All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The German Minister of Foreign Affairs, Annalena Baerbock, is once again involved in controversies against Russia. This time, the minister promised that Russian territories will soon be part of the EU, which sounds simultaneously provocative and unrealistic, considering that Moscow will not allow any part of its Federation to be captured by Western powers and their Ukrainian proxy.
During informal meetings with European politicians, Baerbock said that the future of Ukraine “lies in the EU”, with Kiev moving closer to gaining admission as it – reportedly – “liberates” territories controlled by Russian forces. Interestingly, Baerbock mentioned that the EU will soon “stretch from Lisbon to Lugansk”, making it clear that Ukrainian access to the bloc will occur after an eventual Ukrainian capture of the new Russian regions.
Baerbock also stated that the European community will help Kiev to overcome its internal problems and carry out reforms that will make the country suitable to EU’s political, democratic requirements, with the priority for now, however, being to defeat the Russians.
“Ukraine’s future lies in the European Union, our community of freedom, and it will soon stretch from Lisbon to Lugansk. It [Ukraine] also broadens its path to the EU with every village, every meter that it liberates, and every meter where it saves its people (…) These are things like changing legislation in the legal field, in the media field, but also in terms of fighting corruption, and we are openly discussing the issue that we can expand this path together with our partners here in Ukraine,” Baerbock said.
As well known, Lugansk is an ex-Ukrainian territory, which, after claiming sovereignty for eight years, was reintegrated into the Russian Federation after legitimate referendums that took place in 2022. In these referendums, the regions of Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporozhye also returned to being officially part of Russia. The legal status of these regions has already been formalized in Moscow, and there is no doubt to the fact that they are part of the Russian Federation.
Obviously, Kiev and the West do not recognize this reality and insist on the “need” for the Ukrainian armed forces to regain these territories. But this insistence, in practice, is merely rhetorical, since militarily the Ukrainians do not have enough power to confront the Russian forces and capture these regions. And, likewise, the local people are mostly ethnic Russians and supporters of the Russian government and the special operation.
So, no matter how much Ukraine and the West refuse to formally recognize the reintegration, the union of these regions with Russia is a reality that cannot be ignored. This makes Baerbock’s words a mere bluff. In fact, if Ukraine want to “regain” Lugansk to become a member of the EU, then Kiev will never gain access to the European bloc, as the Russians not only have enough strength to protect their territories, but will also certainly try to liberate even more areas, since until now no security guarantee has been given by NATO, making it impossible to avoid the prolongation of the conflict and the reintegration of more regions.
In addition to a bluff, Baerbock also makes clear the hostile position of Germany and the entire EU when commenting on these issues. As long as there is insistence on the Ukrainian advance into the regions that the Russians recognize as theirs, there will be no possibility of peace talks. As Russian authorities have stated several times, diplomatic negotiations can be resumed, as long as they are under the terms established by Moscow. These terms obviously include the recognition of the liberated territories as Russian and the demilitarization of Ukraine. Without this, there will be no talks and hostilities will continue, causing even more losses for Ukraine itself.
If the EU really wanted to give access to Kiev, the bloc would act more responsibly and advise the Ukrainian government to accept Russian peace terms and commit not to join NATO. But, as well known, the EU has no intention of really benefiting the Ukrainians and is just bluffing when saying that Kiev is “close” to getting its place in the union. The real objective of the EU and NATO was never to allow greater integration on the part of Ukraine, but to force Kiev to fight “to the last Ukrainian“.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Documents that the ruling class tried to keep confidential are confirming that ADE (Antibody-dependent enhancement), VAED (Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease), and AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) are common outcomes after COVID-19 injections. These diseases come on often months after taking the shots.
AIDS is particularly alarming, as it is appearing in a disturbing number of recipients just five months after their initial injections.
Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) and Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED). are serious adverse events that can occur after vaccination.
ADE and VAED can occur when an individual is exposed to a pathogen, such as the alleged Covid-19 virus, after receiving a vaccine that does not provide full immunity.
In these cases, the vaccine-induced antibodies may actually enhance the ability of the pathogen to infect cells, leading to more severe illness than if the individual had not received the vaccine.
When a vaccine causes ADE or VAED, it can have significant public health implications.
First and foremost, individuals who receive the vaccine and develop ADE or VAE may suffer from severe illness, and in some cases, even death. -The Daily Exposé
One example of a bacterial infection that could potentially be worsened by ADE or VAE is streptococcus A (strep A) infection. Strep A is a type of bacteria that can cause a wide range of illnesses, including sore throat, pneumonia, and sepsis. You will have most likely seen in the mainstream news that Strep A infection is killing children all over this winter.
Government documents show that the most likely cause of all of these diseases is the COVID-19 injection.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) attempted to delay the release of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine safety data for 75 years despite approving the injection after only 108 days of safety review on December 11th, 2020.
Instead, in early January 2022, Federal Judge Mark Pittman ordered them to release 55,000 pages per month. They released 12,000 pages by the end of January.
One of the documents contained in the latest data dump is ‘reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf’. Table 5, found on page 11 of the document shows an ‘Important Potential Risk’, and that risk is listed as ‘Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED), including Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Respiratory Disease (VAERD)’.
This evidence was published by The Daily Expose and is rather damning, and horrifying for those who have taken these shots or given them to their own children. These documents could help explain the instances of SADS or sudden adult death sydrome, as well as all of those who have “died suddenly” in the past year since these shots have been rolled out with force.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
If an experimental vaccine were to damage the heart and immune system in a significant number of individuals who received it, it is possible that it could lead to a decline in the overall population size.
This could occur for several reasons.
First, damage to the heart could lead to an increase in cardiovascular diseases, which are a leading cause of mortality worldwide. This could result in a higher number of deaths among individuals who received the vaccine.
Second, damage to the immune system could leave individuals more susceptible to other infections and diseases, which could also contribute to an increase in mortality.
Last, but by no means least, the negative impacts of the vaccine on fertility and reproductive health could lead to a decline in the number of births, further contributing to a decline in the overall population size.
If such a vaccine were to be developed and distributed, it could potentially lead to depopulation due to increased mortality and decreased fertility.
Unfortunately, the world has found itself in a situation where powerful institutions and Governments have coerced millions of people into getting an experimental Covid-19 vaccine that causes all of the ill-fated effects mentioned above.
Official Government reports and confidential Pfizer documents prove it.
Therefore, you are witnessing mass depopulation unfold before your very eyes.
The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination was never about combating a virus. It was about reducing the global population.
This goal aligns with the interests of certain powerful corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population now that AI is advanced enough to replace hundreds of millions of workers.
Regardless of the specific cause, the implications of what is currently occurring in the real world are significant.
This includes major countries like the USA, Canada, and the UK.
Additionally, we were able to extract even more up-to-date data on 28 European countries from EuroMOMO.
All of this information has been provided to the OECD and EuroMOMO by each country’s Government organizations, such as the Centers for Disease Control in the USA and the Office for National Statistics in the UK.
The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US) as well as 27 other European countries –
Are you aware of the staggering number of excess deaths that have occurred in the US and Europe in recent years?
In 2021, the US saw almost 700,000 excess deaths, with another 360,000 excess deaths by November 11th, 2022.
Europe had a similarly alarming 382,000 excess deaths in 2021, with 309,000 excess deaths by November 2022.
And these figures don’t even include Ukraine!
Shockingly, even countries like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada have seen excess deaths that have not decreased since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine.
The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of overall excess deaths in Australia in 2020, 2021, and up to week 30 of 2022 –
Did you know that the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine in Australia led to a shocking 747% increase in excess deaths, from 1,303 in 2020 to 11,042 in 2021?
And the situation has only gotten worse since then.
By the end of July 2022, there were a staggering 18,973 excess deaths in Australia – a 1,356% increase from 2020.
That’s more excess deaths in 7 months than in the previous two years combined.
And the situation in the US is similarly alarming –
Are you aware of the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the US following the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?
By week 38 of 2022, 1,700 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020, and by week 38 of 2021, a shocking 109,000 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020.
These numbers indicate that rather than decreasing, deaths have actually increased following the vaccine rollout.
The following two charts illustrate the total excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” and Europe since the beginning of 2021 when the Covid-19 vaccine was introduced –
Did you know that over 1.8 million excess deaths have occurred in the “Five Eyes” and most of Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?
This shocking figure includes over 1 million excess deaths in the US and over 690,000 excess deaths in Europe according to the Centers for Disease Control and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as significant numbers of excess deaths in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.
The official narrative that the vaccine is safe and effective and would reduce the number of deaths is completely contradicted by these figures, which suggest that the Covid-19 vaccines may be the main cause of the excess deaths.
Children / Teens & Young Adults Have ‘Died Suddenly’
Did you know that excess deaths among children aged 0 to 14 in Europe skyrocketed by a staggering 755% between January and September 2022, according to official data?
This alarming increase, which has prompted the European Union to launch an investigation, occurred despite efforts by EuroMOMO to downplay the figures.
It’s worth noting that the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine was approved for use in children by the European Medicines Agency on 28th May 2021. Which was week 21 of 2021.
Then excess deaths “only “coincidentally” began to be recorded from week 22 once this emergency use authorisation was granted.
Overall, excess deaths rose 630% since the vaccine’s approval for use in children by September of 2022.
It’s a sad reality that despite the mounting evidence pointing to the clear danger of Covid-19 vaccinations for children, it is highly unlikely that authorities will acknowledge this risk.
Tragically, the significant increase in excess deaths among children in Europe since the European Medicines Agency emergency approved the vaccine for use in this population is likely to be dismissed as just another “coincidence” in the long list of such occurrences since the start of the pandemic.
It’s vital that we continue to examine and scrutinize the data to ensure that the health and well-being of our children are protected.
This heartbreaking development has resulted in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 average.
The figures also reveal that there have been 7,680 more excess deaths among children and young adults in 2022 so far compared to the same time frame in 2020, at the height of the alleged Covid-19 pandemic.
However, the worst year for deaths among 0 to 44-year-olds was 2021, with 291,461 excess deaths in total, nearly 60,000 more than occurred in 2020.
According to the official CDC figures, this increase was mainly due to a mysterious sudden rise in deaths among children and young adults starting around week 31 of 2021.
It’s a heartbreaking reality that nearly half a million people aged 0 to 44 have died since week 51 of 2020, resulting in a staggering 117,719 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.
According to official data, the average life expectancy in the USA was 77.28 years as of 2020.
If we are to believe the official narrative that Covid-19 is a deadly disease, then it’s perhaps understandable that 231,987 children and young adults up to the age of 44 died in 2020, resulting in 40,365 excess deaths as an unfortunate consequence of this alleged disease.
