Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Federation of State Medical Boards Attacks Physicians Over COVID ‘Misinformation’ — Who’s Behind It?

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 14, 2022

The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) has taken a stand against what it refers to as “the dissemination of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and disinformation by physicians and other healthcare professionals on social media platforms, online and in the media,” going so far as to recommend disciplinary action and state policy changes.

In a July 2021 press release, the FSMB warned physicians they could risk “disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license.”

And in a lengthier statement issued in April 2022, the nonprofit — which says it “serves as the voice for state medical boards” — appeared to advocate for laws like the one sitting on California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk that would punish doctors who share COVID-19 “misinformation” with their patients, with language like this:

“Prohibitions on disseminating misinformation are already expressly written, or implied, in many state statutes regulating the practice of medicine. However, adopting a specific policy on misinformation is encouraged in light of the increased prevalence of, and harm caused by, physician-disseminated misinformation in this ongoing pandemic.”

In yet another show of support for cracking down on “misinformation,” FSMB President and CEO Dr. Humayun Chaudhry will speak next week on “Misinformation in Health Care: The Implications for Professionalism and the Public Trust” at the American Board of Medical Specialties annual conference.

In its July 2021 press release, the FSMB did not define what it meant by “misinformation or disinformation,” yet the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Family Medicine subsequently issued a joint statement supporting the FSMB’s position.

According to its website, the FSMB says it “supports its member boards as they fulfill their mandate of protecting the public’s health, safety and welfare through the proper licensing, disciplining, and regulation of physicians and, in most jurisdictions, other health care professionals.”

It also issues guidelines that serve as the basis for model policies with the stated goal of positively impacting the health and safety of patients and the medical regulatory system.

But some critics of the FSMB’s aggressive “misinformation” policy questioned where the organization derives its authority and who’s really behind it.

What is the FSMB — and who funds it?

Created in 1912 at a “small annual gathering of state board executive officers with no permanent staff or headquarters,” the FSMB today has almost 200 employees and two national headquarters — one in Texas and another in Washington, D.C.

The private tax-exempt 501(c)(6) trade association says it supports “America’s state medical boards in licensing, disciplining and regulating physicians and other healthcare professionals” and works to “keep patients safe.”

Since its inception, the FSMB has been staffed with members who presently or previously held positions with other medical governing bodies.

In fact, FSMB’s leadership — in conjunction with the U.S. government — in May 1994 spawned another medical authority agency — the International Association of Medical Regulatory Authorities (IAMRA).

According to IAMRA’s website, the IAMRA was formed when “FSMB, under contract with the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), planned and hosted the 1st International Conference on Medical Regulation in Washington, D.C.”

FSMB and IAMRA share an office address in Texas. Their official phone numbers are nearly identical. And when a person calls the phone number listed on IAMRA’s website, the prerecorded welcome message tells the caller they’ve reached FSMB and IAMRA, in that order.

FSMB’s president and CEO, Chaudry, is also the secretary of the IAMRA. This overlapping of leadership positions extends beyond FSMB and IAMRA into medical councils in other countries.

For example, Dr. Emanuel Garcia, a psychiatrist living in New Zealand who publicly voiced concern about the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, noted in an Aug. 22 article for Global Research that the chair-elect of the IAMRA, Joan Simeon, “just happens” to be the CEO of the Medical Council of New Zealand.

Garcia, who questioned whether the FSMB and IAMRA’s true motivations were ensuring safe medical practices, said:

“In casting an eye over the years since the dramatic introduction of the COVID pandemic, the near total shutdown of the world, the immense transfer of wealth from the middle and poorer classes upwards, the universal imposition of an inadequately tested so-called vaccine, and the vehement suppression of critical early treatment, one cannot but conclude that there is indeed an agenda beyond health and welfare.

“The FSMB and the IAMRA have shown by their actions that they are tools whose task is to further this agenda, and that this agenda is both anti-medical and inhumane.”

In addition to contracting with the U.S. government and IAMRA, the FSMB runs its own foundation that functions as a separate 501(c)(3) organization but is supported by a “generous seed endowment” from the FSMB.

Last April, the FSMB foundation celebrated its 10-year anniversary by hosting its annual fundraising luncheon. Its annual highbrow luncheons have raised thousands of dollars to support the organization’s activities, including “the study of state responses to the COVID-10 pandemic.”

The FSMB foundation’s website does not disclose its donors.

Commenting on the FSMB’s July 2021 statement, “Spreading COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation May Put Medical License at Risk,” Garcia said, “The outstanding question remains: Where does the FSMB derive its authority to regulate United States medical boards and, through its apparent international partner, the IAMRA, direct medical councils around the world to discipline doctors?”

So many questions …

Dr. Meryl Nass, an internist and biological warfare epidemiologist who had her medical license suspended in January for “spreading misinformation,” told The Defender the FSMB’s authoritative actions raise many questions.

Nass, a member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory committee, outlined the questions in an email:

  • Why would a nonprofit with no regulatory authority suddenly decide it was important to trash the First Amendment, the Nuremberg Code and other legal doctrines to push for punishing doctors who fail to tell the government’s story and use COVID-19 treatments the government doesn’t want used?
  • Why is the FSMB monitoring the states and collecting information on their attempts to investigate and/or punish doctors for doing their duty to act as  learned intermediaries to their patients?
  • Why did the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Family Medicine, the American Medical Association and the American Association of Pediatrics push identical policies in lockstep in mid-2021 that would destroy physician autonomy, when physicians are, one would think, their clients?
  • Why did the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists push for experimental vaccinations during all trimesters of pregnancy?

Nass suggested all of these questions should be investigated.

A history of ties to Big Pharma

Historically, there is evidence of Big Pharma funneling money to the FSMB.

For example, a decade ago, MedPage Today broke the story on how the FSMB turned to a pharmaceutical company with a $3.1 million request to underwrite the cost of producing and distributing a book about its opioid prescribing policy.

After the FSMB’s guidelines for the use of opioids to treat chronic pain patients were adopted as a model policy, the organization asked Purdue Pharmaceuticals for $100,000 to help pay for printing and distributing the policy to 700,000 practicing doctors.

The initial $100,000 was just a small downpayment on the $3.1 million the FSMB’s foundation estimated it would cost for its campaign to get out the word about the “safe” use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of chronic pain, according to MedPage.

The FSMB also has a history of challenging and attacking non-pharmaceutical medical approaches used by integrative doctors as falling outside the “standard of care” as they define it.

Dr. Christiane Northrup, a former board-certified obstetrician and gynecologist with more than 30 years of experience, told The Defender she intuitively sensed the FSMB had questionable associations and chose not to renew her medical license when it came up for renewal in 2015.

Northrup, who had shifted her professional activities away from directly seeing patients, said she asked herself, “Do I need this for what I’m doing now?” and concluded, “Let’s not renew this.”

Northrup pointed out the historical connection between pharmaceutical companies and the FSMB. She told The Defender that “what we’re talking about is a very carefully orchestrated attempt to control doctors.”

Many people who have been taught that “the doctor knows best,” Northrup said, cannot comprehend the “horror” of the implications of the FSMB’s actions.

The Defender reached out to the FSMB and the IAMRA for comment, but neither had responded at the time of this writing.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 19, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

New Fakes about Russia-DPRK Military Cooperation

By Konstantin Asmolov – New Eastern Outlook – 19.09.2022 

More recently, the author analyzed misinformation that North Korean special forces were about to appear in the Donbass, but the global media soon encountered another misinformation launched from the West: it turned out that North Korea was preparing to supply Russia with shells and possibly military equipment on a massive scale. Or it is already supplying, but that is not certain.

It all started on September 5 with a New York Times article quoting “declassified intelligence reports” that “Russia is buying millions of artillery shells and rockets from North Korea, … a sign that global sanctions have severely restricted its supply chains and forced Moscow to turn to pariah states for military supplies.”

However, the newspaper immediately noted that there were few details about the exact weaponry, timing or size of the shipment, and generally, “there is no way yet to independently verify the sale”, but immediately went on to theorize as to why this was the case. It turns out that the Russian Federation now allegedly has no ability to buy advanced weapons or the electronics to produce them, as international sanctions on Moscow disrupt its supply chains, stocks of shells and missiles are running out and Russia is forced to look for suppliers. This, in particular, was stated by the quoted expert with the Ukrainian-speaking surname Kagan.

