Tag Archives: Eugenics

How a Hollywood Spy Film Brainwashes Us

By Jonathan Cook
Global Research, June 7, 2015
Jonathan Cook’s Blog, June 5, 2015

 

Why are so few of us truly fearful of the impending meltdown of capitalism, stoked by global corporations’ rape and pillage? And why are so many of us passive in the face of impending environmental catastrophe?

The answers, surprisingly, are to be found in a recent spoof spy blockbuster, Kingsman – The Secret Service. American Sniper may have enraged leftists for its overt jingoism and implicit war-cheerleading, but movies like Kingsman, which exercise their spell largely below the radar of political activism, are far more important in shoring up a climate of political submissiveness and naivety.

If Joseph Goebbels were alive today, this is the kind of movie he would be making – lappped up by audiences and winning general critical plaudits. Even critics who have panned it, as several did in the UK’s elite media, faulted it for its crudity; none seemed aware of its insidious faux class politics and faux environmentalism.

No suprise either that the film is made by Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox. Kingsman is the Sun or New York Post on celluloid. Its qualities – stylishness, humour and action – are there to distract us, to prevent us from noticing that we are being “brainwashed under freedom”. The drip-drip of films and TV shows like Kingsman is what keeps us worshipping at the alter of an ideology designed first to imprison us and then to destroy us.

Those critics who dislike the movie have highlighted its ending, which encapsulates the vulgar style of this brash piece of entertainment.

Our young working-class hero, Eggsy, groomed by a group of elite spies masquerading as Savile Row “gentleman” tailors, saves the world from an evil master-mind, Valentine, played by Samuel L Jackson with a lisp. Valentine too believes he is saving the planet: from inexorable climate change. He intends to cull most of the population, especially those from the lower orders.

The film ends with a beautiful, blonde, blue-eyed Swedish princess – imprisoned by Valentine for refusing to help him – promising Eggsy that, if he kills her captor, he can have anal sex with her. The film literally ends with a view of her bare bottom. The “joke”, I guess, if one wants to be lulled into believing this is meant to be clever, is that in this working-class James Bond film sex isn’t just alluded to and isn’t prettified, it’s the real, raw deal.

But the reward of taboo sex actually tells us much more about the movie’s general political message. The whole film is based around outrageous stereotypes of class: a largely ignorant working class operating on violent Darwninian principles; and a sophisticated, self-sacrificing and clever aristocracy that secretly maintains order and security. The middle classes – the politicians, professors, diplomats – are mainly selfish oafs siding with Valentine to save their own skins.

The subtext of its ugly class politics, however, are obscured by a working-class hero myth that serves presumably to enthrall rather than alienate its target audience.

Eggsy is given the chance to break free from his working-class ghetto to join the honorable gentlemen spies. Only one of the group stands in his way. The snobbish leader, Arthur, played by Michael Caine as an Old Etonian, hates Eggsy, supposedly for his vulgarity. In fact, Arthur, we discover, has been concealing his true character. As Eggsy tricks him into killing himself, Arthur’s Alfie-style working class accent returns – his ability to hide his background fades as he dies.

Finally freed from the confines of the working class and able to reinvent himself as a dapper gent, Eggsy saves the world. His reward, in language more fitting to the film, is to “stick it” to a real princess. This across-the-class-divide sex revenge fantasy is ugly enough. But its function is to suggest – like some western version of the supposed Islamic martyr’s reward of 72 virgins – that those who aspire to join the honorable 1% will find their own sexual reward even before they ascend to heaven.

If the film’s class politics are bad, its faux environmental message is even worse.

Bad-guy Valentine is an environmentalist of sorts. He describes the state of climate degradation in fairly accurate and chilling terms, certainly for a Hollywood movie. Humans have become like a virus feeding off the planet, and, if they cannot end their self-destructive urges, then either they or the planet will die.

The problem is the film isn’t interested at all in that “if”. There are no alternatives offered – like restructuring society, or introducing new forms of sustainable energy. It’s either us or the planet. And Valentine decides to side with the planet. In true fascist style, he believes he must cull most of the population, saving those who can finance his dastardly scheme. He will begin life on Earth again with a much smaller population of humans.

Eggsy saves the world by leaving behind the working class, by reinventing himself as the part of the go-getting 1% ( a young Murdoch?) and by killing Valentine and – implicitly – the fanatical ideology of environmentalism that drives him.

As Eggsy finishes off Valentine and heads off for his reward with the princess, the film suggests all is right with the world again. The natural order has been restored. Climate change fades away as if Valentine’s concerns about mankind’s future died with him.

The film’s two messages – that the elites are there for the reason that they are best-placed to manage the world, and that enviromentalists are the real threat to our safety – are so crudely laid out that it is hard to miss them. And yet reading the reviews, miss them is precisely what the reviewers and, it seems, most audiences are doing.

There is a reason for that. What Kingsman shows overtly, the rest of our media implies more gently and artfully every day. We are now so deep in the cult crafted by corporate capitalism that it can show us the bars of our prison, laugh in our face and still know that we will pay to enjoy the ride.

www.rottentomatoes.com/m/kingsman_the_secret_service/

Why Didn’t my Doctor Tell Me Chemo Kills?

By F. William Engdahl
June 3, 2015
New Eastern Outlook

 

5950352_origIn my daily research I came across a report so alarming I put aside planned writing in order to bring this to the attention of those who care about life. It has to do with one of the main treatments for cancer used in modern medicine—chemotherapy. New research has documented that chemotherapy, far from ridding anyone of cancer actually feeds the growth and spread of cancer.

Sometimes it almost seems like the drugs industry works overtime to find new ways to hurt, cripple or even kill us. Scientist Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle in a write-up of a study of why cancer cells were so easy to kill in the lab but not inside our bodies, found that healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein called WNT16B which boosts cancer cell survival. “The increase in WNT16B was completely unexpected,” Nelson told AFP.