However, if we are to accept the official narrative that Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, how do we explain the further increase in deaths among children and young adults in both 2021 and 2022?
It’s worth noting that millions of Americans were pressured into getting the vaccines, and millions of parents were similarly coerced into forcing their children to receive the injections.
The answer is clear: the official narrative is a blatant lie. The Covid-19 vaccines are neither safe nor effective.
The hard-to-find data provided by the CDC only hints at this disturbing trend of young American deaths, but further data published by the UK Government confirms it.
For example, a report published on July 6th, 2022 by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, a government agency, provides further evidence of the danger of these vaccines.
Have you seen Table 2 of the report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, which contains the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for deaths per 100,000 person-years in England up to May 2022?
If not, you should take a look, because the figures it contains are truly disturbing.
We’ve taken the data provided by the ONS for January to May 2022 and created the following chart, which illustrates the devastating consequences of the mass Covid-19 vaccination campaign.
The chart shows the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status among 18 to 39-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022.
It’s clear from this data that the risks associated with these vaccines cannot be ignored.
It’s a disturbing trend: in every single month since the start of 2022, partly vaccinated and double vaccinated 18-39 year-olds have been more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds.
The situation has been particularly dire for triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds, whose mortality rate has worsened month by month since the mass Booster campaign that took place in the UK in December 2021.
In January, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were slightly less likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 29.8 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated and 28.1 per 100,000 among the triple-vaccinated.
However, from February onwards, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were 27% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals, with a mortality rate of 26.7 per 100k among the triple-vaccinated and 21 per 100k among the unvaccinated.
The situation worsened even further by May 2022, with triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 52% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 21.4 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and 14.1 among the unvaccinated.
The partly vaccinated also fared poorly, with May seeing partly vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 202% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group.
The report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics also includes mortality rates for children, although the UK government attempted to conceal this data.
The following chart shows the mortality rates by vaccination status per 100,000 person-years among children aged 10 to 14 in England for the period 1st January 2021 to 31st May 2022 –
According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, the mortality rate for Covid-19 deaths among unvaccinated children aged 10 to 14 is 0.31 per 100,000 person-years.
However, for one-dose vaccinated children, the mortality rate is 3.24 per 100,000 person-years, and for triple-vaccinated children, the mortality rate is an alarming 41.29 per 100,000 person-years.
The situation is no better when it comes to non-Covid-19 deaths. The all-cause death mortality rate is 6.39 per 100,000 person-years among unvaccinated children and slightly higher at 6.48 among partly vaccinated children.
However, the rate worsens with each additional injection: the all-cause death mortality rate is 97.28 among double-vaccinated children and an alarming 289.02 per 100,000 person-years among triple-vaccinated children.
This means, according to the UK government’s own official data, double-vaccinated children are 1422% or 15.22 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children, while triple-vaccinated children are 4423% or 45.23 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children.
The data provided by the Office for National Statistics, which is age-standardized and rates per 100,000 population, is definitive proof that Covid-19 vaccines increase a person’s risk of death.
It’s no surprise, then, to learn that a secret CDC report confirms that nearly half a million American children and young adults have died following the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, resulting in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.
You Only Have One Heart & It Will Not Regenerate
The potential consequences of a COVID-19 vaccine that harms the heart are dire. If such a vaccine were widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population, it could lead to millions of sudden deaths.
The heart is a vital organ that plays a critical role in maintaining the body’s proper functioning, so any adverse effects on it could have disastrous consequences.
Unfortunately, at least two Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna do exactly this, and they have now been administered to millions of people multiple times, and it is likely that these vaccines are responsible for the millions of excess deaths recorded worldwide since their rollout.
The risk of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can lead to sudden death if not treated, is a serious concern when it comes to the Covid-19 vaccine. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, who may not experience any symptoms of myocarditis until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.
Symptoms of myocarditis can include chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, and abnormal heart rhythms, and if left untreated, it can result in heart failure, cardiac arrest, and sudden cardiac death.
This is likely why an investigation of official figures published by Public Health Scotland in April 2022 found that there has been a 67% increase compared to the historical average in the number of people aged 15 to 44 experiencing heart attacks, cardiac arrest, myocarditis, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases since this age group was offered the Covid-19 vaccine.
This means Covid vaccination increases the risk of suffering myocarditis, an autoimmune disease causing inflammation of the heart, by 13,200%.
It is clear from the data presented that the Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna have had a significant impact on the health of millions of people worldwide.
The potential adverse effects on the heart, including myocarditis and an increased risk of heart attacks, cardiac arrest, and other cardiovascular diseases, could lead to a significant number of sudden deaths if these vaccines are widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population.
Additionally, the high number of excess deaths that have occurred since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines suggests that these vaccines may be contributing to a larger trend of depopulation.
Excess deaths refer to the number of deaths above what would normally be expected in a given population, and the fact that there have been millions of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries and Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine is a cause for concern.
The potential consequences of depopulation are far-reaching and could have significant impacts on society, including economic disruption and a decrease in the overall population size. It is imperative that further research is conducted to understand the true extent of the impact of the Covid-19 vaccines on population health and to ensure that any future vaccines are thoroughly tested and deemed safe before being distributed.
Obviously, it stands to reason that more people need to be dying than are being born for depopulation to take place. And unfortunately, confidential Pfizer documents confirm this is now our reality.
The Confidential Pfizer Documents
The data contained in this document is alarming and raises serious concerns about the safety of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy and lactation. According to the data, there have been numerous cases of pregnant women experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine, including miscarriages, stillbirths, and other serious complications.
Furthermore, the data suggests that the vaccine may also pose risks to breastfeeding infants. There have been numerous reports of infants experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine when it is passed to them through their mother’s milk.
These findings are extremely concerning and highlight the need for further research into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. If the risks associated with these vaccines are not properly addressed, it could have significant implications for fertility rates and overall population numbers.
It is imperative that authorities take these concerns seriously and conduct thorough investigations into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. The health and well-being of both mothers and their children must be a top priority.
Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has been linked to a high number of adverse reactions in pregnant women. According to the company’s own data, of the 270 known cases of exposure to the vaccine during pregnancy, 46% of the mothers (124) experienced an adverse reaction.
Of these, 75 were considered serious, including uterine contractions and fetal death.
This means that 58% of the mothers who reported adverse reactions suffered a serious event. These troubling findings raise concerns about the safety of the vaccine for pregnant women and highlight the need for further research.
It is alarming that Pfizer’s own data shows that 124 out of 270 pregnant women who were exposed to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine experienced an adverse reaction. Of those, 75 were considered serious, including fetal death.
It is also concerning that Pfizer has no information on the outcomes of 238 out of 270 pregnancies. These figures raise serious questions about the safety of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women and their fetuses.
The findings of another Pfizer study on Wistar Han rats show that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time.
The ovaries are a pair of female glands that produce eggs and the female hormones estrogen and progesterone.
The study, which can be found in the list of confidential Pfizer documents published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under a court order, administered a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine to 21 female and 21 male rats.
The researchers measured the concentration of total radioactivity in the blood, plasma, and tissues of the rats at various points after the injection was administered. The accumulation of the vaccine in the ovaries raises concerns about its potential impact on fertility and reproductive health.
One of the most concerning findings from the study on the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is the fact that it accumulates in the ovaries over time.
In the first 15 minutes following injection, the total lipid concentration in the ovaries measured 0.104ml, but this increased to 1.34ml after just one hour, 2.34ml after four hours, and 12.3ml after 48 hours.
While the scientists conducting the study did not continue their research beyond 48 hours, it’s unclear whether this concerning accumulation continued.
These findings raise serious questions about the potential long-term effects of the Pfizer vaccine on fertility and reproductive health.
But according to data published by Public Health Scotland, the number of people suffering from ovarian cancer has significantly increased in 2021 compared to the previous year and the 2017-2019 average.
This could potentially be linked to the accumulation of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in the ovaries, as found in a study on rats.
This means the neonatal mortality rate exceeded an upper warning threshold known as the “control limit” for the second time following the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines to women / pregnant women.
The last time it exceeded this limit was in September 2021, when neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births reached 5.1. These levels are on par with those typically seen in the late 1980s.
At the time, PHS said the fact that the upper control limit has been exceeded “indicates there is a higher likelihood that there are factors beyond random variation that have contributed to the number of deaths that occurred”.
This news is shocking and raises serious concerns about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines.
Increased Mortality
It’s alarming to see in figures found in a report published by the UK Government titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here, that in every single month between January and May of 2022, individuals aged 18 to 39 who were either partly or fully vaccinated were more likely to die from non-Covid causes compared to their unvaccinated counterparts.
The situation is particularly dire for triple-vaccinated individuals, whose mortality rates have only worsened month after month since the widespread booster campaign in December 2021.
These shocking figures, provided by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, confirm that the Covid-19 vaccines significantly increase a person’s risk of death.
It’s clear that the vaccines are not only failing to protect individuals, but they are actively causing harm. It’s crucial that action is taken to halt their distribution and investigate the true dangers they pose.
But this situation isn’t isolated to 18 to 39-year-olds. It’s common among every single age group.
The following two charts show the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status for non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 for all age groups –
You can read a full investigation of the above figures broken down by age group here.
Depopulation by COVID-19 Vaccination
The potential consequences of the Covid-19 vaccination campaign are alarming and could lead to depopulation on a global scale.
The heart is a vital organ and any adverse effects on it could have devastating consequences. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, as myocarditis may not cause any symptoms until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.
Data from Pfizer reveals that 46% of pregnant women who received the vaccine suffered adverse reactions, with 58% experiencing serious adverse events ranging from uterine contraction to fetal death.
Moreover, studies have shown that the vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time, raising concerns about its potential impact on fertility.
Official figures also reveal that mortality rates are highest among the vaccinated and lowest among the unvaccinated population in every age group.
With all of this evidence, it is clear that the Covid-19 vaccination campaign could have serious consequences for the future of humanity.
But Why?
There are various reasons that some people may want to depopulate the planet.
One reason could be overpopulation, as some people believe that the earth’s resources are being depleted at an unsustainable rate due to the increasing population.
Other people may argue that depopulation is necessary due to the negative impact that humans have had on the environment, and reducing the population could help mitigate some of these problems.
Some people may also advocate for depopulation due to concerns about the impact of climate change, as a smaller population would likely lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
Finally, some people may simply believe that a smaller population would be more manageable and easier to control, and may advocate for depopulation for this reason.
Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates are two powerful figures who have expressed support for the idea of depopulation through various means, including vaccination.
Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, has argued that reducing the global population would be beneficial for the environment and the economy, and has suggested that advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence could play a role in achieving this goal.
Similarly, Bill Gates has stated that vaccination campaigns can be used to reduce the population, and has funded numerous initiatives that promote vaccination as a means of controlling population growth.
So it should now begin to make sense as to why powerful figures like Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab have been advocating for widespread vaccination campaigns.
The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination isn’t about combating a virus, but about reducing the global population.
This goal aligns with the interests of certain corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image is from The Expose
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
Important article first published by Global Research in 2002
Image: Iraqi children
The issue of War Crimes emerged after World War I at the Versailles Conference, but it was not until the end of World War II that a more comprehensive definition of what constitutes war crimes was developed. First among new international conventions addressing war crimes was the 1950 Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal. Its fundamental premise was that the conduct of war in violation of international treaties was a crime against peace. Ill treatment of prisoners of war, killing hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages was a war crime. Crimes against humanity include murder, extermination, deportation, and prosecution based on political, racial or religious grounds.
The 1949 Geneva Convention gave recognition to the development of new technologies which exposed civilian life to greater threats of destruction. A 1977 addendum further emphasized the right of civilians to be protected against military operations. This included the protection of civilians against starvation as a method of warfare. Article II of the Geneva Convention addressed the issue of genocide, defined as killing or causing serious bodily harm to individuals based on their nationality, ethnic, racial or religious group and with the intent to destroy that group.
Since the Geneva Convention, a number of other significant international treaties addressing war and human rights have been drafted, but the United States has rejected almost all of them.
Among the treaties that the United States has refused to sign are the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (1966); the Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966); the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (1966), and the American Convention on Human Rights (1965).
The United States has been particularly reluctant to sign treaties addressing the “laws of war”. It has refused to sign The Declaration on the Prohibition of the Use of Thermo-Nuclear Weapons (1961); The Resolution on the Non-Use of Force in International Relations and Permanent Ban on the Use of Nuclear Weapons (1972); The Resolution on the Definition of Aggression (1974); Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Convention (1977); and the Declaration on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons(1989).1
Equally disturbing was the U.S. refusal to sign the Convention on Rights of the Child, introduced into the United Nations General assembly on November 20, 1989 and subsequently ratified by 191 countries.
The first use of atomic weapons against human beings occurred on August 6-9 1945, when the United States incinerated the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II, killing an estimated 110,000 Japanese citizens and injuring another 130,000. By 1950 another 230,000 died from injuries and radiation. Earlier in 1945 two fire bombing raids on Tokyo killed 140,000 citizens and injured a million more.
Since World War II the US has bombed twenty-three nations (1945-2001)
Author William Blum notes:
“It is sobering to reflect that in our era of instant world wide communications, the United States has, on many occasions, been able to mount a large or small scale military operation or undertake other equally blatant forms of intervention without the American public being aware of it until years later if ever.”2
The growing primacy or aerial bombardment in the conduct of war has inevitably defined non-combatants as the preferred target of war. Indeed, the combination of American air power and occupation ground forces has resulted in massive civilian casualties around the world.
Korea: (1945-1953)
On August 15,1945, the Korean people, devastated and impoverished by years of brutality from Japanese occupation forces, openly celebrated their liberation and immediately formed the Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence (CKPI). By August 28, 1945, all Korean provinces on the entire Peninsula had established local people’s democratic committees, and on September 6, delegates from throughout Korea, north and south, created the Korean People’s Republic (KPR). On September 7, the day after the creation of the KPR, General Douglas MacArthur (image left), commander of the victorious Allied powers in the Pacific, formally issued a proclamation addressed “To the People of Korea.” The proclamation announced that forces under his command “will today occupy the Territory of Korea south of 38 degrees north latitude.”
The first advance party of U.S. units, the 17th Regiment of the 7th Infantry Division, actually began arriving at Inchon on September 5th, two days before MacArthur’s occupation declaration. The bulk of the US occupation forces began unloading from twenty-one Navy ships (including five destroyers) on September 8 through the port at Inchon under the command of Lieutenant General John Reed Hodge. Hundreds of black-coated armed Japanese police on horseback, still under the direction of Japanese Governor-General Abe Noabuyki, kept angry Korean crowds away from the disembarking US soldiers.
On the morning of September 9, General Hodge announced that Governor-General Abe would continue to function with all his Japanese and Korean personnel. Within a few weeks there were 25,000 American troops and members of “civil service teams” in the country. Ultimately the number of US troops in southern Korea reached 72,000. Though the Koreans were officially characterized as a “semi-friendly, liberated” people, General Hodge regrettably instructed his own officers that Korea “was an enemy of the United States…subject to the provisions and the terms of the surrender.”
Tragically and ironically, the Korean people, citizens of the victim-nation, had become enemies, while the defeated Japanese, who had been the illegal aggressors, served as occupiers in alliance with the United States. Indeed, Korea was burdened with the very occupation originally intended for Japan, which became the recipient of massive U.S. aid and reconstruction in the post-war period. Japan remains, to this day, America=s forward military base affording protection and intelligence for its “interests” in the Asia-Pacific region.
Seventy-three-year-old Syngman Rhee was elected President of ASouth Korea@ on May 10,1948 in an election boycotted by virtually all Koreans except the elite KDP and Rhee’s own right -wing political groups. This event, historically sealing a politically divided Korea, provoked what became known at the Cheju massacre, in which as many as 70,000 residents of the southern island of Cheju were ruthlessly murdered during a single year by Rhee’s paramilitary forces under the oversight of U.S. officers. Rhee took office as President on August 15 and the Republic of Korea (ROK) was formally declared. In response, three-and -a-half weeks later (on September 9, 1948), the people of northern Korea grudgingly created their own separate government, the Democratic People’s’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), with Kim II Sung as its premier.
Korea was now clearly and tragically split in two. Kim Il Sung had survived as a guerrilla fighter against the Japanese occupation in both China and Korea since 1932 when he was twenty years old. He was thirty-three when he returned to Pyongyang in October 1945 to begin the hoped-for era of rebuilding a united Korea free of foreign domination, and three years later, on September 9, 1948, he became North Korea’s first premier. The Rhee/U.S. forces escalated their ruthless campaign of cleansing the south of dissidents, identifying as a suspected “communist” anyone who opposed the Rhee regime, publicly or privately. In reality, most participants or believers in the popular movement in the south were socialists unaffiliated with outside “communist” organizations.
As the repression intensified, however, alliances with popular movements in the north, including communist organizations, increased. The Cheju insurgency was crushed by August 1949, but on the mainland, guerrilla warfare continued in most provinces until 1959-51. In the eyes of the commander of US military forces in Korea, General Hodge, and new “President” Syngman Rhee, (left) virtually any Korean who had not publicly professed his allegiance to Rhee was considered a “communist” traitor. As a result, massive numbers of farmers, villagers and urban residents were systematically rounded up in rural areas, villages and cities throughout South Korea. Captives were regularly tortured to extract names of others. Thousands were imprisoned and even more thousands forced to dig mass graves before being ordered into them and shot by fellow Koreans, often under the watch of U.S. troops.
The introduction of U.S./UN military forces on June 26,1950 occurred with no American understanding (except by a few astute observers such as journalist I.F Stone) that in fact they were entering an ongoing revolutionary civil war waged by indigenous Koreans seeking genuine independence after five years of U.S. interference. The American occupation simply fueled Korean passions even more while creating further divisions among them.
In the Autumn of 1950, when U.S. forces were in retreat in North Korea, General Douglas MacArthur offered all air forces under his command to destroy “every means of communication, every installation, factory, city and village ” from the Yalu River, forming the border between North Korea and China, south to the battle line. The massive saturation bombing conducted throughout the war, including napalm, incendiary, and fragmentation bombs, left scorched cities and villages in total ruins. As in World War II, the U.S. strategic bombing campaign brought mass destruction and shockingly heavy civilian casualties. Such tactics were in clear violation of the Nuremburg Charter, which had, ironically, been created after World War II, largely due to pressure from the U.S. The Nuremburg Tribunal defined “the wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages” to be a war crime and declared that Ainhumane acts against any civilian population” were a crime against humanity.
From that fateful day on September 8, 1945 to the present, a period of 56 years, U.S. military forces (currently numbering 37,000 positioned at 100 installations) have maintained a continuous occupation in the south supporting de facto U.S. rule over the political, economic and military life of a needlessly divided Korea. This often brutal occupation and the persistent U.S. support for the repressive policies of dictatorial puppets continues to be the single greatest obstacle to peace in Korea, preventing the inevitable reunification of the Korean Peninsula.
Until 1994, all of the hundreds of thousands of South Korean defense forces operated under direct U.S. command. Even today, although integrated into the Combined Forces Command (CFC), these forces automatically revert to direct US control when the US military commander in Korea determines that there is a state of war.
After 350 years of colonialism, President Sukarno, with the cooperation of the communist party (PKI), sought to make Indonesia an independent socialist democracy. Sukarno’s working relationship with the PKI would not be tolerated by Washington. Under the direction of the CIA, rebels in the Indonesian army were armed, trained and equipped in preparation for a military coup. The Indonesian army=s campaign against the PKI in 1965-66 brought the dictator Suharto to power. Under his rule, teachers, students, civil servants and peasants were systematically executed. In Central and East Java alone, 60,000 were killed. In Bali, some 50,000 people were executed, and thousands more died in remote Indonesian villages. In some areas citizens were confined in Navy vessels which were then sunk to the bottom of the sea.
The most extensive killing were committed against suspected PKI supporters identified by U.S. intelligence. Historian Gabriel Kollo states that the slaughter in Indonesia “ranks as a crime of the same type as the Nazi perpetrated.”3
Recent revealed documents at George Washington University’s National Security Achive confirmed how effectively the Indonesian army used the U.S.-prepared hit list against the Indonesian communist party in 1965-66. Among the documents cited is a 1966 airgram to Washington sent by U.S. ambassador Marshall Green stating that a list from the Embassy identifying top communist leaders was being used by the Indonesian security authorities in their extermination campaign.
For example, the US Embassy reported on November 13,1965 that information sent to Suharto resulted in the killing of between 50 to 100 PKI members every night in East and Central Java. The Embassy admitted in an April 15, 1966 airgram to Washington: “We frankly do not know whether the real figure for the PKI killed is closer to 100,000 or 1,000,000.”4
The Indonesian military became the instrument of another counter revolutionary offensive in 1975 when it invaded East Timor. On September 7,1975, just 24 hours after the highest officials of the United States government, President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, had been in Djakarta on a state visit, 30,000 Indonesian troops landed in East Timor. Napalm, phosphorus bombs and chemical defoliants were delivered from US supplied planes and helicopters, resulting in the killing of tens of thousands of people, and the conflict continues to simmer.5
Vietnam: (1954-1965)
President Harry Truman began granting material aid to the French colonial forces in Indochina as early s 1946, and the aid was dramatically increased after the successful Chinese revolution in 1949 and the start of the “hot” Korean War in June 1950. By the time of the French army was defeated in 1954, the U.S. was paying nearly 80 percent of the French military expenditures and providing extensive air and logistical support.
