent COVID infection. This is very relevant for the 50 percent of working age adults who have not taken any jab. And vaccinated people should think deeply about getting a booster shot.

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder, and many articles on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | 1 Comment

Israel exploits case of Mexico official wanted for torture, murder for diplomatic gain

MEMO | July 15, 2021

The notorious case of former top Mexican official wanted in connection with the torture, abduction and murder of 43 students, and for embezzling $50 million of state funds, has become mired in a diplomatic tussle between Israel and Mexico over the occupation state’s treatment of Palestinians.

Tomás Zerón de Lucio, the former director of Mexico’s equivalent of the FBI, fled to Israel following the opening of an investigation into his role in the 2014 Iguala mass kidnapping, which continues to cause a storm in Mexico to this day. Zeron headed the criminal investigation, but his report was discredited after it was discovered that crucial testimony was obtained under torture, evidence was mishandled and promising leads ignored.

Zeron has dismissed the charges and has been seeking political asylum in Israel, where he has lived for nearly two years. Mexican officials say that Zeron has connections to powerful Israeli companies that helped him flee Mexico.

Allegations against the former official also include the embezzlement of $50 million worth of state funds. While in office, Zeron is said to have authorised the purchase of tens of millions of dollars in surveillance systems from private Israeli intelligence firms including the notorious Pegasus software developed by Israel’s NSO Group. The software has been used to target journalists, lawyers and activists in several countries around the globe. It’s claimed that in some cases the intelligence gear purchased by Zeron were never delivered.

Mexico has demanded the extradition of Zeron. Israel however has not acted on either the extradition request or the asylum claims and is said to be looking for ways to squeeze diplomatic concessions out of the highly sensitive case.

Senior Israeli officials were cited in the New York Times saying that Zeron’s extradition case was being slow-walked as “tit-for-tat diplomacy” against Mexico, which has supported United Nations inquiries into allegations of Israeli war crimes against Palestinians. “Why would we help Mexico?” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to offer a candid view of a diplomatic dispute.

The senior Israeli official said that the current Mexican government has repeatedly supported resolutions criticising Israel at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, including decisions to investigate Israel’s killing of Palestinian protesters in Gaza in 2018 and the killing of civilians in the besieged enclave during the occupation state’s latest onslaught.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption | , , , | 1 Comment

UK ‘Freedom’ Means Continued Masking, Govt Tracking & Vax Passports

By Mark Harper | Principia Scientific | July 16, 2021

After weeks of denying that vaccine passports would be introduced into everyday domestic life in the UK, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced Monday that the government will ask nightclubs, pubs, and anywhere where people gather to adopt the measure ‘as a matter of social responsibility’.

The announcement was again completely vague, with little details on exactly what venues will be made to use the NHS COVID app system as “a means of entry,” or how it will be managed and enforced.

The only details that were given by ministers are that it will be ‘encouraged’ anywhere where people are “likely to be in close proximity to others outside their household.

So everywhere then.

Far from being a “terminus date” for restrictions in England, “Freedom Day” will see the Government urge large indoor venues to tell customers to show Covid passes before being granted entry, it has been confirmed. — Toby Young (@toadmeister) July 12, 2021

Government guidelines, published Monday also state that if sufficient measures are not taken to limit infection, the Government will “consider mandating certification in certain venues at a later date.

The announcement also comes on the heels of the government suggesting that while face masks and distancing measures will become optional, businesses and transport companies will be encouraged to make their own policies.

Literally every shop, restaurant, pub, education facility, government facility, bank, form of transport and event could do the same if not expressly forbidden by law – and many will, perhaps the majority. So in other words – not a “lifting” of restrictions at all. — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) July 9, 2021

In addition, the NHS ‘Test, Trace & Isolate’ system will also remain in placemeaning that people will still be subject to spontaneous house arrest orders.

The government documents state that “Test, Trace and Isolate has an important ongoing role in managing the virus and reduces the risk of potentially dangerous variants spreading.

The Government expects the Test, Trace and Isolate system will remain necessary through the autumn and winter,” it adds.

The guidance also states that “Anyone who tests positive will still need to self-isolate regardless of their vaccination status. Further details will be published in due course and the changes are likely to come into effect later in the summer.

The Prime Minster also stated Monday that the Government will keep Covid data under review “probably, I’m afraid, into next year” adding that he “will not hesitate” to re-impose restrictions if needed.

The series of ‘freedom’ announcements has left journalists, business owners, MPs, and the general population asking what exactly they are being freed from.

There is a model for what will be coming our way if we do not resist vaccination passports and electronic ID cards: China’s social credit system, which blacklists people for numerous antisocial offences” | Writes @RossjournoClark — The Telegraph (@Telegraph) July 13, 2021

Anyone who thinks I’m being too pessimistic should take a look at the small print in Government documents, which offer more than a hint that the Government is intending to reintroduce restrictions this winter… Read more in my article for @ConHome here👇 — Mark Harper (@Mark_J_Harper) July 12, 2021

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | 1 Comment

Governments are using credit card purchase data as “contact tracing’ COVID surveillance

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim the Net | July 16, 2021

The ongoing “war on cash” that far preceded the pandemic, whose goal is to steer people towards using traceable forms of payment, is coming in very handy in the COVID era precisely for the reason the policy is criticized in the first place – it makes it easy for authorities to keep tabs on individuals who use card transactions.

Reports now mention instances of Australian residents receiving a mandate to quarantine after using their credit card to pay at an establishment, where somebody known to be infected with the virus had stayed.

Credit card receipts led back to the person that was then forced to self-isolate (although they did not have coronavirus) – and apparently led the person to consider what, if anything, is left of their privacy in a world where more and more people leave long “data trails” behind them.

Stop-gap measures like switching to alternative browsers etc (while probably running it on Windows) aside – the takeaway is that the only way to regain some privacy in the world of mass surveillance and tracking is to turn to alternatives – but do it consistently, and be prepared to pay for the privilege of removing oneself from the closed ecosystems like those ruled with an iron fist by Google, Apple, or Microsoft.