He added that,“WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumor cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy.” That would explain why in cancer treatment, tumors often respond well initially, followed by rapid regrowth and then resistance to further chemotherapy.

The study was conducted by a team of scientists from different cancer research centers, universities as well as from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories. It was published online in August 2012 in the journal Nature Medicine. Among their alarming conclusions was that, “The expression of WNT16B in the prostate tumor microenvironment attenuated the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy in vivo, promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression.”

Mustard Gas Toxin

While their study results were alarming enough, more alarming is the complete absence of aggressive action to reexamine the entire field of cancer treatment. Chemo’s origins go back to World War I research into the human effects of exposure to mustard gas. Scientists discovered that the gas was a potent suppressor of blood cell production. During World War II researchers at Yale University School of Medicine in further study of nitrogen mustards, reasoned that an agent that damaged the rapidly growing white blood cells might have a similar effect on cancer. Left out was how to target only cancer cells and not healthy cells. In December 1942, the scientists gave several patients with advanced lymphomas (cancers of the lymphatic system and lymph nodes), a chemotherapeutic drug intravenously. Their improvement was called remarkable. The media concentrated on the remarkable improvement and did not bother to note that soon after treatment all were dead.

The chemotherapy revolution in cancer treatment was off and running. In the 1950’s the first chemo drug used commercially was mustine or Chlormethine. Mustine under the code-name HN2 is a chemical warfare agent. Adverse effect include: “Hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis…Nausea, vomiting and depression of formed elements in the circulating blood…Jaundice, alopecia, vertigo, tinnitus and diminished hearing.”

The research and development of mustine as a possible anti-cancer chemotherapy was led by Cornelius P. Rhoads, director of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, in wartime secrecy and published in 1946 after the war. Rhoads came to Memorial Sloan-Kettering from the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research.

There during the 1930’s as part of the Rockefeller family’s obsession with eugenics, Rhoads spent six months in Puerto Rico, a stateless island often used covertly for human experimentation with new drugs.

In Puerto Rico in 1931Rhoads wrote a letter to a friend in Boston where he stated, “Porto (sic) Ricans are beyond doubt the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever inhabiting this sphere. What the island needs is not public health work but a tidal wave or something to totally exterminate the population. I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer into several more.”

Rockefeller family spin doctor, Ivy Lee, launched a major damage control campaign over the scandal and managed to get Rhoads on the cover of Time as a “life-saving” hero.

Deadly consequences

The subsequent use of toxic chemotherapies on perhaps millions of cancer patients since then have hardly been encouraging. Published side effects of today’s chemo drugs, the largest share of which are made by Roche, are horrendous. They include “depression of the immune system, often by paralysing the bone marrow and leading to a decrease of white blood cells, red blood cells, and platelets. Anemia and thrombocytopenia… sepsis, or as localized outbreaks, such as Herpes simplex, shingles, or other members of the Herpesviridea.”

It gets worse. Because of the chemo resulting in immune system suppression, patients often get typhlitis, a life-threatening gastrointestinal complication of chemotherapy. Typhlitis is an intestinal infection which may manifest itself through symptoms including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, a distended abdomen, fever, chills, or abdominal pain and tenderness. Typhlitis is a medical emergency. It has a very poor prognosis and is often fatal.  It can cause infertility failure in men and ovarian failure in women. All that in addition to the well-known hair-loss, dry skin, damaged fingernails, a dry mouth (xerostomia), water retention, and sexual impotence.

In 2004 the Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Australia, conducted a long-term investigation into the contribution of chemotherapy to 5-year survival in 22 major adult malignancies. The results were shocking: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. The study came to the following conclusion: “..it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.”

Chemo is massively toxic and kill any rapidly dividing cell, tumor or normal. The three best-selling cancer drugs worldwide in 2013 were all made by Roche—Rituxan, Herceptin and Avastin. For all three top chemo drugs sales totaled more than $21 billion.

And the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center now documents how chemotherapy drugs act as carcinogens—they cause cancer which is why, depending on the patient’s immune strength and dosage, within five years a staggering number die after the chemo that was to have saved them.

I was in Beijing several years ago on a speaking tour and had severe back pain after the long flight. My Chinese publisher organized a treatment from a doctor trained in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). She was also the grand-daughter of the chief TCM doctor of the Last Emperor who she said was still alive and chipper at 93 and passing his wisdom on to her and her brother. She told me at the Beijing medical university where she studied, the students were told, “One third of patients die of the psychological shock of being told by a doctor that they have cancer. Another third die from the negative effects of chemotherapy and radiation. The last third simply die.”

It would be useful for all doctors in active practice perhaps to rethink the principal ethical mandate of all physicians since the time of Hippocrates– “nil nocere” – do no harm. The evidence is overwhelming now that chemotherapy only does harm. Would the oncologists promoting chemo to their patients ever take the same were the roles reversed?

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Vaccines and National Security

By Ulson Gunnar
May 4, 2015
New Eastern Outlook

 

4321111One can easily see in the emerging information and cyber war that a nation having its own IT infrastructure, its own hardware, and its own versions of social media platforms is quickly becoming a matter of national security. Without control over these assets, a nation must depend on foreign suppliers for their computers, peripheries and software. Already, this dependence has opened nations up to now evident threats including malware embedded into hardware and software that is otherwise impossible to detect until the damage is already done.

Likewise, a nation’s food supply can and has throughout history, been a source of vulnerability in times of conflict. The inability to grow one’s own food invites blockades and their modern equivalent, sanctions, undermining a nation’s strength and stability and eventually setting the stage for its ultimate demise. Iraq is an example of this.

In the long-term, a nation’s food supply controlled by foreign corporations, particularly in the realm of genetically engineered organisms, can have disastrous effects.  As a nation’s wealth is slowly drained from their shores and into the coffers of corporations like Bayer, Monsanto and Syngenta, inferior, expensive and environmentally devastating crops wreak havoc on the very socioeconomic fabric of a nation. India is increasingly becoming an example of this.