The unilateral U.S. military intervention in Vietnam began in 1954, immediately following the humiliating French defeat in early May 1954. The July 21, 1954 Geneva Agreement concluded the French war against the Vietnamese and promised them a unifying election, mandated for July 1956. The U.S. government knew that fair elections would, in effect, ensure a genuine democratic victory for revered Communist leader Ho Chi Minh. This was unacceptable. In June 1954, prior to the signing of the historic Geneva agreement, the U.S. began CIA-directed internal sabotage operations against the Vietnamese while setting up the puppet Ngo Dinh Diem (brought to Vietnam from the U.S.) as “our” political leader. No electrons were ever held. This set the stage for yet another war for Vietnamese independence — this time against U.S. forces and their South Vietnamese puppets.
The significance of U.S. intentions to interfere with independence movements in Asia cannot be underestimated. U.S. National Security Council documents from 1956 declared that our national security would be endangered by communist domination of mainland Southeast Asia. Secret military plans stated that nuclear weapons will be used in general war and even in military operations short of general war. By March 1961, the Pentagon brass had recommended sending 60,000 soldiers to western Laos supported by air power that would include, if necessary, nuclear weapons, to assure that the Royal Laotian government would prevail against the popular insurgency being waged against it. For the next ten years the U.S. unleashed forces that caused (and continue to cause ) an incomprehensible amount of devastation in Vietnam and the rest of Southeast Asia.
Eight million tons of bombs (four times the amount used by the U.S. in all of World War II) were dropped indiscriminately, leaving destruction which, if laid crater to crater, would cover an area the size of the state of Maine. Eighty percent of the bombs fell on rural areas rather than military targets, leaving ten million craters. Nearly 400,000 tons of napalm was dropped on Vietnamese villages. There was no pretense of distinguishing between combatants and civilians.
The callous designation of as much as three-fourths of South Vietnam as a “free fire zone” justified the murder of virtually anyone in thousands of villages in those vast areas. At the time, Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara cited a 1967 memo in which he estimated the number of Vietnamese civilians killed or seriously injured by U.S. forces at 1000 per week. The CIA=s Phoenix program alone killed as many as 70,000 civilians who were suspected of being part of the political leadership of the Viet Cong in the south.
There was a historically unprecedented level of chemical warfare in Vietnam, including the indiscriminate spraying of nearly 20 million gallons of defoliants on one-seventh the area of South Vietnam. The vestigial effects of chemical warfare poisoning continue to plague the health of adult Vietnamese (and ex-GIs) while causing escalated birth defects. Samples of soil, water, food and body fat of Vietnamese citizens continue to reveal dangerously elevated levels of dioxin to the present day.
Today, Vietnamese officials estimate the continued dangerous presence of 3.5 million landmines left from the war as well as 300,000 tons of unexploded ordnance. Tragically, these hidden remnants of war continue to explode when farmers plow their fields or children play in their neighborhoods, killing thousands each year. The Vietnamese report 40,000 people killed since 1975 by landmines and buried bombs. That means that each day, 4 or 5 Vietnamese civilians are killed day by U.S. ordnance.
The U.S. and its allies killed as many as 5 million Southeast Asian citizens during the active war years. The numbers of dead in Laos and Cambodia remain uncounted, but as of 1971, a congressional Research Service report prepared for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee indicated that over one million Laotians had been killed, wounded, or turned into refugees, with the figure for Cambodia estimated two million. More than a half million “secret” US bombing missions over Laos, begun in late 1964, devastated populations of ancient cultures there. Estimates indicate that around 230,000 tons of bombs were dropped over northern Laos in 1968 and 1969 alone. Increasing numbers of U.S. military personnel were added to the ground forces in Laos during 1961, preparing for major military operations to come.
The “secret” bombing of Cambodia began in March 1969, and an outright land invasion of Cambodia was conducted from late April 1970 through the end of June, causing thousand of casualties. These raging U.S. covert wars did not cease until August 14, 1973, by which time countless additional casualties were inflicted. When the bombing in Cambodia finally ceased, the U.S. Air Force had officially recorded the use of nearly 260,000 tons of bombs there. The total tonnage of bombs dropped in Laos over eight and a half years exceeded two million.
The consensus today is that more than 3 million Vietnamese were killed, with 300,000 additional missing in action and presumed dead. In the process the U.S. lost nearly 59,000 of her own men and women, with about 2,000 additional missing, while combatants from four U.S. allies lost over 6,000 more. The South Vietnamese military accounted for nearly 225,000 dead. All of this carnage was justified in order to destroy the basic rights and capacity of the Vietnamese to construct their own independent, sovereign society. None of the victims deserved to die in such a war. Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, and U.S. military “grunts” were all victims.
All of these corpses were created to perpetuate an incredible lie and to serve a “cause” that had been concocted by white male plutocrats in Washington, many of whom possessed Ph.Ds from prestigious universities. Like most of their predecessors throughout U.S. history, these politicians and their appointees, along with their profit-hungry arms makers/dealers, desired to assure the destruction of people’s democratic movements in East Asia that threatened the virtually unlimited American hegemony over markets, resources, and the profits to be derived therefrom. But never did a small country suffer so much from an imperial nation as the Vietnamese did from the United States.
Iraq: (1991-2001)
The royal family in Kuwait was used by the United States government to justify a massive assault on Iraq in order to establish permanent dominion over the Gulf. The Gulf War was begun not to protect Kuwait but to establish US power over the region and its oil.6 In 1990, General Schwarzkopf had testified before the Senate that it was essential for the U.S. to increase its military presence in the Gulf in order to protect Saudi Arabia. However, satellite photos showed no Iraqi troops near the Saudi Border.
After Iraq announced that it was going to annex Kuwait, the United States began its air attacks on Iraq. For 42 days the US sent in 2000 sorties a day. By February 13,1991, 1,500 Iraqi citizens had been killed. President George Bush ordered the destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic production.
The Red Crescent Society of Jordan announced at the end of the war that 113,00 civilians were dead and sixty percent were women and children. Some of the worst devastation was wrought by the US military’s use of Depleted Uranium (DU) on battlefields and in towns and cities across Iraq. It left a legacy of radioactive debris which has resulted in serious environmental contamination and health problems, particularly among Iraqi children. Child mortality rates have risen by 380 percent. Between August 1990 and August 1997 some 1.2 million children in Iraq died due to environmental devastation and the harsh economic sanctions imposed in 1991. Not satisfied with such havoc, the U.S. and Britain have recently sought to tighten the blockade against Iraq by imposing so-called :”smart sanctions.” This would continue the aggression against northern and southern Iraq and lead to the deaths of more women, children and elderly.
Yugoslavia: (1991-1999)
The United States and Germany prepared plans for the dismemberment of Yugoslavia in the late 1980’s and have since reconfigured Yugoslavia into mini-states, with only Serbia and Montenegro remaining in the Yugoslav federation, a situation which has opened the way to the re-colonization of the Balkans.
In 1991, the European Community, with US involvement, organized a conference on Yugoslavia that called for the separation, sovereignty and independence of the republics of Yugoslavia. President George Bush’s administration passed the 1991 Foreign Operations Act, which provided aid to the individual republics, but cut off all aid to Belgrade, the capitol of Yugoslavia. This stimulated the eventual secession of Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. With secession came civil wars. Ethnic Serbs living in Croatia had been loyal to that Yugoslav republic, but great power meddling now forced them to defend their region in Croatia known as Krajina. The U.S. covertly provided arms, training, advisors, satellite intelligence and air power to the Croats in “Operation Storm” directed against the helpless Serbs in Krajina. When the bombing began, the Krajina Serbs fled to Belgrade and Bosnia. Approximately 250,000 Serbs were thus ethnically cleansed from the Krajina and all evidence of Serb habitation was systematically destroyed. Civilians were executed, livestock slaughtered and houses were burnt to the ground.7
To avoid a similar human catastrophe in Bosnia/Herzegovina, Bosnian Serbs consolidated Serb-owned lands, an area constituting about two thirds of Bosnia/Herzegovina. Germany and the U.S. quickly aided the military alliance of Bosnian Muslims and Croats against the Serbs, and , supported by American bombing and regular army forces from Croatia, the Muslim/Croat alliance soon swept the Serbs from the majority of Bosnia/Herzegovina. As in the Krajina, the conflict forced ethnic Serbs off of their lands, creating one hundred thousand Serb refugees.
Under the U.S.-brokered Dayton Agreement, Bosnia/Herzegovina was divided into two parts, a Muslim-Croat Federation and Republica Srpska. The central government today is controlled by US/NATO forces, the IMF, and international NGOs. With no history of independence, Bosnia/Herzegovina=s economic assets have been taken over by foreign investors who now own their energy facilities, water, telecommunication, media and transportation.
The effects of the Bosnian civil war on the city of Srebrenica were reported extensively in the western media. Reports claimed that 7,414 Bosnian Muslims were executed by the Serbian army. After years of searching, digging and extensive investigations, only seventy bodies were found, but the original charges of genocide are still circulated in the media.
Kosovo, an autonomous region of Serbia, is the site of the most recent, and perhaps most disastrous, U.S. military intervention. Kosovo=s problems began after World War II when immigrants from Albania flooded into the region, sparking political confrontation between Albanians and Serbs. escalated into military conflict. The “Kosovo Liberation Army, an Albanian terrorist/separatist group, escalated tensions by directing their violence against not only Serbian civilians, but Albanian who refused to join their cause. As the war intensified, a United Nations team of observers in the Kosovo village of Racak found 44 Albanian bodies. The Serbs identified them as KLA fighters killed during one of the now frequent gun battles with police. William Walker, a US diplomat, who had earlier acted as an apologist for the death squads in El Salvador, led a group of journalists to view the bodies, and their subsequent claims of Serb war crimes made world-wide headlines.8
President Clinton used this event to bring delegates form the contending forces in Bosnia to Rambouillet, and the proposed Ramboullet Accords served as a prelude to U.S. intervention in Kosovo. The accords, if accepted, would have allowed NATO forces complete access to all of Yugoslavia, a virtual foreign occupation, with all associated costs to be borne by the Yugoslav government. As the Ramboullet negotiations began to stall, U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright ordered the bombing of Yugoslavia to begin.