As for using card transactions to do COVID contact tracing, Australia is far from being the only country that is doing it. In fact, those lauded as most successful in even getting their contact tracing efforts off the ground, like South Korea, pioneered the practice. Data surveillance, reports said, was used by authorities there to make sure that people who were either unable or unwilling to share their every move are eventually forced into doing it.

Australia has “distinguished” itself for being willing to jeopardize people’s privacy with a series of COVID surveillance and control measures over the past 18 months, and last November, the National Contact Tracing Review, whose chair is Australia’s Chief Scientist Alan Finkel, recommended using consumer credit card data for track and trace purposes.

But what about privacy? Privacy rules will apply – until they don’t, seems to be the gist of it.

“Privacy rules will apply,” the Review said, but then added, “and in some jurisdictions legislative change may be required.”

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Covid – start at the beginning and question everything

By Abir Ballan | The Conservative Woman | July 15, 2021

ASKING questions is at the heart of science. Science is not an institution and not an authority. Science is never settled. It is forever evolving through conjecture and criticism. Questions form the basis of all scientific inquiry and scientific progress. Without challenging existing concepts – usually held by a majority – there is no knowledge creation. Censoring dissenting voices eliminates the mechanism of error correction and pushes humanity back into the dark ages.

From the beginning, lockdowns were a questionable public health tool, even described as ‘pro-contagion’ by Professor Ioannidis of Stanford University. As early as June 2020, papers showed that lockdowns and other non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) had no effect on reducing deaths. We were all aware that lockdowns would have a terrible economic impact and a devastating human toll, especially in the developing world. We went along with this ‘cure’ because we were told it would save lives – it was necessary for two to three weeks to flatten the curve of infections and prevent healthcare system strain. Yet the goalposts kept shifting endlessly, moving towards a ZERO COVID world: a completely unrealistic and unachievable goal.

Is now the time to question absolutely everything?

The US Centers for Disease Control, the World Health Organisation and ‘experts’ have flip-flopped multiple times. In February 2020, Anthony Fauci said: ‘In all the history of respiratory-born viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person.’ However, all the pandemic measures were based on the assumption that people who are healthy might be sick without knowing it. On June 8, 2020, Maria Van Kerkhove of the WHO stated  that asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2 is very rare. The next day she walked back her comment saying that studies, based on computer modelling not real-life data, show that asymptomatic spread is cause for concern. A systematic review and meta-analysis paper, published in 2020, falsified this assumption. Asymptomatic spread is simply not the main driver of disease.  What should be of even less concern is transmission in the open air, likely to be below 0.1 per cent of all transmissions. Unfortunately, the CDC overestimated outdoor spread, claiming that it represented 10 per cent of transmissions. This exaggeration was used to justify futile outdoor mask mandates. They later admitted their error, too little, too late. Why are we still testing healthy people and locking populations indoors?

The CDC and the WHO confused the public with their contradictory social media recommendations about masks: ‘Masks don’t work in the community. Everyone should wear masks in the community. Everyone should wear two masks. Even if you are vaccinated you should still wear a mask. If you are vaccinated you can do without a mask.’ Behind the scenes, the CDC published a policy review in May 2020 stating, ‘We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission’. The WHO published an Interim guidance in June 2020 stating ‘At present, there is no direct evidence on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community’. Fauci’s leaked emails showed that he didn’t believe in the power of masks either. He said in February 2020 in his email to Sylvia Burwell, ‘The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through the material.’ Why were masks mandated even when the data showed that they made no difference?

The WHO flip-flopped on the definition of herd immunity, which is the point at which an infectious disease stops being a cause for concern because most of the population is immune to it. They removed natural immunity from the definition and limited herd immunity to that reached via vaccination only. After this meddling caused an uproar, they went back again and included both forms of immunity as contributing to herd immunity. Furthermore, they changed their recommendations about the PCR test, first allowing very high cycle thresholds of 45 (which is the number of times the genetic material of the virus is multiplied until it is detected) and recommending that cases are diagnosed based on a positive PCR test, regardless of symptoms – previously unheard of in medicine. Patients are usually diagnosed with a disease if they are sick. Later the WHO rectified their stance, clarifying that the diagnosis of cases requires clinical symptoms and that high cycle thresholds lead to false positives. Why did the WHO make recommendations contrary to established medical practice for infectious diseases? The PCR test was not designed to diagnose infectiousness. It merely detects viral genetic material, dead or alive. Studies indicate that 25 cycles are enough to detect an infectious virus. How much have the false positive results affected the number of cases and in turn the number of deaths? How many deaths were wrongly attributed to COVID instead of other diseases?

Science doesn’t flip-flop like that. Politics does. Science has become politicised. We need to decouple science from politics. It is being manipulated to serve corporate and political agendas. Anyone criticising ‘The Science’ is silenced harshly. People are smart and if given accurate information they can make the right decisions for themselves and their communities. Unfortunately, people are being misinformed and terrified with non-stop death reports, apparently vanishing immunity and the threat of new variants. Fear is not good for us. It’s not good for our immunity, our health or our ability to think rationally. To calm the fear, we need to know that ‘cases’ are meaningless, deaths are overestimated and immunity – whether natural or vaccine-induced – Is long-lasting and can protect us from future variants. Variants are not unique to Covid. All respiratory viruses mutate. The variants are so minutely different from each other that our immune system will recognise them and protect us. It’s like your friend wearing a cap. Can you still recognise him? In the same way, your immune system also recognises the variants. How much longer should we let those variants haunt us?

Now is the time for error correction. Start at the beginning and question everything: lockdowns, asymptomatic transmission, mask mandates, claims about short-lived immunity and dreadful variants. Now is the time for a better solution.

Mark your calendar for The Question Everything: Lockdowns Summit, on July 17, 2021, where pre-eminent experts from science, social sciences, law and industry will evaluate the response to Covid-19.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Former Pfizer VP answers Reuters ‘fact checker’: ‘A pack of lies’

By Mordechai Sones | AMERICA’S FRONTLINE DOCTORS | June 28, 2021

Former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Science Officer Michael Yeadon today told America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) that a Reuters “fact checker” article calling his statements “misinformation” is “a mixture of straw men and sheer invention,” saying the Reuters article was “well worth rebutting”.