And what of healthcare? Surely the same applies. But even as nations and communities are just now understanding the importance of protecting their food supplies from predatory multinational corporations and the hegemonic ambitions they represent, there seems to be some latency in understanding this likewise in regards to healthcare and in particular pharmaceuticals and vaccines.

The Danger of Big-Pharma’s Vaccines 

Imagine a gang member knocking at your door with a syringe in one hand, demanding you roll up your sleeve and allow him to inject its contents into your bloodstream. Likely there would be no hesitation to call the police and barricade the door until they arrived. Allowing a criminal to inject a substance known or unknown into your body would be an unimaginable risk no sane person would accept.

Now imagine that gang member is wearing a suit, has a multi-million dollar marketing budget, doctors and researchers working for him (paid via an expansive bribery network) and instead of knocking at your door, he invited you to one of his doctors’ offices to receive the injection. What we’ve just done here is describe big-pharma.

Immense pharmaceutical corporations like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) have been caught numerous times engaged in immense criminality.

In 2012, the London Guardian would report in its article GlaxoSmithKline fined $3bn after bribing doctors to increase drugs sales that:

The pharmaceutical group GlaxoSmithKline has been fined $3bn (£1.9bn) after admitting bribing doctors and encouraging the prescription of unsuitable antidepressants to children. Glaxo is also expected to admit failing to report safety problems with the diabetes drug Avandia in a district court in Boston on Thursday. 

The company encouraged sales reps in the US to mis-sell three drugs to doctors and lavished hospitality and kickbacks on those who agreed to write extra prescriptions, including trips to resorts in Bermuda, Jamaica and California.

In early 2014, the London Telegraph would report in its article GlaxoSmithKline ‘bribed’ doctors to promote drugs in Europe, former worker claims that:

GlaxoSmithKline, Britain’s largest drug company, has been accused of bribing doctors to prescribe their medicines in Europe. 

Doctors in Poland were allegedly paid to promote its asthma drug, Seretide, under the guise of funding for education programme, a former sales rep has claimed. 

Medics were also said to have been paid for lectures in the country which did not take place.

Then in late 2014, the BBC would report in its article GlaxoSmithKline fined $490m by China for bribery that:

China has fined UK pharmaceuticals firm GlaxoSmithKline $490m (£297m) after a court found it guilty of bribery. 

The record penalty follows allegations the drug giant paid out bribes to doctors and hospitals in order to have their products promoted. 

The court gave GSK’s former head of Chinese operations, Mark Reilly, a suspended three-year prison sentence and he is set to be deported.

These three news stories establish without doubt that an immense pharmaceutical giant, still allowed to conduct business to this very day, has been engaged in systematic, global criminality. The first story regarding its criminal conduct in the United States should be of particular concern, where the pharmaceutical giant encouraged doctors to peddle harmful substances to children. How exactly is that any different than your local pusher?

And it should be alarming to know that GSK is one of several pharmaceutical giants promoting the use of vaccines. Who would trust vaccines produced and peddled by the same corporation convicted multiple times of immense fraud, corruption and the endangerment of children?

But corrupt corporations peddling poison for profits still isn’t the greatest danger. State sanctioned bioweapons masquerading as vaccines is.

South Africa’s Vaccines Against “Being Black” 

3423222The apartheid regime in South Africa infamously waged war on its black population. So intent was the regime on subduing and/or exterminating black communities, its biological warfare program began developing a bioweapon that would infect only blacks, and planned to administer it covertly under the cover of a vaccine program.

The United Nations in a report titled Project Coast: Apartheid’s Chemical and Biological Warfare Programme would admit:

One example of this interaction involved anti-fertility work. According to documents from RRL [Roodeplaat Research Laboratories], the facility had a number of registered projects aimed at developing an anti-fertility vaccine. This was a personal project of the first managing director of RRL, Dr Daniel Goosen. Goosen, who had done research into embryo transplants, told the TRC that he and Basson had discussed the possibility of developing an anti-fertility vaccine which could be selectively administered—without the knowledge of the recipient. The intention, he said, was to administer it to black South African women without their knowledge.

Unscrupulous corporations with global reach, married to unscrupulous ideologies seeking to covertly kill off entire segments of their population constitutes nightmare scenarios generally confined to the realm of science fiction. However, here are the ingredients, right before our very eyes.

Vaccines and National Security 

 It is very clear then, why communities and nations must take control of their healthcare systems entirely. Not a single aspect of it can depend on foreign suppliers any more than national IT infrastructure, the food supply, power production, or military hardware can.

No nation would “outsource” the protection of its head of state to foreigners. Why would they outsource the protection of their people’s health? Dependence on big-pharma has already put countless lives in danger with untold disease, disabilities and death following in the wake of their unhinged global criminality. It should be noted, that despite their rampant criminality, they are all still very much in business, a testament to the unwarranted power and influence their immense profits and the lobbying efforts they purchase has afforded them.

If vaccines are determined to be beneficial to a nation’s population, they should be developed by that nation and administered only by that nation. There should be no multinational pharmaceutical corporations, because no nation should leave their population’s health to the whims of foreign entities who have already demonstrated the well-being of their customers is the least of their concerns.

And while nations taking up this responsibility and pushing out foreign pharmaceutical corporations is a good start, one must still consider the case of South Africa, where a government sought to destroy entire communities within their borders under the guise of vaccination programs. Individual communities and individuals themselves would be wise to think twice before allowing anyone to inject something into their body.

If vaccinations are so important, then the information required to make them should be made open source and all invited to examine how and why they are made and how to make them in community laboratories located at local universities and hospitals. If that can’t be done, then they probably aren’t that important to begin with nor any more legitimate or necessary than the dangerous antidepressants GSK peddled to little children in America, and surely something society could do well without.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. 

 

Polio or Something More Sinister?