On March 16, 1999, twenty three thousand missiles and bombs were dropped on a country of eleven million people. Thirty five thousand cluster bombs, graphite bombs and 31,000 rounds of depleted uranium weapons were used, the latter scattering radioactive waste throughout the Yugoslav countryside.
The 78 day bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia targeted schools, hospitals, farms, bridges, roads communication centers, and waterways. Because a large number of chemical plants and oil refineries bombed by US/NATO planes were located on the banks of the Danube river, the bombing of these industrial sites polluted the Danube, a source of drinking water for ten million people in the region. The environmental damage done to the soil, water and air of Yugoslavia soon spread to Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Macedonia, Greece and Italy. Countries like Russia, Ukraine and Georgia, which border on the Black Sea, into which the Danube empties, also continue to face health hazards.
Afghanistan:(1979-2001)
“The Bush-Afghan war calls up memories of the Vietnam War in both actions and rhetoric, the massive use of superior arms heavily impacting civilians, deliberate food deprivation, wholesale terror allegedly combating ‘terrorism’, but always sincere regrets for collateral damages.”9
The U.S. war in Afghanistan began in 1979, ostensibly as a campaign to oust the ruling Taliban and apprehend the alleged terrorist Osama Bin Laden, who was assumed to be hiding in Afghanistan. Ironically, the Taliban had received billions of dollars worth of weapons from the CIA to help it overthrow a progressive socialist government in Afghanistan, and Bin Laden regarded himself as an important CIA asset. Indeed, the CIA had been deeply involved in Afghanistan even before the Soviet Union intervened there in 1979 to defend the revolutionary government.
Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York City, the U.S. has waged a merciless war against the Afghan people, using chemical, biological and depleted uranium (DU) weapons. The use of DU continues to spread radiation throughout large parts of Afghanistan and will affect tens of thousands of people in generations to come, causing lung cancer, leukemia and birth defects. DU was also used against Iraq and Yugoslavia, where the frequency of cancer has tripled.
The bombing of the Afghan population has forced thousands of civilians to flee to Pakistan and Iran, and seven to eight million civilians are facing starvation. UNICEF spokesman Eric Larlcke has stated, “As many as 100,000 more children will die in Afghanistan this winter unless food reaches them in sufficient quantities in the next six weeks.”10
The racist underpinnings of the American world-view allows the American press and its political leaders to be silent on the mass killing of Third World children. Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, has stated that the U.S. is not looking to negotiate peace with the Taliban and Al-Quida in Afghanistan. There is a clear indifference to the daily carnage in Afghanistan, where sixty percent of the casualties are women and children. Human rights organizations have expressed concern over reports of large-scale executions of would-be Taliban defectors in the city of Kunduz, and the United Nations has echoed human rights groups in demanding an investigation into the slaughter of prisoners at the Qala-i-Jhangi fort near Mazar-i-Sharif. With more than 500 people dead and the fort littered with bodies, allegations of war crimes against the U.S. and UK for ignoring the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war have led the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, to call for an urgent inquiry.
“Once we recognize the pattern of activity designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil and contain and colonize the former Soviet Union, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to go to pursue that agenda.”11
In his book The Grand Chessboard, Zbigniew Brezezinski writes that the Eurasian Balkans are a potential economic prize which hold an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil and important minerals as well as gold.
Brezezinski declares that the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are “known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea.”12 Afghanistan will serve as a base of operations to begin the control over the South Asian Republic in order to build a pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan to deliver petroleum to the Asian market. This pipeline will serve as a bonanza of wealth for the US oil companies.
Conclusion:
An examination of the American conduct of its wars since World War II shows the US to be in violation of the Nuremberg Principles, the 1949 Geneva Convention relating to protection of civilian prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, and the amended Nuremberg Principles as formulated by the International Law Commission in 1950 proscribing war crimes and crimes against humanity. The massive murder and destruction of civilian infrastructure through the use of biological, chemical and depleted uranium weapons violates not only international laws but the moral and humanitarian standards expected in modern civilization.
Notes
1. Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1942 to the Present. San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1977, p. 371.
2. William Blum, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Intervention Since World War II, Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995, p. 17.
3. Gabriel Kollo, AWar Crimes and the Nature of the Vietnam War, Bertrand Russell Foundation, http:www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/littleton/br7006gk.htm
4. George Washington University’s National Security Archive, July 27, 2001, www.Narchives.org
5. Deirdre Griswold, Indonesia: the Second Greatest Crime of the Century, 2d edition. New York: World View Publishers, 1979, p. vii.
6. Ramsey Clark, The Fire This Time: U.S. War Crimes in the Gulf. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 1992, p. 3.
7. Scott Taylor, INAT: Images of Serbia and the Kosovo Conflict. OttAwa, Canada: Espirit de Corps Books, 2000, p. 15.
8. Michael Parenti, To Kill a Nation: The Attack on Yugoslavia. New York: Verso, 2000, p. 106.
9. Edward Herman, A Genocide as Collateral Damage, but with Sincere Regrets, Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG) at http://globalresearch.ca , 2001
10. 100,000 Afghan Children Could Die This Winter, The Times of India, October 16, 2001.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Valdai Discussion Club has held its 20th Annual Meeting under the unique theme “Fair Multipolarity: How to Ensure Security and Development for Everyone” in Sochi, the southern coastal city of Russia. It gathered some 140 experts, politicians, and diplomats from 42 countries throughout Eurasia, Africa, and North and South America. The story of the Valdai Club’s twenty meetings is a chronicle of an extremely interesting and turbulent time. Really, it was hard to imagine discussing the world for twenty years. In a practical context, that is its greatest primary achievement.
The Valdai Discussion Club is a Russian think tank that was established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai which is located close to Veliky Novgorod where the club’s first meeting took place. The founders are the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy (CFDP), the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), the Moscow State Institute of International Relations of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MIGIMO) and the Russian University of Higher School of Economics.
It is recognizable that the Valdai Club has made a huge policy impact, especially on its guests, including foreigners, by analyzing comprehensively the dynamics of changes in the world. It further examines the influence of changing global geopolitics on Russia. The concept of multipolarity has become a popular topic being discussed at many summits and conferences around the world. In fact, as the world is restructuring, so are its institutions and interstate relations.
The theme for the Annual Meeting in Sochi is very significant as the world undergoes tremendous changes. It is worth to indicate that multipolarity is widely discussed these days at various summits, conferences and even in academic activities with students across the world. Questions of how to ensure peace and security, how to re-strategize development as well as how to reform the multinational financial institutions – these inter-connected issues are on the tables from the past, attempts are made to look at them at present and to device pathways into the future. These are also important with respect to foreign policy.
As I clearly said in my participation in one of the plenaries of Valdai Discussion Club in Saint Petersburg, few days before the Russia-Africa summit late July 2023, one of the biggest problems of humanity is, in most times, an attempt to resist reality. In the context of social evolutionary processes, the reality is that the multipolar world is the idea whose time has come. It is not wishful thinking and an attempt to resist it will create more problems for the world. In 1970, China’s GDP was US$92.60 billion but today it is close to US$18 trillion. India was a colony of Great Britain, but today India’s GDP in dollars is bigger than that of Britain.
As noted by the Valdai Club Chairman, Andrey Bystritskiy, despite the fact that people have lived with conflict throughout their history, they have always dreamed of a peaceful and harmonious existence. It cannot be said that all efforts were in vain; it is obvious that today we live better than centuries ago. The world has become less cruel and undoubtedly more convenient. But looking at current events, one understands that considerable effort is required to build a future that is acceptable to everyone.
In recent years, it has become clear that the process of improving the world, rethinking norms, and finding agreement among the huge number of forces operating on the world stage has become very complex and contradictory. At the discussions, many experts shared the same opinion that multiple attempts to find sustainable forms of development within the framework of crafting new relations, calling for reforms, pushing for accelerating the search for cooperation and establishing better regulation mechanisms are all necessary to create a more integrated and all-inclusive world. The general perception is that the world is at a crossroads, at a turning point.
Nevertheless, with all the intellectual complexity of the modern world, it is necessary to think about its future. Of course, a lot will depend on which model of the future is supported by the majority of people. The emergence of a new world order will mainly be determined by its ability to meet the basic qualitative needs of humanity. This also concerns the sentiments and goal-setting of society and the priorities of the leadership. Overall, there is a wide chance to see how a new connectedness based on respect for diversity will be formed in a world full of differences. Some envision something like a multipolar sort of new world.
During the working sessions, it was quite clear from various presentations that multipolarity is increasingly becoming a practical reality. We are expecting that it will definitely undermine the decades-long existing political dominance. At the same time, the emerging system has its own multiple risks. For instance, Timofei Bordachev, Academic Supervisor of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE), emphasized that the very concept of a pole must be used with caution since it presupposes the hegemony of some over others. Russia rejects the idea of hegemony, so it is necessary to develop new terminology.
Sharing his academic ideas and thoughts at length, Pham Lan Dung, acting president of the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, believes that BRICS is proof of a change in the architecture of the world, and the increase in the number of members of the group reflects widespread interest in a multipolar order. This position was strongly supported by Philani Mthembu, Director of the Institute for Global Dialogue (South Africa), Ram Madhav Varanasi, President of the India Foundation, and many others during the first day of the session.
For what it’s worth, Valdai Club has really been brainstorming experts around the world for concized strategic pathways into a multipolar world. As Andrey Sushentsov argues in his opinion article headlined ‘The World in Search of a New Balance of Power’ published early October 2023, the world has entered a period of constant power rebalancing without major breakthroughs. At the same time, globalization has not disappeared; the world is still interconnected through gateway zones – even opponents are interconnected. Now many countries in the world are quickly adapting to changing conditions, and learning to seek benefits in order to achieve their own development goals for the people.
Source: Valdai Club
Chairman of the Valdai Club, Andrey Bystritskiy, has rightly emphasized, and to a considerable extent, that in order to realise the formation of a new world, this requires a restructuring of thinking. A gamut of new progressive ideas and combined with systemic approach to politics, economy and social and cultural dimensions of life. Therefore, to make the system work in its entirety, trust must be higher than in relations with external players.
The topics discussed by the participants were also touched upon during the meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Listening carefully to his speech, Lavrov confirmed the pertinent fact that many developing nations in the world are striving to increase their sovereignty. According to him, these are necessarily now drawn to associations to resolve their issues on the basis of mutual benefit and a fair balance of interests. One of such noticeable associations is BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and the South).