A little later, AP Agency gave some details and quotes, which, however, still did not clarify the situation. Brigadier General Pat Ryder, a Pentagon Press Secretary, said “the information that we have is that Russia has specifically asked for ammunition” but had no other details, including whether money changed hands and whether any deliveries were continuing.

Asked why this information was declassified, Ryder said it was important to illustrate the state of Russia’s ongoing military campaign in Ukraine. And, the author would add, against the backdrop of Ukraine’s attempted counter-offensive.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby also said there was no indication yet that the arms purchase had actually taken place or that any North Korean munitions had entered the battlefield in Ukraine. Nevertheless, the talks themselves are “just further evidence of how desperate Putin is becoming”, with US intelligence suggesting that Russia is buying millions of rounds of ammunition from the DPRK.

After that, the news spread around the world media and even reached South Korea, but discussion on the relatively objectivist website NKNews showed that assessments are directly dependent on both their bias and their distance from the Russian context.

For example, Jack Watling, Senior Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, confidently stated that since February 2022 Moscow had been buying up stocks of 152mm and 122mm shells “in any way they can. And that includes North Korea.” All this is said to be common knowledge in intelligence circles, but the source of this information is not in the public domain, and he is personally unaware of specific deliveries from North Korea to Russia. However, Watlig’s level of knowledge is better described by another quote:  “Moscow had for some time pushed for Pyongyang to support its war effort,” which, he said, was not limited to supplying ammunitions.

For his part, Joost Oliemans, a specialist focused on DPRK military capabilities, expressed more restraint – Pyongyang certainly has a huge amount of old ammunition, and can produce new weapons for export, but “if this story is really true, we could expect to see video evidence of North Korean ammunition in Ukraine in the coming months.” In other words, he is not prepared to discuss the subject without evidence.

By the very next day on September 6, both Ryder and Kirby had already given up somewhat. The former said in a press briefing that “we do have indications that Russia has approached North Korea to request ammunition”, he could not provide more details, but in any case “it is indicative of the situation that Russia finds itself in, in terms of its logistics and sustainment capabilities.” And also that Moscow is asking for help precisely from those countries that the US has defined as “rogue”.

Kirby also conceded that the US doesn’t “have any indication that the purchase has actually occurred yet so it’s difficult to say what it’s actually going to end up looking like”, much less evidence that these weapons are being used in Ukraine.

The Russian side has also spoken out. According to Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN Security Council, Vasily Nebenzya, “I have not heard about it and I think it’s just another spreading fake news.”

On September 7, 2022, NKNews specifically updated its piece to clarify that “there is no evidence in the public domain of Russian efforts to procure North Korean arms since February 2022”. By this time, both Russian and unbiased Western experts had formulated a set of theses indicating that the hype news was nothing more than misinformation.

  1. The DPRK’s arms exports to Russia are a violation of UN Security Council resolutions, which prohibit that country from exporting or importing arms from other countries. Moreover, back in the day Vladimir Putin banned the supply of small arms and light weapons to North Korea as part of the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2270 of March 2, 2016. An overt violation of this kind undermines Russia’s status as a permanent member of the UNSC, and from the author’s perspective even the hypothetical arrival of North Korean construction workers in the DLPR (a far less overt violation) is at best discussed. Perhaps this disregard for sanctions will happen later on the backdrop of a further breakdown of the old world order, but that time has not yet come.
  2. It is not at all clear how sending such a volume of cargo is compatible with “emergency anti-epidemic measures” and border closures. Especially considering that there is only one railroad bridge between the Russian Federation and the DPRK, which has limited capacity. How exactly Moscow will pay is also a good question in view of the sanctions.
  3. A comparison of Russia’s and DPRK’s weapons production capabilities also leads to the question of whether Russia does not have its own military and industrial complex at all, and whether the start of the SMO has not affected the rate of ammunition production. And also regarding the volume of Russian military stockpiles: as even Oliemans pointed out, Moscow must have a huge amount of old Soviet ammunition, which is unlikely to run out anytime soon.
  4. All right, let’s say that “the Russians don’t want to go below a certain level of reserves in case they face other threats”, but the same logic is all the more applicable to the DPRK, which is constantly on alert against a superior enemy. By that logic, Pyongyang needs the shells and missiles itself.
  5. Most importantly, there is no idea how exactly US intelligence could have obtained such data. But misinformation fits in well with the West’s propaganda mindset that the successes of Russian SMO in Ukraine are about to come to an end. It is known that these successes are largely due to technical rather than numerical superiority, and therefore the argument “we’ll talk when the Russians run out of shells” is very popular in the pro-Ukrainian environment.

Of course, if one considers this misinformation as a kind of “mental exercise”, North Korean military equipment and ammunition might well come in handy. Russian military expert Vladimir Khrustalyov lists a whole range of DPRK military equipment capable of showing off in Donbass – the arsenal turns out to be quite impressive.

But talk of “what would have been” is beyond the scope of the article, and the author is far more interested in how the US intelligence community knew about the ominous “signs”. The author has two options and the first one is that this information is not intelligence but military-psychological. In other words, the news was simply made up for propaganda purposes to cradle the “desperate Putin is trying to find a million missiles” picture, which will leave a certain residue even after the falsity of the data comes to light.

The second option is more amusing and, alas, more realistic: the source of the sensational information could be such an anonymous and specific medium as Russian politicized Telegram channels, in which the SMO is constantly discussed. However, Telegram’s anonymity often makes it impossible to identify the channel’s real author. This means that any high-school student with a glib tongue can easily portray himself as an “expert from those very structures” involved in the “secrets of the Kremlin court”, even if the information has no real basis in fact.

For the author, the validity of such anonymous channels amounts to reports of “secret informants in the DPRK” who “know the local life” and “report the truth”, but non-core or engaged experts easily cite such sources in case they fit their point of view. In addition, even a broken clock is right twice a day. On this basis, it can be assumed that a Russian-speaking US military intelligence official subscribed to a similar channel that discussed the notion that Russia would soon run out of bombs and missiles and need to buy them somewhere, probably even from North Korea.

Perhaps the scout did not distinguish the ironic context from the dramatic one. It is even more likely that he did not realize that the alleged foreign intelligence general or presidential administration official describing the secret talks was typing on his smartphone in algebra class. But the information has gone up the chain of command and in one way or another has “come in handy”.

To conclude the conversation, it is worth noting how the propaganda image of the DPRK has changed: before the SMO, the Western media presented North Korea as a starving third-world country, but now it is a superpower providing Putin with builders, soldiers and now also ammunition. Therefore, the fake about millions of missiles is clearly not the latest fake about the “Jucheans in the Donbass”.

Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, leading research fellow at the Center for Korean Studies of the Institute of China and Modern Asia, and the Russian Academy of Sciences.

September 19, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , | Leave a comment

Expectedly, new Bucha-like narratives spring up in Kharkov region

By Drago Bosnic | September 19, 2022

After the late March/early April withdrawal of Russian troops from the northern and northeastern areas of Ukraine, Western state and corporate-run mainstream media immediately constructed the so-called “Bucha massacre” narrative with the aim of damaging Russia’s international standing. Western governments and the media were unanimous – Russian Armed Forces were the alleged “perpetrators of the Bucha massacre”, while some even called it “genocide”. The Kiev regime claimed that the Russian military killed at least 412 people. Expectedly, the claims were unsupported by any actual official investigation by a party neutral to the conflict. The Kiev regime and the political West flatly refused to allow an international investigation, while any claims contrary to the official narrative were immediately suppressed. If anyone dared to question the narrative, they would be labeled “conspiracy theorists”, “genocide deniers” and “Putin’s propagandists”.

Taking into account the “Bucha massacre”, we can only say the new “Izyum massacre” narrative is a predictable joint propaganda stunt of the Kiev regime and the political West. The pattern is virtually the same. In only a few days, Western and Kiev regime’s alleged “investigators” found “undeniable evidence” that the “evil Russian occupiers killed hundreds of innocent civilians.” On September 15, the Kiev regime media reported: “The terrible footage of the graves of the victims of the Rashist [Kiev regime pejorative wordplay term meaning ‘Russian fascist’) occupation on the outskirts of Izyum. There are almost no names on the plates anywhere. Apparently, bodies are buried here from under the rubble of bombed houses, which have yet to be identified.”