By F. William Engdahl
April 6, 2015
New Eastern Outlook

 

342432111Polio is something I have more than a passing acquaintance with. Two days before my fifth birthday a medical doctor in Minneapolis diagnosed me with polio. I only learned decades later that it was not polio, poliomyelitis or infantile paralysis as it was also called. It was shortly after World War II. Then a few years later we were presented Jonas Salk and the polio vaccine, and the world believed that because of that vaccine and the Sabin variant, polio had been stamped out. The reality was that polio was not and is not a “virus,” nor did the vaccines of Salk or Sabin eradicate.

The symptoms that were given the name “polio” had dramatically declined several years before the first vaccine and Salk claimed the credit for his vaccine which was released in 1955. The symptoms that got the name polio came from a team at the Rockefeller University in 1910. Those symptoms were listed as fever, severe headache, stiff neck and back, deep muscle pain. Pretty vague.

Many, many things can cause fever and such symptoms in a small child, for example being raped by someone they thought loved them or experiencing other trauma. It has been suggested that there was a major wave of in-family child rapes as soldiers returned from the traumas of their own war experiences in World War II. It was convenient for some to label the upsurge in such symptoms as polio and create a national media scare that was to most Americans in the early 1950’s more terrifying than Joe Stalin and communism. The drug industry got a huge boost and today, even newborns are jabbed multiple times in the first weeks of their fragile lives with concoctions that have been documented not to prevent viral infection but to make weak, sick and in some tragic cases autistic or even dead children.

The Rockefeller University in New York had begun literally playing around with children with the symptoms later formalized as polio as far back as 1910. Simon Flexner, first director of the predecessor to the Rockefeller University, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, had produced the symptoms later named polio. He did that in a rhesus monkey which then transmitted the disease from one animal to another. Flexner was a close friend and advisor of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., son of the founder of the Standard Oil trust.

Albert Sabin, creator of the Sabin polio vaccine had come out of the Rockefeller University. Human experiments with untested versions of the polio vaccines were done on already crippled children in care homes, on children in homes for the mentally insane and on that Rockefeller family plantation for human experiments, Puerto Rico.

Since that time the Rockefellers, some of the world’s most ardent financial backers of eugenics, have been at the center of the developments around what was named polio and its “vaccine.”

Eugenics was a fraudulent social theory that a “better society” could be created by eliminating “undesirable” human blood lines and promoting the desirable types like those of Rockefellers or DuPonts or their likes. To the present day eugenics is the guiding ideology of the very rich, loveless American oligarchs including Bill Gates and David Rockefeller. To this day the major financial backers of the criminal activities of the UN WHO (World Health Organization) and their fraudulent swine flu pandemic scares are the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Gates, GAVI and Murder Inc.

Several years ago, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, along with the World Bank, UNICEF, the WHO and a group of pharmaceutical companies, united all in something called GAVI and set out to bring massive polio vaccination first to India. GAVI: The Vaccine Alliance was founded by the Gates Foundation in 2000 as a “public-private partnership” to unite in assaulting poorer developing countries with the Big Pharma vaccine industry they would otherwise be spared.

In India Gates, Rockefellers and WHO with their Big Pharma partners convinced the Indian government to spend some $8 billion of their scarce funds, along with a tiny amount of “seed” money from GAVI partners, to vaccinate Indian children.

The result?

An article in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics in 2012 concluded, “In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated.” Instead, Gates and Company proclaimed India “polio” free.

They ignored the fact their “polio” vaccines were killing and paralyzing 48,000 Indian children because the WHO definition of polio allowed them the casuistry. NPAFP stands for Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis. The medical-industrial complex are masters at coming up with names.

By calling it non-polio, they defined polio as eradicated in India. But their vaccines are killing and paralyzing tens of thousands of children. So by the WHO semantics the GAVI vaccines did not caused a single case of “polio.” It did cause 48,000 cases of something far deadlier and more damaging, Acute Flaccid Paralysis, a condition the WHO admits is clinically indistinguishable from polio and which occurred in direct proportion to the doses of polio vaccine received.

A similar phenomenon took place at the same time in neighboring Pakistan. In 2011 the Paktstan Tribune reported, “A government inquiry has found that polio vaccines for infants funded by the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunisation are causing deaths and disabilities in regional countries including Pakistan. Geneva-based officials of GAVI, Jeffrey Rowland and Dan Thomas, were contacted by e-mail but they did not respond. “ GAVI spent a mere 7.8% of the total cost of the mass vaccination in Pakistan, of Rs26 billion. The Tribune continued, “Pakistan will be spending Rs24.2 billion from its own resources on the purchase of new and under-used vaccines at much higher cost as compared to their equivalent vaccines.” The Gates-Rockefeller-WHO polio vaccination program in Pakistan killed an estimated 10,000 and crippled tens of thousands more.

Now the focus has moved to another US warzone, Syria.

Polio in Syria?

For two decades Syria has been polio-free. Now, beginning 2013 in the wake of their criminal efforts in Pakistan and India, the WHO has declared the presence of polio outbreaks in Syria and accused President Assad of refusing vaccine teams – the previous ones in Pakistan, laced with CIA agents.

The “polio” spreading in war-ravaged Syria, where the CIA and Pentagon and their assets such as ISIS and CIA-funded opposition have destroyed homes and driven millions into refugee status, is vaccine-caused, just as in India and just as in Pakistan. The polio spreading through Syria is “vaccine-derived polio,” specifically, the same strain of “non-polio acute flaccid paralysis” as in India and Pakistan that coincided with the mass vaccinations with Sabin oral vaccines by GAVI. The vaccine originated from the oral polio vaccine developed by former Rockefeller University researched, Sabin, which contains an attenuated vaccine-virus or active polio virus along with unknown adjuvants or boosters the drug companies prefer not to reveal.

Kindah al-Shammat, Syrian Minister of Social Affairs, said at the time that, “The virus originates in Pakistan and has been brought to Syria by the jihadists who come from Pakistan.”