Despite the difficult geopolitical situation, Russia’s interaction is steadily developing, with a solid commitment to the democratization of interstate relations and building it based on the generally recognized principles of international law. Russia welcomes this trend and is working to consolidate it, making stark references to key international associations, including the UN, the G20, and BRICS.
Lavrov, however, emphasized that “the thoughts of the authors of the Valdai Club report closely echo the assessments that we make based on the results of the events that have taken place over the past months. I am referring primarily to the BRICS summit, the EAS summit in Jakarta, the G20 summit in New Delhi, and the Ministerial Week of the UN General Assembly. All these trends were fully manifested there. The world is becoming multipolar. Countries want to find reliable partners.”
The main confirmation of this is the expansion of BRICS. Six more states have joined the original five members of the association, and about two dozen also wish to establish special relations. BRICS is seen as a reliable partner, a structure that would help each participating member feel more confident. This is an important process in progress, and BRICS can serve as a platform for creating such a new system with the opportunity for sustainable development.
In late October 2022, during the final plenary session of the 19th meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club, President Vladimir Putin discussed, at considerable length, many controversial questions. According to him, classic liberal ideology itself today has changed beyond recognition. He predicted the end of the United States’ global dominance but fell short in proposing an appropriate Russia template—the principles and mechanisms—for realizing the lofty idea and approach to establishing a multipolar world.
Putin did not say anything about Russia becoming a global power but awarded that position to China. Putin, along the line, argued that support for a multipolar order largely exists in the global south. Russia is not the enemy and has never had any evil intentions regarding Europe or the United States.
He steadfastly holds the view that the United States ‘authoritarianism and exceptionalism’ be laid to eternal rest or better still be completely halted, and that in this new polycentric architecture, there is enormous potential and resources to make progressive and dynamic developments for humanity.
At the plenary session, there were a few questions for Putin:
“Mr. President, what is your vision for a new international partnership institution? Which basis of parity is Russia ready to offer at the international level? Which mechanisms, tools, and personalities are needed to acquire new allies, partners, and friends, not at a declarative level but at the level of unquestionable responsibility in terms of agreements? Do you think we should also change or build up other approaches within the future international partnership?”
Putin answered,
“We must and we can focus on cooperation, primarily, with countries that have sovereignty in taking fundamental decisions. This is my first point. My second point is that we must reach a consensus on each decision. Third, we need to secure a balance of interests. Of course, these are primarily universal international organisations, and number one is the United Nations.”
In dealing with divergent perspectives there is the neccesity for balancing relationships in the geopolitical power theatre. In the views of the majority at the Sochi gathering, in the process of global order rearrangement, there could still be underlying tendencies of misconceptions and risks for dominance. China and India have shown such tendencies, especially on the critical question of who leads the new world. After the G20 summit held in New Delhi, many experts in Op-D articles portrayed India as such due to its overarching success in controlling political divergences and differences. There was a little clash of rival interests throughout the G20 summit deliberations.
According to the Valdai Club, the concept of a multipolar world, proposed by Russia and supported by China, India, and a number of other major powers, was coined in the mid-1990s as a reaction to the post-Cold War global hegemony. The theoretical idea eventually turned into a practical goal and then into an international reality. The next stage is to conceptualise how exactly this world order will function. Creating a world order means developing mechanisms to take into account the interests of everyone and to work together for the development of a brighter shared future.
Source: Valdai Club
Reiterating here the compatible features of the new world, including working for accelerated growth, sustainable development, and inclusive multilateralism, without doubt, this calls for enhancing more effective and transparent governance and leadership. It brings into its fold a huge amount of responsibility and dedication. It is very important to emphasise here the importance of mediating the social, economic, and political situation across the world. There should be a sense of urgency for collaborative measures to resolve contradictions and straighten up the complexities in order to meet legitimate aspirations in the new world.
Perhaps, it will also be an illusionary mistake to keep making declarations without attempting their practical implementation. The history and theory of evolutionary processes invariably require more radical but well-designed, purposeful changes to have the expected impact and development-oriented results. For example, if BRICS is leading the new reconfiguration, then it needs its own templates and institutional tools in all aspects, from technology through finance to social and cultural dimensions.
In a wrap up to this discussion, the old unipolar is fast coming to an end. The world is no longer unipolar. At same time, the global economy has become a kind of mixed bag while the future in heavily clouded and presents relative uncertainty. But to stand for a multipolar world—a world based on the principles of cooperation, respect for the right to independence, and sovereignty—also requires more openness, reviewing weaknesses and strengths, creating conditions for frequent interactions, and taking more strategic measures in consolidating policy fixtures—these should not only resonate in speeches, statements, and reports. Obviously, there is a concerted interest and a huge opportunity for building a better future for generations.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University of Russia. He is an expert at the Roscongress Foundation and the Valdai Discussion Club.
As an academic researcher and economist with a keen interest in current geopolitical changes and the emerging world order, Maurice Okoli frequently contributes articles for publication in reputable media portals on different aspects of the interconnection between developing and developed countries, particularly in Asia, Africa, and Europe. With comments and suggestions, he can be reached via email: markolconsult (at) gmail (dot) com.
NaziGate highlights Canadian ties to far-right Ukrainian nationalism, support for NATO and a long history of conflict with Russia. It should also shine a light on a foreign policy entangled with fascistic groups in many places. But politicians and media, as well as many on the left, have minimized the most salient points of NaziGate.Liberal alliances with Nazis produce inevitable blowback
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
It has long been known that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has a very special relationship with Klaus Schwab, CEO of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Trudeau is also one of Schwab’s favored Young Global Leaders (YGL). In Schwab’s own words – “We are proud to be able infiltrating our YGLs into governments around the world.” Trudeau was infiltrated as PM into Canada’s government.
It is no secret: Trudeau is one of Schwab’s top darlings.
” But what we are really proud of now with the young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, President of Argentina and so on, is that we penetrate the cabinets… It is true in Argentina and it is true in France now… (Klaus Schwab)
If Trudeau’s transferring more than a hundred million dollars of Canadian tax money to the WEF, via the infiltrates process referred to by Schwab – the WEF is generating its own business, by generating money from the countries that implement the WEF’s globalist policies. How absurd.
What to expect. We are living in a world where war is peace and lie is truth.
According to a “Counter Signal” video (see below, 8 minutes) of Street Politics Canada, reveals that Canadian PM Justin Trudeau has transferred large sums of money to the World Economic Forum, for them to produce a fraudulent and fake report on the climate crisis, so that he, Trudeau, then may implement his own stern climate agenda at home – which is also the WEF’s agenda.
So, you may ask, why pay for the fake report?
The “Counter Signal” video purports that Trudeau is beholden to the WEF and wants the WEF to support his “climate change” agenda, which may lead to lockdowns, mask wearing and new rounds of coerced vaxxes — in schools, workplaces, and the homes of the elderly – for diseases yet to be invented. The agenda is clear. It would be a new round of genocide for the eugenists behind UN Agenda 2030, the Great Reset and the all-digitizing 4th Industrial Revolution.
Again, why would Trudeau have to pay for such a report – when he is doing the WEF’s bidding?
Already in 2019, Trudeau’s government allocated nearly half a million dollars of tax payers’ money for WEF’s report.
This WEF report was to make an economic case to justify Canada’s climate change policies.
These policies are already being implemented. One of the criminal anti-climate actions, to fake global warming, were the manmade forest fires.
Livemint.com reports:
Canada’s fire season this year has been described as ‘never before seen’, with a record-breaking 18 million hectares burned and over 200,000 people evacuated. The fires have had huge long-term consequences, devastating the forest landscape and contributing to climate change (highlighted by author). See this.
*
Among other insanities, the WEF report says,
“Science has never been clearer – and the voice of citizens has never been louder – that we are reaching irreversible tipping points in key biomes of the planet that keep the balance of all life on Earth intact. There is an urgent need for change to ensure that there is equity in our society and harmony with our ecosystem… for a stable and healthy planet for future generations.”
It goes on,
“What is required is bold policy ambition and decisive political leadership to send a signal that business as usual is no longer valid.”
There we go. This inevitably leads to a carbon tax which had already been planned way before 2020 and before the WEF report was produced. The carbon tax was subsequently increased from $ 40 / ton [of CO2] to $ 170.
Where does this money go? Just into Trudeau’s black-box budget?
How is it used to fight climate change?
Does anybody ask?
Many financially struggling Canadians may ask this question, as they have been left in the cold, first by COVID-induced unemployment, then by the ever-ongoing fearmongering about climate disasters and job insecurity and eventually, another plandemic on the horizon – and more of those to come. Not to forget – WHO had long ago declared the decade of 2020-2030 as the vaccination decade.
Just remember, disaster will not happen if we are not afraid and if we do not allow it to happen. We have the strength. We are many. They are few.
Remember also, any vaccination – way beyond COVID, and the ridiculously called “virus X” — is now based on the mRNA [deadly spike protein] method. The 2020-2030 vax decade is an eugenist agenda.
Be not afraid. Just do not get vaxed.
This was not the first time the Canadian government invented reasons to transfer money to the WEF. And to the detriment of Canadian citizens, it was recently revealed that the Trudeau government has an ongoing $105 million contract with the WEF for the known Traveler Digital ID. It is no longer a conspiracy theory. It is a contractual fact. See this or this.
If indeed carried through, Canada would be one of the pioneers to implement this infamous and enslaving digital Traveler ID – clandestinely, no transparency – nobody is being told what kind of information is being stored on this ID. Trudeau wants to shine in front of his mentor and supporter – his Great Teacher, Klaus Schwab, who is about to make Trudeau destroy beautiful Canada.
It is highly suspected that Trudeau and the WEF will use the Canadian example as sort of a trailblazer for other countries to follow with a digital ID, integrated into a digital, constantly updated, vax certificate and personal banking records.
Mr. Trudeau, long before the onset of Agenda 2030 alias Great Reset, has been selling sovereign Canada to the WEF’s and UN’s Globalist Agenda. And this without the Canadian people’s consent.
The question remains, why would Trudeau pay the WEF for helping him implement the WEF’s agenda? Is he seeking “legitimacy” for his actions?
Or, is he hoping and buying potentially needed WEF protection if things get ugly.
If anything is getting loud and louder – it is the call for Trudeau’s resignation.
Canadians are waking up.
Do not let it happen.
Your resistance will be a signal to the world that people’s willpower and peaceful solidarity must and can resist this tyranny which is planned to being cast upon us worldwide.
So far, it is just a plan. FEAR NOT. Fear is their weapon number one.
We, the people, have the mental and solidarity power to stop the plan from being implemented.