This is not the first time Reuters has tried to discredit Yeadon by “fact checker” obfuscation, although past attempts have been less half-hearted. This time, Reuters called Yeadon an “anti-vax proponent” who “has made unfounded claims”. Relying on an entity that calls itself “Meedan’s Health Desk, a group of public health scientists working to tackle medical misinformation online,” the Reuters “fact check” addresses Yeadon statements on asymptomatic spread, variants, the COVID-19 vaccine, and its use in pregnancy. The article’s concluding “verdict” tries to claim that “infected but symptom-free people can spread the coronavirus; vaccinated people are better protected but not 100% immune; research shows COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective for adults and pregnant women.”

Relating to the article, Yeadon said: “The narrative statements that have repeatedly been claimed by the authorities which are a pack of lies are:

“1. Asymptomatic transmission. It’s definitely a lie. Have you seen that video where Fauci states that ‘it’s always a symptomatic person who drives an epidemic and never people without symptoms’?

“A WHO doctor said exactly the same thing.

“There’s also a terrific peer-reviewed journal article showing that domestic transmission in asymptomatic cases was effectively zero.

“All marries up with the statements I’ve made, and with biological logic.

“2. Variants. They’re just being idiotic. I can show several good quality papers demonstrating that T-cells from a convalescent person or an immunized person each recognize all the then-available variants, again, as anticipated by fundamentals of immunology. The weak twaddle in their piece about antibodies is risible.

“3. Vaccines. The bastards are actually claiming they’re safe. Got them. We have VAERS, Yellow Card, and EMA monitoring. We have mechanism of toxicity. We have multiple open letters to EMA (warning of blood clots) which were immediately followed by vaccine withdrawals (for blood clots).

“4. Pregnancy/fertility. No one in their right mind thinks giving experimental treatments to pregnant women is other than reckless. Especially when reproductive toxicity testing is incomplete.”

Yeadon continued: “But on top of this stupidity, are two recent public disclosures: (I) the distribution of vaccine to tissues in mice shows a very disturbing concentration into ovaries. No one has followed it up, so the assumption has to be this is happening in humans too, and (II) our concern expressed in the December 2020 petition to EMA about immune cross-reactivity between spike protein and human syncytin-1 has been confirmed. A paper was very recently published showing young women making antibodies to syncytin-1 within days of vaccination.”

Summarizing, Yeadon concluded: “Of course this is wholly fraud. Imagine that the number of people in U.K. who’d actually been killed by the virus, instead of dying with it, was just a couple of thousand; you’d been on the streets with torches and pitchforks.

“You should be. Governments everywhere have lied and lied and lied about every one of the central narrative points about this virus.

“The effect of compliance with their ludicrous policy responses has been to hollow out and arguably to have destroyed economically several G20 counties, and actually increased the number of avoidable deaths, not least by deprivation of healthcare.

“These people all need locking up in that new high-security facility being built at speed at Wellingborough, Northants. The prima facie case against a dozen or so people in U.K. warrants their arrest pending criminal prosecutions.

“If these figures are of the same order of magnitude for other countries as well, and there is no reason to assume otherwise, then the plague is a deception of unprecedented proportions, and crimes committed against humanity on a huge scale have been committed here.”

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | 1 Comment

Jews enlist US govt to intervene in Chile as Palestinian-descendant rises to presidential election frontrunner

By Eric Striker | National Justice | July 15, 2021

Jews in America are demanding the United States intervene in Chile’s internal politics in the run up to their presidential election next November.

Daniel Jadue, a descendant of Palestinian refugees and member of the Chilean Communist Party, is currently the frontrunner in polls. Jadue is an unapologetic anti-Zionist who has in the past directly confronted the Jewish power structure of his country.

Gerardo Gorodischer, president of Chilean Jewish lobby, has successfully recruited Democrats and Republicans in the US Congress to call on Secretary of State Antony Blinken — a Jew himself — to meddle in Chile’s internal affairs and prevent Jadue from becoming president.

Jadue has in the past called attention to Jewish control of the media in his country. Last year, he was listed as one of the top 10 anti-Semites in the world by the Simon Wiesenthal Center after he passed a strict Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) law as mayor of the city of Recoleta. He is currently supporting a law in the parliament that would make Chile the first nation in the world to officially institute a total boycott of Israel.

With 400,000 descendants, Chile is home to the world’s largest Palestinian diaspora outside of the Middle East. Chilean-Palestinians are overwhelmingly Christians who were forced to flee their homeland after being ethnically cleansed by Israel. Chile’s Jewish population is much smaller, currently estimated at 150,000 people. Jews in the country have started immigrating to Israel in larger than usual numbers out of fear of Jadue potentially becoming the nation’s next leader.

So far, Jewish attempts at “Corbyning” Jadue have failed. Complaints from Zionist organizations in Latin America and the US to stop Jadue have largely been ignored by the local population. Their trump card appears to be using the United States to intimidate the Chilean government with threats of economic retaliation or more.

In her letter to Blinken, Democratic congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz made a collective racial attack on the entire Chilean Palestinian community for protesting against Israel’s attacks on Arabs last May:

“Militant leaders of the 400,000-strong Chilean Palestinian community, and their partners, from a variety of political parties, were quite aggressive during and after the Gaza crisis, burning Israeli and U.S. flags, brandishing Nazi symbols and accusing Israel of apartheid and Chilean Jews of controlling the media. This dangerous climate has been intensifying for many years and has already affected Chile’s social fabric despite alarms sounded by the local Jewish community and U.S. Jewish organizations like the American Jewish Committee.”

The billionaire neo-conservative president of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, also received the letter. His allies in the parliament have started grilling Jadue over his 1983 high school yearbook entry, where he declared himself an “anti-Semite” and vowed revenge against Jews for what they did to his family. Jadue, a 54-years-old man, responded by making fun of Chilean conservatives asking him to “clarify” comments he made as a teenager as the country suffers through an economic crisis.