WHO Rockefeller Tetanus abortions

If this sounds improbable take a close look at a recent expose by a concerned group of Kenyan doctors about a vaccine developed by WHO in conjunction with the Rockefeller and Gates foundations. The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association discovered an antigen that causes miscarriages in a tetanus vaccine that is being administered to 2.3 million girls and women by the World Health Organization and UNICEF. Since 1972 the Rockefeller Foundation has worked in secrecy with the WHO and various pharmaceutical companies to fund a WHO program in “reproductive health.” There they developed an innovative tetanus vaccine.

In the early 1990’s, according to a report from the Global Vaccine Institute, the WHO oversaw massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines. Comite Pro Vida de Mexico, a Roman Catholic lay organization, became suspicious of the motives behind the WHO program. When they tested numerous vials of the vaccine they, like in Kenya today, found they contained the same Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, or HCG. They found that to be very curious in a vaccine designed to protect people against lock-jaw arising from infection with rusty nail wounds. Tetanus is also rather rare, so why a mass vaccination campaign and that for only women of child-bearing age?

HCG is a natural hormone needed to maintain a pregnancy. However, when combined with a tetanus toxoid carrier, it stimulated the formation of antibodies against HCG, rendering a woman incapable of maintaining a pregnancy, a form of concealed abortion.

The pattern is clear. The global agenda of Rockefellers, Gates, Clintons, Bushes and their very rich loveless friends is racist. It calls for elimination of non-white populations, genocide. Their tools of choice include wars everywhere from Afghanistan to Pakistan to Libya to Syria to Ukraine. It includes campaigns of massive select vaccinations in war-torn countries. It includes setting the CIA and Mossad to the job of creating fake Islamic “jihadist” terrorists to kill and main and create the cover for a Washington “war on terror.” Their only problem of late is that these strategies are failing. That’s bad news for the paranoid oligarchs, good news for sane remnants of the human race, human beings.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The Covert Eugenics Agenda: Melodie Scott and Dr. Wouter Basson

By Janet Phelan
March 30, 2015
New Eastern Outlook

 

61159742_d541bdb42fIt is a generally accepted axiom that one of the primary purposes of government is to protect its citizenry. The protection may manifest in one of two ways—as security against foreign foes or as a system to apprehend and punish members of the citizenry from transgressing against other citizens. This is generally called a “system of justice.”

In a democratic or republican form of government, it is assumed that the rules governing the conduct of citizens are equally applied. In other words, justice is no respecter of persons or status.

So when governments begin to protect certain citizens from culpability for crimes committed against other citizens, the natural question would be—What is going on? Or—Have the rules changed and no one told us?

The Rules Are Changing

Back in the 1990’s, when Dr. Jack Kevorkian challenged the age- old maxim for physicians–”First, do no harm”– and began assisting in the suicides of multiple individuals, the reaction of the legal system was clear and definite. After allegedly being involved in over 130 medically- assisted suicides and experiencing numerous arrests, Jack Kevorkian was found guilty in 1998 of second degree murder in the death of Thomas Youk, who suffered from “Lou Gehrig’s” disease. Kevorkian was sentenced to 25 years in prison. He was released in 2007 after he promised to never assist in another death.

Fast forward to 2015 and we find that physician- assisted suicide is no longer considered much of a crime. In fact, nations are passing physician- assisted suicide laws in droves, even in the face of the abuses of this process being reported in the vanguard nations, such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Switzerland.

Those in the forefront of the “Right to Die” movement are ignoring the pivotal fact that, under the euthanasia and assisted suicide laws, people are in fact being put to death who have not requested nor consented to this. Disability rights groups see clearly the progress of the slippery scope, as now in the state of Washington the issue is being bandied about of extending physician- assisted suicide beyond the terminally ill and to those who are simply poverty stricken. Equally of concern is that under the laws regulating incapacity, specifically those cases wherein a guardian has been appointed by a court, the alleged incapacitated person may have no voice in his termination, which can be ordered by the guardian without consulting the ward.

This brings us to a woman named Melodie Z. Scott. Scott is what is called a “professional conservator” (guardian) for the elderly and disabled. Guardians are generally appointed through court proceedings when there are allegations that an individual is lacking the capacity to make his own decisions. Upon such appointment by a court, the guardian will act in the stead of the alleged incapacitated person, making his financial decisions, selling his property, making his medical decisions and also decisions concerning his social life—whether or not he can marry, whether or not he can even have contact with family and friends. Melodie Scott is licensed by the state of California to perform these services.

And Scott has repeatedly used her position to terminate the lives of her clients and to steal their money, with a level of protection by the police, district attorneys and attorney general that could be compared to the highest level of “diplomatic immunity.” It should be noted that Scott is performing her “angel of death” services in a state which has not passed physician- assisted suicide laws.

Scott is not alone in her position as a state- sponsored executioner. Reports are now coming in from Florida, Colorado, Illinois, Texas, Ohio and elsewhere of similar abusers who have achieved a remarkable level of protection for what are generally considered to be crimes against the vulnerable.

The US media is largely keeping mum about these abuses. Every now and then, a local paper will carry a story on some problems associated with guardians, generally ascribing the failure of the system to protect the victims as a result of “overworked” judges and district attorneys.

People as Capital

In fact, the legal system is working overtime to protect these miscreants. Joey Quattrochi, outraged at the abuses inflicted upon his father, WWII veteran and ward of Melodie Scott, hired a lawyer and filed a federal law suit against Scott. His lawyer, Jim Reiss, was subsequently disbarred and Quattrochi was unable to find another lawyer willing to take the suit on. His suit was subsequently dismissed. When Illinois attorney Ken Ditkowsky became aware of the abuses taking place in the guardianship of Mary Sykes, he began a campaign of contacting law enforcement. Ditkowsky was then summarily suspended from the practice of law by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, which also suspended attorney L’anre Amu for the act of filing complaints against judges and stating that the courts are corrupt.

Arizona attorney Grant Goodman went even further and devised a template for RICO lawsuits against miscreant guardians. Goodman was subsequently suspended from the practice of law in Arizona.