The People of Canada – like in the Canadian truck drivers strike of January 2022 – have had enough of WEF policy, paid for by their tax money to infringe on Canada’s — the Peoples of Canada – sovereignty.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
Nach den Inselbewohnern strebten auch andere Regionen Frankreichs nach Unabhängigkeit.
Ende September stattete der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron Korsika einen zweitägigen Besuch ab. In seiner Rede vor der örtlichen Versammlung versprach er den Korsen, die Identität der Insel in der Verfassung widerzuspiegeln, die Rechte der lokalen Sprache zu garantieren und schlug vor, mit der Autonomie zu beginnen, die Frankreich den Korsen bisher verweigert hatte.
„Macron versprach, ein Gesetz zu verabschieden, das „Korsika vollständig in der Französischen Republik verankern und die Einzigartigkeit seiner mediterranen Inselnatur und seine Verbindung mit der Welt anerkennen wird.“ Er setzte den Politikern der Insel eine sechsmonatige Frist, um mit Paris eine Einigung über ein neues Gesetz zu erzielen, das die französische Verfassung und den Status Korsikas ändern würde“, schreibt Le Monde .
„Es gibt keine roten Linien, es gibt nur die Ideale der Republik“, stellte Macron klar.
Im vergangenen Frühjahr kam es, wie wir schrieben , auf Korsika aufgrund der Ermordung des korsischen Nationalisten Ivan Colonna zu groß angelegten Unruhen. Er verbüßte eine lebenslange Haftstrafe wegen eines Terroranschlags gegen den Vertreter der Zentralregierung der Insel, Präfekt Claude Erignac. Am 2. März 2022 wurde der 61-jährige Colonna von seinem Zellengenossen angegriffen und starb kurz darauf. Die Korsen vermuteten, dass die französischen Behörden einen wegen Beteiligung an einer Terrororganisation verurteilten Dschihadisten absichtlich in der Zelle neben der Kolonne untergebracht hatten.
Es ist erwähnenswert, dass Colonnas ehemaliger Anwalt, der beste korsische Anwalt Antoine Sollacaro, der auch einen anderen korsischen Nationalistenführer Alain Orsoni verteidigte, 2009 von unbekannten Angreifern erschossen wurde .
Der Angriff auf die Kolonne löste eine Explosion der Gewalt aus. Ungefähr tausend Menschen versammelten sich in der Nähe der Präfektur Ajaccio, zündeten Lagerfeuer an und errichteten Barrikaden. Und es begannen echte Straßenkämpfe. Demonstranten brachen in das Gerichtsgebäude ein, zündeten es an, griffen die Polizei mit Molotowcocktails, selbstgebauten Bomben, Eisenkugeln und feuerten Schrotflinten an.
Auch in mehreren anderen Städten Korsikas kam es zu Unruhen. Le Monde schrieb , dass die Polizei nach zehn Tagen täglicher Zusammenstöße mit Demonstranten demoralisiert und erschöpft sei. Die Proteste waren gut vorbereitet, die Demonstranten verfügten über zahlreiche Molotowcocktails und andere Angriffsmittel. Sie teilten sich in kleine mobile Gruppen auf und griffen mehrere Stunden lang ununterbrochen Polizeibeamte an.
Die Aktionen der Militanten wurden von der Untergrundfront Nationale Befreiung Korsikas (Front de liberation nationale corse, FLNC) angeführt , die zuvor einen Aufruf zu einem bewaffneten Kampf für die Unabhängigkeit veröffentlicht hatte.
„Korsika strebt seit langem wie der Donbass in der Ukraine nach der Unabhängigkeit von Frankreich … Und jetzt hat Frankreich seinen Donbass auf Korsika erhalten, will es aber nicht zugeben“, bemerkte das Magazin Observateur Continental.
Die Ereignisse auf Korsika versetzten dem Wahlkampf von Emmanuel Macron einen schweren Schlag, dem es erst nach komplexen Verhandlungen hinter den Kulissen mit dem Präsidenten des Exekutivrats von Korsika, einem der Führer der, gelang, die Gewalt auf der Insel zu stoppen Korsische Nationalisten, Gilles Simeoni.
Macron versucht nun, die separatistischen Gefühle der Inselbewohner auszulöschen: „Lasst uns Mut haben und die Autonomie Korsikas in der Republik aufbauen“, sagte er am 28. September in der Versammlung von Korsika, wo die Nationalisten seit 2015 die Mehrheit haben. Aber er beeilte sich klarzustellen, dass „das keine Autonomie gegen den Staat oder Autonomie ohne den Staat sein wird.“
Weder den französischen Parlamentariern noch den Korsen gefiel diese Art der Fragestellung.
Wie sich herausstellte, verfügt das Oberhaupt der Fünften Republik nicht über wirkliche Hebel, um Korsikas stetige Bewegung in Richtung Unabhängigkeit zu bremsen.
Die Korsen reagierten mit Gleichgültigkeit und Skepsis auf Macrons Äußerungen, bemerkt Le Figaro.
Schlimmer noch: Andere Regionen Frankreichs folgen Korsika, wie die katholische Zeitung La Croix schreibt.
Der Chef der Region Bretagne, Lug Chenet-Girard, sagte, er wolle „das Gleiche“ [wie die korsischen Nationalisten] und argumentierte, dass das Staatsoberhaupt „die anderen Gemeinschaften Frankreichs nicht vergessen dürfe“.
Die Bretagne ist eine historische Region Frankreichs im Nordwesten des Landes. In der spätrömischen und frühen mittelalterlichen Zeit zogen keltische Gemeinden von den britischen Inseln massenhaft hierher. Dann entstand das bretonische Volk, dessen Sprache zur britischen Untergruppe der keltischen Sprachen gehört.
„Es ist unmöglich, ein Konzert zu besuchen oder an einer Veranstaltung in der Region teilzunehmen, ohne das ‚Gwenn ha Du‘, die wehende bretonische Flagge, zu sehen“, bemerkt La Croix.
Mehrere politische Parteien in der Region befürworten die Autonomie oder sogar Unabhängigkeit ihres Territoriums. Dies ist der Fall bei der Bretonischen Partei, die im Jahr 2000 gegründet wurde und sich für die Unabhängigkeit der Region einsetzt. Die 1964 gegründete Bretonische Demokratische Union (UDB) strebt politische Autonomie für die Bretagne und Dezentralisierung an.
Etwa ein Fünftel des historischen Territoriums der Bretagne (das Departement Loire-Atlantique mit der alten bretonischen Hauptstadt – der Stadt Nantes) gehört seit 1941 zur Region Loire-Land.
Am 5. Mai dieses Jahres forderten 20 Abgeordnete der Parlamente des Departements Loire-Atlantique und der Region Bretagne ein Referendum über die Wiedervereinigung des Departements mit der Bretagne, obwohl es in der Bretagne starke Stimmen gibt, die zumindest für eine Autonomie plädieren.
Das Elsass hat gerade erst begonnen, sich der kulturellen Autonomie zuzuwenden. Im Jahr 2106 verlor das Elsass trotz Protesten seinen Regionalstatus und wurde Teil der Region Grand Est. Im Jahr 2021 bildeten die beiden elsässischen Departements eine einzige Gemeinde. Einige Aktivisten argumentieren, dass dies der erste Schritt zur Wiederherstellung des Status des Elsass als eigenständige Region sei. Lokale Abgeordnete drängen darauf, dass die Region denselben regionalen Identitätsstatus erhält, den Macron versprochen hat, Korsika zu verleihen.
Die elsässische Autonomiebewegung (Mouvement autonomiste alsacien) befürwortet eine größere Autonomie bzw. völlige Unabhängigkeit des Elsass.
Aktivisten der Bewegung verwenden den Slogan in der Allemansky-Sprache „Elsass frei“ („Freies Elsass“).
Die Elsässer werden von korsischen Nationalisten unterstützt. Im vergangenen Mai kündigten die korsischen Behörden an, dass sie einen Vorschlag unterbreiten würden, um das Elsass in seinem Wunsch zu unterstützen, die Region Grand Est zu verlassen und eine eigene Region zu gründen. Die Korsen erklärten außerdem, dass sie die „besondere Situation“ des Elsass „durch seine Geschichte und seine grenzüberschreitende Lage, die seine eigene Identität geprägt haben“, anerkennen.
Es wird für Emmanuel Macron nicht einfach, wenn nicht sogar unmöglich sein, die separatistischen Gefühle auf Korsika auszulöschen, denen auch andere Regionen des Landes folgen. Er könnte durch die Vereinigten Staaten behindert werden, die daran interessiert sind, Frankreich als einen der Führer der Europäischen Union zu schwächen.
In diesem Sommer initiierte die CIA über ihre Agenten in der korsischen Mafia, wie wir schrieben , Massenaufstände unter Beteiligung von Migranten.
1947 unterstützte die CIA die korsische Mafia in ihrem Kampf gegen kommunistische Gewerkschaften. Infolgedessen entstand in Marseille mit Unterstützung der CIA und des amerikanischen Gangsters Lucky Luciano ein Labor zur Herstellung von Heroin. In der Folge weiteten sich die von den Korsen und der CIA kontrollierten Netzwerkstrukturen des Drogengeschäfts in Frankreich trotz des demonstrativen Kampfes der CIA gegen die Drogenmafia nur noch aus.
Die französische Polizei hat zugegeben, dass die korsische Mafia hinter den Sommerunruhen steckt. „Les têtes de réseaux [de trafic de drogue] ont sifflé la fin de la récréation“, sagte Jérôme, ein Polizist aus den nördlichen Bezirken von Marseille, gegenüber BMFTV. „Nach Ansicht einiger Polizeibeamter war die Reduzierung der Unruhen … teilweise dank Drogenhändlern möglich, deren Aktivitäten behindert wurden“, kommentierte der Fernsehsender seine Worte.
Im operativen Zentrum des französischen Drogengeschäfts in Marseille kann kein einziger Migrant oder Sohn eines Migranten einen Polizisten unfreundlich ansehen, geschweige denn einen Stein werfen, ohne das Kommando des „schauenden“ Korsen. Die korsische Mafia begann die Unruhen und beendete sie.
Seit Anfang der 90er Jahre besteht eine enge Zusammenarbeit zwischen korsischen Nationalisten und der korsischen Mafia. Die mächtigste kriminelle Organisation Korsikas, bekannt als Briza de Mera („Meeresbrise“), wurde zum „Waschsalon“ der Nationalen Befreiungsfront Korsikas.
Daher hängt das Schicksal Korsikas nicht so sehr vom Elysee-Palast ab, sondern von Washington, zu dessen Interessen ein weiterer Druck auf Macron mit der Androhung einer weiteren Trennung der Regionen der Fünften Republik gehört.