Jews have been encountering resistance from all across the political spectrum and diverse countries in recent months. Earlier this month, Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko gave a speech suggesting that Jews use the “Holocaust” to intimidate and control people. Yesterday in Poland, local nationalists crashed a Jewish ceremony racially defaming Poles as genocidal killers.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | 9 Comments

The CIA, Kennedy, and the Haiti Assassination

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | July 16, 2021

The legal authorities have been rounding up suspects in the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse. Criminal prosecutions will follow. If those accused are found guilty, they will be punished  with long terms in jail.

Ironically, however, if the CIA or the Pentagon had been the ones that assassinated Moïse, the situation would be completely different. There would be no arrests or criminal prosecutions. That’s because the CIA and the Pentagon wield the authority to do what private individuals are not allowed to do — the authority to assassinate political leaders and, well, for that matter, anyone else in the world.

Recall the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassim Suleimani. He was in charge of Iran’s security and intelligence apparatus. The U.S. national-security establishment fired a missile at him, killing him instantly.

Unlike the recent assassination in Haiti, there were no arrests or prosecutions of any Pentagon or CIA official after Suleimani’s assassination. That’s because they wield the authority to snuff out people’s lives on grounds of national security.

Moreover, assassination is not some new power wielded by the CIA and the Pentagon. It actually stretches all the way back to the conversion of the U.S. government to a national-security state after World War II. As far back as 1953, the CIA was developing an assassination manual for its assassins. The manual trained the CIA’s assassins not only in the art of assassination but also in the art of covering up the CIA’s role in assassinations.

The following year — 1954 — the CIA instigated a regime-change operation in Guatemala in which it prepared a list of Guatemalan officials to be targeted for assassination. While the CIA still will not release that top-secret list — on grounds of “national security” of course — there is no doubt that the democratically elected president of the country, Jacobo Arbenz, was at the top of the assassination list. Fortunately for him, he was able to escape the country before they could kill him.

In 1961, just before President Kennedy was sworn into office, the CIA conspired to assassinate Congo leader Patrice Lumumba. They actually rushed the assassination because they knew that Kennedy would oppose it. Lumumba was assassinated on January 17. Kennedy was sworn into office on January 20.

In 1970, CIA officials conspired with other U.S. officials to kidnap and assassinate Gen. Rene Schneider, the overall commander of Chile’s armed forces. Although the CIA denied any role in the assassination at the time it was carried out, it later came out that the CIA had conspired to violently kidnap Schneider.

The CIA claimed that its conspiracy was limited to kidnapping, not assassinating, Schneider. However, that was clearly a lie because the CIA’s intent was to remove him from his position in the government because he opposed the U.S. plan for a coup in Chile. Thus, there was no way they ever would have returned him after kidnapping him. In any event, Schneider was shot dead on the streets of Santiago during the kidnapping attempt. The CIA was later caught paying hush money to the killers.

One of the things that has long fascinated me about all this assassination mayhem is how some Americans find it inconceivable that the CIA and Pentagon planned and carried out the assassination of President Kennedy. How can such an assassination be inconceivable when that’s what the Pentagon and the CIA do — they assassinate political leaders on grounds of protecting U.S. national security.

No one seems surprised when they learn about the Pentagon’s or CIA’s assassination of a foreign leader. In fact, most everyone seems pretty nonchalant about the matter. But when one brings up the Kennedy assassination, there is a segment in mainstream American society that goes absolutely ballistic. I don’t get it. 

I suppose they would claim that the CIA and the Pentagon would never assassinate an American citizen. But that’s ridiculous. If the CIA or the Pentagon conclude that an American citizen poses a threat to national security, why would they hesitate to take him out? In fact, during the Chilean coup, they authorized Chilean officials to execute two American citizens, Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi. More recently, they assassinated two American citizens — Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son Abdulrahman.

That leaves the final inconceivable argument — that it is simply inconceivable that the Pentagon and the CIA would exercise their power of assassination against a U.S. president. But what if they conclude that the president poses a grave threat to national security and that that country will fall to the communists or the terrorists or to Russia owing to the president’s policies? Would the Pentagon and the CIA really just let the country go down, or would they take the necessary steps to save the country?

We know the answer to that question from the coup in Chile. Like the United States, the Chilean Constitution did not allow for an assassination or coup to save the country from a president whose policies were deemed to pose a grave threat to national security. That’s why Gen. Schneider opposed a coup. The position of the Pentagon and the CIA was that regardless of the Chilean constitution, the Chilean national-security establishment had a moral duty to save the country by forcibly removing its democratically elected president, Salvador Allende, from office. After Schneider was removed from the scene through assassination, the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s view prevailed. The U.S.-inspired coup occurred on September 11, 1973, and left Allende dead.

Thus, the real questions are: (1) Did the Pentagon and the CIA conclude that Kennedy posed a grave threat to national security owing to the radically different direction he was taking America? (2) Does the evidence establish that Kennedy’s assassination was a highly sophisticated regime-change operation on the part of the U.S. national-security establishment?

Those are the two questions that the inconceivable crowd declines to confront and address. They remain stuck within their inconceivable doctrine.

The answers to those two questions were provided in FFF’s recent online conference “The National Security State and the Kennedy Assassination.” I have no doubts that anyone who watches the presentations delivered in that conference from beginning to end will conclude beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that the Pentagon and the CIA exercised their power of assassination on November 22, 1963, to protect the country from a president whose policies they concluded posed a grave threat to national security. 

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | 2 Comments

Cuba and Color Revolution: A Cautionary Tale of the Next Phase of Forever-War

By Joaquin Flores | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 14, 2021

If one believes that the protests in Cuba can be explained within the rubric of 20th century economic systems, and then believes they can go on to extract some great truths about socialism vs. capitalism, then they are misinformed. No, this is about technocracy, color revolution, and forever-war.

The events in Cuba were caused by the staged economic collapse directed by the IMF under the advisement of the World Economic Forum, under the pretext of supply-line stoppages and economic closures to combat Covid-19. The socio-economic strife that such an imposed crisis is known to provoke, is then weaponised to destabilize ‘regimes’ so as to further the hegemonic agenda of the (admittedly divided) oligarchy ruling the global west. We saw this before in 2008 with the crash and crisis, and how this was weaponised to create a destabilization process known as the Arab Spring.