According to Dr. Sam Sugar, a retired physician who has launched a group called Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianships, somewhere in the range of six billion dollars are being processed through Florida guardianship proceedings each year. Money is definitely in the mix, but does not explain the rising death toll of individuals who are being sent to their early graves through the acts of their guardians.

“Don’t Lie to the State!”

An action was launched in 2008 by the California Professional Fiduciaries Bureau (PFB) to deny Melodie Scott’s professional fiduciary license. The origin of the action against Scott was not due to her involvement in the deaths of Lawrence Yetzer, Stevie Price, Elizabeth Fairbanks, Frank Bellue, De’Wayne Cory, Charlie Castle, Doris Baker or others whom had been under Scott’s care.

Indeed, the PFB had in its files numerous complaints alleging criminal acts by conservator Scott. The PFB chose to ignore all the complaints and instead focused on the fact that she lied on her application for a professional fiduciary license.

After proceedings which generated concerns that the Deputy Attorney General representing the PFB in the matter, Jonathan Cooper, was working to secure Scott’s license for her, she was ultimately granted her license on a technicality in 2010.

In April, Melodie Scott again faces administrative proceedings launched once more by the PFB, which has charged her again with lying on her mandated yearly filings with that body. The PFB is refusing to supply any information to the press as to how many consumer complaints they currently have on file concerning Scott. Similarly, the DAG representing the PFB in this matter, Rita Lane, has declined to release numbers of complaints on file with the DOJ.

Parenthetically, the California Attorney General’s office has a history of refusing to investigate complaints about criminal misconduct by guardians. AG Kamala Harris’s office has stated to this reporter that they don’t “do” such cases. When asked for the legal authority (written law) which exempts the California Attorney General from prosecuting crimes committed under the mantle of guardianship, Harris’s office has steadfastly refused to respond.

Police Killing Blacks and Mentally Ill

On a separate but related front, concerns are ramping up in the US concerning the seeming immunity now enjoyed by police for killing people. These concerns were again inflamed by the recent outcry concerning the police killings in Ferguson, in New York, and also the latest killing of an unarmed and naked black man, Anthony Hill, in a suburb of Atlanta. A review of the statistics of police killings confirms that the police are largely killing blacks and the mentally ill.

And getting away with it, as district attorneys repeatedly fail to consider these acts to be murders, instead referring to them as “justified” following an internal and opaque review process.

Back in 2003, an incident was reported in local Los Angeles newspapers that should have strained the credibility of any thinking reader. According to the papers, a man shot a police officer at a routine traffic stop, then took off running on foot. He was shortly apprehended by other officers, who reportedly “forgot” to take the alleged cop-shooter’s gun away from him. The suspect was taken to the police station, still armed but handcuffed, then taken into questioning, where the sole officer present removed his handcuffs. The individual then—reportedly—took out his gun and shot himself.

Do you believe that?

The district attorney in the matter stated that no investigation was necessary. Case closed.

A legal system wherein police are judges, jury and executioners is not redolent of a democratic society. Rather, it is indicative of the very worst of repressive dictatorships, wherein racial groups, the vulnerable and enemies of the state can be summarily executed without due process. The racial nexus harks uncomfortably back to what happened in Germany in the thirties and forties.

Another Alleged Race Killer Escapes Culpability

Another indication of what appears to be a eugenics agenda would be the failed prosecution of Dr. Wouter Basson, who, as head of apartheid South Africa’s biological and chemical weapons programme, Project Coast, was alleged to have not only been involved in hundreds of murders of enemies of the state but was also working on developing a biological weapons which would only kill people of color. Recent articles here and here have explored the possibility that Basson, who was heavily connected with British and American intelligence agencies, may have in fact created this race-specific bioweapon, which may be in deployment.

Basson was arrested in 1997 after the apartheid government fell and initially charged in criminal court with over sixty counts, including fraud, embezzlement and drug trafficking, He faced over 150 witnesses against him and was the sole witness in his defense.Testimony linked him to 229 murders. Judge Willie Hartzenberg acquitted him on all counts, after refusing to step down from the case amidst allegations that he was biased in favor of Basson.

In December of 2013, Dr. Basson was subsequently found guilty by the Health Professions Council of South Africa of acting unprofessionally as a medical doctor in his capacity as director of Project Coast. His sentencing, which may include loss of his medical license, probation or a fine, has been repeatedly delayed. Basson now enjoys a successful cardiologist practice in Capetown.

After failing in his recent effort to have the HP committee recused for bias, Basson will again be in hearings on May 28-29, ostensibly for sentencing. As a valued soldier in what is appearing to be a hidden war of eugenics, Basson has shown no remorse for his acts and appears to have deep layers of protection.

Another race killer, Auschwitz’s Dr. Josef Mengele, was hunted for decades in South America, where he fled to evade capture. But as we have seen, the times they are a’ changing and those who kill the weak and also those in certain racial groups are now exonerated, rather than punished. Whether or not the Health Professions Council of South Africa will be able to sentence a race killer for “acting unprofessionally” and whether or not the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau in California will equally be able to revoke the license of a murderous guardian– who heinously lied on her licensing papers– the signals here should be clear: Murder ain’t the crime it used to be. Particularly if the victim happens to be in the ranks of weaker or disfavored groups.

Janet C. Phelan, investigative journalist and human rights defender that has traveled pretty extensively over the Asian region, an author of a tell-all book EXILE, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook

Gates and Obama Share a Dark Secret

By F. William Engdahl
March 24, 2015
New Eastern Outlook

 

bill-gates-officeIn 2014 there was the western Africa Ebola hoax where US President Barack Obama, the first black man to be President, announced his “War on Ebola” in September last year, ordering 3,000 US military troops to the region, though reportedly none had experience in public health and no one had produced rigorous laboratory proof of a single person dying from something called Ebola virus. Liberia was among the poorest and most war-torn regions in the world.