Exactly like in the case of the Bucha narrative, the Kiev regime reports made no mention of the fact that Izyum and the surrounding areas and settlements have been under near-constant heavy shelling by the Kiev regime forces. Their artillery has been firing at the area indiscriminately for nearly half a year. Still, the very next day, on September 16, the Kiev regime started the exhumation of bodies from the alleged mass graves. According to the Kiev regime, 400 bodies were allegedly found at several mass burial sites. In addition, the Neo-Nazi junta claims that the bodies of civilians and even children supposedly “show signs of torture.”

The new Bucha-like narrative came only a day after the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen visited Ukraine and stated that she wanted to “see Russian President Vladimir Putin face the International Criminal Court” over alleged “war crimes.” The official head of the Kiev regime Volodymyr Zelensky also stated that the Neo-Nazi junta is in talks with its G7 backers to set up a “war crimes tribunal” which would “investigate and punish Russia and its top officials and military leaders for war crimes.” Again, expectedly, the idea was actively supported by the political West. EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell stated that “the leadership of Russia and all those involved in this will be held accountable. The EU supports all efforts in this direction.” Earlier, Borrell has also called Russia a “fascist state”, which is quite ironic, given the openly Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev which the EU has been supporting for nearly a decade now.

Hundreds of Western reporters have already flooded Izyum and the surrounding areas. Some Kiev regime media claim that there are only civilians buried, but the photos which have been shared so far only show the bodies of men in military uniforms. This indicates that the bodies of conscripted soldiers, who have been used as cannon fodder by the Kiev regime forces, are now being used to stage another false flag with the goal of tarnishing Russia’s international reputation. After hundreds of (often forcibly) conscripted Ukrainians have been killed on the battlefield and abandoned by their military command, the Russian military buried their remains, because the Kiev regime refused to take them. As they remain unidentified, the Kiev regime accomplishes several goals – the military gets the chance to hide their real losses and also not pay money to the families of the dead, while the regime can use the soldiers’ remains to set up false flags and fake narratives which serve strategic propaganda purposes.

In addition, last week local sources reported that mercenaries and possibly the infamous Neo-Nazi units embedded with the Kiev regime forces have been deliberately targeting civilians in the Kharkov region. The head of Kharkov’s civil-military administration told TV Rossiya-24 that pro-Kiev regime forces fired on civilians during the so-called “counter-offensive” in the last few days. In addition to killings, the agents were also filming the events with the aim of spreading the videos and images on the internet claiming that the Russians were responsible. In addition, acts of torture were also taking place to make the allegations more gruesome, according to local administration.

If the false flag allegations prove to be true, it certainly wouldn’t be the first time the Kiev regime has used fakes to create a narrative that suits their interests. Back in late May and early June, Lyudmila Denisova, former Ukrainian Ombudsman for Human Rights, has been fired for spreading disturbing fake reports about perverted sex crimes against children, allegedly committed by Russian soldiers. Denisova’s reports were entirely fabricated, based on nothing but her twisted imagination and malicious desire to portray Russia as the virtual Mordor of our time. There is no reason to believe the Kiev regime and its backers from the West are doing anything different in this particular case.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

September 19, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

WHY Is Germany Committing Suicide?

The Same Reasons WHY the EU/UK is Being Deindustrialized!

BY DAVID CHU • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 17, 2022

Well that’s the real question, isn’t it? Why? The how and the who is just scenery for the public. Oswald, Ruby, Cuba, the Mafia. Keeps ’em guessing like some kind of parlor game, prevents ’em from asking the most important question, why? Why was Kennedy killed? Who benefited? Who has the power to cover it up? Who?

~ Mr. X in JFK movie

Why is Germany committing harakiri (or seppuku)?

Because the Americans ordered them to do so!

Recently, William F. Engdahl wrote a very interesting article titled, “Europe’s Energy Armageddon From Berlin and Brussels, Not Moscow” which was re-worked in Pepe Escobar’s “Germany’s Energy Suicide: An Autopsy”.

Both articles give a fascinating explanation of HOW Germany is committing suicide. Green Agenda 2030. The Great Reset. Etc.

I emailed Engdahl about the following statement that he wrote in his article and asked him, “What is the real reason for the complete deindustrialization of Germany? Besides the Green Energy or Great Reset bullshit.”:

It is not because politicians like Scholz or German Green Economy Minister Robert Habeck, nor EU Commission Green Energy Vice President Frans Timmermans are stupid or clueless. Corrupt and dishonest, maybe yes. They know exactly what they are doing. They are reading a script. It is all part of the EU plan to deindustrialize one of the most energy-efficient industrial concentrations on the planet. This is the UN Green Agenda 2030 otherwise known as Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset. [Bolded emphasis is mine.]

For whatever reasons, Engdahl didn’t reply to my email. But in my email to him, I basically answered my question when I asked the following:

Is it to emasculate Europe completely so as to make Europe completely dependent on the US for both energy and technology? The rest of the world is moving towards BRI and BRICS. The only block left to harvest aka rape and pillage for the Americans is Europe (plus Japan and South Korea).

That was September 5, 2022.

On September 16, 2022, RT (Russia Today) ran an article titled, “Elite US think tank dismisses EU plot report as ‘fake’”:

The story of an alleged US plan to drain EU resources to prop up its economy was reported on Tuesday by Nya Dagbladet, a Swedish news outlet, which describes itself as anti-globalist, humanist, pro-freedom, and independent. An English-language version was released later in the week.

The newspaper claimed that it obtained a classified document signed by the RAND Corporation, titled ‘Weakening Germany, strengthening the US’. The paper, which was allegedly produced in January, outlined a scenario for how the US could help its struggling economy by draining resources from its European allies.

The purported plot involved goading Russia into attacking Ukraine, which would force the EU to impose sanctions on Russia and decouple their economies from Russian energy.

Well, today (September 17, 2022) I contacted the two Swedish authors of Nya Dagbladet and asked them to provide me with the RAND document. Markus Andersson, one of the authors and chief editor, quickly replied and voila here is the “fake” RAND document:

https://nyadagbladet.se/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/rand-corporation-ukraina-energikris.pdf

You better save a copy of this PDF on your hard drive and pass it on to all your friends, especially those sheeple living in Germany, before the RAND people scream bloody murder and disappear this very important “fake” document!

Very soon now, the RAND people will call it a “forgery”.

The RAND report is titled, “Executive Summary: Weakening Germany, strengthening the U.S.”

It is dated January 25, 2022 and is labelled “Confidential”. The distribution list include WHCS (White House Chief of Staff), ANSA (Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs), Dept. of State, CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), NSA (National Security Agency), and the DNC (Democratic National Committee).

Shall we take a little peek into this “fake” document?

The present state of the U.S. economy does not suggest that it can function without financial and material support from external sources [very definition of a parasitic empire!]. The quantitative easing policy, which the Fed has resorted to regularly in recent years,s as well as uncontrolled issue of cash during the 2020 and 2021 Covid lockdowns, have led to a sharp increase in the external debt and an increase in the dollar supply [the very definition of high inflation rates].

The continuing deterioration of the economic situation is highly likely to lead to a loss in the position of the Democratic Party in Congress and the Senate in the forthcoming elections to be held in November 2022. The impeachment of the President cannot be ruled out under these circumstances, which must be avoided at all costs. [Bolded emphasis is mine.]

There is an urgent need for resources to flow into the national economy, especially the banking system. Only European countries bound by the EU and NATO commitments will be able to provide them without significant military and political costs for us. [The USA has ran out of third-world and developing nations to rape and pillage.]

The major obstacle to it is growing independence of Germany. Although it still is a country with limited sovereignty, for decades it has been consistently moving toward lifting these limitations and becoming a fully independent state. This movement is slow and cautious, but steady. Extrapolation shows that the ultimate goal can be reached only in several decades. However if social and economic problems in the United States escalate, the pace could accelerate significantly. . . .

Vulnerabilities in German and EU Economy

An increase in the flow of resources from Europe to U.S. can be expected if Germany begins to experience a controlled economic crisis [bolded emphasis is mine]. The pace of economic development in the EU depends almost without alternative on the state of the German economy. It is Germany that bears the brunt of the expenditure directed towards the poorer EU members.

The current German economic model is based on two pillars. These are unlimited access to cheap Russian energy resources and to cheap French electric power, thanks to the operation of nuclear power plants. The importance of the first factor is considerably higher. Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. . . . [Bolded emphasis is mine.]