The planners involved are long-term planners, having transcended the quarter-driven constraints of the old market system. The new technocracy emerging is simply able to use Friedmanesque manipulations to keep the system afloat until the law of value is entirely transcended through automation. That was the crypto-Marxian understanding of economics promoted by Maynard Keynes.

Just as Cuba positioned itself away from socialism and towards further integration into global markets, the IMF moved openly to wind down the global market system and move towards a new type of totalitarian order which some critics have likened to communism.

Cubans are protesting against the mask-mandates and the lockdowns which have harmed people’s way of life. They are protesting the way that the government has effectively privileged those with dollar accounts who can buy from state-sanctioned dollar stores. Hence, those without families abroad sending dollars are negatively affected the most. This strikes against the whole narrative of Cuba and its gusano diaspora. Cuba produces its own vaccine, one that is not an experimental mRNA vaccine. The US would like very much to force a concession onto Cuba that it accept the mRNA vaccine. Perhaps the Cuban population of 11 million is just too high.

The fake news talking points that Cubans are protesting a lack of vaccines is a lie. We knew that trans-Atlantic talking points were a part of the Color scheme last year in Belarus when we were told that protestors rose up to oppose Lukashenko’s lackadaisical approach to the plandemic. Lukashenko in turn revealed that he refused an IMF offer of $980 million to play the lockdown deathmatch.

This is a Color Revolution

Anyone like Tom Fowdy for RT who writes that it is premature to say that the clear signs of a Color Revolution aren’t there, probably only says so because they don’t really know what those signs are.

They probably approach that question in terms of on-location forensics: identifying that a particular protest leader is actually an employee of the state department or Soros NGO in some fashion.

Yet for those who understand what the signs are, the signs of a Color Revolution are certainly there. But to understand this requires a long and broad view of the interplay between staged economic crises and the predictable turmoil they create in certain countries.

Because turmoil and protests are all but predictable even to OXFAM, once the FAO food index price surpasses about 210 (by 2012 ratios). Then, it becomes a question of which countries global lending institutions deem worthy of borrowing to subsidize against the newly inflated food price, or which countries the food production companies view in a lenient fashion.

As OXFAM wrote in 2012: “While concerns about high food prices are foremost about the spread of hunger and poverty, high food prices are also strongly correlated with political instability and have historically been a catalyst for mass protest in countries where legitimacy is already faltering. Research performed by the New England Institute for Science and Society has identified “a global food price threshold for unrest;”

Since 2007, food riots have broken out in more than 60 countries and have occurred with heightened frequency during periods of record-breaking food prices such as in 2008, when food riots erupted from Europe to the South Pacific. The FAO food price index crossed the 210 threshold, for the first time, in February 2008.”

Do we need to mention again that global economic crises are staged? Surely, there are structural problems broadly speaking, in the entire Neo-Keynesean system built in some large part from the ideas of Milton Friedman. So it should be clarified that while the timing of these economic crises are planned, they are also bound to happen. But when precisely they happen, and the point of them, would probably shock and confuse, then demoralize anyone who had a naïve understanding of global politics. You see, the point of planned economic crises is the upwards redistribution of wealth. Every firm except a handful of ‘zaibatsu’ style state-picked winners must absorb their own losses. This is corporatism 101.

Milton Friedman (July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006) American economist and statistician who received the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

Each market crisis is structurally predetermined as these bubbles which define them, grow to a certain point. But it is a decision that is made to ‘pop the bubble’ at a particularly more fortuitous time as opposed to some other time – granted that it would need to be popped sooner or later. So these are both features of the structure, but also planned.

Understanding Color Revolutions requires an understanding of this phenomenon. In 2008, the massive bail-outs to banks using currency debasement, led to a geopolitical strategy on the part of the US deep state to buy up and corner the markets on perishable goods, especially those markets and firms which directed their energies towards Turkey, the Arab world, and Iran. This led to strife across the Maghreb region, Egypt, Syria, an increase of problems in occupied Iraq, and a boon to the Green movement in Iran.

The Crisis in Cuba

Further destabilization in Cuba will be a huge part in a coming global destabilization, and so it must be opposed. This is the case, even contemplating the reasonable grievances of the actual protesters, which in turn are not the same as the Sorosian demands placed in the mouths of anonymous protestors by the globalist media.

An inflation crisis has hit Cuba because of the staged political response to Covid, meant precisely to cause inflationary crises globally. The tourism industry has taken the biggest hit. Food and similar perishables are unaffordable for many without access to dollar accounts. There are state-picked favourites in the private sector (as is the case everywhere) as well as Communist Party bureaucrats who seem unaffected by the very same conditions that the protesters accuse them of bringing about. This much seems reasonable: in looking at who to blame for a problem, look to those who are making out.

The themes affecting Cuba are isolation and sovereignty, versus integration and dependence. Ever since the collapse of the USSR, which Cuba relied on for massive subsidies, Cuba has had both up and down periods as it struggles to balance between these two questions. Cuba is an island nation with just 11 million people, and so there can be no real sovereignty without the heavy price of isolation, nor can there be any integration into the globalist system without becoming a dependent state.

It’s a very tough predicament, because the Ideological State Apparatus of Cuba is its own variant of Marxism-Leninism, and this means that no matter how actually integrated and dependent Cuba is or is becoming, it must use the pages of Granma to pencil polemics declaring that Cuba is more sovereign and stable than ever before. Conversely, each undeniable period of crisis must be blamed on the very same socio-economic systems of global governance which Cuba relies upon in part for its own legitimacy.

The July 13th Edition of Granma, Official Organ of the CC of the CP of Cuba

The problem then is when people really believe this state propaganda, or when people are forced to openly proclaim a public truth they know personally to be a lie. Because instead of the public understanding that Cuba has lost much of its sovereignty in its process of dollarizing so much of its economy, (and that the machinations of foreign actors, the IMF, the planned and staged collapse of the global speculative economy that Cuba is integrated in, is a large part of Cuba’s present woes) blame is laid by the public directly at the feet of a nominally sovereign state’s ruling government.

Quite the predicament. Because the government cannot really tell the truth, it must take the blame. Or do as it has done (and done so with no shame for provoking incredulity), and claim that the entire protest is a foreign provocation.