Wars over blood diamonds and colonial genocidal tribal wars have left a devastated, mal-nourished population in its wake. Was Ebola simply a panic-maker? Further investigation uncovered the Pentagon was developing an Ebola vaccine with Monsanto and suspicion was that the 3,000 US troops were sent to force the population to become human guinea pigs for the untested substances.

Before that Obama, or more precisely then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in 2011 ordered Libya to be bombed back to the stone-age as what she called “responsibility to protect.” Today, four years after, the country is anarchy pure with roving lawless bands killing and looting.

Now Obama and his Administration, the US Government, have teamed up with “Mr Vaccinate All Africans” Bill Gates, a eugenics protégé and intimate of David Rockefeller. Obama and Gates share a dark secret. They are colluding to contaminate the incredibly rich and productive soils of Africa with GMO, GMO from a company where Gates is a major stockholder, Monsanto.

USAID, Gates and Monsanto in Africa

A new report was released on February 23 that documents for the first time the stealth methods of the US State Department and USAID, the ostensible Agency for International Development which is intimately tied to the agenda of the CIA and Pentagon’s AFRICOM, together with Monsanto, to push unwanted GMO crops, especially Monsanto GMO maize, on African countries.

Haidee Swanby from the African Centre for Biosafety who authored the report stated, “The US, the world’s top producer of GM crops, is seeking new markets for American GM crops in Africa. The US administration’s strategy consists of assisting African nations to produce biosafety laws that promote agribusiness interests instead of protecting Africans from the potential threats of GM crops.”

According to Swanby, USAID has two projects in Africa which “help” various African governments draw up national biosafety laws as such consumer protection is lacking in all but seven African countries. However, USAID in collusion with Monsanto, the world’s largest GMO purveyor, drafts laws that permit insufficiently tested GMO seeds such as Monsanto GMO maize, to be considered “biosafe,” claiming GMO is the solution to African hunger, a brazen lie as no GMO plant on the market today has been modified to increase harvest yield.

Swanby points to the rare case of South Africa which has allowed GMO for the past 16 years:“South African farmers have more than 16 years’ experience cultivating GM maize, soya and cotton, but the promise that GM crops would address food security has not been fulfilled. Indeed, South Africa’s food security is reportedly declining with almost half the nation currently categorized as food insecure even though South Africa exports maize.”

Subverting Cartegena Protocol

In 2003, over the bitter opposition of the US Government, 168 nations adopted what is called the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. It puts the “precautionary principle” as primary—If you have not sufficiently proven safety of GMO and other bio-engineered crops, protection of human health is primary, not free trade. Once the Protocol came into force, Washington began to lobby African governments and institutions (among others) to accept GMO crops with minimal safety assessment, hoping their lack of institutional depth would allow them to be either fooled or corrupted. The USAID is assisting Regional Economic Communities in Africa to develop policies aimed not at ensuring biosafety, but at limiting regulation, which they consider to be a barrier to regional trade in GMO food and crops.

The Swanby report documents how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation works hand-in-glove with USAID by funding organizations such as the African Agriculture Technology Foundation whose aim is to promote introduction of GMO crops into Africa. Gates also works closely with the Rockefeller and Gates Foundations in their Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, which pushes GMO crops as the wonder advance in biological science. If harvest failure, declining crop yields and mandatory use of highly toxic Roundup weed killer from Monsanto—which has been proven to kill cells in human embryos—can be called a biological wonder, we should perhaps see it through the eyes of eugenics advocates like Bill Gates and David Rockefeller who have dreamed of biochemical population reduction for decades.

In effect, we have the first African-American US President, through the US AID, in an alliance with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Monsanto to spread death and destruction of natural agriculture in Africa.

Their dark secret is that they are wittingly trying to kill off the darker-skinned peoples of the African Continent. It is an old agenda of “stupid white male” European colonialists, but one now being imposed with the sophistication of Madison Avenue PR and mumbo-jumbo about the wonder of biotech GMO.

Their only problem for Gates and company is that, fortunately, African people are not so stupid as Bill Gates or Barack Obama or his personal handler, another African-American, Susan E. Rice, who has blood of millions of Africans on her hands going back to her role in the US State Department as Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and her responsibility for the Rwandan Genocide of more than one million Tutsis in 1994 under Bill Clinton.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/03/24/gates-and-obama-share-a-dark-secret/

World Overpopulation? Hold On, Buddy!

By William Engdahl
January 3, 2015
New Eastern Outlook, January 1, 2015

 

452222I first began to seriously look into the arguments that the world faces a terrifying over-population problem about a decade back, when I was researching for my book on the history of gene manipulation or GMO. I was curious and in a strange way impressed with the intensity of the interest of the Rockefeller family’s foundation and other organizations affiliated with that foundation to sponsor the study or the application of eugenics. The real story about our global population is radically different as from the picture the mainstream media would lead us to believe.

In the course of my research I came across documented evidence that the Rockefeller Foundation had not only financed much of the work of Margaret Sanger and her eugenics Planned Parenthood organization during the 1930’s, when her “Negro Project” in black Harlem was trying to develop ways to eliminate the black population. The same Rockefeller Foundation at the same time financed the work of the various experiments of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin and Munich during the Third Reich. They knew exactly what barbarism they were supporting—ways to eliminate the “unfit.”

The same Rockefeller family in the 1950’s created and financed the enormously influential eugenics work of the John D. Rockefeller III Population Council.

In June 1952 John D. Rockefeller III convened a secret conference at Williamsurg, Virginia where some thirty of the nation’s most eminent conservationists, public health experts, Planned Parenthood leaders, agriculturalists, demographers and social scientists met. They formed a new group which could act as “a coordinating and catalytic agent in the broad field of population.” John D. Rockefeller III publicly christened The Population Council and announced that he himself would serve as its first president. They organized their vast financial and media resources to spread the myth of over-population that today is blindly accepted by most as scientific truth. They spread the myth that “people pollute,” or as the Rockefeller Foundation’s Alan Gregg preferred to describe growing human populations in the developing world, “cancerous growths that demand food.” Population reduction became the strategic priority, step-wise, of the US Government and then the US-controlled World Bank.