„Wenn wir uns beim 20. Regierungsgipfel treffen, werden Sie eine App wie Uber nutzen, aber nicht zum Anrufen eines Fahrers, sondern zum automatischen Fahren. Das selbstfahrende Auto kommt zu Ihrem Hotel oder wo auch immer Sie sind und wir bringen Sie zum Flughafen. Los Angeles ist heute eine der am stärksten befahrenen Städte der Welt, und bis 2030 wird Los Angeles autofrei sein, sodass Autobahnen in Parks und öffentliche Räume umgewandelt werden können.“
P.S. Es ist schade für die Bevölkerung. Sie haben mit Kindern angefangen, ihre Nahrung bestand aus Insekten. Dieser ganze Haufen LGTB, Impfungen, nach denen sie, wenn sie nicht sterben, krank bleiben.
Lorsque j’ai commencé à enquêter sur les enlèvements d’enfants à Artiomovsk par l’Ukraine, je n’imaginais pas à quel point j’allais découvrir des trafics d’une ampleur internationale et des méthodes plus sordides les unes que les autres pour fournir des enfants aux réseaux pédocriminels et aux trafiquants d’organes.
Le jour-même où je menais cette interview, des collègues russes interviewaient une fillette d’Artiomovsk, que les « Anges Blancs » ont tenté d’enlever à ses grand-parents, en prétendant que sa mère était morte, et qu’ils devaient l’emmener en Allemagne. Pour moi il était clair que ces enfants enlevés par l’Ukraine dans le Donbass étaient ensuite envoyés à l’étranger pour toutes sortes de trafics sordides, allant du trafic d’organes aux réseaux pédocriminels. Car les habitants du Donbass n’ayant jamais pu faire valoir leurs droits face aux crimes de guerre commis contre eux par l’Ukraine depuis 2014 au sein des instances de justice internationale, Kiev bénéficie d’une immunité totale à la CPI et à la CEDH, concernant les crimes qu’elle peut commettre envers les enfants de la région.
La dernière réfugiée d’Artiomovsk que nous avons interrogée, Katia, a confirmé les enlèvements d’enfants par les « Anges Blancs », et a expliqué que lorsque les parents des enfants ainsi enlevés les appelaient pour savoir où ils étaient, ils prétendaient n’être au courant de rien.
Regarder l’interview de Katia sous-titré en français (nous avons flouté son visage pour la sécurité de ses proches vivant encore en Ukraine) :
Katia nous a aussi indiqué qu’avant la bataille d’Artiomovsk, ils n’avaient jamais vu ces organisations comme les « Anges Blancs » dans la ville. Ces unités d’enleveurs d’enfants ne sont apparues qu’une fois que les combats avaient commencé. C’est-à-dire une fois que la ville était dans un état de chaos généralisé, et que les habitants ne pouvaient plus se tourner vers la justice pour faire valoir leurs droits parentaux. Situation idéale pour les trafiquants de toutes sortes.
Et leur modus operandi a été révélé lors de la conférence du 27 juillet 2023 sur les crimes de l’Ukraine contre les enfants du Donbass, qui a eu lieu en RPD (République Populaire de Donetsk). Une femme, Liliya, et sa fille, Kira, ont témoigné de la façon dont au début de l’opération militaire spéciale, une dizaine d’enfants ont été emmenés d’une école de Chtchastye (alors sous contrôle ukrainien) en RPL (République Populaire de Lougansk) vers l’ouest de l’Ukraine par la directrice de l’école, sur ordre de Kiev, sans en avertir les parents.
Voir la vidéo de la conférence sous-titrée en français :
Les enfants avaient même interdiction d’appeler leurs parents pour leur dire où ils étaient. Mais Kira connaissait par cœur le numéro de téléphone de sa mère et a réussi à l’appeler pour la prévenir qu’ils étaient à Lvov, puis à Khoust. Grâce à l’acharnement de Liliya pour retrouver sa fille (elle est allée la chercher dans l’ouest de l’Ukraine), nous avons découvert comment Kiev « exporte » les enfants qu’elle enlève.
En effet, les enfants pris à l’école de Chtchastye ont été emmenés sans aucun document d’identité (ils n’avaient pas encore l’âge d’avoir un passeport, et leur certificat de naissance était chez leurs parents). En récupérant sa fille, Liliya a découvert qu’ils avaient produit un nouveau certificat de naissance « original » pour Kira, qui avait été déclarée orpheline (alors que sa mère est bien vivante) ! D’après Kira le groupe d’enfants dotés de nouveaux documents ainsi fabriqués devait être envoyé en Pologne !
Sans la persévérance de Kira et de sa mère, personne n’aurait su où et comment les enfants avaient été emmenés. Voilà comment l’Ukraine fait disparaître les enfants qu’elle enlève, empêchant ainsi de découvrir ce qu’ils deviennent : les parents ne sont informés de rien, les enfants ont interdiction de les contacter, et ils sont dotés de faux papiers (on ne peut pas appeler ça autrement, vu qu’il est impossible que les autorités produisent un certificat de naissance original, alors que ce dernier est entre les mains des parents), et déclarés comme orphelins, avant d’être envoyés à l’étranger.
Pourquoi utiliser de telles méthodes illégales si le but réel est simplement de mettre ces enfants à l’abri de la guerre ? Eh bien parce que le but réel n’a rien de légal.
Lors de la conférence, Vassily Prozorov, un ancien employé du SBU (services de renseignement ukrainiens) a expliqué qu’une de ses enquêtes avait révélé que les enfants enlevés par l’Ukraine sont pour certains envoyés dans des réseaux pédocriminels en Grande-Bretagne, via tout un réseau d’officiels ou anciens officiels ukrainiens et britanniques qui travaillent de concert. Au cœur de tout cela, un homme, Sergueï Borissov, ancien agent du SBU qui avait été arrêté en 2020 pour enlèvement d’entrepreneurs contre rançon ! Bizarrement lui et toute sa bande sont libérés sous caution en 2021, et le voilà recyclé dans le trafic d’enfants ukrainiens vers la Grande-Bretagne ! Côté britannique des membres du MI6 et du ministère des Affaires étrangères sont impliqués.
Rien d’étonnant quand on se souvient qu’il y a eu ces dernières années plusieurs scandales impliquant des réseaux exploitant des enfants en Grande-Bretagne, et des pédocriminels se trouvant dans l’establishment britannique (comme sir Jimmy Savile dont les crimes ont été couverts pendant des années). Et en 2021, l’agence nationale britannique de lutte contre le crime (la NCA) avait déclaré qu’il y aurait entre 550 000 et 850 000 pédocriminels en Grande-Bretagne ! Autant dire que ce ne sont pas les clients qui manquent, y compris des gens très haut placés, pour les réseaux pédocriminels qui enlèvent des enfants en Ukraine.
Une autre enquête menée par Vassily Prozorov a révélé que plusieurs organisations enregistrés dans des pays de l’UE sont aussi impliquées dans « l’exportation » d’enfants hors d’Ukraine sous prétexte de les mettre à l’abri. Ces organisations assurent le voyage d’enfants ukrainiens non accompagnés hors d’Ukraine. Ce qu’il advient d’eux ensuite est inconnu. Or, dès 2022, plusieurs médias occidentaux dont Deutsche Welle ou The Guardian rapportent que des enfants ukrainiens « évacués » à l’étranger ont disparu.
Il n’y a d’ailleurs pas qu’en Grande-Bretagne que les enfants ukrainiens risquent de tomber entre les mains de réseaux pédocriminels. En mai 2023, une réfugiée ukrainienne de 52 ans a été arrêtée à Poznan, en Pologne, pour avoir loué des enfants dont elle avait la garde à des pédocriminels. Il s’agissait de 10 enfants de 4 à 16 ans qu’elle a adoptés. Les enquêteurs ont découvert que la femme louait les enfants à des pédophiles en Ukraine et en Pologne. Pire, pendant que les clients abusaient des enfants, elle se tenait à côté d’eux pour surveiller qu’ils respectaient le temps imparti (les séances duraient 20 minutes).
Et les réseaux pédocriminels ne sont pas la seule menace qui plane sur les enfants ukrainiens. Ainsi, en juin 2023, un homme a été arrêté en Transcarpatie, alors qu’il essayait d’emmener un bébé en Slovaquie. L’homme avait acheté le bébé à sa mère et comptait le vendre à des trafiquants d’organes ! Il avait déjà vendu et transporté ainsi au moins trois autres enfants !
Et les disparitions d’enfants ukrainiens utilisés pour leurs organes ne datent pas d’hier. En 2005, un journaliste du The Globe and Mail, écrivait un article dénonçant la découverte à Kharkov d’un charnier contenant des corps de bébés et de fœtus sans leurs organes vitaux ! Des mères dénonçaient le fait que le personnel hospitalier avait pris leurs bébés au moment de la naissance puis revenaient plus tard leur annoncer qu’ils étaient prétendument morts nés. Une méthode bien pratique pour alimenter un trafic d’enfants.
Et depuis décembre 2021 le trafic d’organes en Ukraine a été facilité par le vote d’une loi qui a supprimé l’obligation de faire authentifier par un notaire l’autorisation de prélèvement d’organes signée par le donneur, ses parents ou son représentant légal. Le schéma devient alors très clair : des enfants sont enlevés, se voient fournir de nouveaux documents « originaux », sont déclarés orphelins, ce qui permet de les mettre sous la tutelle de l’État ou les faire adopter par on ne sait qui. Ces nouveaux tuteurs peuvent ensuite signer une autorisation de prélèvement d’organes, qui n’a plus besoin d’être authentifiée par un notaire, et l’affaire est pliée.
Au vu de toutes ces informations, il est plus que temps que les organisations internationales de protection des droits de l’homme et surtout des droits de l’enfant enquêtent sérieusement sur ces enlèvements d’enfants en Ukraine, et les trafics sordides (trafic d’organes ou réseaux pédocriminels) dont ils sont les victimes.
Il est aussi temps que les populations occidentales ouvrent les yeux sur ce qui se passe en Ukraine, avec la complicité active des autorités du pays, en matière de trafics d’enfants ! Car en Ukraine, des officiels gagnent de l’argent en vendant des enfants à des réseaux pédocriminels occidentaux ou des trafiquants d’organes, grâce au conflit en cours ! Voilà comment l’Ukraine « rembourse » sa dette auprès des pays occidentaux qui lui fournissent armes et financements : en vendant les enfants qu’elle vole dans le Donbass et les autres régions où ont lieu des combats, pour leurs organes, ou pour assouvir les fantasmes de pédocriminels haut placés.
Der Friedensstifter 