A Controlled Crisis

Due to coalition constraints, the German leadership is not in full control of the situation in the country. Thanks to our precise actions, it has been possible to block the commissioning of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, despite the opposition of lobbyists from the steel and chemical industries. However, the dramatic deterioration of the living standards may encourage the leadership to reconsider its policy and return to the idea of European sovereignty and strategic autonomy.

The only feasible way to guarantee Germany’s rejection of Russian energy supplies is to involve both sides in the military conflict in Ukraine. Our further actions in this country will inevitably lead to a military response from Russia. Russians will obviously not be able to leave unanswered the massive Ukrainian army pressure on the unrecognized Donbas republics. That would make possible to declare Russia an aggressor and apply to it the entire package of sanctions prepared beforehand. . . .[Bolded emphasis is mine.]

The RAND Executive Summary then goes on to detail the “Expected Consequences” with projections of financial and economic loses for Germany.

The rest as they say is . . . (almost) Mission Accomplished!

P.S. Adolf must be rolling in his Argentina grave now that Sergeant “I Know Nothing!” Scholz is in full command of the Fatherland . . . .

September 18, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , , | Leave a comment

Alleged Discovery of Izyum Mass Graves a ‘Monstrous Provocation’, Russian Envoy to Canada Says

Samizdat – 17.09.2022

The reports of mass graves being discovered in Izyum, Ukraine is another “monstrous provocation” by Kiev which is trying to stage a fresh version of Bucha and mobilize public opinion in the West as the United Nations General Assembly prepares to meet next week, Russia’s Ambassador to Canada Oleg Stepanov told Sputnik.

“The Kiev regime supplies the media with lies about crimes against humanity allegedly committed by Russian troops in Izyum,” Stepanov told Sputnik on Friday.

“We are talking about another monstrous provocation, about an attempt to stage ‘Bucha’ in a new way. All this is being done on the eve of the opening of the High-Level Week of the UN General Assembly to try to manipulate a certain part of the western public on the subject of Ukraine.”

That western media and officials immediately pick up “fabrications of Kiev” about the alleged crimes against humanity in Izyum without double-checking is simply an indicator of how aggressive the information war against Russia is, Stepanov added.

He also said that he is optimistic that the truth about Izyum will come out, just as it did with the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.

On Friday, Ukrainian authorities alleged that mass burial sites were found in Izyum after Russian troops withdrew from the Kharkov region in early September, and that more than 400 bodies had been found so far.

Russia’s Defense Ministry has warned several times that the Kiev regime supported by the collective West has been preparing Bucha-style provocations to accuse Russia of war crimes.

On 24 February, Russia began a military operation in Ukraine, responding to calls for help from the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. Moscow has said that the aim of its operation is the “demilitarization and de-Nazification” of Ukraine.

Western countries have responded by imposing comprehensive sanctions against Russia, while accusing Moscow of crimes against humanity, including alleged atrocities in the city of Bucha. The Kremlin has denied the allegations, and has accused Kiev of employing typical terrorist methods, such as hiding behind civilians and deploying weapons in civilian areas.

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

US impeded independent research into Covid origins – Lancet

Samizdat – September 15, 2022

The US has prevented independent research into the origins of the Covid-19 virus, a report by the Lancet Commission has asserted.

Washington barred the researchers from accessing relevant laboratories and refused to disclose full information on American studies of the virus, the document, published in the British medical journal on Wednesday, outlined.

“Independent researchers have not yet investigated the US laboratories engaged in the laboratory manipulation of SARS-CoV-like viruses,” the report said while discussing the potential origins of the Covid-19 infection. Nor had they gained access to the research conducted at the Wuhan laboratory, which has been considered a possible place where the disease might have originated, the document added.

The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) also “resisted disclosing the details” of the research conducted in America on SARS-CoV-related viruses, which the US government agency has been supporting, according to the report. Eventually, only an “extensively redacted” version of the relevant data was provided, the document said, adding that it contains only as much information that was required by the Freedom of Information act lawsuits.

The lack of the needed data on the virus origins still prevents the researchers from determining the origin of the virus, the paper admits, adding that virtually any hypothesis in this field remains plausible. In particular, it said that “two main possible pathways” of its emergence should still be considered: a natural spillover event, in which a person contracted it from an animal, and a “research-related” incident.

The second pathway particularly suggests that a researcher could have become “infected in the field or in the laboratory with a natural virus, or … in the laboratory with a genetically manipulated virus,” the document said.

“The search for the origins of the virus requires unbiased, independent, transparent, and rigorous work … supported by all governments,” the report noted. Washington has so far not commented on the Lancet Commission findings.

The exact origins of the Covid-19 virus have yet to be conclusively proven. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated in February 2021 that it was most likely transmitted from an animal, possibly a bat, to humans.

Earlier in September, an Israeli study concluded that bats are likely not to blame for the Covid-19 pandemic since there is no compelling evidence proving a link between bats and the disease outbreak.

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Illegal Collusion Between Government and Big Tech Exposed

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | September 15, 2022

In a September 1, 2022, article,1 the Post Millennial reveals how federal officials in the Biden administration have held secret censorship meetings with social media companies to suppress Americans’ First Amendment rights to free speech, and to ban or deplatform those who share unauthorized views about COVID and vaccines.

The evidence for this comes out of a lawsuit2 brought by the New Civil Liberties Alliance and the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana (Eric Schmitt and Jeff Landry) against President Biden, filed in May 2022.

During the discovery process, the plaintiffs sought to identify “all meetings with any social media platform relating to content modulation and/or misinformation,” which is how we now know that such illegal meetings did, in fact, take place.

Illegal Collusion to Suppress Free Speech

Monthly, a Unified Strategies Group (USG) meeting took place — and may still be taking place — between a wide variety of government agencies and Big Tech companies, during which topics to be censored and suppressed were/are discussed.

Censored topics included stories involving COVID jab refusal, especially those involving military refusals and consequences thereof, criticism against COVID restrictions and their effects on mental health, posts talking about testing positive for COVID after getting the jab, personal stories of COVID jab side effects, including menstrual irregularities, and worries about vaccine passports becoming mandatory.3 According to the New Civil Liberties Alliance:4

“… scores of federal officials … have secretly communicated with social-media platforms to censor and suppress private speech federal officials disfavor. This unlawful enterprise has been wildly successful.

Under the First Amendment, the federal government may not police private speech nor pick winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas. But that is precisely what the government has done — and is still doing — on a massive scale not previously divulged.

Multiple agencies’ communications demonstrate that the federal government has exerted tremendous pressure on social-media companies — pressure to which companies have repeatedly bowed …

Communications show these federal officials are fully aware that the pressure they exert is an effective and necessary way to induce social-media platforms to increase censorship. The head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency even griped about the need to overcome social-media companies’ ‘hesitation’ to work with the government …

This unlawful government interference violates the fundamental right of free speech for all Americans, whether or not they are on social media. More discovery is needed to uncover the full extent of this regime — i.e., the identities of other White House and agency officials involved and the nature and content of their communications with social-media companies.”

Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance added:5

“If there was ever any doubt the federal government was behind censorship of Americans who dared to dissent from official COVID messaging, that doubt has been erased. The shocking extent of the government’s involvement in silencing Americans, through coercing social-media companies, has now been revealed …”

Federal Agencies Involved in Free Speech Suppression

Documents obtained so far have identified more than 50 federal employees across 15 federal agencies, who participated in these censorship meetings or otherwise engaged in illegal censorship activities.6 This includes officials from:

  • The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s (CISA) Election Security and Resilience team
  • Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Office of Intelligence and Analysis
  • The FBI’s foreign influence taskforce
  • The Justice Department’s (DOJ) national security division
  • The Office of the Director of National Intelligence
  • White House staff (including White House lawyer Dana Remus, deputy assistant to the president Rob Flaherty and former White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andy Slavitt)
  • Health and Human Services (HHS)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
  • National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
  • The Office of the Surgeon General
  • The Census Bureau
  • The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
  • The State Department
  • The U.S. Treasury Department
  • The U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Emails from a strategic communications and marketing firm called Reingold7 also reveals that outside consultants were hired to manage the government’s collusion with social media to censor Americans. For example, Reingold set up a “partner support portal” for the CDC so that CDC officials could link emails to the portal for easier flagging of content it wanted censored by social media companies linked to the portal.