The Rockefeller-financed research into cheap, effective birth control, and other eugenics projects resulted in the US Government, officially and secretly, making reduction of population growth in key raw material rich developing countries like Brazil, India, Nigeria and Indonesia the explicit USA Government policy. “No population control, no USAID money.” Henry Kissinger drafted the document for it, NSSM-200, titled, ‘Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests,’ and President Gerald Ford signed it as Government policy in 1975.

The mainstream media that has been controlled by Rockefellers and their eugenics-loving very rich and very loveless friends for decades, pumped us full of the myth that the world was a human “population bomb” as the title of a lying book by Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, in the time of the Vietnam War in the early 1970’s. In his book, published in 1970, Ehrlich argued, “We are going to have to adopt some very tough foreign policy positions…We must use our political power to push other countries into programs which combine agricultural development and population control.”

Population Implosion

There’s only one problem with their grand strategy of convincing us of an over-population danger. The world is facing, not a population bomb, but a population implosion, a collapse of the human species.

Some statistics are in order. It is well established, given average life-spans, death rates, that an average 2.1 live births per woman are required to maintain population equilibrium. A recent study looks at live birth rates around the world. The results are shocking perhaps to some.

In Germany, the birthrate has sunk to just 1.36, worse even than low-fertility Spain (1.48) and Italy (1.4). Western Europe as a whole will most likely shrink from 460 million to just 350 million by the end of the century. And barring dramatic reversal of the foolish One (sometimes Two) Child Policy, China’s population will be reduced in half.

Even the USA where a large immigrant Hispanic population immigration has kept birth rates higher, is now facing reduction. A Pew Research Center report found that immigrant births fell from 102 per 1,000 women in 2007 to 87.8 per 1,000 in 2012, to bring the overall US birthrate to a mere 64 per 1,000 women—not enough to sustain current population. Europe, in short, is dying off, China and Russia, and the United States as well.

Yes, some might argue, but the over-population bomb is in the developing world, in Africa, India, Latin America…

Not so.

The poor, highly fertile countries of the developing world, in part thanks to the Rockefellers and their loveless friends, are no longer reproducing as before. From 1960 to 2009, Mexico’s fertility rate plunged from 7.3 live births per woman to 2.4. India’s dropped from 6 to 2.5, and Brazil’s fell from 6.15 to 1.9. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, where the average birthrate remains a relatively high 4.66, fertility is falling and is projected to fall below replacement level by the 2070s. This change in developing countries will affect not only the U.S. population, of course, but eventually the world’s.

This population implosion will soon be recognized as one of the gravest problems facing the future of life, literally, on the planet.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook

 

First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2015/01/01/world-overpopulation-hold-on-buddy/

 

Assisted Suicide—A Slippery Slope to Eugenics?

By Janet Phelan
November 29, 2014
NEO

 

With last week’s vote on A2270, New Jersey’s Assembly approved physician assisted suicide. Oregon, Washington and Vermont have also passed AS (Assisted Suicide) laws.

State courts in Montana and New Mexico have affirmed the rights to physician assisted suicide.

What’s wrong with that, you might well ask. If a person is terminally ill and wishes to end his or her suffering, why should this not be permitted?

In fact, this issue is not as clear cut as some might wish you to believe. The effect of such legal permissions, as seen in other countries which have historically permitted doctor- assisted suicide, is worth reviewing.

Before we look at how this issue has played out in Switzerland, the Netherlands and Belgium, let’s first define our terms. Euthanasia is also called “mercy killing,” and is defined as the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person (or animal) suffering from an incurable disease or condition. The law generally differentiates between active and passive euthanasia. As defined in Wikipedia, “Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments, such as antibiotics, necessary for the continuance of life. Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces, such as administering a lethal injection, to kill and is the most controversial means.”

Assisted suicide, on the other hand is defined as follows: “Suicide facilitated by another person, especially a physician, who organizes the logistics of the suicide, as by providing the necessary quantities of a poison.”

Switzerland became the first country to legalize assisted suicide in 1942. In the 1980’s, the law was reinterpreted to allow the existence of organizations to provide aid in dying. There are now six organizations in Switzerland which, for a fee, will help you to die. According to a recent study in the Journal of Medical Ethics, about six hundred people a year –many of whom are foreigners–avail themselves of these services in Switzerland. Hence the term—“suicide tourism.”

In 2002, Netherlands passed the Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide Act, which legalized euthanasia and physician assisted suicide in specific cases, and for people twelve years old and up. In 2004, the Groningen Protocol came into effect, which allows doctors to euthanize infants, who are obviously not able to request or consent.

According to EPC-Europe, “In the Netherlands the number of deaths by euthanasia has increased by 64% between 2005 and 2010 … In comparison, the Dutch population grew by less than two percent over the same period. Yet the Dutch are now discussing the extension of euthanasia to people with dementia despite huge concerns about proper consent.” In addition, euthanasia is now being performed on psychiatric patients in the Netherlands, with 42 such cases reported in 2012.

We have seen the expansion of the concept of relieving a person’s pain to apply to emotional and psychiatric problems.Recently, an 89 year old retired art teacher took her life at Dignitas in Switzerland. In an interview given to the London Times, she stated that she couldn’t adapt to modern life and found that other people were acting increasingly like “robots.”  She had no terminal illness.

Dignitas also recently accommodated the end- of- life wishes of an 85 year old Italian woman, who was depressed that she was “losing her looks.” Oriella Cazzanello had no terminal illness and, other than wounded vanity, had been in excellent health.

There is a slippery slope through which assisted suicide is becoming acceptable for those with emotional rather than terminal physical pain. This incurs uncomfortable recollections of the treatment of psychiatrically ill people in medieval times. Modern medicine seemed to go a great distance to reverse the perceptions and fate of those who were mentally ill, only to have a contemporary pathway carved out for their termination, via “choice.”

Read more…