The Cuban government and its sinecure functionaries must always declare that any grassroots grievances expressed en masse are always at its core the work of foreign ‘imperialist’ intelligence operations bent on a destabilization strategy.

Yet such accusations of foreign plots are more likely to be true than not.

Another problem, and this is something where the Cuban government needs to make a fix, is the issue of dollar accounts.

Those with dollar accounts are tremendously less affected by the perishable goods inflation crisis in Cuba. But those deposits are only possible by having loved ones who have left Cuba for the US. So those who have ‘betrayed’ the revolution are the ones able to help those in Cuba. Those in Cuba living better off are not those who have been loyal to the socialism project of Cuba excepting a small layer of bureaucrats and professional snitches, but instead are the relatives of those gusanos in Florida and the rest of the US who have moved on to greener pastures.

What sort of message does that send? This greatly weakens the legitimacy of the government, because those common-folk who defend the Cuban system are left feeling like fools. When this layer joins a protest movement, the government’s days are numbered.

Cuba – Between a Rock and a Hard-Spot

Color Revolution schemes cannot work unless there are real-existing grievances shared among large segments of the population.

And yet going further, those real-existing grievances today, (while they compound longer standing ones which the Cuban government must account for), are directly caused by the IMF’s decision to bring global capitalism to a grinding halt for some period of time.

It is very difficult for a nominally sovereign government to tell a Thatcherite story of ‘TINA’ – there is no alternative. Cuba lacks alternatives except going either the path of the Khmer Rouge, or the path of laissez-faire. It has chosen some middle-path.

This really touches on a very big problem Cuba faces: its civilizational decision to place its legitimacy at the hands of international organizations related to global governance. Cuba strives to show its own citizens, and perhaps secondarily the US, that the rest of the world and especially the UN’s alphabet soup of agencies and organizations, recognize any number of successes that Cuba promotes having accomplished. To wit, at least within the rubric of those accounting systems, Cuba makes a decent case.

So a problem arises when this very same system of global governance, under the pretext of fighting Covid-19, instructs various countries to commit ritual seppuku at the altar of world health in order to preserve this status and these relationships to global trade and global governance.

And how? The western hemisphere is controlled almost entirely by the IMF and global banking systems. Cuba exists in some netherworld of ‘helpful harm’, if not through the US due to sanctions, then through the same banks in their Trans-Atlantic incarnations by way of Europe.

Since we understand that the WHO is effectively controlled by allies of the World Economic Forum like Bill Gates, which in turn is the think-tank of the IMF; and since the IMF includes in its bylaws and requirements that countries in a time of a declared global pandemic by the WHO must take the proscribed measures to combat this, then we understand what we have seen as a global phenomenon.

It’s been only a handful of leaders, several in Africa, in Haiti, and Belarus, that have openly bucked these provisions. And of these, all have been since eliminated except for Lukashenko in Belarus who no doubt enjoys some security provisions from the Russian Federation.

The Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) explains that in 2019, “The top exports of Cuba are Rolled Tobacco ($287M), Raw Sugar ($211M), Nickel Mattes ($134M), Hard Liquor ($97.3M), and Zinc Ore ($78.4M), exporting mostly to China ($461M), Spain ($127M), Netherlands ($65.5M), Germany ($64.7M), and Cyprus ($48.9M).

The top imports of Cuba are Poultry Meat ($286M), Wheat ($181M), Soybean Meal ($167M), Corn ($146M), and Concentrated Milk ($136M), importing mostly from Spain ($1.01B), China ($790M), Italy ($327M), Canada ($285M), and Russia ($285M).”

Hence Cuba was placed in a pincer move. It lost massively from the global plandemic and the restriction of supply lines, the tightened access to imports, the loss of tourism. The compliance of other countries to the IMF’s mandated economic implosion reduced demand for Cuba’s exports and damaged tourism as well.

But in order to maintain its own relationship with the IMF and also following the global narrative of the Socialist International (2nd International), (an EU driven social-democratic association of governments and political parties), it went along with the ‘solidarity’ driven component of woke politics seen in the ‘do-your-part’ masking and lockdowns.

But those harmed by the lockdowns were ordinary Cubans, not government officials or those with dollar accounts. And so the reaction we see today is a predictable one.


There can be no doubt: Cuba’s present crisis is not the direct result of its own economic mismanagement, but rather the staged demolition of finance, global trade, and supply lines using the Covid pandemic as a pretext. However, a number of social and political decisions by Cuban leaders have no doubt compounded the impact of the crisis and emboldened protesters.

What citizens in first world countries have seen as a ‘stock market rebound’ predicated by ‘too-big-too-fail’ type bailouts (socialism for the rich), are only possible so long as those moneys are held on the books but not really spent – hence the lockdowns. At least not spent in such a way as would this liquidity naturally circulate in the economy. For such velocity of moneys based on such extreme debasement of the currency, would lead to the largest inflationary crisis in the history of man on earth.

In raw-materials producing countries like Cuba, that has meant a tripled hardship. The aim of the centers of finance capital has been to do something like the Arab Spring, only more so.

At the same time, the Cuban government’s defensive and accusatory posture is poor optics and bad politics. It needs to better engage the protestors and validate some part of their grievances. Pointing the finger at Uncle Sam is tone deaf and only serves to satisfy a single demographic in Cuba.

Today, we are seeing only the start of a fresh wave of global destabilization efforts, never-ending wars. But now governments have prepared the civilian populations for these wars under the pretext of never-ending lockdowns due to a mystery illness. The right to protest, strikes, and the basic social contact needed to organize these can be revoked by instantaneous mandate as some new variant of Covid will always invariably be discovered. This is the biggest threat humanity faces since the Second World War, but in addition to destabilization campaigns, is the backdrop of a class-war gambit of the oligarchy against everyday people. Cuba needs to be understood in this light, and while it needs a better approach to managing the Covid narrative and hearing its people, foreign meddling in its affairs needs to be opposed.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Economics | , , | 1 Comment

US Targets Nicaraguan Presidential Election

By Roger D. Harris | Dissident Voice | July 14, 2021

Before Henry Kissinger became a Clinton pal, liberals condemned him for saying: “I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” The 1973 US-backed coup and bloodbath in Chile followed. Now Uncle Sam has a problem in Nicaragua, where independent polls predict a landslide victory for Daniel Ortega’s leftist Sandinista slate in the November 7th presidential elections.

The US government and its sycophantic media are working to prevent Ortega’s reelection. On July 12, the US slapped visa restrictions on one hundred Nicaraguan elected legislative officials, members of the judiciary, and their families for “undermining democracy.” A month earlier, the Biden administration imposed sanctions on President Ortega’s daughter, along with a military general, the head of the central bank, and an elected legislator.

These and other recent illegal US sanctions on Nicaragua are designed to promote regime change and are based on the ridiculous charge that this poor and tiny nation is a “extraordinary and unusual threat to the US national security,” when the opposite is the case.

The NICA Act of 2018, under the Trump administration, imposed sanctions, including blocking loans from international financial institutions controlled by the US. In August 2020, the Responsive Assistance in Nicaragua (RAIN) plan was revealed, which is a multi-faceted coup strategy by which the US contracted corporations to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. RAIN calls for a “sudden, unanticipated transition” government to forestall what they admit would otherwise be a Sandinista victory in a free election. In a seamless handoff from the Trump to the Biden administration, the pending RENACER Act would further extended “targeted sanctions.”

US intervention in Nicaragua and, indeed, in all of Latin America under the 1823 Monroe Doctrine has a long history continuing to the present. Back in 1856, US citizen William Walker tried to impose himself as head of a slave state in Nicaragua, only to be assassinated four years later. In 1912, the US began an occupation of Nicaragua, forcing the country to become a US protectorate. The US was ousted in 1933 in a war led by national hero Augusto C. Sandino, after whom the present revolutionary party was named. In the 1980s, the US government proxies, the Contras, fought the new Sandinistas after they overthrew the US-backed Somoza dictatorship.

Problematic premises

In the past, most US progressives opposed the imperialism of their government. But more recently, as Jeremy Kuzmarov of CovertAction Magazine observed: “United States warmakers have become so skilled at propaganda that not only can they wage a war of aggression without arousing protest; they can also compel liberals to denounce peace activists using language reminiscent of the McCarthy era.”

A recent Open Letter to the Nicaraguan Government from U.S. Solidarity Workers 1979-1990 reflects the US imperial talking points. This US open letter, dated July 1, is joined by one from Europeans, formerly active in solidarity with Nicaragua, and one from international academics, mainly in the field of Latin American studies. (Links to all three letters may be dodgy.) All three letters, likely coordinated, use similar language to make matching critiques and demands.

While other international activists from the 1980s still prioritize non-intervention and solidarity with the Sandinista government, the concerns expressed in the open letter should be respectfully evaluated. The open letter is based on the following problematic premises:

  1. The open letter claims the Ortega “regime” is guilty of “crimes against humanity.”

In fact, Nicaragua is by far the most progressive country in Central America under the Sandinista government.

Unlike the Guatemalans, Hondurans, and El Salvadorians in these US client states, Nicaraguans are not fleeing to the US in search of a better life. Poverty and extreme poverty have been halved in Nicaragua, and the UN Millennium Development Goal of cutting malnutrition has been achieved. Basic healthcare and education are free, and illiteracy has been virtually eliminated, while boasting of the highest level of gender equality in the Americas. Nicaragua, which enjoys the lowest homicide rate in Central America, also has the smallest police force with the smallest budget in the region. These are not the hallmarks of a dictatorship.

  1. The open letter claims the 2018 coup attempt was simply a “demonstration of self-determination.” While the open letter correctly notes that the events of 2018 reflected an element of popular discontent, it renders invisible the millions of dollars and many years of US sponsored subversion in Nicaragua.

Social media campaigns of false information orchestrated by US-sponsored groups fueled viciously violent protests. According to solidarity activist Jorge Capelán: “those who kidnapped, tortured, robbed, murdered and raped citizens here in Nicaragua in April 2018 were the coup promoters. They themselves recorded everything with their cell phones. They even set fire to murdered Sandinista comrades in the street.”

Benjamin Waddell, a signatory to the open letter, admitted “it’s becoming more and more clear that the US support has helped play a role in nurturing the current [2018] uprisings.” Dan La Botz, another Ortega-must-go partisan, provided the background: “US organizations such as USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and no doubt the CIA had for decades, of course, worked in Nicaragua as they do everywhere in the world.”

No substantive progressive alternative was offered by the opposition in 2018, according to William Robinson, another signatory to the open letter. Rather, 2018 was an attempt to achieve by violent means what could not be achieved democratically at the ballot box.

  1. The open letter claims the Nicaraguan government “in no way represents the values, principles and goals of the Sandinista revolution.” This stance arrogates to foreigners the role of telling the Nicaraguan people how to evaluate their revolution. The electoral process in Nicaragua makes clear that the Nicaraguans think otherwise.

After successfully overthrowing the US-backed dictator Somoza and fighting the counter-revolutionary war against the US-backed Contras, the Sandinista’s lost the 1990 election. Notably, outgoing President Ortega without hesitation obeyed the electoral mandate, the first time in Nicaragua’s history that governing power was passed peacefully to another political party. After 17 years of neoliberal austerity, Daniel Ortega won the presidential election of 2006 with a 38% plurality and went on to win in 2011 with 63% and 72.5% in 2016. Ortega’s ever increasing electoral margins suggest the majority of Nicaraguans support him as the legitimate leader of the Sandinista revolution.

Problematic proposals

 Using the same loaded language as the US government, the open letter calls on the “Ortega-Murillo regime” to release political prisoners currently being held, including “pre-candidates,” members of the opposition, and “historic leaders” of the Sandinista revolution; rescind the national security law under which these individuals were arrested; and negotiate electoral reforms.

Nicaragua has passed two recent laws: the Foreign Agents Law and the Law to Defend the Rights of the People to Independence, Sovereignty, and Self-Determination for Peace. These laws, which the open letter wants rescinded, criminalize promoting foreign interference in Nicaragua’s internal affairs, seeking foreign military intervention, organizing acts of terrorism, and promoting coercive economic measures against their country. These are activities, it should be noted, that are similarly prohibited in the US’s FARA Act, after which the Nicaraguan laws were modeled.