Big Tech Companies Involved in Government Censorship

On the private industry side, notable tech participants in the censorship meetings include:

  • Google
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Reddit
  • Microsoft
  • Verizon Media
  • Pinterest
  • Wikimedia Foundation

While some social media companies may have “hesitated” to censor on the government’s behalf at times, Facebook was certainly an eager beaver from the get-go. As early as February 2020, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was in contact with the State Department, offering its services to help “control information and misinformation related to coronavirus.”8

Biden Administration’s ‘Executive Privilege’ Denied

As you might expect, the White House has not cooperated with discovery and have fought to keep communications secret — especially with regard to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s correspondence — claiming all White House communications as “privileged.”

However, executive privilege does NOT apply to external communications, so the plaintiffs called on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana to “overrule the government defendants’ objections and order them to supply this highly relevant, responsive and probative information immediately.”

September 7, 2022, Judge Terry Doughty did just that. The Biden administration’s claim of executive privilege was rejected and Doughty ordered the White House to hand over any and all relevant records.9 That includes correspondence to and from Fauci, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and many others. According to the judge’s order, they have three weeks to comply.

Examples of Illegal Government Censorship

On Twitter,10 Missouri AG Schmitt has shared a long list of examples of government censorship, including one document in which Clarke Humphrey, COVID-19 response digital director at the White House, asked Facebook to take down the Instagram account “anthonyfauciofficial,” a parody account dedicated to making fun of Fauci.11 Facebook complied.

Schmitt also shared emails12,13 between a senior Facebook official and the surgeon general, stating, “I know our teams met today to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.” This email came on the heels of the surgeon general’s July 2021 “misinformation health advisory.”

The CDC also coordinated with Facebook, providing them with talking points to debunk various claims, including the claim that spike protein in the COVID shots is dangerous and cytotoxic. In a July 28, 2021, email, a CDC official provided Facebook with the following counter-narrative, taken straight from the “How mRNA Vaccines Work” section on the CDC website:14

“Messenger mRNA [sic] vaccines work by teaching our cells to create a harmless spike protein …” (Emphasis in the original.)

Fast-forward to mid-June 2022, and the CDC was suddenly less sure about the harmlessness of the spike protein.

Up until then, the words “harmless spike protein” had always been bolded, but in this June revision, they removed the bolding, along with an entire section in which they’d previously claimed that mRNA was rapidly broken down and spike protein did not last more than a few weeks in the body.15 Clearly, the truth was catching up to them and certain lies were getting too risky to hold on to.

CISA also reached out to Google, Meta (Facebook’s parent company), Microsoft and Twitter for help, shortly after the DHS’s Disinformation Governance Board was announced.16 Fortunately, public outcry put an end to this Orwellian Ministry of Truth before it got started.

When Censorship Becomes Election Interference

According to The Washington Times :17

“Details about the Biden administration’s conduct raised the hackles of Republican lawmakers. ‘Confirming that this is the most dangerously anti-free speech administration in American history AND that Facebook … is nothing but an appendage of the deep state,’ Sen. Josh Hawley, Missouri Republican, said on Twitter as he shared news of the court filing.”

Other lawmakers are also getting involved. In an August 29, 2022, letter18,19 to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin requested records of the government’s contacts with social media companies to ascertain whether the FBI and/or DOJ did, in fact, instruct them to censor information about the Hunter Biden laptop scandal by falsely referring to it as “Russian disinformation.”20

Zuckerberg has also been asked21 to provide any correspondence involving the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story, especially as it pertains to the FBI’s instructions to censor this political hot potato — something he openly admitted in a recent Joe Rogan interview (see video above).22

Lawmakers Pursue Legislation to Penalize Gov’t Censorship

Three Republican House Representatives on the House Oversight and Reform, Judiciary, and Commerce committees — Reps. James Comer of Kentucky, Jim Jordan of Ohio, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington — have also introduced the Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act23 (HR.8752), aimed at preventing federal employees from using their positions to influence censorship decisions by tech platforms.

The bill would create restrictions to prevent federal employees from asking or encouraging private entities to censor private speech or otherwise discourage free speech, and impose penalties, including civil fines and disciplinary actions for government employees who facilitate social media censorship.

While the U.S. Constitution clearly forbids government censoring and restricting free speech, HR. 8752 could be a helpful enforcement tool, as people might tend to think twice when they know there’s a real and personal price to pay.

Sources and References

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

War of the Worlds

By Todd Hayen | OffGuardian | September 17, 2022

The Queen is dead, long live the King. In another world I used to know, and can still access at will, I would be interested in such an event. I would be a bit sad and reverent; thinking of an amazing life lived, thinking of all of the people who loved her so much.

In that other world I would binge watch The Crown, and be anxious to watch the plethora of documentaries showing up on Netflix for the occasion. I would be anxious to watch the pomp and spectacle of her funeral and the coronation of the man who now would be king.

Sure, even in that world there is bitter-sweetness, there are things about Elizabeth and Charles that are not perfect. The biggest crime against the Queen was probably, in this older (in my experience) world, is the way she treated Diana.

Charles would be accused of the same, as well as other stupid things that made him a rather unsavoury character. But that’s about it.

In that world.

Now, in the other world, the newer world in my experience, Queen Elizabeth II is at times called Queen A-Lizard-Beast. The Now-King Charles is suspected by some of being a pedophile and was involved with his brother’s association with the Isle of Epstein Evil.

Although both of these accusations are found to originate in the QAnon movement and not shared by everyone occupying World B, it is still a part of it. Both Queen Elizabeth and King Charles are/were members of the WEF group-of-goons-club positioned to take over the world.

In this other world they both, including the whole of the Royal Family, are guilty of so many other atrocities and horrors it would take volumes to present. The Queen’s death is certainly something that should not be mourned, on the contrary, it is an event that should be celebrated, and Charles taking on the throne of one of the most powerful nations on earth (at least historically) should send a shiver up everyone’s spine.

World A and World B—to keep it simple—will be what I use to differentiate between these two “realities” in this article.

World A is the world I used to know, and what would now be considered all a lie.

World B is, to me, the “new” world, although it is anything but new. This is the world where truth resides, the world that exists behind the wizard’s curtain. And it is really, really, dark. Now, World B does contain truth, and it really is the only place to find most of it.

But not everything in World B is true. It contains obvious things (if you pull aside the curtain) such as blatant Government corruption, censorship, medical terrorism, the unelected elite running the world, tyranny, totalitarianism. Simple stuff like that. But it also contains stuff that is way out there, like some of the things mentioned above.

Is it all true? I doubt it, or I should say, I hope not. If so we are in bigger trouble than we know.

Worlds A and B apparently have always existed. I have not given that claim a whole lot of serious consideration, but I would be fine to believe these two worlds co-existed for quite some time. At the very least they have been around for 200 years or so.

I do believe that World B was, at one time, not as prominent, and maybe there was a bit more reality to World A. But at the moment, it is rather clear, even to a guy that spent most of his life happily in World A, that World B is here, clearly and obviously.

I think the last three years has been the primary curtain pull, certainly for me. A reveal that quite a few people “got,” but then quite a few people didn’t. There have been numerous curtain pulls before that, but I have to admit that yours truly was just as blind as a blissful sheep back then.

I questioned a bunch of things along the way, but never saw the whole picture, nor realized the extent of the implication. I scratched my head with various historical events, Viet Nam, Watergate, The Gulf War, Saddam Hussein and WMDs, Kennedy’s assassination, and particularly 9/11.

But nothing revealed the whole extent of the Wizard behind the controls, behind the curtain, than Covid. Finally, I saw it all, or most of it, or maybe not most of—it is a deep rabbit hole, and as my toes curl, I resist seeing it all.

To restate, not everything in World B is true, of course.

World A folks don’t think any of it is. However, much of World B is true—a whole lot of it. Anyway… World B definitely exists for me now, but World A is still very seducing. I was happy back when World A was my world—then in my ignorance. Now, I no longer am happy.

Right at this moment I am sitting on my deck in my backyard. The weather is sublime. I am watching the birds at our feeders, and feeling the amazingly comforting breeze as it wafts over the deck. My wife, who manages to live exclusively in World A, suggests we go out to a local festival tonight and have a nice “date night.”

World A is so seductive. Why not?

Why not ignore World B entirely, follow all the protocols and demands of World A, and just “be happy”?

We’ve heard that one before, right, “you’ll own nothing and be happy”?

Honestly, I know my wife would. She says when hearing that Herr Klaus statement, “What’s the big deal?”—the title of a recent article. Yeah, really, what’s the big deal?

Another interesting point about this idea, is that anyone who lives most of his or her life in World A, and has some sort of inkling of a World B, believe that everything in World B is a lie.

The other way around is true as well. If you live in one world, the other world is not reality.

This is easier to do if you live in World A most of the time because it has most of the persuasive power and support behind it. The media is there supporting its illusion, and nearly everyone in power supports its reality.

World B is dark and dank, it is filled with shadows and uncertainties, and it is, by design, very evil. No one wants World B (just like no one except truth seekers wanted to live outside of the illusion of the Matrix). So the illusion of World A is easier to maintain for people who really don’t think about it.

Most of the time, though, people in World A don’t even know about World B.

People in World B know everything about World A though, obviously.

There is something about following the truth, though, that is too compelling to just dismiss, along with all its accompanying pain, and say, “Forget that, I don’t need it, I’m going to live the happy life, even though it is entirely made up of lies.” I have brought this up before in previous articles.

During this current insanity I have thought often about a Star Trek episode (from the ‘60s series) where Capt. Pike (the first Enterprise Captain from the pilot) is stuck on a planet where the inhabitants have him imprisoned. These strange beings can read their prisoners’ minds and create incredible realistic environments based on their prisoners’ memories.

Pike ends up in a place with horses, beautiful natural surroundings, and a super fox partner who could not have been more alluring (especially for my pubescent sensibilities). All this was pulled from his memory banks, and as I watched this when it first aired in the ‘60s I said to myself, “Dude, this is a no brainer! Take the girl and the horse and be happy!” (Needless to say, I more than likely did not say “dude” since that was not yet popular… creative license, forgive me.)

Of course, Pike would have nothing of it. “No way,” he said, “these beings are not going to take away my freedom!” The girl, and I, shouted, “Stupid! You are crazy!!”

There is a similar situation in the first instalment of The Matrix series. “Wouldn’t you rather have this (World A) than that?” The choice in that example was the wrong one.

You should always choose truth (real) over lies (unreal). Every time.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not considering choosing the “fake good” side. But I am confused by it. As I said, it is seductive. And although it does not “lure” me into untruth, it confuses me. Living this double life is indeed a serious example of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance can cause all sorts of problems: depression, anxiety, and disorientation being just a few of them.

I think one odd thing that comes from all this, at least for me, is a desire for World B to fill my reality. I am tired of living in this “eye of the storm”… this world of ambiguity. As awful as I know that would be, it seems that this would break the cognitive dissonance and the appearance of the world around me would not be a mixture of the two worlds, but only one world, the real one.

World A is difficult to give up. It is filled with familiar things and familiar rituals. It is a bitter-sweet world, but for the most part filled with happy stuff. Vacations, sporting events, happy people in happy television and internet advertisements. Happy people on talk shows, newscasts, etc. All dressed up, all pretty for the camera.

Celebrities we love, and swoon over, movies we love, TV series we love; a The Truman Show reality that is filled mostly with good things.

When someone famous dies we mourn, cry, think about their wonderful life, or about their miserable life and thank God our life is not as miserable. We don’t see much that is happening in the world where it isn’t so pretty. Most of that is at arm’s length.

In World A we trust our leaders. We trust our medical professionals, our Universities and hospitals. We trust institutions like the UN, the WHO, and NATO. We trust famous people like the Pope, Bill Gates, and Tom Hanks. Maybe some of these people are good, maybe not. In World A we don’t care, we trust.

But I do often wonder if the reality, THE reality, is not categorically World B, but a mixture of A and B. Maybe reality is not as bad as it seems to be, but until everyone is on board, and the lies of World A take a back seat to truth, we will find that things are not so unconscionably evil.

This is a hope and a dream, but I have an uncomfortable feeling that it is just a pipe dream, and more than likely things we discover will be worse.

But even so, there will be no temptress of World A tugging at my heart. I will finally be living only the truth where my wife, and most other loved ones, and the rest of the world are not telling me I am a dolt and a conspiracy theorist.

Then I will not be tempted to slip into a dream world of untruths, no matter how nice it once looked.

Todd Hayen is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology. Todd also writes for his own substack, which you can read here.

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Russia won’t congratulate CIA on its diamond jubilee

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | SEPTEMBER 15, 2022 

In the Russian journal Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defence), the chief of Russia’s foreign intelligence Sergey Naryshkin has written a riveting essay on the 75th anniversary of the Central Intelligence Agency, which falls on Sunday. It is an unusual gesture, especially in the middle of the hybrid war in Ukraine. 

Probably, it serves a purpose? Most certainly, it serves to remind the Russian people and foreigners alike that nothing has been forgotten, nothing forgiven. 

The title of the essay — 75 candles on the CIA Cake — is somewhat misleading, as Naryshkin’s concluding remark is that “Anniversary congratulations and wishes there will not be. As there can be no compromise in assessing its (CIA’s) role in history and ‘merits’ to humanity.” 

Naryshkin’s essay will be closely studied by the western intelligence  for any “clues.” Indeed, what is he messaging? Naryshkin and President Vladimir Putin go back some 40 years. Naryshkin had just graduated from one of Moscow’s most prestigious institutions, the Felix Dzerzhinsky Higher School of the KGB and  Putin was already working in the foreign intelligence department of the Leningrad KGB when they bumped into each other in the corridors of the Big House (as KGB’s regional headquarters in Leningrad was known).

Unsurprisingly, Naryshkin writes about the CIA with an easy familiarity. As he put it, “The CIA was created at the beginning of the Cold War era in order to conduct intelligence activities around the world as a tool to counteract the existence and strengthen the role of the USSR in the world, the formation of a bloc of socialist states, and the rise of the national liberation movement in Africa, Asia, and South America.” 

Funnily enough, nonetheless, the CIA began with a colossal intelligence failure when it predicted on 20th September 1949 that the first Soviet atomic bomb would appear in mid-1953, when, actually, 22 days before the publication of that forecast, the Soviet Union had already conducted its first test of a nuclear device.  

The CIA was once again clueless when Putin announced in March 2018 in an address to the Russian Parliament that Russia had developed a new hypersonic missile system, which “will be practically invulnerable.” US officials and analysts were taken aback. The CIA has a history of getting Russia all wrong, including about the collapse of the Soviet Union.  

But the CIA had its successes too — for example,  the overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1951 after his move to nationalise Iranian oil fields. By the 1950s, CIA already turned into a “multi-disciplinary monster” when besides traditional intelligence activities, it was also “tasked with tracking and suppressing any political, economic, military processes in all parts of the planet that could threaten the world hegemony of the United States and its allies.” Naryshkin gives credit to Allen Dulles for this metamorphosis. Dulles introduced “aggressiveness and lack of morality into the activities” of the CIA. He was just the man to do so, having been station chief of the OSS (CIA’s predecessor) in Bern in 1942-1945, who had clandestine dealings with the Nazis behind the back of the US’ Soviet ally. 

Naryshkin takes us through the chronicle of CIA’s “coups d’etat, direct military interventions, provocations of all kinds, assassinations of objectionable politicians, terror, sabotage, bribery” and all that cloak and dagger stuff, which prompted President Lyndon Johnson’s famous condemnation of the agency as the “damn murder corporation.” Like in Banquo’s ghost scene at Macbeth’s banquet table in Shakespeare’s play, the victims appear — Patrice Lumumba, Salvador Allende …

There are chilling references to the CIA’s practice of using cancer spreading technology to eliminate “objectionable” Latin American leaders — Argentina’s Kirchner (thyroid cancer), Paraguay’s Lugo (lymphoma), Brazil’s Lula da Silva (laryngeal cancer) and D. Dilma Rousseff (lymphoma) — and, of course, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (tracheal cancer). According to Naryshkin, “In 1955, the CIA attempted to eliminate Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, who was perceived by the Americans as “a maniacal fanatic seeking to take over the world,” but failed miserably. Agents blew up the plane on which Zhou was supposed to fly to a conference of Asian and African leaders in Indonesia.” Thereupon, Dulles developed a plan to poison Zhou but gave up fearing that CIA’s involvement might get exposed!