The recent actions of the Nicaraguan government prosecuting people who break their laws is a normal function of governance. That some of the accused perpetrators may have political aspirations does not immunize those individuals from arrest for unlawful activities.

The letter from the aforementioned academics claims that among those detained are the “most prominent potential opposition presidential candidates.” In fact, none of the 17 political parties in Nicaragua have chosen their candidates, and “most of those currently under investigation do not belong to any legally registered party.” In fact, Stephen Sefton reports from Nicaragua that “no leading figure from Nicaragua’s opposition political parties has been affected by the recent series of arrests of people from organizations that supported the 2018 coup attempt.”

One of the most prominent of those arrested is NGO director Cristiana Chamorro, charged with money laundering for receiving millions of dollars from the USAID, other US government agencies, and allied foundations for regime-change purposes. In her defense, she incredulously claimed that the US State Department had audited her and found everything to their liking.

The “historic leaders” of the Sandinista revolution are just that; people who had broken with the revolution long ago and since 1994 had collaborated with the US-allied rightwing opposition and NGOs. More to the point, they are being charged with illegal collusion with foreign powers.

The open letter calls for “negotiating electoral reforms,” but electoral law in Nicaragua as in the US is determined by the legislative process and not by negotiations among various power blocks. Nicaragua has implemented some but not all reforms mandated by the Organization of American States. The fourth branch of government, the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE), oversees elections. A third of the current CSE is composed of representatives of parties other than the ruling party, even though the Sandinistas hold a super-majority in the legislature.

The right of the Nicaraguan revolution to defend itself

While acknowledging “the long and shameful history of US government intervention,” the open letter does not acknowledge the right of the Nicaraguan revolution to defend itself. On the contrary, their implied endorsement of the 2018 coup attempt is a call for regime change by non-democratic means and an implicit pass for US interference.

The open letter’s finding that “the crimes of the US government – past and present – are not the cause of, nor do they justify or excuse” the behavior of the current government in Nicaragua is a door that swings two ways. Whatever the alleged wrongdoings the Ortega government, that still does not justify the US government’s regime-change campaign. The open letter is thunderously silent on current US intervention, notably the punishing NICA and RENACER acts.

The Nicaraguan government has prioritized the needs of poor and working people and has made astounding progress on multiple fronts. That is why they are being targeted for regime change, and why the Nicaraguans have taken measures to thwart US intervention.

The Trump administration specifically targeted the so-called “Troika of Tyranny” – Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua – with repressive illegal sanctions aimed at regime change. That policy of US domination did not start with Trump, nor is it ending with the new US administration.

The imperialists are clear on who they target as their enemy; some elements on the left are less clear on who is their friend and whether Nicaragua has a right to defend itself.  If the signers of the open letter believe, as they claim, “in the Nicaraguan people’s right to self-determination…of a sovereign people determining their own destiny,” then the November 2021 election should be protected, free from interference by the US, its international allies, and its funded NGOs.

Roger D. Harris is with the human rights organization Task Force on the Americas founded in 1985.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , , | 1 Comment

UK’s arms sales to Riyadh three times higher than previously thought

Press TV – July 15, 2021

A new investigation has revealed that Britain has exported around three times as much weaponry and military equipment to Saudi Arabia, which is leading a devastating military aggression against Yemen, than previously believed.

According to a report published by British online newspaper The Independent, the British government’s official figures state that British ministers have signed off 6.7 billion pounds (9.28 US dollars) worth of arms, such as bombs, missiles, and aircraft, to the oil-rich kingdom ever since it started its bombardment campaign of neighboring Yemen back in March 2015.

However, researchers say the actual figure is likely to be close to £20 billion (over $27 billion) because the official numbers do not entail sales carried out under an obscure “open license” system.

The investigation further casts doubts on allegations of the British government about having “one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world.”

The probe emphasized that Britain’s operation of the parallel and less transparent “open license” system gives a more open-ended green light to arms manufacturers to sell specific armaments to a specific country without a monetary limit.

It further noted that the United Kingdom operated an open license for bombs and air-to-surface missiles to Saudi Arabia between 2014 and August 2019.

Moreover, an open license has covered Britain’s sales of equipment and components for use in the twin-engine and multi-role Eurofighter Typhoon jets to Saudi Arabia. The warplanes have been used in Saudi airstrikes across Yemen.

The researchers also examined the accounts of companies known to be selling arms to Saudi Arabia, and discovered that the revenues of British multinational arms producer BAE Systems, for instance, totaled nearly 17 billion pounds (23.5 US dollars).

As a result, they estimate that the real value of exports is close to £20 billion ($27 billion).

“The use of open licenses also offers the government a convenient sleight of hand when it comes under pressure over arms sales to a particular country due to events such as wars, military coups, or well-publicized human rights abuses,” the report warns.

Katie Fallon of Campaign Against Arms Trade, which conducted the research, stated, “The use of Open Licenses covers up the real extent of the UK arms trade and makes it impossible to know what quantities of weapons are being sold around the world.”

“UK-made fighter jets, bombs and missiles have had a devastating impact in the ongoing bombardment of Yemen. The fact that the real total of these sales could be so much higher than previously reported emphasizes the central role that the UK government and UK-based companies have played in the war. There must be full transparency about what arms have gone over and in what quantity,” Fallon added.

“So much of the arms industry takes place in secret, and that’s how the arms dealers like it. As long as the widespread use of Open Licenses continues, the true nature and volume of the UK arms trade will remain hidden from scrutiny, and therefore from meaningful control,” Fallon pointed out.

Saudi Arabia, backed by the US and its regional allies, launched the devastating war on Yemen in March 2015, with the goal of bringing the government of former Yemeni president Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi back to power and crushing the popular Ansarullah resistance movement.

Yemeni armed forces and allied Popular Committees have, however, gone from strength to strength against the Saudi-led invaders, and left Riyadh and its allies bogged down in the country.

The Saudi war has left hundreds of thousands of Yemenis dead, and displaced millions more. The war has also destroyed Yemen’s infrastructure and spread famine and infectious diseases across the Arab country.

July 16, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , , | 1 Comment