A US Senate commission in 1975 uncovered and confirmed CIA involvement in contract killings and coup d’état. It counted 8 cases of assassination attempts by CIA agents and mercenaries on Fidel Castro during 1960-1965 alone. Havana later revealed the full tally — from 1959 through 1990, CIA planned 634 assassination attempts on Fidel. To quote Naryshkin, “With maniacal persistence, the CIA officers developed simply exotic ways to eliminate the Comandante. They tried to kill him with the help of suicide pilots, paratrooper agents, recruited agents from the inner circle, shelling cars and yachts from ships, boats and subversive saboteurs, with the help of scuba gear with a tubercle bacillus brought there, poisoned cigars, poisonous pills for food and much more.”

“The CIA used every opportunity to inflict maximum damage on the Soviet Union, including economic damage. CIA director W. Casey personally addressed the king of Saudi Arabia and persuaded him to sharply increase oil production, which caused world prices for the most important export resources for the USSR to fall by almost three times. For the budget of the Soviet Union, this was a huge loss, which seriously influenced further political events in the USSR.” 

Naryshkin throws some riveting insights into the saga of Ukraine in the 1948-1949 period when the CIA “actively used the experience of Hitler’s special services for launching subversive work against the USSR with recruits in the camps of displaced East Europeans who included quarter of a million Ukrainians. “Almost all the leaders and top functionaries of the Ukrainian nationalists were in one way or another bound by cooperation with the Nazis and therefore were completely controlled” by the CIA and British intelligence. In November 1950, the head of the CIA’s Policy Coordination Office, Frank Wisner bragged that CIA was capable of deploying up to 100,000 Ukrainian nationalists in case of a war with the Soviet Union. 

The U2 incident — shooting down the CIA spy plane — in the Urals on May 1, 1960 was a dramatic incident when Washington accused the USSR of destroying a scientific aircraft and a pilot-scientist, but was profoundly embarrassed when Moscow presented not only the wreckage of the aircraft and spy equipment to the media, “but also the living pilot Francis Gary Powers, who frankly told what he was doing in the sky over the USSR and on whose instructions.”

On the other hand, the masterstroke of a South Korean Boeing entering  Soviet airspace and getting shot down in 1983 provided just the “propaganda basis” for President Reagan “to announce another ‘crusade against communism.’ The policy of detente was thrown aside, and a new round of the arms race began.”  

Naryshkin’s final reflection is calm and collected with no trace of hyperbole: “Evaluation of the effectiveness of any special service is always relative. The US Central Intelligence Agency, entering its 76th year of existence, has been and remains a zealous executor of the will of the ruling circles of its country. Despite the significant changes taking place, they continue to imagine themselves as the only hegemon in the unipolar world. The organisation is intelligence, based on its name, but with a sensitive focus on conducting subversive actions against sovereign states.” 

To Indians, CIA has become a benign creature, no longer feared. Having links with the CIA carries no stigma among Indian elites. They regard “CIA phobia”  as a legacy of the Indira Gandhi era. And they thrive as mainstream columnists, think tankers and opinion makers. Naryshkin’s essay is a sobering reminder that history has not ended — and it never will. 

The essay (in Russian) is here. 

September 17, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Exposed: The ‘97% of scientists agree with manmade global warming’ lie

By David Craig | TCW Defending Freedom | September 12, 2022

Our government is imposing draconian limitations on our lifestyles, our economy and our finances to save the planet from supposed catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW), now renamed ‘climate change’.  Probably one of the most repeated arguments you’ll hear in support of the need to achieve ‘net zero’ is that ’97 per cent of scientists agree CAGW is happening’.

President Obama is just one of many who have made this claim: ‘Ninety-seven per cent of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.’

So did President Biden’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, when he warned of the ‘crippling consequences’ of climate change and said: ‘Ninety-seven per cent of the world’s scientists tell us this is urgent.’

Yet, in spite of the damaging effects reaching ‘net zero’ will have on Western economies, not a single politician or mainstream journalist seems to have made the effort to find out where this ‘97 per cent’ figure came from and how accurate it is.

The main author of the paper which came up with the figure was John Cook, an Australian former web programmer and blogger who later gained a PhD in philosophy at the University of Western Australia and founded what could be seen as a climate alarmist website.

He assembled a group of volunteers recruited via the website as part of a ‘citizen science’ project and tasked them with examining the abstracts of 11,944 climate papers from 1991-2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. Note that the volunteers didn’t speak to any scientists and didn’t read the scientific papers. They just looked at the abstracts – a summary paragraph or two. The volunteers classified the abstracts into one of seven categories according to their opinions of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW):

1.      Explicit endorsement of AGW with quantification

2.      Explicit endorsement of AGW without quantification

3.      Implicit endorsement of AGW

4.      No position or Uncertain

5.      Implicit rejection of AGW

6.      Explicit rejection of AGW without quantification

7.      Explicit rejection of AGW with quantification

The reviewers then ‘simplified’ results into four main categories as follows:

Endorse AGW               3,896                   32.6 per cent of abstracts

No AGW position         7,930                   66.4 per cent of abstracts

Reject AGW                  78                         0.7 per cent of abstracts

Uncertain on AGW      40                         0.3 per cent of abstracts

This gave 32.6 per cent of abstracts which the reviewers concluded endorsed AGW.

Now comes the clever bit. Instead of admitting that just 32.6 per cent of papers (actually just abstracts of papers) endorsed AGW, the group removed the 7,930 abstracts which didn’t take a position on AGW. That left just 4,014 abstracts of which 3,896 (97 per cent) supposedly ‘endorsed’ AGW.

This is like doing a survey of the voting intentions of 1,000 people. You find that 90 say they’ll vote Labour, 10 say they’ll vote Conservative and the remaining 900 are undecided. You eliminate the 900 undecideds and claim that 90 per cent of voters support Labour and just 10 per cent of voters will vote Conservative. This is, of course, complete statistical nonsense as the real percentage of the sampled 1,000 voters who have said they will vote Labour is 9 per cent, not 90 per cent.

That’s not the end of the magic employed to reach that wondrous 97 per cent. The reviewers lumped together three categories of abstracts – ‘explicit endorsement with quantification’, ‘explicit endorsement without quantification’ and ‘implicit endorsement’. (Implicit endorsement means that the reviewer felt that the paper endorsed the AGW theory even though the paper didn’t do so explicitly).

In the paper claiming 97 per cent support for AGW, the reviewers don’t tell us how many papers fitted into each of these three categories, but the survey’s own database shows that of the 3,896 abstracts which supposedly ‘endorsed’ AGW, just 64 were in the ‘explicit endorsement with quantification’ category; 922 were in the ‘explicit endorsement without quantification’ and the vast majority – 2,910 out of 3,896 – were in the ‘implicit endorsement of AGW’ category.

Thus only 986 of 11,944 – that’s just 8.2 per cent – of abstracts explicitly said they agreed with the theory of man-made global warming.

To summarise, this ‘97 per cent of scientists’ claim was based on the work of 11 to 12 volunteers, whose scientific credentials have not (as far as I know) been released and all of whom were probably firm AGW believers. Each looked at around 1,000, often quite obscure, scientific abstracts and from these documents decided whether the scientific papers (which they hadn’t read) supported the AGW theory. To claim such an approach is statistically valid is beyond farcical. To call the ‘97 per cent of scientists endorse AGW’ result ‘garbage’ could be seen as insulting to garbage.

Given the damage ‘net zero’ will do to our economies and our lives, it is incredible that not a single politician, mainstream journalist or editor seems to have had the ability or the inclination to expose the dubious origins of the ubiquitous ‘97 per cent of scientists endorse AGW’ claim.

September 14, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Yet another “whistleblower” means yet more censorship

By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | September 13, 2022

A new Twitter “whistleblower” has come forward. Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, allegedly a former hacker and Twitter’s ex-head of security, testified in front of congress today, with dire warnings about the business practices of the social media giant.

Did he talk about the company’s egregious attacks on their users’ free speech under the guise of “protecting” the public?

Did he mention the suppression of alternative and independent journalism through practices such as “shadow-banning” and discretely removing followers?

Perhaps he told them about how, like all major social media platforms, it is so cross-pollinated with intelligence assets it may as well be considered just another branch of the Deep State.

No, none of that. His main concern is that Twitter’s security is too lax, and that the platform’s “cyber-security failures” leave it potentially open to “exploitation” that can “cause real harm to real people”.

According to the write-up of his testimony in The Guardian, “Zatko said Twitter runs out-of-date and vulnerable software on more than half of its data center servers and that in “multiple episodes” the platform was breached by foreign intelligence agencies.”

Adding, “Zatko has also accused Twitter of doing little to combat problems with spam bots – an allegation that bolsters Elon Musk’s case for backing out of his Twitter acquisition.”

Do you see how this works? It’s gearing up the machinery to label anyone who dissents as either a “spy” or a “bot” (and perhaps reveals something of the purpose behind Elon Musk’s “revelation” about the number of “fake accounts” on twitter).

If this all sounds eerily familiar, don’t worry you’re not experiencing deja vu, you’re just remembering Frances Haugen, the facebook “whistleblower” from last year. She said very similar things in a very similar way.

We’ve seen this dance before, we know the steps. As I wrote only last year:

Like so many other testimonies before congress in the past, the entire event looks fake and probably is. A stage-managed exercise involving some “expert witness” telling a bunch of politicians exactly what they want to hear, so they can go ahead push the legislation they were going to push anyway. It’s all leading up to loud bipartisan calls for “regulation”, and that’s not a good thing.

They wheel out some person – who may or may not be real, and may or may not have an axe to grind – prop them up in a nice suit in front of some po-faced senators and have them reel off a few thousand serious sounding words.

Their pay-off is a few minutes of fame, a ghost-written book deal and being called “brave” by moist-eyed liberal pundits, their hands white-knuckling around their pearls.

While they prattle on at length about the supposed “problem”, the “solution” is already planned and ready to roll out. Such is the crushingly predictable nature of the Hegelian dialectic.

And, just in case any of you hadn’t already figured out what that was, The Guardian is more than clear [emphasis added]:

In his testimony, Zatko said there had not been enough government enforcement when it comes to the operations of big tech, and that the federal trade commission (FTC) is “in over its head” when going up against huge tech firms.

More “government enforcement”.

It’s all so tiresome.

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Never Let A Good Crisis Go to Waste Relentless Ukraine reporting helps conceal other conflicts

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 13, 2022

It is astonishing how many observers of war in Ukraine who should know better have been inclined to take at face value the assertions of “sources” that clearly originate among the various governments that are involved in the conflict. Those leaders who are engaged in the inexorable march by the US and its allies to turn the Ukraine crisis into World War 3 surely have learned the lesson that managing the narrative of what is taking place is the greatest weapon that the war hawks have in their possession. One recalls how post-9/11 and leading up to the Iraq War the George W. Bush White House and the neocons in the Pentagon lied about nearly everything to convince the public that Saddam Hussein was a terrorist supporting megalomaniac armed with weapons of mass destruction, inevitably describing him as a man in some ways comparable to Adolf Hitler. Nevertheless, many observers of what was occurring were not fooled and there were large scale demonstrations in a number of cities prior to the invasion in March 2003, which, of course, were rarely reported in the mainstream media in order to control the message.

Iraq in some ways was a learning experience for those in government and also for those in the media who did the heavy lifting by propagating the deception to a largely unsuspecting public. What we are seeing now relating to Ukraine and Russia, however, makes the Iraq experience look like child’s play in terms of the sheer audacity of the alleged information that makes it, or does not make it, into the news. I note particularly the recent terrorist car bombing of Russian activist journalist Dalya Dugina by a Ukrainian assassin made the news for roughly forty-eight hours before disappearing, but not before the lie that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was responsible was firmly planted in a number of places in the mainstream media.

Now that Joe Biden is about to designate a two or three star general to head the Ukraine campaign and has pledged billions of dollars more in aid, Ukraine will be all the news all the time. The US involvement will also feature a catchy name. I would suggest Operation Empty Wallets, which is what Americans will soon be experiencing due to government bailouts and other profligate spending, or maybe Operation Give Me a Break. And it will also create a new dimension to the narrative-shaping in that Ukraine reporting’s domination of what comes out of the newsrooms already is effectively killing much of what else might otherwise be appearing on TV or in the newspapers. That selective management of information provides cover for neglecting stories that might prove embarrassing for those in power. It in effect means that there has been plenty of room for the usual players to engage in business as usual with hardly any scrutiny by the public over what is going on outside Ukraine in secondary theaters like the Middle East and Africa.

All of which leads one to examine what the two countries that have unilaterally declared themselves to be rules makers and enforcers have been up to. Those two countries are perhaps not surprisingly the United States and Israel. The US is, in fact, increasing its combat role in Africa featuring airstrikes in Somalia, all of which have taken place since US President Joe Biden approved the redeployment of hundreds of special forces troops to that country in May, reversing a decision by former President Donald Trump to reduce troop levels in AFRICOM. The two latest attacks killed at least twenty Somalis, all of whom were of course described as “terrorists” by the US command. Independent sources state that US forces have bombed Somalia at least 16 times under Biden, killing between 465 and 545 alleged al-Shabaab militants, including no less than 200 individuals in a single drone plus ground forces strike on March 13th.

Describing the paucity of reporting on the issue, Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a senior adviser at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, observed “If you were unaware that we were bombing Somalia, don’t feel bad, this is a completely under-the-radar news story, one that was curiously absent from the headlines in all of the major newspapers…”

And then there is Syria, where a paucity of information in the media reflects White House policy. The United States, which has possibly as many as a dozen illegal bases in Syria, has a major airbase located in the al-Omar oil field in Syria’s northeastern Deir Ezzor province. Several weeks ago, three US soldiers were reportedly slightly wounded in rocket attacks directed at the base by alleged “Iranian-backed militants.” The US responded to the claimed attacks by launching strikes from Apache helicopters against three vehicles belonging to an Afghan Shia militia, killing between six and ten “militants,” and there are reports that more tit-for-tat exchanges of fire are likely. CENTCOM afterwards claimed that President Joe Biden personally ordered the strikes in “self-defense” and justified them by citing Article II of the US Constitution. But the Constitution was never intended to cover illegal activity in a foreign land where US forces are occupying a country with which it is not at war and which has a functioning government that opposes the American presence. The US reportedly has its illegal bases mostly located in the oil producing and agricultural bread basket of the country. Both the grain and oil are routinely stolen by the US and much of the oil winds up in Israel.

So, one inevitably comes to Israel, which has used the cover provided by Ukraine not only to bomb Syria frequently but also to kill Palestinians both in Gaza and on the occupied West Bank. Recently the pace has accelerated with the Israeli Army and police killing on average several Palestinians every day, very little of which is reported in the US media, a fatality rate five times higher than that which prevailed in 2021. It is clearly a deliberate policy to step up the pressure on the Palestinians and a vital part of the process is to let it happen with minimal scrutiny by the media and public, so Israel is widely publicizing the support it is giving to Ukraine to draw attention away from what it does locally.

In short, Israel is increasing efforts to make the historic Palestine Palestinian-free by rendering life so miserable that many Arabs will decide to leave. The use of selective violence and constant harassment is all part of that effort and Palestinians have found that describing Israel as an “apartheid” state does not accurately describe the intensity of the indiscriminate punishments and killings by soldiers which have become all too common.

Israel meanwhile is also doing its best to delegitimize Palestinian national identity by labeling Arab human rights groups as “terrorists.” Israeli police recently raided the offices of seven such groups, confiscated their office equipment and communications, and ordered the premises to be shut down completely. Ironically, a CIA assessment of the groups determined that they were not in any way terrorist linked. The Joe Biden administration characteristically responded to the development by indicating that it was “concerned” but did not condemn the Israeli action.

So, if you open a newspaper or turn on the television and watch or read the international news, you will be told what to think about what is going on in Ukraine. And it will be from the Ukrainian/US government point of view. If you are interested in what the US and Israel are up to in the Middle East, you will most often be out of luck as “defending democracy” in Ukraine while also demonizing Russia is providing cover for Washington and Jerusalem to get into all kinds of mischief. It is a reality derived from how the media and government work collectively to shape policies that in no way benefit the American public. Instead, powerful interest groups with plenty of cash drive the process and are the ones who gain still more power and money through it. It is the sad reality of what has happened to our “land of the free and home of the brave.”

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

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »